Remove this Banner Ad

The whether to go for another year conundrum

  • Thread starter Thread starter 1970crow
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Joined
Jun 7, 2011
Posts
69,654
Reaction score
77,454
Location
Mount Gambier
AFL Club
Adelaide
Not a problem at our club, but other clubs seem to agonise over it a bit. Kornes, goodes, Judd, all champs of their club entered this season without a contract for 2015. Korne's form has gotten him another year and the other 2 warrant another year although there's an element of risk as to whether they would run next year out as strong as this year.

At the adelaide crows, we seem to have a different strategy. We seem to contract our players to their absolute last year and sometimes beyond. Who was the last player who didn't limp to their retirement at the end of a multi-year contract. From memory we had the goody, Edwards, macca group who I think all signed 1 year deals to finish their careers.

On our current list we have an abundance of players playing out their last or future years in the 2's or risk not playing at all;

Rutten 2014
Porps 2014
Thommo 2015
Reilly 2015
Pods 2015
Van berlo 2016
Mackay 2018

That's about 20% of the usable list that is/was potentially over-contracted. It can't just be about the sanctions because we just signed mackay for 4 as we are about to re-enter the draft and he's only about 2 decent midfielders away from becoming an sanfl stalwart.

I accept there are a couple of arguable players listed, but across the group and the risk associated with each player, it seems like a lot to me.
 
Weren't we well known for only giving single year deals once a player turned 30?
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Weren't we well known for only giving single year deals once a player turned 30?

Yes we were, it was a policy at the time that applied to every player, and I wonder if that's the question behind the thread. Have we purposefully changed to the other end of the spectrum.
 
We have a low appetite for risk - the over 30 rule caused too much controversy and was abolished. It's the same mentality that drove us to put Craigy on staff and give Sanderson a contract extension well before it was needed or deserved.
 
We have a low appetite for risk - the over 30 rule caused too much controversy and was abolished. It's the same mentality that drove us to put Craigy on staff and give Sanderson a contract extension well before it was needed or deserved.

A similar strategy appears to be applied in the non-football operation of the club as well. The over-riding view that we've already got what we need in-house. It's just a matter of being a bit better or adjusting a skill-set.
 
We have a low appetite for risk - the over 30 rule caused too much controversy and was abolished. It's the same mentality that drove us to put Craigy on staff and give Sanderson a contract extension well before it was needed or deserved.

Understatement of the year. Bunch of handbag clutching nannnas.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Think Thommo will retire at the end of this season. Will probably announce it before St.Kilda game.
Imo he will play out his contract next year.

Reilly I'm less sure will play on as no longer part of best 22.
 
Pretty certain his last kick in the AFL was a goal that put us infront of Hawthorn in the 07 Elimination final - hard up against the boundry near the 50 -

Then that Franklin moment happened....

From memory he kicked a similar goal in the 2006 final against Freo when the game was on the line.

"Franklin moment" more a "Neil Craig/Massie" moment.
 
Pretty certain his last kick in the AFL was a goal that put us infront of Hawthorn in the 07 Elimination final - hard up against the boundry near the 50 -

Then that Franklin moment happened....
No it didn't, and you can't convince me otherwise.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom