Is a player manager required to accurately declare the dollar values of offers made by competing clubs? Say Melbourne offer $800k, can Lever's manager say that the offer is $900k and Adelaide need to match it?
List Mgmt. Re-Signing Jake Lever
- Thread starter Vooligan
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Status
- Dec 29, 2000
- 23,647
- 20,899
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Agree with last line but I'll take it a step further. If we have matched or even bettered than what someone has offered and he still hasn't signed then I'd play him up until the GF and if we make it I'd say the week before the GF, you either sign or you don't play, your choice?
What do you want Jake, a GF or not? Team is bigger than the individual.
- Sep 30, 2014
- 18,956
- 40,126
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
I posted the same thing a few days back.
courageous_tom
Team Captain
Are you one of the blokes that calls into 5AA after a game to whinge? This is one of the most idiotic things I've heard in a while. If you believe for one second that we would go into a GF without our best side, your dreaming. Also, have you dealt with many 20 year old's lately? Trying to blackmail him will almost certainly make him leave, even if he was intending to stay.
- Mar 20, 2013
- 4,947
- 4,980
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
And your last line shows exactly why that would never happen
SnakesLadders
Team Captain
- Jul 12, 2017
- 312
- 407
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Banned
- #6,106
Either way if lever goes, we have lost great talent over a fair few years and we always get a player to stand up and guess what we are top on the ladder
Davis - talia
Tippett - Jenkins
Gunston - lynch
Vince - M.crouch
Danger - TBA
Davis - talia
Tippett - Jenkins
Gunston - lynch
Vince - M.crouch
Danger - TBA
- Dec 29, 2000
- 23,647
- 20,899
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Well he can f-off, I don't care if you are 20 or 40, the game is bigger than the club, which is bigger than the individual. If we are equaling what he is prepared to get, why not sign? Pretty ******* easy. It's not rocket science.
The team is bigger than the individual - take a leaf our of the New England Patriots and Bill Belichick - it is all about the team - the past 16 seasons missed the playoffs once, 5 Super Bowl titles. Bill's theory, if you don't want success but instead the money, then piss off, no place for you in his team. Their teams haven't been the most star studded but has been the most successful.
- Sep 30, 2014
- 18,956
- 40,126
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Too early to say Greenwood is taking over from Dangerfield?
- Sep 30, 2014
- 18,956
- 40,126
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
The great Geelong and Hawthorn teams of recent years weren't made because 20 year olds were demanding top dollar.
Levers approach with all of this has been incredibly selfish.
As was Dangerfield.
And they're entitled to do so.
Just like we're entitled to think poorly of them for it.
SnakesLadders
Team Captain
- Jul 12, 2017
- 312
- 407
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Banned
- #6,110
Too early, prob safe to say danger leaving gave opportunity for a handful of players such as look at what RAT has done this year but imo Greenwood will become a top 10 player but danger is another level
If you get 2 or 3 top ten players delevop faster due to the open opportunities from losing a Brownlow medalist I don't see it a huge loss
Individuals win brownlows
Teams win flags
Let's see who wins the flag first
Hindsight is a wonderful thing but how Danger wasn't worth two firsts at a minimum is beyond me
And Danger in the team in anyone's book is stronger than not having him, I wish I could justify saying we are better if without him but there is no way to make a positive out of it
On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
- Sep 30, 2014
- 18,956
- 40,126
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Ask yourself this. Why this year for Lever? If he wants to leave, then last year he could have done so. I doubt he's only made that decision recently.
Of course the difference is he's out of contract.
It makes no difference to the new contract he negotiates. He'll get the same deal regardless.
The only difference it makes is to us because now we lose some leverage.
Prick of a move to the only club willing to pick you up after your dodgy injuries.
Same with Dangerfield. People say he gave his all and made sure we got fair value for him. Bollocks. He knew he was going at the end of his contract. He should have requested a trade the year before while he was still under. The only reason he stayed til the end of his contract was so it was cheaper for Geelong to pick him up.
(just like we're doing with Rockliff at the moment)
Of course the difference is he's out of contract.
It makes no difference to the new contract he negotiates. He'll get the same deal regardless.
The only difference it makes is to us because now we lose some leverage.
Prick of a move to the only club willing to pick you up after your dodgy injuries.
Same with Dangerfield. People say he gave his all and made sure we got fair value for him. Bollocks. He knew he was going at the end of his contract. He should have requested a trade the year before while he was still under. The only reason he stayed til the end of his contract was so it was cheaper for Geelong to pick him up.
(just like we're doing with Rockliff at the moment)
courageous_tom
Team Captain
I'm guessing we wouldn't be playing McGovern or Greenwood either?
Does this work both ways? Can players who we don't offer contacts too decide that they won't play?
Opportunities to win a flag don't come around often. You play your best team. In this sense, it doesn't matter about the player's contact, if the coach hates him, he's shagging his teammates girlfriend, it doesn't matter, you play them.
Last edited:
SnakesLadders
Team Captain
- Jul 12, 2017
- 312
- 407
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Banned
- #6,115
Not saying we are better off, just that it hasn't been the end of the world
If Lever goes I'm sure the club won't fold into the fetal position
I'm normally a pragmatic person and would agree that if you have a shot then you need to go in with your best team.
BUT people keep talking about drawing a line in the sand. Some say we can do this by letting him go into the PSD, but maybe we need to do this with the playing group as a whole. Maybe we need to put our stake in the ground and say you're either with us our against us. Maybe we need to start rewarding commitment not those who are turncoats. Maybe playing him may cost us a final, or GF (remember Tippett against Syndney in 2012).
To me that does more to change our culture than anything else.
If Lever goes we will be further entrenched as the club you can pry players from, that's not a good rep and will only continue.
I also think it's about time we cut this crap about only drafting players with good character, it obviously doesn't make a difference, players don't have loyalty, the same as clubs don't.
You deal with it as there isn't a choice
But players like Danger and Lever are enormous loses and the disappointing thing is with danger we had to put up with his development which at times actually cost us, the same with lever and we missed out on putting the development in to get the ultimate return
If lever leaves it will be the same and even more so with Gov as his development is definetly not there yet and he plays games which aren't that good but we need to get them in him so he can become a great player
All this development and we don't reap the rewards is the disappointing thing
On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
Look why should a player try and do the right thing when the clubs don't when it doesn't suit them?
We pushed out Vince for a pick.
We pushed out Lyons for a pick.
Players aren't dumb, why should they be the ones showing loyalty when the clubs don't?
- Sep 30, 2014
- 18,956
- 40,126
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
I said the players are entitled to do it. Just like I'm entitled to speed up if I see you driving next to me with your indicator on.
Lyons was at least out of contract.
People need to realise this is now professional sport.
Loyalty is for a bygone era. Player movement will become more common.
The club will always exist, players will come and go. The way I see it the club needs to ensure we stay in a strong position even with players moving on.
So far we have. You can be critical of certain moves ie Dangerfield trade. But step back and look at the bigger picture and our list is one of the best in the comp.
Look down the road. Keep all their players but have a far worse list than us. It is a mess.
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
Loyalty is for a bygone era. Player movement will become more common.
The club will always exist, players will come and go. The way I see it the club needs to ensure we stay in a strong position even with players moving on.
So far we have. You can be critical of certain moves ie Dangerfield trade. But step back and look at the bigger picture and our list is one of the best in the comp.
Look down the road. Keep all their players but have a far worse list than us. It is a mess.
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
SnakesLadders
Team Captain
- Jul 12, 2017
- 312
- 407
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Banned
- #6,122
I agree with you but I feel we need to get used to it as will most clubs because this is the way the AFL is heading
They will which is why it is becoming more and more important when drafting and conducting interviews to realise what you are getting yourself in for with certain players
If we traded hard it wouldn't matter as if players left we would get worth for them but unfortunately we don't and in Levers case he cost us a first rounder we have spent 3 years in development and let's be honest some good and bad games so if we broke even it's a crap result
Two ways to look at it trade harder, or pick better
Look at the reason why we are losing them
Danger and Gunston left to go back to Vic if Lever and Gov leave it will be to go home
With that reason alone surely it puts us in the box seat as we can force them into the draft so trade harder
On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
When trading this development needs to be considered by our club when requesting the trade requirement
On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
SnakesLadders
Team Captain
- Jul 12, 2017
- 312
- 407
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Banned
- #6,125
If you want my honest opinion the AFL have to change the current FA / Trade rules in its current state.
Rules such as deadline dates for a FA to explore the options at seasons end & the FA current clubs have rights to offer longer contracts and pay a %more outside the cap! Meaning if destination clubs will only be able to offer less money and smaller contracts to entice FA to come over or home
- Status
Similar threads
- Poll
