List Mgmt. The Bryce Gibbs trade has set our club back 5 years.

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

I’m sure Reid did and which is fair.

So odds are SOS held him there for another year even when he knew there were personal issues and even the following year played funny buggers.

And yet you all laud SOS and the way he acted.
Come on. 2017 Gibbs had a great year for us. 2018 was top 5 in b & f for you. Complete speculation as to whether there was/is a gambling problem. But SOS is a bad person because of it?
 
The club may have. I'm saying "we" - the bigfooty posters don't know.
And we are discussing SOS’s actions at the time. Obviously you guys wouldn’t have known then but you have a fair idea now, what’s your thoughts? Because we still get many posts harping on about how SOS cleaned up Reid.
 
Come on. 2017 Gibbs had a great year for us. 2018 was top 5 in b & f for you. Complete speculation as to whether there was/is a gambling problem. But SOS is a bad person because of it?
So you don’t think there is a gambling problem or it just started this year?
 
And we are discussing SOS’s actions at the time. Obviously you guys wouldn’t have known then but you have a fair idea now, what’s your thoughts? Because we still get many posts harping on about how SOS cleaned up Reid.
We are still guessing. Perhaps more information now to make an educated guess, but still guessing.

In any case, we can now clearly say it was a good business decision.

The humanitarian aspect has many variables which we are just guessing on:

-How bad was the gambling problem? How much would it improve (if any) if he was sent to Adelaide?
-How bad were the other issues? How much would it improve (if any) if he was sent to Adelaide?

Anyway, the point is Master Justin had the opportunity the year earlier to be "humanitarian" and get Gibbs over by trading the 2 first rounders then too. He chose not to as it would be irresponsible.
 
We are still guessing. Perhaps more information now to make an educated guess, but still guessing.

In any case, we can now clearly say it was a good business decision.

The humanitarian aspect has many variables which we are just guessing on:

-How bad was the gambling problem? How much would it improve (if any) if he was sent to Adelaide?
-How bad were the other issues? How much would it improve (if any) if he was sent to Adelaide?

Anyway, the point is Master Justin had the opportunity the year earlier to be "humanitarian" and get Gibbs over by trading the 2 first rounders then too. He chose not to as it would be irresponsible.
It was and it was the following year. Perhaps his humanitarian side won out whilst SOS continued to be an a-hole.
 
So you don’t think there is a gambling problem or it just started this year?
I have absolutely no knowledge of a gambling problem (And nor would I)
However As a pretty ardent follower of big footy and the blues I can confirm that I have read and heard some of the most ridiculously and patently untrue gossip about nearly every footballer over the years.

I can confirm that I did not hear one iota of any gossip regarding Bryce stating that he had a gambling problem prior to him leaving the blues.
 
It's an interesting take. So it appears that SOS has gone from being incompetent (start of year) to being a tough heartless hombre who has used the poor unsuspecting crows as a dumping ground.
 
Come on. 2017 Gibbs had a great year for us. 2018 was top 5 in b & f for you. Complete speculation as to whether there was/is a gambling problem. But SOS is a bad person because of it?
Very good 1st half, polled 7 Brownlow votes (3-2-2) in 3 out of the 1st 9 games and then has gone down-hill from there.....luckily we only really gave you pick 10 in a weak draft (as we got an equivalent 1st rounder back from you in a very strong draft) ;)
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

It was and it was the following year. Perhaps his humanitarian side won out whilst SOS continued to be an a-hole.
Lol fair enough, but again we are just guessing. At the end of the day, humanitarian-wise we are just guessing.

From a business POV, I am glad you and many other Crows fans have admitted the trade was 2 first rounders and irresponsible. Funny to watch the remaining denialists deny it still.
 
I’m sure Reid did and which is fair.

So odds are SOS held him there for another year even when he knew there were personal issues and even the following year played funny buggers.

And yet you all laud SOS and the way he acted.

Come on mate, you'd want our guys to do the same.

We're the dumb dickheads who traded for a bloke with massive personal issues.
 
Come on mate, you'd want our guys to do the same.

We're the dumb dickheads who traded for a bloke with massive personal issues.
I know we are, but I think given the circumstances we’d be more accommodating, if it was Noble we would have given them picks
 
It's an interesting take. So it appears that SOS has gone from being incompetent (start of year) to being a tough heartless hombre who has used the poor unsuspecting crows as a dumping ground.
Whynotboth.gif
 
I was pretty sure that gibbs was going to take his career to the next level at the crows. Pretty different environment in terms of success and experience coming from the Blues to Adelaide at the time he was traded. If he'd done that and you got close to another flag than it'd be a completely different discussion. I don't think Justin Reid and the powers that be were far off the mark with the trade had it all worked out. Maybe a bit out, but again, had all the pieces fallen into place than it's a genius move. Can imagine Gibbs with a Norm Smith and/or GF medal? You win some, you lose some. We had Warnock ahead of Jacobs and let him go along with Eddie. A fairly glaring error in judgement in hindsight. Eddie so so (and it's been great watching him to be honest) for me but Jacobs was a bad one. Where's Warnock right now?

As for the curse Graham Cornes brought it up on 5AA and begged Bryce to not take the number 6 jumper when the trade was done. Seemed a bit odd at the time but old 'stud' was convinced it was a bad choice.
I didnt. There is a fallacy on big footy that a good player in a weak midfield will take his game to another level when he goes to a team with a good midfield. Supposedly having the extra talent around him will take the opposition attention away from him and allow him to get more of it. What actually happens is that he can no longer shine and he has more competition from team mates to get the ball and look good.
Gibbs was a good B grader in a weak side. In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king.
 
lol .. FMD, you're more than a bit of a dickhead

Laugh out loud, * my dick hehehe, giggle giggle.
What was your problem with my post?

The poster says Adelaide has a potent midfield.. despite Crouch's being good players (sitting about the 20 - 30th best midfielders in the competition) I don't think they are potent - in fact the opposite - impotent - they are not attacking, damaging midfielders.

I would call Smith, Milera and Sloane potent players from Adelaides lineup.
Crouch's - no.. what is the hurt factor on each of Matt's possessions - at 9 metres gained per possession and 5 turnovers per match I'd say not very much.

Comparing it to
Sloane 14m gained / possession
Milera 14.7m gained / posession
Smith 22.5m gained / possession

and some actual potent midfielders
Bont 19m gained / possession
Martin 17m gained / possession
Yeo 16 m gained / possession
Kelly 15m gained / possession
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top