Top 5 Most Disappointing Recruits in 2016

[Melksham2Siposs]

I thought Carlisle was turning 27 next year. He's one ugly dude for 24. Bonus though.

He can still play another 200 games. Gresh 300 games. 500 games for a pick that ended up around the 8/9 mark.




The Richmond Yarran thing has ended up a nightmare. We all overate our young stock, but their recruitment team must have been snorting xanax.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

The Richmond Yarran thing has ended up a nightmare. We all overate our young stock, but their recruitment team must have been snorting xanax.

At least there is time for Yarran! Reece Conca was even worse by Richmond!

 

[King Wavo]

Jesus Christ

Where to begin with this muppet

Hmm how was what I wrote incorrect?

• I got his salary wrong??? ($600,000-800,000)
• You only slightly downgraded your pick and actually picked up a promising player (Gresham) as well???
• Behavioural problems were most likely a one-off and in some part can possibly be related back to the ASADA inquiries?

???

 

[Ian Dunross]

So you were wrong in every part

 

[dewah07]

So you were wrong in every part

this guy (King Wavo) was a guy who last week said he followed the draft closer than a lot of people and then said carts wasnt rated in the top 10.

 

[Roadto2018]

Based on what?

Well you're not guaranteed to get a better one, and as I've said it's likely we would've picked Gresham at 6, so really didn't lose anything if you look at it that way

 

[Sweet Jesus]

Well you're not guaranteed to get a better one

You're not guaranteed to get a better player with pick 1 either. Does that mean you would have traded pick 1 for Carlisle?

 

[Roadto2018]

You're not guaranteed to get a better player with pick 1 either. Does that mean you would have traded pick 1 for Carlisle?

Pick 1 is different to pick 5.... Also not likely to get the same player at 14 that you want at 1 like we did with 5 and 14

 

[Sweet Jesus]

Pick 1 is different to pick 5.... Also not likely to get the same player at 14 that you want at 1 like we did with 5 and 14

My point is you're not guaranteed to get anything with any pick.

If your criteria is 'we weren't guaranteed to get a better player with pick 5', you could say the same about pick 1. Does that mean you'd trade pick 1 for Carlisle?

 

[TwentyNine]

At 35 North will offer him a three year deal to switch clubs.

Never heard that one before!

I thought Carlisle was turning 27 next year. He's one ugly dude for 24. Bonus though.

He can still play another 200 games. Gresh 300 games. 500 games for a pick that ended up around the 8/9 mark.




The Richmond Yarran thing has ended up a nightmare. We all overate our young stock, but their recruitment team must have been snorting xanax.

This post might be the greatest unintentional work of comedy I ever saw.

 

[Footy4thekids]

Never heard that one before!

Truth nothing more.


This post might be the greatest unintentional work of comedy I ever saw.

Can see both being key players for years.

 

[Ian Dunross]

My point is you're not guaranteed to get anything with any pick.

If your criteria is 'we weren't guaranteed to get a better player with pick 5', you could say the same about pick 1. Does that mean you'd trade pick 1 for Carlisle?

I read it to mean that pick 6 for Carlisle and pick 14 is good value because unlikely you'll find a player at pick 6 worth more than Carlisle and who they thought they could get w pick 14

Pretty uncontroversial

 

[King Wavo]

this guy (King Wavo) was a guy who last week said he followed the draft closer than a lot of people and then said carts wasnt rated in the top 10.

Took a bit a heat for that one

 

[Sweet Jesus]

I read it to mean that pick 6 for Carlisle and pick 14 is good value because unlikely you'll find a player at pick 6 worth more than Carlisle and who they thought they could get w pick 14

Why is that unlikely?

I'm not sure why you're paraphrasing someone else's post. He justified the trade because "you're not guaranteed to get a better player" with pick 5. He underlined the word guaranteed. So I don't know how you "read that to mean" something else.

My question is: if that's the critieria, you'd trade pick 1 as well, wouldn't you? Because you're not guaranteed to get a better player with that pick either.

 

[Ian Dunross]

Fair enough, I can't speak for the other poster

But mine is the equation that I'd be weighing if is was the Saints recruiter

 

[dewah07]

Took a bit a heat for that one

your new to BF but just don't BS and you'll be fine.

 

[juss]

Would people say the same things about Yarran if he had done his ACL and missed the season? Its time people started treating mental health like any other health issue. It happens and he deserves the same support that someone with a health issue would get. Injuries sometimes just happen from bad luck, so can mental health issues.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

Would people say the same things about Yarran if he had done his ACL and missed the season? Its time people started treating mental health like any other health issue. It happens and he deserves the same support that someone with a health issue would get. Injuries sometimes just happen from bad luck, so can mental health issues.

I guess the thing with Yarran is that there were question marks about his preparedness to play at the top level while still at Carlton. Yet Richmond still parted with pick 19.

 

[aussierulesrules]

The ex-Essendon guys are a bit of a separate case I reckon as it's still more than likely that Jake Carlisle has plenty of high quality football left in him. Negative publicity early on was a bit of a disaster, but scandals blow over and he's had a fair bit of time out of the spotlight so there's still a pretty good chance that the Saints will be happy with what they've got.

The year off could be very good for Carlisle for a number of reasons. For one, he's apparently had knee tendonitis for the last few years, so hopefully the year off has allowed that to heal to some degree and he also had a hip operation a few months ago, to fix up something else that I think had been troubling him for a while, so the year off could really help his body in general to get through the next phase of his career and to get right back to his very best when he returns.

Then from a mental and maturity POV it could also help as well, as not having to play could give him the mental break he looked like he needed by the end of last season and prior to his hip op he was working as an assistant site manager on a construction site, so hopefully having to do a 9-to-5 job (especially in a role that has some responsibility) will help him to mature and also appreciate the fact that he gets to play footy for a living.

Will be really interesting to see how he goes when he returns.

 

[TwentyNine]

Would people say the same things about Yarran if he had done his ACL and missed the season? Its time people started treating mental health like any other health issue. It happens and he deserves the same support that someone with a health issue would get. Injuries sometimes just happen from bad luck, so can mental health issues.

That's a fair point to make and it's a very serious issue, but it's also pretty clear he has not approached his footy in a professional manner for a while now, and this was not unknown to Richmond when they recruited him. I don't think the club can reasonably plead 'bad luck', though certainly it's fair to say that the man himself should be supported by the community through this bad patch as much as is possible.

 

[Zach Package]

Bizarre post. I don't think there is a single person in the footy world who would have expected him to be anything other than reserve option who comes in and puts up a contest in a ruck in case of emergency. Which is exactly what he has done. From where does the biterness stem?

Fair is fair, he's been recruited by two clubs to be capable depth and hasn't looked like it.

The fact that he's been shunted to the side in favour of two non ruckmen in McKernan and Mitch Brown should tell you all you need to know.

 

[King Wavo]

your new to BF but just don't BS and you'll be fine.

Apparently poorly researched, hate-filled, biased commentary isn't welcomed here.

 

[dewah07]

Apparently poorly researched, hate-filled, biased commentary isn't welcomed here.

If your attackig anouther teams player then yes.

 

[Roadto2018]

My point is you're not guaranteed to get anything with any pick.

If your criteria is 'we weren't guaranteed to get a better player with pick 5', you could say the same about pick 1. Does that mean you'd trade pick 1 for Carlisle?

That's not my criteria at all, we filled a huge need with Carlisle and got the same player we would've got at 6 anyway, get that through your thick skull. You're just trying to argue for the sake of it, you'd have a minor and insignificant point IF that's the only reason why I'm saying we traded for Carlisle, which it isn't, and at no point have I said that.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

That's not my criteria at all, we filled a huge need with Carlisle and got the same player we would've got at 6 anyway, get that through your thick skull.

You said "you're not guaranteed" to get a better player at pick 5. You underlined it.

If that means that it made sense to trade that pick, then you could say the same about pick 1.

The point is that you're not guaranteed anything with any pick. That doesn't make any pick more or less tradeable.