- Apr 6, 2014
- 6,645
- 9,636
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
I don't disagree entirely with the prior to 2014 stuff but it is irrelevant to compare to that anyway. I am not buying into the KT game of reflecting on our previous dire situation and saying that today everything is fine. That is not what this club is about. This is about the future and about Port being on the map of success. For far too long, too long, like a combined 30+ years we have won West Adelaide levels of silverware at either level.
I don't disagree with your point of the current recruiting of short people either but I am concerned this is likely due to there not being decent big men available. Let's be frank, the available players we have at our disposal are ninth best players after all eight sanfl clubs have picked the talent pool apart. We no longer have sanfl level players form our juniors anymore. Pointing out Bruggerman and Beiman's and Krakouer and Gordon is mute as Beiman's had his ties with Boak's sister and Krakouer was a wayward afl player, and Gordon couldn't crack the league side, and Bruggerman proved to be decent but evident that he didn't want to work hard. These are not what successful clubs are built upon. This is very few fish in the sea and since that year have we gotten any others with similar ability? 'The answer's no ... no'. Besides, if they're any good they get lured by money offers and the ******* cycle begins again. What ******* baloney is this?
When you say "The vast majority of our supporters wanted all our AFL players in the one side. It had to come at a cost." you are sounding that you don't give a stuff about winning or losing sanfl games, whether true or not that is how it sounds but the comment is totally irrelevant and doesn't need to be said. How much of a cost? Being made a bottom club in the sanfl? Is that the deserved cost? From the very outset of joining the afl all Port players should have been playing at Port Adelaide as of 1997 onwards. Had that occurred from the beginning, the board at the time probably had a bit more nous and balls to make sure we had some kind of better deal for the sanfl teams, but let's assume that in 1997 we were stripped of juniors and had these dead rotten rules enforced in 1997 that we have now, I'm confident the vast majority of us supporters would've been up in arms about it because there would have only been one club for all supporters to identify with, Port Adelaide, not Magpies, not Power. This is the problem of Port supporters of today as they still appear to have their opinions influenced on the notion that there are still two tribes of supporters or communities, pro-Magpies or pro-Power ... I don't know how to really explain my point here but had this crap been set upon us in 1997 or prior no way would there have been this soft acceptance. There is one club of 40+ listed players with extras and some ridiculous development dampening rules on us with a growing poor number of extras at that but PAFC is in the sanfl, not Magpies, but PAFC and it is being treated dirty.
It really is time for Port supporters to stop thinking that the Magpies are a sideshow and acknowledge that we have under these rules a PAFC team that is now going to be too young and inexperience to win sanfl games let alone make finals. There are no 24+ year old experienced Sharrad, Young, Beimans et al and these young AFL draftees need men around them, not just one leadership player. These rules are designed to keep us bottom and being bottom is not good development for any player and any poor sucker coach. You look around the leagues and other AFL clubs have had the ability to rookie or draft players form their contracted list, not many, but it has happened. Under our rules we will have no chance of doing that because our quality is far from it.
Why the hell should the sanfl have a right to tell us who our best 21 is on a week by week basis and in finals? Why? This infringes on our club's on-field performances, its culture, its in-club competition between players. What right does any organisation have on who we pick week by week? It is like the AFL telling all non-Vic teams that come finals time they need to play four rookie listed players ahead of other players that are in better form. What right do they have? Why should my son get drafted by Port or the crows and be a long shot at making the afl but be good enough to play sanfl weekly yet have limited chance of success at his level for a handful of years just because he's been recruited by the two SA clubs? Why?
Bottom line is this, our club name, our history, our culture is being stomped on. For us to be successful at AFL we must have our stuff together from top to bottom but we can't. Let Port Adelaide control its inner sanctum from end to end and we will become successful but by not having this autonomy it is hindering us from becoming who we truly can be. Not one Port Adelaide person should be at all satisfied with this.
I don't disagree with your point of the current recruiting of short people either but I am concerned this is likely due to there not being decent big men available. Let's be frank, the available players we have at our disposal are ninth best players after all eight sanfl clubs have picked the talent pool apart. We no longer have sanfl level players form our juniors anymore. Pointing out Bruggerman and Beiman's and Krakouer and Gordon is mute as Beiman's had his ties with Boak's sister and Krakouer was a wayward afl player, and Gordon couldn't crack the league side, and Bruggerman proved to be decent but evident that he didn't want to work hard. These are not what successful clubs are built upon. This is very few fish in the sea and since that year have we gotten any others with similar ability? 'The answer's no ... no'. Besides, if they're any good they get lured by money offers and the ******* cycle begins again. What ******* baloney is this?
When you say "The vast majority of our supporters wanted all our AFL players in the one side. It had to come at a cost." you are sounding that you don't give a stuff about winning or losing sanfl games, whether true or not that is how it sounds but the comment is totally irrelevant and doesn't need to be said. How much of a cost? Being made a bottom club in the sanfl? Is that the deserved cost? From the very outset of joining the afl all Port players should have been playing at Port Adelaide as of 1997 onwards. Had that occurred from the beginning, the board at the time probably had a bit more nous and balls to make sure we had some kind of better deal for the sanfl teams, but let's assume that in 1997 we were stripped of juniors and had these dead rotten rules enforced in 1997 that we have now, I'm confident the vast majority of us supporters would've been up in arms about it because there would have only been one club for all supporters to identify with, Port Adelaide, not Magpies, not Power. This is the problem of Port supporters of today as they still appear to have their opinions influenced on the notion that there are still two tribes of supporters or communities, pro-Magpies or pro-Power ... I don't know how to really explain my point here but had this crap been set upon us in 1997 or prior no way would there have been this soft acceptance. There is one club of 40+ listed players with extras and some ridiculous development dampening rules on us with a growing poor number of extras at that but PAFC is in the sanfl, not Magpies, but PAFC and it is being treated dirty.
It really is time for Port supporters to stop thinking that the Magpies are a sideshow and acknowledge that we have under these rules a PAFC team that is now going to be too young and inexperience to win sanfl games let alone make finals. There are no 24+ year old experienced Sharrad, Young, Beimans et al and these young AFL draftees need men around them, not just one leadership player. These rules are designed to keep us bottom and being bottom is not good development for any player and any poor sucker coach. You look around the leagues and other AFL clubs have had the ability to rookie or draft players form their contracted list, not many, but it has happened. Under our rules we will have no chance of doing that because our quality is far from it.
Why the hell should the sanfl have a right to tell us who our best 21 is on a week by week basis and in finals? Why? This infringes on our club's on-field performances, its culture, its in-club competition between players. What right does any organisation have on who we pick week by week? It is like the AFL telling all non-Vic teams that come finals time they need to play four rookie listed players ahead of other players that are in better form. What right do they have? Why should my son get drafted by Port or the crows and be a long shot at making the afl but be good enough to play sanfl weekly yet have limited chance of success at his level for a handful of years just because he's been recruited by the two SA clubs? Why?
Bottom line is this, our club name, our history, our culture is being stomped on. For us to be successful at AFL we must have our stuff together from top to bottom but we can't. Let Port Adelaide control its inner sanctum from end to end and we will become successful but by not having this autonomy it is hindering us from becoming who we truly can be. Not one Port Adelaide person should be at all satisfied with this.
