Remove this Banner Ad

Tippett's Gone - READ RULES BEFORE POSTING

  • Thread starter Thread starter doodle48
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

Which AFC deserter were/are you most salty towards?


  • Total voters
    33
  • Poll closed .

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sydney has a better chance of winning now without Kurt because they cannot keep on bombing it in to him and will need to rely on their other players. The Swans exploded last week, esp in that 3rd quarter.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

All jokes aside, there was some serious discussion earlier in the week in the media (forget where), which severely questioned his value and contribution to the Swans - and they felt the Swans were better off without him. Maybe they read BF. ;)
 
All jokes aside, there was some serious discussion earlier in the week in the media (forget where), which severely questioned his value and contribution to the Swans - and they felt the Swans were better off without him. Maybe they read BF. ;)
Not sure about that, one of the stations showed a graphic, where it made no difference, they'd won and lost the same amount, there scores were nearly identical with and without him.
 
Froggy precisely! :) Having a slow night are we? :p
No there's a difference between being better off without him and it not mattering whether or not he plays (other than the money factor)
 
Froggy precisely! :) Having a slow night are we? :p
No there's a difference between being better off without him and it not mattering whether or not he plays (other than the money factor). Your implying that people say they win more without him than they loose, im saying they win the same amount with or without him, sure your not having the slow night ;)
 
Hard to say he adds much if the effect with or without him is neutral?
That is true, but I'm not trying to say he adds much, I'm saying he adds nothing which is different to hindering them
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Adding nothing on field while consuming a vast amount of the salary cap as their highest paid player sounds like a pretty big hinderance to me
Which is where I point you to this post
No there's a difference between being better off without him and it not mattering whether or not he plays (other than the money factor). Your implying that people say they win more without him than they loose, im saying they win the same amount with or without him, sure your not having the slow night ;)
 
Adding nothing on field while consuming a vast amount of the salary cap as their highest paid player sounds like a pretty big hinderance to me

Gaining Tippett for free in the PSD and being able to pay him in COLA has not hindered Sydney from gaining or retaining any other player. They even kept White as backup and will benefit come the prelim.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

He beat up on some lower sides which got the chubbies going in Sydney.

Was rubbish against Geelong, has a rest to avoid Hawks, then rubbish against Hawks, then another spell against Carlton.
 
Of course paying Tippett a million dollars is a hindrance. It's not as though that money was just going to disappear if they didn't spent it on him. They could have spent it elsewhere, or frontended a contract, or whatever.

I'm not at all convinced that he's added nothing to their side, though.
The only player I could see Sydney missing out on is Franklin. Sydney had a lot of spare cash given recent retirements.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom