Was it mistake gtting Jordy?

[Croat tiger]

Was it mistake getting Jordy?

Obviously he doesn't like the rough stuff,picks up cheap kicks to make his stats
look good and turns over the ball regularly.I wasn't fan of his from day 1 and my opinion hasn't changed.

 

[Jisha]

No. Jordy is fine.

 

["The Roar Is Back"]

No. Jordy is fine.

Sorry Jisha but that is the problem, he is fine , no injuries, and is still not good enough to get a game in a side which will fail to play finals. Can't hit a target and as one of the commentators said his decision making is terrible, which in turn makes our side look slow.
If he didn't already have a connection with TW, he would have started the year in the Magoos, as most predicted, and would have stayed there probably for most of the season.

 

[scarecrow2k1]

I don't think we should have traded pick 19 for him, but I don't agree with how harsh the criticism is.

NO other club would have traded pick 19 for him though. We consistently overpay for players we trade for

 

[Pasquali]

He's been one of our best all year. Jesus, he and all the other 21 players had a terrible game, give him a break.

Cotchin was terrible, shall we sack him? No, i dont think so...

BRING IN COUGHLAN IF HE IS FIT!!!

 

[Jisha]

Sorry Jisha but that is the problem, he is fine , no injuries, and is still not good enough to get a game in a side which will fail to play finals. Can't hit a target and as one of the commentators said his decision making is terrible, which in turn makes our side look slow.
If he didn't already have a connection with TW, he would have started the year in the Magoos, as most predicted, and would have stayed there probably for most of the season.

Hmm as much as I agree he does have some work to do on his skills, they are not amazing by any standards, he was most certainly not the worst on the ground today, and only weeks ago there was threads saying how he was progressing well.

I fully believe this thread was made out of anger and not exactly about Jordy.

I have faith in Jords abilities and I still honestly believe he will be an amazing asset to us in the next couple of years.

By the way, I do not listen to the commentators, they are usually completely off the mark. This has been commented on by many tigers fans throughout the year. If we are talking about decision making skills, then we can pretty much talk about our whole list. Not one of them made a good decision today, including Richo, Cotchin or Foley. This is not the place to talk about that anyway and even though I am bitterly dissapointed in our performance yesterday I do not think Jordy deserves a thread like this being posted, especially after the more recent threads made about how he is starting to make progress with the tigers.

Hehe I dunno pace, I just think we are on different sides of the fence on this one. I just think it will be a critical mistake to stop giving him chances, as he is easily still in our top 22.

 

[mattdwyer]

stupid thread ....

YES IT WAS THE RIGHT THING GETTING HIM ... how is he a down hill skier ??? when he plays well, we win .. when he's a bit down, the whole team is a bit down, why is it his fault ?? he is just as much part of the team as foley, deledio, richardson ... jordy is a gun ... i dont want him becoming the new "whiping" boy ...... you supporters make me sick

 

[Kyusss]

has been good this year

 

[Ah Cheung]

I have an issue with giving up pick 19 for him.
He's not our best or our worst player but I think we over paid for him. I think something around 30 would've been sufficient. Not sure if we had the pick though.

 

[Madtiger2006]

90% of the time he is very good. The other 10% he does stupid things such as the long handball deep in defence to a crows player. I'd prefer to replace him with Connors in the side as our half back. I think Connors has the edge in class, size and aggression and will only improve with experience

 

[beaver fever]

Hilarious, suggestion "He'll come good eventually". He is in his 8th year and will NOT have some miraculous improvement in his 9th. He is soft, unaccountable, poor disposal under pressure and average otherwise. To top it off we gave up a top 20 pick for him. Disgrace of the highest order that trade was.

 

[Thecho]

not a fan of mcmahon dont know y we got him, fair enough he isnt the most accountable backmen as we recruited him as a reboundin defender, but constantly he makes terrible decisions (like tryin to handball 20m across goal) and his skills are not as good as they should be.

 

[Kyusss]

Hilarious, suggestion "He'll come good eventually". He is in his 8th year and will NOT have some miraculous improvement in his 9th. He is soft, unaccountable, poor disposal under pressure and average otherwise. To top it off we gave up a top 20 pick for him. Disgrace of the highest order that trade was.

What do u like about this club?
What have we done right?

 

[beaver fever]

What do u like about this club?
What have we done right?

I support the tigers and nothing will change that.

Now what have we done right? Not a lot really. I think everyone is in agreement that the years 2002-2004 were a debacle so no need to go into that dark age. The 2004-2008 is the one up for debate. A full-on rebuild was in order. How many players have we found that are locked into our 22 since 2004? Only 4 in my opinion: Thursfield, Deledio, Riewoldt and Cotchin. That isn't a lot from 4 drafts and one was a rookie. The only other players on our list I would pencil in for the future are Foley and Moore with perhaps Tuck if he can be a tagger.

Now that wouldn't annoy me so much if the club genuinely attempted to bring in youth to address the various structural issues with the list. What it has done is brought in band aid solutions, a list of flankers, and a list full of half glass full types.

Our talls are in disarray with only 2 genuine talls going forward being Thursfield and Moore. Neither are key position players in my opinion (that being ff, chf, chb, fb) for which we have maybe Riewoldt at CHF, but he is still relatively unproven. I have hopes for him though. Simmonds and Richardson are our best talls and are 30 and 33 respectively. If they are injured we are done for. Hughes, McGuane, Graham, Pattison, Schulz, Polak, Silvestor, Cartledge are bonfide duds. Putt, Gourdis, and Rance unproven with Riewoldt unproven to an extent as well.

Now what strikes me as weird here is that for a list with such poor quality in its talls, that we only have 15 players over 190cm. That means we are relying on too few to make the grade and is just asking for trouble. We should have 20 of these players so we can sort out who can play and who can not. Those that can't are moved on and a fresh batch brought in and the process continues. Eventually once we are healthy enough in talls we can cut back to 15, but for the moment we really needed to do more in this area. That's why it is so disconcerning that we traded 2 picks last year for flankers, when we were screaming out for more talls. I thought trading was to address list needs. The club has failed in this area.

I could go on about the rest of the list, but seeing that 99% of you are brightsiders you have probably stopped reading by now.

 

[the ranger]

I don't like either of the choices in this poll, so I won't vote. He has been pretty good for us and I'm glad to have him, but I think pick 19 was a bit much to give up, considering he wanted out of Footscray and coming off a mediocre season. Should have received a 3rd round pick or something in the deal as well.

 

[beaver fever]

Ranger if you don't think he was worth pick 19 then you should be voting the first option. That's what the whole thread is about is it not? Was he worth pick 19.

 

[Doobie]

I support the tigers and nothing will change that.

Now what have we done right? Not a lot really. I think everyone is in agreement that the years 2002-2004 were a debacle so no need to go into that dark age. The 2004-2008 is the one up for debate. A full-on rebuild was in order. How many players have we found that are locked into our 22 since 2004? Only 4 in my opinion: Thursfield, Deledio, Riewoldt and Cotchin. That isn't a lot from 4 drafts and one was a rookie. The only other players on our list I would pencil in for the future are Foley and Moore with perhaps Tuck if he can be a tagger.

Now that wouldn't annoy me so much if the club genuinely attempted to bring in youth to address the various structural issues with the list. What it has done is brought in band aid solutions, a list of flankers, and a list full of half glass full types.

Our talls are in disarray with only 2 genuine talls going forward being Thursfield and Moore. Neither are key position players in my opinion (that being ff, chf, chb, fb) for which we have maybe Riewoldt at CHF, but he is still relatively unproven. I have hopes for him though. Simmonds and Richardson are our best talls and are 30 and 33 respectively. If they are injured we are done for. Hughes, McGuane, Graham, Pattison, Schulz, Polak, Silvestor, Cartledge are bonfide duds. Putt, Gourdis, and Rance unproven with Riewoldt unproven to an extent as well.

Now what strikes me as weird here is that for a list with such poor quality in its talls, that we only have 15 players over 190cm. That means we are relying on too few to make the grade and is just asking for trouble. We should have 20 of these players so we can sort out who can play and who can not. Those that can't are moved on and a fresh batch brought in and the process continues. Eventually once we are healthy enough in talls we can cut back to 15, but for the moment we really needed to do more in this area. That's why it is so disconcerning that we traded 2 picks last year for flankers, when we were screaming out for more talls. I thought trading was to address list needs. The club has failed in this area.

I could go on about the rest of the list, but seeing that 99% of you are brightsiders you have probably stopped reading by now.

spot on best ive heard in ages

 

[ize_]

This is a biased poll. I think Jordy's been good and will be top 10 best and fairest. The only options there are "He's crap, get rid of him" or "He's crap, but he'll get better."

 

[beaver fever]

This is a biased poll. I think Jordy's been good and will be top 10 best and fairest. The only options there are "He's crap, get rid of him" or "He's crap, but he'll get better."

That's because it is an honest poll. Sure you can put a deluded option in with McMahon being a good player, but what is the point when he isn't.

 

[CoggaRules]

This is a biased poll. I think Jordy's been good and will be top 10 best and fairest. The only options there are "He's crap, get rid of him" or "He's crap, but he'll get better."

Bwahaaahaaaaa......whoaaaaa.....lets have it....Jordan McMahon- honours gained- equal 9th in JD medal in 2008. The comp will be busting down the door to recruit him with that on his CV.

 

[beaver fever]

Bwahaaahaaaaa......whoaaaaa.....lets have it....Jordan McMahon- honours gained- equal 9th in JD medal in 2008. The comp will be busting down the door to recruit him with that on his CV.

He will make the top 10. Just shows you how poor we are.

 

[CoggaRules]

He will make the top 10. Just shows you how poor we are.

dude, you dont have to explain that to me....there are many here who dont understand how devalued the JD became the minute they handed it to our captain as a token gesture to justify whatever the **** they were trying to justify.

 

[tigertRANCE]

It wasn't a mistake to get McMahon. It was what we paid for him that was an unforgiveable mistake. To give up pick 19 for him is criminal. We got McMahon a 25 yr old average flanker, instead of using pick 19, a high pick on a player like Maric, Pears, Ward, Selwood, etc... How could we possibly do this? IF we took him with a PSD pick or a 4th round pick, then it would of been ok. So having him on our list isn't necessarily a mistake but giving up pick 19 for him certainly was. Unbelievable in the position our club is in, that we give up this pick for him.

GO TIGES!!!

 

[tigertRANCE]

I support the tigers and nothing will change that.

Now what have we done right? Not a lot really. I think everyone is in agreement that the years 2002-2004 were a debacle so no need to go into that dark age. The 2004-2008 is the one up for debate. A full-on rebuild was in order. How many players have we found that are locked into our 22 since 2004? Only 4 in my opinion: Thursfield, Deledio, Riewoldt and Cotchin. That isn't a lot from 4 drafts and one was a rookie. The only other players on our list I would pencil in for the future are Foley and Moore with perhaps Tuck if he can be a tagger.

Now that wouldn't annoy me so much if the club genuinely attempted to bring in youth to address the various structural issues with the list. What it has done is brought in band aid solutions, a list of flankers, and a list full of half glass full types.

Our talls are in disarray with only 2 genuine talls going forward being Thursfield and Moore. Neither are key position players in my opinion (that being ff, chf, chb, fb) for which we have maybe Riewoldt at CHF, but he is still relatively unproven. I have hopes for him though. Simmonds and Richardson are our best talls and are 30 and 33 respectively. If they are injured we are done for. Hughes, McGuane, Graham, Pattison, Schulz, Polak, Silvestor, Cartledge are bonfide duds. Putt, Gourdis, and Rance unproven with Riewoldt unproven to an extent as well.

Now what strikes me as weird here is that for a list with such poor quality in its talls, that we only have 15 players over 190cm. That means we are relying on too few to make the grade and is just asking for trouble. We should have 20 of these players so we can sort out who can play and who can not. Those that can't are moved on and a fresh batch brought in and the process continues. Eventually once we are healthy enough in talls we can cut back to 15, but for the moment we really needed to do more in this area. That's why it is so disconcerning that we traded 2 picks last year for flankers, when we were screaming out for more talls. I thought trading was to address list needs. The club has failed in this area.

I could go on about the rest of the list, but seeing that 99% of you are brightsiders you have probably stopped reading by now.

Great post, except i still hold some hope for Hughes & McGuane, both have some value. On the rest, ur spot on.

GO TIGES!!!

 

[the ranger]

Ranger if you don't think he was worth pick 19 then you should be voting the first option. That's what the whole thread is about is it not? Was he worth pick 19.

Well, it's poorly worded then. I don't think it was a mistake to get him.