Parasite
Norm Smith Medallist
Warnock is no good.
-
Mobile App Discontinued
Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
Warnock and 69 for 24 56 72 confirmed
- Thread starter dominguez
- Start date
- Tagged users None
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
Warnock is no good.
The Old Dark Navy's
Moderator
- Moderator
- #127
LOL
The Old Dark Navy's
Moderator
- Moderator
- #128
They were at this end, can't say the same for your mob.
Ah we all have 'em. I just ignored some of the more extreme Freo posters .... 'you want me to do what ... with what?? I don't think that is physically possible.' Oh and by the way, I was born 4 weeks after my parents got married.
- Thread starter
- #129
Obviously before, Carlton fans aren't going to come here and bag him now, are they.
It went something like this TODN-
i) Warnock wants home, probably to play with his brother
Melbourne fans- He's shit anyway, we'll take him in the PSD. P.S. dorkers r gay!
ii) Wallace says he's keen on Warnock.
Richmond fans- Dunno why we'd want him, he's crap but we'll give ya our third rounder or you'll lose him to Melbourne in the PSD.
iii) Carlton linked with Warnock
Carlton fans- Why have we offered 24, he's crap and it's the frockers, give em pick 40. He was pick 42 ffs!!!
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
- Moderator
- #130
ODN I hope Carlton supporters don't expect this kid to step up next year, the truth is he is probably further away than Kruezer.
For all his natural ability he has always had attitude issues, I have no doubt that playing second fiddle to sandilands and the prospect of doing that his entire career played a part in him leaving.
Is Kruezer a better prospect and therefore more likely to be first choice eventually?
I would not be surprised to see Warnock play for a number of clubs (Other than freo and carlton) in his career.
For all his natural ability he has always had attitude issues, I have no doubt that playing second fiddle to sandilands and the prospect of doing that his entire career played a part in him leaving.
Is Kruezer a better prospect and therefore more likely to be first choice eventually?
I would not be surprised to see Warnock play for a number of clubs (Other than freo and carlton) in his career.
- Aug 23, 2007
- 3,907
- 24
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Rory Sloane
Hahahaha you have got to be joking.
I would be laughing all day long if Adelaide had all those picks.
The Old Dark Navy's
Moderator
- Moderator
- #132
Nice embellishment but yes, there were certainly a few of those. On the flipside however ....
Freo fans before draft: 3 years of development, he is better than Cox and Sandilands at the same age, will be the 3rd best ruckman in the game in two years, would go by Pick 4 if in the draft this year.
Freo fans after draft: Happy with that. He isn't that good. Only 21 games.
Not having a shot but there are some massive backflips on both sides of the coin. I was cautious but interested then, I am cautious but interested now. Nothing has happened to sway my opinion either way. Now that we have Warnock, I will happily be optimistic and talk him up, but the truth is I have no idea how he will go.
The Old Dark Navy's
Moderator
- Moderator
- #133
This is why I puzzled at why Carlton wanted him. I honestly think we have gone all nostalgic about the days of Harry Madden and got sick of these undersized rucks. Kreuzer would be better IMO but may not be a true tap ruckman. Hampson may end up a tap ruckman because of his awesome leap, but is behind in development at this stage. I reckon we figured that one of them will become elite and that is what we need to compliment our midfield.
I think also that we think Kreuzer can become a permanent forward, hopefully a tall CHF option with is agility and second efforts and general footy smarts.
We are definitely hedging our bets here but in reality we have done nothing to address our rucks being smashed. Warnock is not a number one ruckman yet and our midfield needs someone now.
Hell I would still sign White for 1 year just in case.
Freo supporters keep talking about this draft being deep. Its a strong draft but no deeper than most years. Whats different about this draft is the quality tall stocks are deeper but they will all go inside the top 30 or 40.
- May 26, 2003
- 25,367
- 21,534
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- SFFC, Aussie Women's Cricket, HNK
^^^^^^^^^
This man speaks the truth.
Look at that set of numbers that Cartel (thanks to Mr McFuttock for that one I believe...
) have to use in the draft...6
40
69
That's something else we got out of it - you reckon they weren't spitting at giving up #56??
Yesterday they offered 56 for 69.
Today we got 56 and 72 for 69 - effectively cancelling out their "sweetener" from yesterday, and picking up that extra pick for nicks. Not great, but better than a kick up the arse.
For all those that say "I don't get why we swapped 69 and 72 except to sweeten of for them".... ummm I don't think so.
It would have been:
Icke: okay last offer, same as yesterday. Warnock and 69 for 24 and 56.
Bond: Nup. Why should we give you 69? What's the big deal with 69? Just give us 56 and forget 69. We're quite happy with 69. Good number. Got a nice ring to it. 69.
Icke: okay, okay... shit we got 10 minutes left. Look, we need to make it look good for Dick. He told us there'd be no cardboard jobs if we didn't get 69. You give us 69 and we'll chuck in 72. 72 for 69. Keep 56 it's your for free. Just give us 69 and you can have 72.
Bond: The sound of desperation. Okay, done.
So by them agreeing to give us 72, we have effectively nabbed an extra pick (56) that they didn't want to give. It ain't much, but it's better than 24 on its own. I would have liked 40, but that would have left it pretty thin on the ground for them, so in reality that was unlikely.
They've got 6, 40, 69. Those aren't the world's best picks.
We also knew we were getting **** all for the Dirty Little Traitor, so we could afford to spend the week on this. We effectively kept them out of any other deal. We let Colin Young and Robbie Warnock that we consider them tossers of the highest order... and for the second year running, we let a big Vic club know that we won't be pushed around and accept their shit. Remember that Essendon started off asking for a 2nd rounder for Kep, then conpromised to a 3rd, then finally agreed to accept our 4th, by which time we said... nah you're right, and we picked him up for free at... pick 69.
Don't think that there wasn't a little ripple in the lower bowels and a twitching of the rectal sphincters of Icke, Warnock and Colin Young at 1.30 this afternoon.
Two years in a row Freo have not accepted shit. We got Kep for free (big deal some may say - but it's the principle that counts); now we squeezed an extra pick for Warnock from them. Yeah big deal, it was only a 4th rounder, but originally they were saying it was 24 or forget it... and look what they're left with and look at what other deals they managed to out through this week.
Sweet FA on both accounts.
Seriously chook and those others that think we caved and got screwed... I think we did pretty well under the circumstances of what we had in front of us, and I think other clubs will be careful when dealing with Freo in future.
- Thread starter
- #136
The bold part is true though. Obviously the other stuff is speculation, but he will be very good IMO.
He's much better than Cox and Sandilands already when the ball hits the ground, if his tapwork and contested marking improve (which they should considering his age) he'll be a star. The deal looks reasonable considering circumstances but will look a real bargain for the Blues in time.
The Old Dark Navy's
Moderator
- Moderator
- #138
72 was never an issue for us as it was never going to be used. I don't think anybody was holding out for that pick to be honest.
- May 26, 2003
- 25,367
- 21,534
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- SFFC, Aussie Women's Cricket, HNK
Think you got it the wrong way around fruitboy.
Carlton supporters (and plenty of others too might I add) kept telling us that the draft is deep so 24 is really like 15 in any other draft so we should take the 24 and be happy with it cos the draft is deep and why would we expect anything more for a guy who's only played 21 games in 3 years and is way overrated, and did we mentiion its a deep draft so take 24 cos its really like 15 in any other draft....
There were plenty here saying "deep draft my backside - it's like any other draft".... which I believe is what you are saying yourself.
get your facts straight...
- May 26, 2003
- 25,367
- 21,534
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- SFFC, Aussie Women's Cricket, HNK
So why bother swapping 69 and 72?
You could have just kept 72, but you wanted 69 for 56... and we ended up with 56 and 72 for 69.
It's small change at the end of the day - but why would you have bothered?
In effect, we got your 4th rounder for free.
So, now Carlton has alienated both WA clubs, it will be interesting to see how West Coast and Fremantle react in the future when a young WA blue asks to be traded home.
We'll probably try to outbid each other and end up paying over market value for the player
So, now Carlton has alienated both WA clubs, it will be interesting to see how West Coast and Fremantle react in the future when a young WA blue asks to be traded home.
We'll find out next year I guess. Though the clubs should devise some sort of system to determine who gets who. I mean we don't want to get into a bidding war now do we
.🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
Interestingly we ended up getting pretty much the same for Warnock as the eagles did for McDougal in the 2006 super draft, picks 29 and 59
Yeah, we then traded Gardiner + 59 for pick 43. So, we ended up with:
Pick 29: Eric MacKenzie
Pick 43: Tim Houlihan
Got Will Schofield at pick 50, probably still wouldn't have been around if we had pick 59 though.
We'll find out next year I guess. Though the clubs should devise some sort of system to determine who gets who. I mean we don't want to get into a bidding war now do we
I'm sure they'll find a way. Alternating years maybe?
I'm sure they'll find a way. Alternating years maybe?
I was thinking more along the lines of 'The Dale Kickett Cup'
Two match committees enter, one Blues player leaves.
CrippsonBlue
Cancelled
You just answered your own question. Pick 72 creates the illusion you got more than what you did.
What was pick 72 to us? Nothing, we weren't going to us it. You also didn't really need it, as teams are passing at that stage anyway.
The basis of the deal is Warnock for pick 24, and a swap of picks 56 and 69.
By chucking in a useless pick like 72, it gives this illusion that we swapped picks 72 & 69, so in essence as you say, it appears you got pick 24 & 56 for him.
It's just a face saving exercise, a clever one at that. Sweetner was a bit less than you would have liked, and we didn't want to add a sweetner; as many seem to agree, win/win I'd say.
*cough* Pick 69 is your third selection *cough* you have to use it *cough*
If anyone asked for the upgrade it was you. Not us.
