Remove this Banner Ad

Analysis Scott Selwood Debate

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

boondy said:
Selwood is a spud I would take pick 37 over keeping Selwood in a heartbeat . As someone mentioned before page 16 of this thread the Richmond game sums up almost every game he played in my eyes .
Click to expand...
Shame we couldn't trade him out 3 years ago at the height of his worth. Melbourne were rumoured to be interested with a low 1st round pick?

Anyway, not best 22, poor disposal and ankle issues for 2-3 years now is a hyge concern. No guarantee he will get over them.

If he comes good (ankle issues), we got dudded.

As it stands right at the moment, we got fair value for his worth.


He's gone... move on.
 
Trouto said:
We are mostly all thinking Scott is a crab and we are glad to get rid of him...anyone actually thinking he has played average this year to lower his value to help out Geelong? I mean, the guy was our champion in 2012 and he is, age wise, in the prime of his footy career. The way he played in the games he played this year, NO team would want him, which leads me to think something is suspect.
Would not surprise me if he tore it up at Geelong next year.
Click to expand...
Occam's Razor.
 
Having two picks together like you do now opens up a few opportunities trade wise, especially with clubs who have academy selections coming up. For example Picks 36 and 37 are worth more points to a side like us than pick 21. As an example to a Sydney, they're the equivalent of a pick 18 actually. So there's certainly options to get back up in the draft order or facilitate other trades.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Seems Brisbane were informed of the compensation they would get . Wish we had asked the question re: Selwood (as Nisbett stated we were expecting a first round pick ....)- wonder if we would have opted to match the offer if we had the extra information .
 
Scott on his surgery - "Hopefully I can start afresh and have a fresh start"

loooooooooooooooooooooool
 
2006_Eagles said:
Really? He said the exact same thing in two different ways that weren't different at all really.
Click to expand...
You're confusing me, that doesn't make sense and speaking to you makes me confused.
 
MWPP said:
Seems Brisbane were informed of the compensation they would get . Wish we had asked the question re: Selwood (as Nisbett stated we were expecting a first round pick ....)- wonder if we would have opted to match the offer if we had the extra information .
Click to expand...

If Nisbett genuinely expected a band two compensation pick after having read the AFL's formula that was distributed pre trade period , then he seriously lacks any creditability in the art of comprehension.

The Geelong contract to Scooter that they had to match, was specific in $$$ value ( and chose not to ), and as such clearly fell with in the band 3 compensation range. In fact it was closer to band four than it was to band two.

F*** me after I read the AFL memo re :- the formula for draft compensation I knew that band three was best we were going to get ....... Seriously I would have thought it would not have been that hard to join the dots.

The "Hissy Nissy Fit" is solely for posturing and a future challenge to the FA compensation formula, the Clubs collectively need to reclaim some of the power that has been granted to the AFLPA.

Its politically motivated and should be seen as such.
 
Last edited:
thorne89 said:
You're confusing me, that doesn't make sense and speaking to you makes me confused.
Click to expand...

Start afresh

Fresh start

It's exactly the same thing. Saying them back to back makes you sound silly nad like you have limited vocab.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

2006_Eagles said:
Start afresh

Fresh start

It's exactly the same thing. Saying them back to back makes you sound silly nad like you have limited vocab.
Click to expand...
Stop repeating yourself, you've said the same thing thing more than once, your repetition is unnecessary.
 
thorne89 said:
Stop repeating yourself, you've said the same thing thing more than once, your repetition is unnecessary.
Click to expand...

Sorry I missed it.

You're too quick even for me thorney :thumbsu:
 
Masto said:
I think Geelong would be smart to play him purely as an inside midfielder where he rarely kicks and feeds the ball out. Will take stress off his ankles and prolong his career. Unfortunately Priddis already has that role for us.
Click to expand...
Will enjoy watching him flop about on top of the ball giving away holding the ball free kicks
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Max zero said:
TBH considering all he costs them is wages and a list spot I doubt they are too freaked out.
Click to expand...
Sorry to intrude, but that's exactly how we feel. I'm not convinced he'll amount to much, really. I am concerned that his ankle will never be right again, but giving up nothing more than cash makes it a very acceptable risk to take.

A lot of Geelong supporters are hoping that he'll turn into a good tagger. I think pick #37 is fair and I don't think your club ever harboured genuine desires to match.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Analysis Scott Selwood Debate

Similar threads

E
Toast Vale Adam Selwood
6 7 8 9 10
Replies
244
Views
15K
Wild Kelly
Wild Kelly

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top