GFC - Big enough to take risks?

[bingle]

Sure it doesnt always work, but they dont use, "he will destroy our culture" as an excuse not to give it a go.

I think with regard to this you'll find it's usually fans that say it. I havent heard many teams out there actually say they won't recruit someone because of a checkered past. I've heard clubs use the term "gamble" a couple of times with those sorts of players but that could actually mean gamble by way of players age or how injury prone they are

 

[Belisarius]

Cannot believe given the pay these Gridiron players get - this guy gets fined $5,000 for endangering another player's well being ?

What sort of system do they run over there ? Seems like very little consequences for some serious stuff !

I reckon we should stick with what has gotten us this far - not worth the risk of trying something different.

My guess is that it is high on Wells' to tick off list is - no bad attitude players - and perhaps that maybe the reason Darling was not selected by us. Not sure but given how little crap really we have had at the club over a long period of time - I suspect GFC want solid citizen players.

 

[bulletproof]

There are just as many examples of it failing as there are of its success.

I am no moral crusader and care nothing for Fevola's antics, and yes it is absurd he is not playing AFL football, but Geelong do not need a 30yo full forward. Lovett is probably of more interest but again there is a risk/reward payoff.

Yes he is a more talented player than say Brynes but would his potential contribution be exponentiallygreater and consumerate with the risk taken on? I would say no.

 

[David the Cat]

There are just as many examples of it failing as there are of its success.

I am no moral crusader and care nothing for Fevola's antics, and yes it is absurd he is not playing AFL football, but Geelong do not need a 30yo full forward. Lovett is probably of more interest but again there is a risk/reward payoff.

Yes he is a more talented player than say Brynes but would his potential contribution be exponentiallygreater and consumerate with the risk taken on? I would say no.

If you recall, Geelong were sniffing around Lovett during the Thompson years.

The story goes that Thompson asked Hird " off the record " whether Lovett was a good trade. Apparently Hird told Thompson not to touch him with a 40' pole...

Geelong subsequently shied away from any further discussion on Lovett......talented but not worth the risk to team fabric...

Fev would be in the same basket. I would be gobsmacked if Geelong drafted Fevola.

 

[dazbroncos]

Haynesworth is a freakish talent and a total me first ********.

There is NO way that Geelong's club culture needs to incorporate knuckleheads the likes of this.

The " We ARE Geelong" way is an ethos that has taken years to develop and refine into what it is today, and will require continual sculpting going forward.

The common link throughout is that the players must buy into the belief that what they are doing physically and mentally is for the benefit of the group and the club, and that no individual is bigger or better than the collective, but that the collective only exists because of the extraordinary talents of the groups members.

Haynesworth, Moss, Fev et al may have the talent but can't exist as a faceless person because the personality overwhelms the situation sooner or later.

Do you see James Kelly looking for accolades like other players get, or do you just see him going harder and harder each week playing his role and excelling in the process.

Leave the rubbish personalities at the other end of the highway.

Even Moons, one of the most dominant personalities around, pulled his head in as the team ethos developed from 2005 onwards....

Just my thoughts...

Go Catters... We ARE Geelong!

 

[Turbocat]

I'm not against risk taking , infact as others have mentioned we have several players on our list that are here after being taken with a risky choice.

Pods, Varcoe, Selwood, Ottens all had a risk ? marking hanging over them. What about Mackie at 7. Risky I'd say. Or Bathie.

Its more a matter of balancing the acceptable,calculated risk versus the potential need or requirement.

As much as he is a name, and the story is there etc I don't see Fev suiting the risk profile. Lets say if Hawkins & Pods had gone down with some sort of injury ruling them out for an extended period of time..perhaps. But I think we have more urgent needs then another tall forward. Infact the way he did not fit in Brisbane with Brown would worry me when Hawkins and Pods are such big strong marking presences.

To me , if we want to take a 'risk' this year id look at Andrew McLean before Fev. Taking a player at his age and experience would be a risk but one that would suit our needs more than an even older player. Elevating Simpkin would be a risk too that I would seriously consider.

As far as Fev goes , I neither wish him ill or success. He has only himself to blame but i suspect he knows that , the noise's he is making would indicate that. If a club has indicated that they may draft him as a mature Rookie good luck to him