Pets Delisted

[mitch richmond]

Polak has a year left on his contract so if we did that, it would mean paying him out of this years contract. Might as well keep him on the list to see how he does recover rather than having to pay him out and then re-draft him.

In that case definitely keep him!

 

[ize_]

If Petts gets delisted, Good luck for the rest of your life and thanks for contributing to the tigers

If he does not get delisted the OP deserves a red card.

Time of the month?

 

[Jisha]

Not really. I am sick of seeing these stupid threads popping up. Why don't people just wait for the OFFICIAL word. As many people have said these threads are made over and over and over and over. No sources, no clue.

 

[beaver fever]

At this stage, next year the list will have 5 players over 31 and 3 players that are most likely not to play any part in it through injury (Coughlan, Polak, Pettifer). We need to turn over these players as quickly as possible, and we need to start right now, not in 2 years time. Polak and Pettifer should have been delisted without a doubt.

However, what l am concerned about it is (if the rumour is true) the number of players that have we have since delisted, when we were expecting to have a quiet off period. Tivendale, Hyde, Meyer, Casserley, Gourdis and possibly Pettifer... thats too many for a list that was on the up. Particularly considering we only kept one of 4 rookies.

This is absolutely and utter garbage. A list that is on the up? The list is struggling to hang onto mid-table, let alone be a top 4 list. Only lists that are up should contemplate only taking 3-4 ND picks. Otherwise it should be policy to get rid of at least 6 players every year and bring in more youth. The list is full of players that need to be improved on. Have a look at what the other sides are doing, most that are below us have moved on at least 6 players.

 

[peterbuch74]

For what it's worth I have heard the same news from one of the club staff just today... Word is he hadn't quite been the club man that we all think that he is, especially begin arrogant towards staff around the club.

That coupled with the not so good prognosis on his injury has left the club no real choice moving forward.

I wish him the best of luck in his recovery and playing future if his name turns up on the next cut list as I personally have enjoyed watching him play in the yellow and black.

 

[sante]

[YOUTUBE]1VSSOWQXHMk[/YOUTUBE]

He's been pretty serviceable. Playing as a HF in a pretty shit team over his career must have been hard work.

If this is true, then good luck in the future Petts, if not, lets hope you can recover from your knee and find some form at Coburg to keep the pressure on for spots in our 22.

 

[RichosGuns]

If true, good luck to Petts in the future. No easy feat to scratch up 100 games esspeacially considering he was never really a coaches favourite under Frawely or Wallace. ALOT of blokes have gotten a much easier ride in the same time *Cough* Krakouer *Cough*

 

[_RT_]

At this stage, next year the list will have 5 players over 31 and 3 players that are most likely not to play any part in it through injury (Coughlan, Polak, Pettifer). We need to turn over these players as quickly as possible, and we need to start right now, not in 2 years time. Polak and Pettifer should have been delisted without a doubt.


This is absolutely and utter garbage. A list that is on the up? The list is struggling to hang onto mid-table, let alone be a top 4 list. Only lists that are up should contemplate only taking 3-4 ND picks. Otherwise it should be policy to get rid of at least 6 players every year and bring in more youth. The list is full of players that need to be improved on. Have a look at what the other sides are doing, most that are below us have moved on at least 6 players.

How do you judge whether the list is on they way up or not? I would have thought that a list that won 8 from 11 in the second half of the season after going 3 from 11 in the first half of the season would have been enough to make the call. Especially after that same list won 3.5 games in the previous season. Would hardly call that struggling to hang on to mid table.

For the record, the year before the Cats won the flag they took only 4 picks in the ND and 4 picks in the rookie draft. Year before that took 5 picks. Hawthorn took 3 picks in the draft last year and 5 picks the year before that when they were a club outside the 8 and were considered to be on the way up by many.

Just how mush longer do you think we should continue to rebuild the list before we decide the list is good enough to make the 8?

 

[Pick a Ring]

I'm neither here nor there whether Petts
However, what l am concerned about it is (if the rumour is true) the number of players that have we have since delisted, when we were expecting to have a quiet off period. Tivendale, Hyde, Meyer, Casserley, Gourdis and possibly Pettifer... thats too many for a list that was on the up. Particularly considering we only kept one of 4 rookies.

We MUST BE eyeing someone up in the PSD, because we wouldnt be taking 5 selections at the ND.

Thompson was added.

 

[bigstyletiger]

Petts was good to watch at his best. He had two pretty good seasons but the writing must be on the wall. Couldn't crack the side this year when fit so he must be out of the calculations. It wasn't as if he was having a spell for a 2 or 3 matches - he was in the twos for the majority of the season.

From that i would hope that we would delist him as he will just clog up the list. Get some kids in who are hungry for success and let them learn from the way Cotch goes about it.

 

[Darth_Tiger]

i was always a supporter of him, even when he was struggling to make the grade. but if he has had a second reco, im afraid its goodbye. he has been overtaken by others anyway.

 

[beaver fever]

Just how mush longer do you think we should continue to rebuild the list before we decide the list is good enough to make the 8?

Make the 8? What mediocrity is this? You don't build lists to make the 8, you build them to win a premiership for ****s sake. This club is no-where near a premiership, especially with 5 31 year olds (4 in the top 10 b&f) retiring within the next 1-2 years. The list is still in re-build mode in my opinion.

Those example you gave. Geelong had a period of success before 2006 if you can't remember, and any idiot would have realised they had a good list, even in 2006. Hawthorn took a PSD pick in 2006 too so that is 6 picks. You don't have to use only ND picks when replacing players. They can come from rookie elevations and PSD picks.

 

[Doobie]

what is the gourdis situation i dont no so tell

 

[sante]

what is the gourdis situation i dont no so tell

Officially delisted.

Here

 

[tony_montana]

Make the 8? What mediocrity is this? You don't build lists to make the 8, you build them to win a premiership for ****s sake. This club is no-where near a premiership, especially with 5 31 year olds (4 in the top 10 b&f) retiring within the next 1-2 years. The list is still in re-build mode in my opinion.

Those example you gave. Geelong had a period of success before 2006 if you can't remember, and any idiot would have realised they had a good list, even in 2006. Hawthorn took a PSD pick in 2006 too so that is 6 picks. You don't have to use only ND picks when replacing players. They can come from rookie elevations and PSD picks.

what ^^^^^^^^^ said.

 

[telsor]

I've no problem with us delisting more players.

Then next few years will be pretty lean for drafting, so I'd rather clean out the 'borderline' cases and try someone else.

That said, I don't dislike Petts as much on some on this board...I've always thought that in a good team, he'd be the sort of player who would be the cream that made us great, but really just couldn't shoulder the weight by himself. That said, if people are right about the prognosis on his knee being really bad, then better to clear the spot and try someone new.

 

[_RT_]

Make the 8? What mediocrity is this? You don't build lists to make the 8, you build them to win a premiership for ****s sake. This club is no-where near a premiership, especially with 5 31 year olds (4 in the top 10 b&f) retiring within the next 1-2 years. The list is still in re-build mode in my opinion.

Those example you gave. Geelong had a period of success before 2006 if you can't remember, and any idiot would have realised they had a good list, even in 2006. Hawthorn took a PSD pick in 2006 too so that is 6 picks. You don't have to use only ND picks when replacing players. They can come from rookie elevations and PSD picks.

Is it your position is that if the list isn't good enough to win the flag we shouldn't even bother making the 8 because that is just a mediocre result?

Or do you expect the club to suddenly jump from a bottom 8 struggler, as you put it, and be a premiership contender?

What is wrong with making the finals and get a bit of finals experience into the youngsters along the way, while we continue to add more youngsters to the list as Richo, Johnson, Simmonds, Brown & Bowden retire over the next few years?


We've gone down the path of turning over huge numbers of players at the end of the year. 2003 we added 9 players to the list through the ND plus 2 PSD picks and 2 rookies. The following year, in Wallaces first off season we added another 9 players in the ND, 1 PSD and 1 rookie. Thats 24 players in 2 years. Do you think the list is still as bad as it was back then? Because it seems you do by the way you're advocating we delist 6 players and have that many picks in the ND.

The list is no where near as bad as it was back then so I don't see why the list needs to be turned over so dramatically when odds are most players who get picked up outside the first 3 rounds of the draft will end up being cut 2 years later because they were nothing more than speculaive picks to begin with.

 

[Danog]

Officially delisted.

Here

Hopefully he gets rookied.

 

[beaver fever]

No, my position is that you never stop a re-build mentality until you are in a premiership window. Only then can you perhaps look at other ways to stretch out the window. Making the 8 doesn't mean you stop re-building.

I don't care that we have turned over some players in the past. The list still has several deficiencies and needs much more work to it before it can challenge for the premiership. I don't like comparing the list to what is was at the end of 2004 because that makes you think the job is done. That is a loser mentality. If you want to be the best, you compare yourself to he best, not the worst.

In regards to the value of 4th round picks and above, well 14 players out of the 35 players on our list were taken in the 4th round or higher or rookie elevations. That is 40% of the senior list. Perhaps we can start to take the National Draft seriously when we realise how important those late picks are.

 

[tony_montana]

Is it your position is that if the list isn't good enough to win the flag we shouldn't even bother making the 8 because that is just a mediocre result?

Or do you expect the club to suddenly jump from a bottom 8 struggler, as you put it, and be a premiership contender?

What is wrong with making the finals and get a bit of finals experience into the youngsters along the way, while we continue to add more youngsters to the list as Richo, Johnson, Simmonds, Brown & Bowden retire over the next few years?


We've gone down the path of turning over huge numbers of players at the end of the year. 2003 we added 9 players to the list through the ND plus 2 PSD picks and 2 rookies. The following year, in Wallaces first off season we added another 9 players in the ND, 1 PSD and 1 rookie. Thats 24 players in 2 years. Do you think the list is still as bad as it was back then? Because it seems you do by the way you're advocating we delist 6 players and have that many picks in the ND.

The list is no where near as bad as it was back then so I don't see why the list needs to be turned over so dramatically when odds are most players who get picked up outside the first 3 rounds of the draft will end up being cut 2 years later because they were nothing more than speculaive picks to begin with.

in a nutshell if you are not a realistic chance at a premiership and we certainly arent then theres no point having blokes over 30 taking up a spot on the list when you could be putting 2 years development into a youngster/s during the same time. If that means finishing 11th instead of finishing 9th or mayber 8th for a season or so then so be it!

hawthorn were never close to a premiership and they cut everyone over 26! when they started their rebuild under clarkson....not getting finals experience a year or 2 early hasnt hurt them in the long run has it?

there is absolutely no point in us playing bowden and johnson on now when the best we can hope for is perhaps 7th or 8th for a season. then we replace them in 1-2 years when the draft is compromised. yep good list management

 

[_RT_]

No, my position is that you never stop a re-build mentality until you are in a premiership window. Only then can you perhaps look at other ways to stretch out the window. Making the 8 doesn't mean you stop re-building.

I don't care that we have turned over some players in the past. The list still has several deficiencies and needs much more work to it before it can challenge for the premiership. I don't like comparing the list to what is was at the end of 2004 because that makes you think the job is done. That is a loser mentality. If you want to be the best, you compare yourself to he best, not the worst.

In regards to the value of 4th round picks and above, well 14 players out of the 35 players on our list were taken in the 4th round or higher or rookie elevations. That is 40% of the senior list. Perhaps we can start to take the National Draft seriously when we realise how important those late picks are.

I agree with parts of what you're saying. The way I look at it, the first part of the rebuild is completed. We now have a very good foundation in place that we now need to build upon. To do that we shouldn't just add players to the list because we need to, we should only add players to the list that improve on what is already there.

I also agree that there are still areas we need to work on. We've cut 4 from the senior list as it stands as well as 3 rookies. We'll be adding 4 more players to the senior list and another 5 rookies this year with the new rules in place because of the GC. Surely cutting 7 players deemed not good enough and adding 9 kids to the list is enough of a change.

in a nutshell if you are not a realistic chance at a premiership and we certainly arent then theres no point having blokes over 30 taking up a spot on the list when you could be putting 2 years development into a youngster/s during the same time. If that means finishing 11th instead of finishing 9th or mayber 8th for a season or so then so be it!

hawthorn were never close to a premiership and they cut everyone over 26! when they started their rebuild under clarkson....not getting finals experience a year or 2 early hasnt hurt them in the long run has it?

there is absolutely no point in us playing bowden and johnson on now when the best we can hope for is perhaps 7th or 8th for a season. then we replace them in 1-2 years when the draft is compromised. yep good list management

So there is no point making the finals unless you're a serious threat for the premiership. So you wont be going to the finals this year if we make it? Of course you will.

You talk about how the Hawks were nowhere near a premiership side when Clarkson took over in 04 and how he cut everyone over 26. Crawford was 30 when Clarkson took over, Everitt remained at the Hawks until 2 years ago and he was also near 30. Then along the way they kept playing their players who were approching 30. Guys like Vandenburg, Smith & Barker were still getting games even though they weren't really part of their best 22. We're doing the same thing. Just like Clarkson forced his younger players to take a spot from established players Wallace seems to be doing the same thing with our kids. Forcing them to perform better than the established stars to get a game in the 22. That has to be better than just handing out games to kids just because they are kids.

Speaking of the Hawks premiership, do you honestly think they would have been able to win the flag this year had they not experienced finals footy last year? They wouldn't have got close. So playing finals when you're not a real premiership threat is hardly a waste of time. I know I would like to head into a era where we are a real threat for the flag knowing that players like Deledio, Foley, Thursfield, Reiwoldt, etc, etc have finals experience to call on when needed, not just going in blind and then getting belted.

 

[beaver fever]

I agree with parts of what you're saying. The way I look at it, the first part of the rebuild is completed. We now have a very good foundation in place that we now need to build upon. To do that we shouldn't just add players to the list because we need to, we should only add players to the list that improve on what is already there.

Then what you are advocating is basically a finals window stretching policy. This will impact on the list negatively in the long-term and may help us to make the finals, but it won't sustain us there, nor help us to win a premiership. Therefore I absolutely disagree with your philosophy.

I also agree that there are still areas we need to work on. We've cut 4 from the senior list as it stands as well as 3 rookies. We'll be adding 4 more players to the senior list and another 5 rookies this year with the new rules in place because of the GC. Surely cutting 7 players deemed not good enough and adding 9 kids to the list is enough of a change.

No it is not. 6 senior list and 3 rookies cut. Bring in 5 ND picks, a PSD pick and 5 new rookies. Players like Pettifer and Polak offer us absolutely nothing next year and not only that, they haven't even solidified a spot in the 22. 7 years Polak, 8 years Pettifer, sheesh how long will we give this perennial mediocre players? Time to move them on and see if some kids can make it. Only through this process will the list eventually have enough talent to push for the premiership.

 

[Junior24]

I spoke to my "source" again today and questioned what happened and that i thought pettifer was getting delisted. He said he was on the list to be delisted the week leading up to the list being finalized, but was changed for gourdis as they think they will loose a lot of experience at the end of next year.

 

[Sausage roll]

Get rid of the non-tackling, selfiswh one trick pony!1

Can't stand is false attempts at chasing and tackling, then the baning of the fist into the ground when he missess the tackle like he cared in the first place!

bye-Bye baby

 

[mhill]

I agree with parts of what you're saying. The way I look at it, the first part of the rebuild is completed. We now have a very good foundation in place that we now need to build upon. To do that we shouldn't just add players to the list because we need to, we should only add players to the list that improve on what is already there.

I also agree that there are still areas we need to work on. We've cut 4 from the senior list as it stands as well as 3 rookies. We'll be adding 4 more players to the senior list and another 5 rookies this year with the new rules in place because of the GC. Surely cutting 7 players deemed not good enough and adding 9 kids to the list is enough of a change.


So there is no point making the finals unless you're a serious threat for the premiership. So you wont be going to the finals this year if we make it? Of course you will.

You talk about how the Hawks were nowhere near a premiership side when Clarkson took over in 04 and how he cut everyone over 26. Crawford was 30 when Clarkson took over, Everitt remained at the Hawks until 2 years ago and he was also near 30. Then along the way they kept playing their players who were approching 30. Guys like Vandenburg, Smith & Barker were still getting games even though they weren't really part of their best 22. We're doing the same thing. Just like Clarkson forced his younger players to take a spot from established players Wallace seems to be doing the same thing with our kids. Forcing them to perform better than the established stars to get a game in the 22. That has to be better than just handing out games to kids just because they are kids.

Speaking of the Hawks premiership, do you honestly think they would have been able to win the flag this year had they not experienced finals footy last year? They wouldn't have got close. So playing finals when you're not a real premiership threat is hardly a waste of time. I know I would like to head into a era where we are a real threat for the flag knowing that players like Deledio, Foley, Thursfield, Reiwoldt, etc, etc have finals experience to call on when needed, not just going in blind and then getting belted.

FWIW RT, What you are saying makes perfect sense. I think our current list is as good as it has been since the early 90s - which undelivered.

I do think it is critical that we make finals next year to justify keeping Wallace for another couple of years. Changing coach at the end of 2009 would de-stabilize the playing group which was a critical part of our downfall throughout the 90s.

Like the Hawks and Cats during 2006, we need to hold our nerve on the coach next year BUT he needs to hold his end of the deal and steer the club in the finals.