Roast Dumb s**t reporters say

Remove this Banner Ad

  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #27
'I can't see how this one gets done' is really creeping in.

Not sure if it's code for 'I can't manufacture a juicy story out of this' or 'I don't have any sources'. Or both.

Step 1 - Manufacture a trade rumour
Step 2 - Claim “I can’t see how this one gets done though”
Step 3 - Story has no substance and if called out refer to step 2
Step 4 - Rinse and repeat
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Enjoy trade radio. Get to know some “gun” victorians who I’ve never heard of wanting to move to other vic clubs. Well that’s what it seemed like a few years back

"Gun" is the trade/draft hypothetical equivalent of "star" in the regular press (when reporting on a player doing something naughty) - it applies to anyone on a list and about 40 undrafted 17-18 year olds.
 
Listen to the "out of bounds" podcast. Quartermain really has nfi of what is going on with Kelly. Said he should go to Freo and if he doesn't want to then Geelong should keep him. FFS he is the Sunday Times chief football writer.
Further his take on the Willie Rioli drug saga was infuriating. Pretty much written him off at 4 years with current result. Which may well be the case but his reasoning was so much heresay and factually incorrect, for a journalist I'd expect alot more. I personally can't see it above 2 years.
Duffield talked sense thankfully. Said why should Freo not sell the farm to get Kelly when he doesn't want to go there. Finally
some common sense! And from a Freo supporter.
Quartermain?

More like quarter-brain
 
"Gun" is the trade/draft hypothetical equivalent of "star" in the regular press (when reporting on a player doing something naughty) - it applies to anyone on a list and about 40 undrafted 17-18 year olds.
And if you've got a few Brownlow votes you're a champion.
 
This one’s a couple of days old now but it’s a humdinger

I don't expect the Vic media to know our team (or players, gamestyle etc) but gaff for Kelly is not a clear win for us at all.

Especially with Masten gone, we need to keep our elite runners (Not even getting into the arguments around who is better, more damaging, has more brownlow votes or AA jumpers).

Gaff may not be the latest craze, but he is consistently top 3 in the league in his position.

On SM-G973F using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
This one has got to be the number one pearler
A month later

Im preety sure most of his articles belong in this thread.
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
 
This one has got to be the number one pearler
A month later

Im preety sure most of his articles belong in this thread.
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
1CB97177-BE2B-4570-AF5B-AC4ACF7C04F2.jpeg
 
Gaff for Kelly is 'I'm 15 and watch US sports' level analysis.

Kawhi Leonard wants out of San Antonio so Toronto gamble and say 'DeRozan you've been excellent but Kawhi is just better than you so off you pop'. They only get him for a year but that year results in their first Championship. Gamble pays off. That doesn't happen in the AFL because clubs can't trade players without consent.

Let's say you ignore Gaff's near 200 games, 2 AAs, B&F, 76 Brownlow votes in 5 seasons etc. and rate Kelly a better player. Each to their own and all that. Would WC minus Gaff plus Kelly be better or worse? Matter of opinion. It's not 22nd best out, 5th best in stuff - which is how you actually make your team better.

Why would WC trade out a player in their best half dozen when they don't have to? Why would WC try to trade a player who hasn't expressed any desire to leave for one who has (previously) expressed a desire to join?

Trading players in the AFL is about minimising the damage more than anything. There is merit to trying to move on guys 25-30+ if you are at the bottom and staring at a couple of years there, but you rarely improve by getting rid of players who want to be there.
 
The HUN is just a gift that keeps on giving.
A bit behind the 8 ball is Mr Clark

Andrew Gaff to become a free agent next year despite six-year deal
Jay ClarkHerald Sun

That wasn't the facepalm part.

Gaff, 27, was largely considered to be an Eagle for life after signing a six-year deal worth about $1 million a season at the end of last season.

Yeah no. Try about 600k.

11 players TOTAL in the AFL earning 1 mil+ last year. No team can afford 2.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Gaff for Kelly is 'I'm 15 and watch US sports' level analysis.

Kawhi Leonard wants out of San Antonio so Toronto gamble and say 'DeRozan you've been excellent but Kawhi is just better than you so off you pop'. They only get him for a year but that year results in their first Championship. Gamble pays off. That doesn't happen in the AFL because clubs can't trade players without consent.

Let's say you ignore Gaff's near 200 games, 2 AAs, B&F, 76 Brownlow votes in 5 seasons etc. and rate Kelly a better player. Each to their own and all that. Would WC minus Gaff plus Kelly be better or worse? Matter of opinion. It's not 22nd best out, 5th best in stuff - which is how you actually make your team better.

Why would WC trade out a player in their best half dozen when they don't have to? Why would WC try to trade a player who hasn't expressed any desire to leave for one who has (previously) expressed a desire to join?

Trading players in the AFL is about minimising the damage more than anything. There is merit to trying to move on guys 25-30+ if you are at the bottom and staring at a couple of years there, but you rarely improve by getting rid of players who want to be there.
Plus it ignores the very simple equation that Kelly is still on a basement-level salary, whereas Gaff is on "$1 million a season" so how would Geelong fit him into the salary cap anyway? This is coming from the guy that said he "dreads another West Coast grand final "
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top