Kane McGoodwin
Make me an Admin!
- May 21, 2001
- 81,477
- 82,031
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Adelaide Crows
So you are in affect agreeing with me.I don't coach the Adelaide Crows.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
So you are in affect agreeing with me.I don't coach the Adelaide Crows.
No, but instead of scrutinising his selection and not drafting a replacement, you’re hanging your hat on their opinion.I don't coach the Adelaide Crows.
No, but instead of scrutinising his selection and not drafting a replacement, you’re hanging your hat on their opinion.
If you can’t see how that makes you look, well.
If we are to improve he will be squeezed outI think he's just pointing out that the Crows wouldn't look to replace the guy they ranked as 6th in the B&F which is a fair point
They probably won't replace him and probably will have him best 22 again
Oh by pointing out that they rate Murphy, he’s not actually agreeing with their assessment, he disagrees with it and has expressed so.I think he's just pointing out that the Crows wouldn't look to replace the guy they ranked as 6th in the B&F which is a fair point
They probably won't replace him and probably will have him best 22 again
If we are to improve he will be squeezed out
Why do they drop him annually?What if the club thinks he's a very important player?
I mean they've rated him highly, why would they replace him?
They rated Sloane highly too which clearly explains his selection and contract extension
Then we remain stagnantWhat if the club thinks he's a very important player?
I mean they've rated him highly, why would they replace him?
They rated Sloane highly too which clearly explains his selection and contract extension
FTFY.If we are to improve he has to be squeezed out
Can't help stupid.What if the club thinks he's a very important player?
I mean they've rated him highly, why would they replace him?
They rated Sloane highly too which clearly explains his selection and contract extension
And yet some just back in their decisions because it’s our coaches who could be sacked any dayThis has always been unexplainable, like it was for Mackay and many others before him.
It's even more puzzling as the coaches rate Murphy higher than they ever did for Mackay
Who did we draft that could replace him?
Mods……………… please interveneDare I say… McHenry is probably his likely replacement
Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
How come you guys dont cop the same wrath from mutineer that I do when you point out he needs to be removed from the 22?..Can't help stupid.
We need to prioritise talent.
Murphy should be depth.
Sloane can be a regular sub as he can't run out 4 quarters consistently.
I have had no shortage of thumbs down from Bicks...How come you guys dont cop the same wrath from mutineer that I do when you point out he needs to be removed from the 22?..
is it cause simply because I call his AFL football abilities “garbage”?..
Given Murphy has been selected consistently ahead of him, I doubt it.Dare I say… McHenry is probably his likely replacement
Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
Gut feel is yes. Might even get rival interest and request a tradeGiven Murphy has been selected consistently ahead of him, I doubt it.
Is this McHenrys last year? Can see us cutting our losses and delisting him or he becomes a rookie
Jesus christ we have to rip the band aid off with players at this club who are borderline best 30. This whole give em 5 years in the senior list and if they aren't good enough, another 1 or 2 in the rookie list and see what happens is just stupid. If Ned isn't ( and at this stage I doubt he will) be best 22, then he needs to go, free up a list spot on someone else.Given Murphy has been selected consistently ahead of him, I doubt it.
Is this McHenrys last year? Can see us cutting our losses and delisting him or he becomes a rookie
Oh I agree, I’m guessing the club won’t be able to let him go and will hang on to him as a rookieJesus christ we have to rip the band aid off with players at this club who are borderline best 30. This whole give em 5 years in the senior list and if they aren't good enough, another 1 or 2 in the rookie list and see what happens is just stupid. If Ned isn't ( and at this stage I doubt he will) be best 22, then he needs to go, free up a list spot on someone else.
Oh I agree, I’m guessing the club won’t be able to let him go and will hang on to him as a rookie
But..
Why carry anyone if you dont have to?
Whats with this weird “ahhh, we can have one or two underperformers” attitude to this?..
We shouldve realised murphy is garbage.. and given other players like dowling, cook or nank a good solid run at it this year.. (nank finally got a run in the end but as a half back) and if they dont perform after being given a solid block of games.. start looking for something else.
This club seems to really love clinging to certain players that are underperformers just cause they try hard.
I think he's a role player who does exactly what the coaches ask and need.So you are in affect agreeing with me.
Yeah…Hey Clam, quick one for you….
Have you ever coached a team? Ever been in a position to build a squad? In sport or business?
You pick individuals like BK and LM to target with your hateful posts … Probably two of the most loved players of our coach. Do you ever wonder why that might be?
Maybe you need to get your spite meter checked, it appears to be out of alignment.