Opinion The 'Carlton related stuff that doesn't need it's own thread' thread Part 2

[goreds]

lie down with dogs, geth...........

End up on top of the ladder??

 

[thylacine60]

I thought I dungeoned you?

 

[Blue_Fusion]

I'd be interested in hearing specifically where I was disrespectful.

In any case, though, it's probably worth saying that respect is earned, and you're being rather rude.

Being a smart arse is generally disrespectful behaviour, particularly when it's unwarranted.

Didn't realise asking for respect was rather rude...

In what way is this not a broad question? Need I define what a broad question is first?

It's not broad for reasons I've already outlined. He was our list manager from 2015-2019. So 5 years is a great sample size. 2 years nearly since he's been gone. Was what he did good or bad?

You knew exactly what I was asking...

I point to a lack of players taken ready to play AFL level immediately, and a desire to cut players that have demonstrated that they had rather a lot of footy to give.

Henderson got us McKay, but what if instead of drafting both Harry and Charlie, we had gotten just one? Instead of trading Tuohy, we'd retained him? Gibbs couldn't have been convinced to remain?

Did we have to cut as hard and completely as we did?

TPK ahead of Worpel as well.

Ok, let's discuss getting one of Harry or Charlie whilst keeping Hendo...

We'd either be short of a guy who's about to win the Coleman entering his peak. Or we wouldn't have a genuine match winner in Charlie Curnow (knee injury is irrelevant as there's no way SOS could've known at the time of drafting him). But we'd have an aging KPD instead.

Yeah, I'm sticking with SOS here. How about you?

If we didn't trade Tuohy, I'd suspect we'd still be about where we are now anyway. He's hardly the type that would make a difference. The trade was mostly facilitated to bring in Marchbank. That was clearly a gamble at the time, but there were many on here who were happy to let go of pick #5 for him...

Gibbs wanted to leave for personal and family reasons, so no I doubt very much he would've stayed.

Thank Christ he picked TDK ahead of Worpel...

Dow is not the selection I'm disputing. In isolation, the selection is fine; collectively, he's drafted a single 'ready to go' midfielder in Kennedy who then proceeded to have precisely the same injury he had at the giants which has hampered him all the way through.

It's the critical mass of small, light bodied and not immediate impact players that I'm criticising. They're there in every draft; SOS selected for ceiling, not floor, and that's my issue.

If we were more attractive earlier, could we have lured Jack Steele? What would we look like then?

Critical mass? Who are you referring to?

... you're not reading this with an interest in understanding, BF.

Go pick an argument with someone else if you're smarting for one.

So, I ask why it's necessary to bring in people from outside the club in order for us to be successful. You then tell me it hasn't worked in the past, completely ignoring the failures of the outsiders we've brought in too...

I then tell you that past is irrelevant to the future. Different people will mostly have a different way of doing things.

Yet, I'm the one smarting for an argument? I didn't even ask you in the first place. I'm always happy to have a healthy debate.

 

[Gethelred]

I thought I dungeoned you?

What can he say, he's TENACIOUS.

 

[thylacine60]

I guess.

 

[thylacine60]

I see

 

[Gethelred]

Critical mass? Who are you referring to?

Critical mass is the smallest amount of fissionable material which is required to sustain a nuclear chain reaction; in this sense, I'm referring too many small, high ceiling/low floor mids at the same time.

So, I ask why it's necessary to bring in people from outside the club in order for us to be successful. You then tell me it hasn't worked in the past, completely ignoring the failures of the outsiders we've brought in too...

Not what I said. I said (in order) that:
- we may not want to get more club champions ostracised from the club due to firing them after they fail.
- an awful lot of the people who were at Carlton recently were either not good at their roles or were eclipsed by other clubs; ie, that they weren't successful, and neither were we.
- those we have remaining have, in the majority, left football, and might be bringing in an outdated model for how a football club/department should be run.

At no point did I say that it hasn't worked in the past, or have I even mentioned the failures of the outsiders we've brought in.

If you wish to put further words in my mouth, could you at least take me to dinner first?

I then tell you that past is irrelevant to the future. Different people will mostly have a different way of doing things.

The past has a way of informing the future, especially when people seek to ignore it and damn the torpedoes.

Yet, I'm the one smarting for an argument?

Yep.

I didn't even ask you in the first place. I'm always happy to have a healthy debate.

You're always up for a fight, you mean.

You go through patches in which you seem to actively pursue an argument on here. Unfortunately, I don't have time to accommodate you further today; I have studying to avoid.

 

[Lace_Out]

Pagan was an outsider and so was Bolton..

So we've gone, outside, inside, outside, outside, inside

That's 2/5 that are/were Carlton people...

So that doesn't answer how bringing Carlton people in are an ongoing problem?

Just trying to ascertain why it's necessary to bring in outsiders in order to obtain success?

Silvagni was not an outsider.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

 

[Blue_Fusion]

Critical mass is the smallest amount of fissionable material which is required to sustain a nuclear chain reaction; in this sense, I'm referring too many small, high ceiling/low floor mids at the same time.

Yes but who are these many small high ceiling/low floor mids specifically? Surely you're not talking about the salary cap dumps from GWS?

Not what I said. I said (in order) that:
- we may not want to get more club champions ostracised from the club due to firing them after they fail.
- an awful lot of the people who were at Carlton recently were either not good at their roles or were eclipsed by other clubs; ie, that they weren't successful, and neither were we.
- those we have remaining have, in the majority, left football, and might be bringing in an outdated model for how a football club/department should be run.

Or, praising them as legends if they succeed...

The Old Dark Navy's original point was they would have more passion for the club.

At no point did I say that it hasn't worked in the past, or have I even mentioned the failures of the outsiders we've brought in.

You literally said it here in this very post:

- an awful lot of the people who were at Carlton recently were either not good at their roles or were eclipsed by other clubs; ie, that they weren't successful, and neither were we.

and here:

Carlton people from this side of the millennium - during which footy has changed an awful lot - haven't been the most successful.

If you wish to put further words in my mouth, could you at least take me to dinner first?

I didn't put words in your mouth... or posts. I've quoted them again.. word for word.

The past has a way of informing the future, especially when people seek to ignore it and damn the torpedoes.

So Kernahan's presidency (as an example) is an indication that another president of former Carlton glory (Fraser Brown as another example) is going to lead us to more failure? ok...

Yep.

You're always up for a fight, you mean.

What fight? I'm merely pointing out the logical flaws in what you're saying.

You go through patches in which you seem to actively pursue an argument on here. Unfortunately, I don't have time to accommodate you further today; I have further studying to avoid doing.

Do I? So I should just allow you to rebut my point with responses I disagree with and let it slide? Well... I guess you are entitled to your opinion..

 

[Blue_Fusion]

Silvagni was not an outsider.

Yeah, we've been discussing him as an insider and his effect for the last couple pages...

 

[gab213]

Yeah but just because some haven't been doesn't mean all won't be.

Was SOS bad for our club?

SOS wasn't bad for our club in the way he did his job but his departure whenever it occurred and however it occurred was always a given to be messy. If his name was Bill Bloggs nobody would have cared all too much.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

SOS wasn't bad for our club in the way he did his job but his departure whenever it occurred and however it occurred was always a given to be messy. If his name was Bill Bloggs nobody would have cared all too much.

Bill Bloggs was a genius when it came to trading. Made the most of very little currency so we didn't have to go to the draft for one top line talent per year, and picked up physically developed players to help us through a tough period. People look and see failed recruitment. I look at players like Jed Lamb playing 44 games over 3 years as achieving exactly what it was supposed to achieve.

I still would have hated losing that tough negotiator Billy Bloggs.

 

[gab213]

Bill Bloggs was a genius when it came to trading. Made the most of very little currency so we didn't have to go to the draft for one top line talent per year, and picked up physically developed players to help us through a tough period. People look and see failed recruitment. I look at players like Jed Lamb playing 44 games over 3 years as achieving exactly what it was supposed to achieve.

I still would have hated losing that tough negotiator Billy Bloggs.

On the balance of things, I think he did a pretty good job, I wasn't really commenting on his competency. I'm sure that we would have hated losing that Billy Bloggs too but we would have gotten over it more quickly.

I agree with you on players such as Lamb too, they came in and performed in a role as long as we needed them to. Our players would have been smashed twice as hard without them in the team.

All I'm saying was that the breakup, whenever it came was going to be difficult.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

All I'm saying was that the breakup, whenever it came was going to be difficult.

There didn't need to be a breakup.

 

[gab213]

There didn't need to be a breakup.

Well, not at that time but it was always going to happen at some point in time.

 

[footyfan1978]

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Well, not at that time but it was always going to happen at some point in time.

No, it could have just been a mutual parting of the ways with zero angst. Forces made it untenable.

 

[Blue_Fusion]

SOS wasn't bad for our club in the way he did his job but his departure whenever it occurred and however it occurred was always a given to be messy. If his name was Bill Bloggs nobody would have cared all too much.

Not really. It only got messy because of an outsider sticking his nose where it doesn't belong.

 

[gab213]

Not really. It only got messy because of an outsider sticking his nose where it doesn't belong.

Fair enough, that's your opinion but I predicted a messy exit from when he was appointed, SOS is a prickly character. That's just from knowing his persona, it's not a criticism of him.

 

[Stig O'Hara]

Levity - noun

‘That trick magicians do’

Pretty sure.

 

[Stamos]

but I have my doubts we needed to cut so deep and so hard

I can only think of one cut that was even debatable, and it's only debatable due to Marchbank's horror run with injuries.

 

[gab213]

No, it could have just been a mutual parting of the ways with zero angst. Forces made it untenable.

We'll have to disagree, SOS has never left a club without there being some level of angst involved, he's not an easy person to get along with. Once again, not a criticism, just how he is.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

We'll have to disagree, SOS has never left a club without there being some level of angst involved, he's not an easy person to get along with. Once again, not a criticism, just how he is.

Is this fact or speculation? Assistant coach at 4 clubs and List Manager at 2. He kept getting hired despite angst at 6 clubs?

I get the GWS exist may not have been great considering he was poached and took Brodie with him. That's not a character flaw though. GWS were content to keep him for quite a while.

I see him as a quiet, introverted type who doesn't speak for the sake of speaking. Being that way myself, I can see how it comes across as being bristly. It really is quite the opposite though.

 

[Gethelred]

You literally said it here in this very post:
and here:
I didn't put words in your mouth... or posts. I've quoted them again.. word for word.

Again...

You've misinterpreted what I've said in an effort to find something to argue with. Go shake your jowls at someone that cares about your opinion.

So Kernahan's presidency (as an example) is an indication that another president of former Carlton glory (Fraser Brown as another example) is going to lead us to more failure? ok...

More misinterpretation.

Next time you put words I haven't said in my mouth, I'm laying charges, and that's being generous.

What fight? I'm merely pointing out the logical flaws in what you're saying.

No, you're misinterpreting my posts and quoting specific sentences shorn of context in order to disagree with me.

I think you need to look up the definition of logic and the definition of flaw up, because at best you've exposed flaws in inductive reasoning.

Do I? So I should just allow you to rebut my point with responses I disagree with and let it slide? Well... I guess you are entitled to your opinion..

You clearly have no respect for my responses, seeing as you feel yourself free to disassociate the words I use from their meanings.

As for 'let it slide', you wondered why I might form the impression you're a bit anxious for a fight?

 

[gab213]

Is this fact or speculation? Assistant coach at 4 clubs and List Manager at 2. He kept getting hired despite angst at 6 clubs?

I get the GWS exist may not have been great considering he was poached and took Brodie with him. That's not a character flaw though. GWS were content to keep him for quite a while.

I see him as a quiet, introverted type who doesn't speak for the sake of speaking. Being that way myself, I can see how it comes across as being bristly. It really is quite the opposite though.

I understand the introversion as I'm much the same, he clearly isn't an extrovert, when he speaks it's quite considered, there's no doubt about that at all. I understand sitting back and observing, I spent the first few years on this board doing that to take in what is what and who is who As I said, I wasn't criticising him but he can be prickly as well. He's been like that from when he was a kid.