Trigg on 5AA

[jenny61_99]

• AFL CEO meeting next week. Only thing on agenda is equalisation.
• Collingwood and Hawthorn will be affected most. Bottom teams (GWS/St Kilda/ will benefit most.
• Gaming profits. Fixture and TV exposure. Profitability. Attendance at games. etc. might be taxed.
• Hard to know how it will effect us? Obviously no gaming profits for us so no cost.
• Asked why no-one wants capping on Footy department spend? Trigg says don't cap innovation/health/sports science. But certain salaries (that doesn't affect progression) could be looked at. (not sure what that means).
• Discussed Aiden Riley's departure. He had been promised a rookie spot, but they absolutely understood him taking up the offer to a main list. He said he was well liked and will be missed. Said they felt he will make it, but they just didn't have the spot for him on the main list. Wished him all the best.
• Talked about corporate sponsorship - 3 out of 70 boxes left. Most other levels of corporate sponsorship nearing capacity. As is general membership.
• Thinks Adelaide Oval will be a great venue. Surface should be good. Looking at making games more interactive, getting the crowd more involved (competing against free to air). Generally looking at doing things differently and making it more of an experience for members.
• Coaching development program for all levels of coaching from Sando down. Helping them with strategies to deal with Gen Y (and Gen Z) players who all have vastly different learning styles to the players of old.

Think that pretty much covers it.

 

[Elder van Berlo]

[*]Discussed Aiden Riley's departure. He had been promised a rookie spot, but they absolutely understood him taking up the offer to a main list. He said he was well liked and will be missed. Said they felt he will make it, but they just didn't have the spot for him on the main list. Wished him all the best.

This is a bit galling when Jaensch, Martin and Graham remain on the senior list. Is our salary cap that tight that we can't afford to pay out a year of one contract?

If we don't think Riley is up to it, fine. But if we do, the squeeze for list spots is a pretty poor reason not to give him another contract.

 

[The Sloane Ranger]

This is a bit galling when Jaensch, Martin and Graham remain on the senior list. Is our salary cap that tight that we can't afford to pay out a year of one contract?

If we don't think Riley is up to it, fine. But if we do, the squeeze for list spots is a pretty poor reason not to give him another contract.

Spot on the money

 

[Deaneus!]

• AFL CEO meeting next week. Only thing on agenda is equalisation.

Think that pretty much covers it.

I find it interesting that a meeting between all the CEOs is happening the same week as the draft, perhaps a good way to keep the outcome of the meeting in the background lest it be unfavourable?

 

[Niximus]

This is a bit galling when Jaensch, Martin and Graham remain on the senior list. Is our salary cap that tight that we can't afford to pay out a year of one contract?

If we don't think Riley is up to it, fine. But if we do, the squeeze for list spots is a pretty poor reason not to give him another contract.

I don't see the point of delisting contracted players if we're just going to be stuck with another list clogger that will now have a 2-year contract.

it just makes no sense to me.

Was giving them contract extensions a mistake? IMO yes.
But also IMO, the Riley delisting and Vince trade has signaled to me a change in attitude. I don't expect extensions will be as easy to come by for fringe players, and others will be moved on when needed.

 

[Elder van Berlo]

But that's the whole point. According to Trigg, Riley wasn't considered a list clogger.

If the club really does rate him as being good enough, they should have kept him and dumped a contracted spud.

 

[Niximus]

But that's the whole point. According to Trigg, Riley wasn't considered a list clogger.

If the club really does rate him as being good enough, they should have kept him and dumped a contracted spud.

I think people read too much into the standard response. Of course we're going to say all nice things about him, do people expect otherwise.

As they say, 'Actions speak louder than words', if we really rated him, we wouldn't have delisted him.

 

[40porpoise]

I don't see the point of delisting contracted players if we're just going to be stuck with another list clogger that will now have a 2-year contract.

it just makes no sense to me.

Was giving them contract extensions a mistake? IMO yes.
But also IMO, the Riley delisting and Vince trade has signaled to me a change in attitude. I don't expect extensions will be as easy to come by for fringe players, and others will be moved on when needed.

Plus when it comes to midfield depth compared to line breaking/outside player depth it makes sense to prioritise Martin and Jaensch (even though they're spuds).

 

[jenny61_99]

But that's the whole point. According to Trigg, Riley wasn't considered a list clogger.

If the club really does rate him as being good enough, they should have kept him and dumped a contracted spud.

I think it's more a case of the players ahead of him already in the squad. He's not competing with jaensch and Martin for a spot in the 22, he's competing against a very good group of young players. It is more likely we would have rookied him as a depth player, nothing more. If we'd wanted him as a part of the 22, he would have been signed. Instead we've said, we will rookie list him, but there's no guarantee of a spot. He rightly looked at other options. It's no real major loss to us and it's a win for him.

 

[The Sloane Ranger]

I think it's more a case of the players ahead of him already in the squad. He's not competing with jaensch and Martin for a spot in the 22, he's competing against a very good group of young players. It is more likely we would have rookied him as a depth player, nothing more. If we'd wanted him as a part of the 22, he would have been signed. Instead we've said, we will rookie list him, but there's no guarantee of a spot. He rightly looked at other options. It's no real major loss to us and it's a win for him.

Interesting to read that Melb believe that Pigdog can also play front or back which means that there is no reason why he could not have competed with Martin or Jaensch

Personally I believe coaches can be career killers by pigeon holing players to certain roles only, Tambling is another example of a pkayer that we persisted with as a defender and refused to give game time in another role such as wing or HF

 

[jenny61_99]

Interesting to read that Melb believe that Pigdog can also play front or back which means that there is no reason why he could not have competed with Martin or Jaensch

Personally I believe coaches can be career killers by pigeon holing players to certain roles only, Tambling is another example of a pkayer that we persisted with as a defender and refused to give game time in another role such as wing or HF

I guess coaches would have an idea what players are best suited to though? Sure they'd make mistakes from time to time, but on the whole, they would have a fair and reasonable idea.

 

[Cap]

But that's the whole point. According to Trigg, Riley wasn't considered a list clogger.

If the club really does rate him as being good enough, they should have kept him and dumped a contracted spud.

um.he was delisted and offered a rookie contract.

Id say that pretty much indicates the club view him as list clogger material.

 

[macca23]

Think that pretty much covers it.

Well done jenny, excellent summary IMO.

Two intangibles that went with what he actually said

- the old Trigg confidence/arrogance is back, after a couple of low key efforts on radio prior to this one. I found it impossible not to bracket them, as a confident Trigg always sounds arrogant along with it.

- whenever he talks about anything to do with the playing list, he carefully avoids any reference to our drafting handicaps that will naturally affect our playing list. Equally 5aa avoid any reference to these drafting sanctions when talking to Trigg. For obvious reasons one would have to say.

A fair percentage of Crows fans, myself included, thought that Trigg should have been gone as a result of his role in the Tippett saga. He hasn't, and once this year's draft is over, I'll probably gradually move on and accept that he is still the CEO, because our participation in future drafts will go back to normal.

However, the one thing that he hasn't done (unless I missed it) when he came back from his suspension, was to apologize publicly on radio to the members of the Club for the damage that his actions have done to the Club in the last 2 years drafts, the flow-on effect to the playing squad and to the overall, and the overall standing and reputation of the club.

It's very hard to completely forgive somebody that doesn't bare their soul and say sorry.

 

[spenze]

Whereas I often shake my head at the crap you espouse, but felt that was just a low blow...










Just funning ya.

I often shake my head when I re read my own posts, don't worry.

 

[spenze]

However, the one thing that he hasn't done (unless I missed it) when he came back from his suspension, was to apologize publicly on radio to the members of the Club for the damage that his actions have done to the Club in the last 2 years drafts, the flow-on effect to the playing squad and to the overall, and the overall standing and reputation of the club.

It's very hard to completely forgive somebody that doesn't bare their soul and say sorry.

Would have gone a long way, wouldn't it?

 

[jenny61_99]

Well done jenny, excellent summary IMO.

Two intangibles that went with what he actually said

- the old Trigg confidence/arrogance is back, after a couple of low key efforts on radio prior to this one. I found it impossible not to bracket them, as a confident Trigg always sounds arrogant along with it.

- whenever he talks about anything to do with the playing list, he carefully avoids any reference to our drafting handicaps that will naturally affect our playing list. Equally 5aa avoid any reference to these drafting sanctions when talking to Trigg. For obvious reasons one would have to say.

A fair percentage of Crows fans, myself included, thought that Trigg should have been gone as a result of his role in the Tippett saga. He hasn't, and once this year's draft is over, I'll probably gradually move on and accept that he is still the CEO, because our participation in future drafts will go back to normal.

However, the one thing that he hasn't done (unless I missed it) when he came back from his suspension, was to apologize publicly on radio to the members of the Club for the damage that his actions have done to the Club in the last 2 years drafts, the flow-on effect to the playing squad and to the overall, and the overall standing and reputation of the club.

It's very hard to completely forgive somebody that doesn't bare their soul and say sorry.

He did apologise though, very early on didn't he? I agree though, it wouldn't have gone astray on his return as well.

Also agree that his confidence is back (along with the "swagger" in his speech pattern).

Funnily enough (re the comments re the scandal/handicaps) they talked openly about the Swans game in round 3 (even though we'll have already played against port at AO in round 2) and how people should be hanging from the rafters (Triggs words I think). Like they referred to it but didn't?

 

[The Sloane Ranger]

I guess coaches would have an idea what players are best suited to though? Sure they'd make mistakes from time to time, but on the whole, they would have a fair and reasonable idea.

Jen your theory is sound however coaches also need to find a way to unlock the value in a player and this could mean exploring different roles

Crowley is a great example, he went from a average player to a B&F winner largely driven by a change in roles

 

[Brenton Davy]

He did apologise though, very early on didn't he? I agree though, it wouldn't have gone astray on his return as well.

Also agree that his confidence is back (along with the "swagger" in his speech pattern).

Funnily enough (re the comments re the scandal/handicaps) they talked openly about the Swans game in round 3 (even though we'll have already played against port at AO in round 2) and how people should be hanging from the rafters (Triggs words I think). Like they referred to it but didn't?

AS do I. A little "Mea Culpa" would have gone a long way toward smoothing the waters on his return.

 

[macca23]

He did apologise though, very early on didn't he? I agree though, it wouldn't have gone astray on his return as well.

Also agree that his confidence is back (along with the "swagger" in his speech pattern).

Funnily enough (re the comments re the scandal/handicaps) they talked openly about the Swans game in round 3 (even though we'll have already played against port at AO in round 2) and how people should be hanging from the rafters (Triggs words I think). Like they referred to it but didn't?

Yep, that's a very good example of what I was talking about Jen.

Every other discussion not incorporating Trigg has played up the Tippett factor of this match. Not even mentioned by Rowe and McDermott, let alone not by Trigg.

 

[Southerntakeover]

AS do I. A little "Mea Culpa" would have gone a long way toward smoothing the waters on his return.

I don't think it really matters much to me either way.

 

[The Sloane Ranger]

Well done jenny, excellent summary IMO.

Two intangibles that went with what he actually said

- the old Trigg confidence/arrogance is back, after a couple of low key efforts on radio prior to this one. I found it impossible not to bracket them, as a confident Trigg always sounds arrogant along with it.

- whenever he talks about anything to do with the playing list, he carefully avoids any reference to our drafting handicaps that will naturally affect our playing list. Equally 5aa avoid any reference to these drafting sanctions when talking to Trigg. For obvious reasons one would have to say.

A fair percentage of Crows fans, myself included, thought that Trigg should have been gone as a result of his role in the Tippett saga. He hasn't, and once this year's draft is over, I'll probably gradually move on and accept that he is still the CEO, because our participation in future drafts will go back to normal.

However, the one thing that he hasn't done (unless I missed it) when he came back from his suspension, was to apologize publicly on radio to the members of the Club for the damage that his actions have done to the Club in the last 2 years drafts, the flow-on effect to the playing squad and to the overall, and the overall standing and reputation of the club.

It's very hard to completely forgive somebody that doesn't bare their soul and say sorry.

M23 I have spoken to Chappy on 2-3 occasion on the very issue that Trigg may have strong relationships with his board and sponsors however he needs to put more time and effort in building relationships and trust with his members, notice I didn't use the word rebuild because my message to Chappy is that even prior to Tipoett-gate Triggy did not work hard enough in building a rapport with the members

Given that Chappy did accept my concerns as a reasonable observation I am disappointed that I'm not seeing any actions from our Chairman or CEO to start building a stronger relationship with the clubs members

 

[jenny61_99]

Would either you (SR) or Macca mind if I share your thoughts with Triggy?

 

[Southerntakeover]

One of the points that hit me harder than I think I was expecting was when equalisation was discussed.

Trigg ran through a list of the big clubs that it would effect in a large way or something to that effect. The Collingwood, Hawthorn, and West Coasts of the world.

We weren't on that list. We're not a powerhouse club.

 

[jenny61_99]

One of the points that hit me harder than I think I was expecting was when equalisation was discussed.

Trigg ran through a list of the big clubs that it would effect in a large way or something to that effect. The Collingwood, Hawthorn, and West Coasts of the world.

We weren't on that list. We're not a powerhouse club.

We don't attract 80,000 plus crowds, nor do we have gambling licences to bolster our coffers. And that surprises you?

 

[The Sloane Ranger]

Would either you (SR) or Macca mind if I share your thoughts with Triggy?

Jen, like I've said I shared my concerns with Chappy in good faith hoping the voice of the members will find its way back to Triggy

Chappy himself told me that it was a fair assessment that Triggy has invested more time with Corporate sponsors than he has with the members and accepted that he needs to consider how (style) he engages with members

My view is whether its from you, Chappy or other feedback channels Triggy needs to find a way to listen to the voice of the members and make a personal investment in our members

My feedback is in good faith and im more than Happy for you to share