Tippett's Gone - READ RULES BEFORE POSTING

[WaynesWorld19]

Ignoring cap implications, we draft for 3-5 years down the line; FA's are for help now.

Yup. The crouch argument frustrates me too. We paid for him last year, and not at give away prices.

I think we'd do that deal again with hindsight too, but he was an expensive buy back in 2011. In no way can he be seen rationally as a freebie in 2012

hate that photo of Crouch's photo with this years draftees ......PR bullcrap at its best to try and treat supporters as dumb

Crouch was last years recruit !!!!!

Crouch & Brown ended up being one of the smartest deals the club has done ..... plaudits to whoever put the idea up

 

[Sanders]

Why is it that some talls show nothing till mid career ......then flourish at a second club (Jolly, Ottens, ....even Maric)

Not sure about saying those guys had shown nothing.

We're talking a good deal lower down the pecking order here.

Take McKernan - who i also like - i agree he'll get his chances, plenty of em.

If he doesn't take them, his career has to be at risk.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Not sure about saying those guys had shown nothing.

We're talking a good deal lower down the pecking order here.

Take McKernan - who i also like - i agree he'll get his chances, plenty of em.

If he doesn't take them, his career has to be at risk.

No ....if the club perservered with Smith for 5 years ......they'll at least do the same with Mckernan understanding that as a introverted immature teen you just won't see the best of him at this age.
Hell Jenkins is 2 years older .....people forget

Losing draft picks and tall KPP guarantees he's going no-where

 

[Hank93]

FA does make up for losing our draft picks in a very slight way, in the sense that we would normally have several options available to us but would only realistically choose to exercise some of them. It's possible that a free agency option we might have chosen to ignore in 2013 in favour of bringing in a new draftee will now be taken, and so instead of simply losing the pick, we lose the difference between that pick and the free agent we end up chasing.

Of course, realistically, if the free agent was worth a damn we'd do it anyway so in practical terms it's a rubbish to imply that it will in any way make up for losing picks. It's almost as bad as claiming that adding Crouch to our list this year makes up for losing draft picks, when we already had him signed beforehand.

This only applies when you consider Crouch a 2012 draftee, which you could do considering this was technically his draft year (against his peers) and he wasn't eligible to play until next year any way.

Yes, the deal was done last year so its not making up for it, but he is still essentially a new recruit for the 2013 season (and a very likely top 5 pick in the draft pool).

 

[Sanders]

This only applies when you consider Crouch a 2012 draftee, which you could do considering this was technically his draft year (against his peers) and he wasn't eligible to play until next year any way.

Yes, the deal was done last year so its not making up for it, but he is still essentially a new recruit for the 2013 season (and a very likely top 5 pick in the draft pool).

No he's a 2011 recruit. Very little meaningful difference to Dangerfield.

We "bought" his rights in 2011

 

[cmndstab]

This only applies when you consider Crouch a 2012 draftee, which you could do considering this was technically his draft year (against his peers) and he wasn't eligible to play until next year any way.

Yes, the deal was done last year so its not making up for it, but he is still essentially a new recruit for the 2013 season (and a very likely top 5 pick in the draft pool).

I'm aware that he's essentially a new recruit. The point is, we already had him locked away. The fact that we had him in the past doesn't now make up for losing what we've lost. We were going to get him in addition to the draft picks. We had two commodities coming our way before, we now only have one of them. Having now lost those picks, we can't then turn around and say, well, we still have him so therefore the picks we've lost are offset by his addition to the list.

I'm not sure what amazes me more. The fact that the club has the audacity to run with this line, or the fact that it seems to be getting eaten up without question. My suspicion is that they just mentioned the Crouch thing offside at one point and were amazed to see that nobody bothered to question it, and so they just kept going with it.

 

[Paladin]

Not sure about saying those guys had shown nothing.

We're talking a good deal lower down the pecking order here.

Take McKernan - who i also like - i agree he'll get his chances, plenty of em.

If he doesn't take them, his career has to be at risk.

If Jimmy Sellar can get a shot at another club no doubt McKernan or Jenkins would also.

FA helps because we don't have to give up draft picks to sign a player. So we are in a stronger position than we would of been prior to FA coming in with regards to our penalty. Of course we could have utilised FA without the Tippett saga but no doubt it mitigates our situation to a large degree. Just imagine our sanctions without FA we would have no avenue to Top talent period!

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

FA helps because we don't have to give up draft picks to sign a player. So we are in a stronger position than we would of been prior to FA coming in with regards to our penalty. Of course we could have utilised FA without the Tippett saga but no doubt it mitigates our situation to a large degree. Just imagine our sanctions without FA we would have no avenue to Top talent period!

Maybe that was taken into account when setting our penalty

 

[jenny61_99]

I'm aware that he's essentially a new recruit. The point is, we already had him locked away. The fact that we had him in the past doesn't now make up for losing what we've lost. We were going to get him in addition to the draft picks. We had two commodities coming our way before, we now only have one of them. Having now lost those picks, we can't then turn around and say, well, we still have him so therefore the picks we've lost are offset by his addition to the list.

I'm not sure what amazes me more. The fact that the club has the audacity to run with this line, or the fact that it seems to be getting eaten up without question. My suspicion is that they just mentioned the Crouch thing offside at one point and were amazed to see that nobody bothered to question it, and so they just kept going with it.

Surely Crouch is a new recruit regardless of when he came to us? He hasn't played a game of afl. He wasn't eligible to. Dangerfield was different. He COULD have played in his first year but we allowed him to finish his schooling. Whilst we paid for Crouch last year, he is essentially a recruit for next year as that is when he'll debut. Does he make up for lost draft picks this year? No, but he sure as hell softens the blow.

 

[Sanders]

Surely Crouch is a new recruit regardless of when he came to us? He hasn't played a game of afl. He wasn't eligible to. Dangerfield was different. He COULD have played in his first year but we allowed him to finish his schooling. Whilst we paid for Crouch last year, he is essentially a recruit for next year as that is when he'll debut. Does he make up for lost draft picks this year? No, but he sure as hell softens the blow.

No...

Crouch is no more this years recruit than kerridge

All those reasons above don't apply

 

[jenny61_99]

No...

Crouch is no more this years recruit than kerridge

All those reasons above don't apply

According to who?

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

According to who?

It's pretty simple.

We should have had Crouch AND our 2012 draft picks.

Therefore he doesn't make up for us losing them.

 

[Hank93]

No he's a 2011 recruit (Wrong). Very little meaningful difference to Dangerfield (Wrong).

We "bought" his rights in 2011 (Absolutely correct)

When you look in your afl record guide to 2012, no where does it mention Crouch as a "IN:" to the list. He didn't come onto the list until this offseason. He was not eligible to play ANY football in 2012.

I realise we brought him in last year, so we're still at a net loss of 4 draft picks, but he's 2012 new recruit with the rights to him secured in 2011 according to the AFL rules. I'm not trying to spin it as some how making up for our loss of picks, I'm just stating facts.

It was up to us what we did with Danger, which is completely different to Crouch. Danger still played 2 games in 2008.

 

[Paladin]

Maybe that was taken into account when setting our penalty

No doubt Carl. Still if we do it well (FA) and sign a Griffen or Thomas or similar we can really minimise the effect of our sanctions.

If we cant sign anyone or sign another Tambling the loss of draft picks could be killer.

 

[Paladin]

Ignoring cap implications, we draft for 3-5 years down the line; FA's are for help now.




Yup. The crouch argument frustrates me too. We paid for him last year, and not at give away prices.

I think we'd do that deal again with hindsight too, but he was an expensive buy back in 2011. In no way can he be seen rationally as a freebie in 2012

You have stated this before and you are wrong again imo.

Pick 10 and Davis compo pick which turned into pick 21 this year for Brad Crouch and Luke Brown.

Brown was easily rated a top 20 pick (crows said around the mark for their pick at 10 but you have to discount that somewhat)

So your getting Crouch a top 5 prospect for pick 10. Great deal then and even better in hindsight - without seeing his career play out yet.

 

[cmndstab]

Surely Crouch is a new recruit regardless of when he came to us? He hasn't played a game of afl. He wasn't eligible to. Dangerfield was different. He COULD have played in his first year but we allowed him to finish his schooling. Whilst we paid for Crouch last year, he is essentially a recruit for next year as that is when he'll debut. Does he make up for lost draft picks this year? No, but he sure as hell softens the blow.

I don't think you understand the point I'm making. I know we haven't had access to him playing for us until this year. I know that, from an on-field perspective, he's a new recruit.

But we already had him on our list. We were going to get him anyway, in addition to the picks we lost. So when we lose the picks we can't then claim that getting him offsets them - we already had him. We can't get him twice.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

No doubt Carl. Still if we do it well (FA) and sign a Griffen or Thomas or similar we can really minimise the effect of our sanctions.

If we cant sign anyone or sign another Tambling the loss of draft picks could be killer.

Gorringe comes out of contract this year

 

[WaynesWorld19]

I don't think you understand the point I'm making. I know we haven't had access to him playing for us until this year. I know that, from an on-field perspective, he's a new recruit.

But we already had him on our list. We were going to get him anyway, in addition to the picks we lost. So when we lose the picks we can't then claim that getting him offsets them - we already had him. We can't get him twice.

Correct ......does that mean if Joyce plays his first AFL game in 2014 ...that makes him a 2014 recruit ?
Course not
No difference to a first year recruit doing a knee and not playing to the following year .....he's always a recruit in the year he's drafted

 

[Elite Crow]

Gorringe comes out of contract this year

And what are we going to give up for him? A third round draft pick?

 

[Wright Away]

According to who?

According reality, facts and logic

 

[Elite Crow]

Fox footy are showing the Richmond game, Tippett has been non existent. For a player earning such a huge cash shit he has a lot of quiet games

 

[WaynesWorld19]

And what are we going to give up for him? A third round draft pick?

No he's going to claim "homesick" ....put himself in the draft and not speak to any other club or do any medicals

But seriously could be a player trade if Gorringe doesn't get opportunities this year

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Fox footy are showing the Richmond game, Tippett has been non existent. For a player earning such a huge cash shit he has a lot of quiet games

Not sure how much you can read into this year?

Remember early on how aggressive Tippett was at going for the ball and mark ......fighting fiercely for front position.

Many times this year he was limply putting his hands in the air ..... that aggressive/competitive approach was very much diminished.
Not sure how many times he wrestled his opponent in a one on one and took the mark ...or that pack mark ...but it seemed many of his marks this year were more leading

Seemed to reflect his attitude to Adelaide and club

 

[Slippery Pete]

It's pretty simple.

We should have had Crouch AND our 2012 draft picks.

Therefore he doesn't make up for us losing them.

This is the sort of rocket science not within the grasp of the 5AA Sports Show.

 

[Slippery Pete]

I don't think you understand the point I'm making. I know we haven't had access to him playing for us until this year. I know that, from an on-field perspective, he's a new recruit.

But we already had him on our list. We were going to get him anyway, in addition to the picks we lost. So when we lose the picks we can't then claim that getting him offsets them - we already had him. We can't get him twice.

The worst part is that it shouldn't need explaining.