You know, if WB were so willing to cough up a big contract for Keath, and we knew what he was offered, surely that adds leverage at the trade table?
List Mgmt. Why the exodus?
- Thread starter Damp Squarie
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Golumless
A bigger deal out west.
I agree, if you are going for the "they overpaid for Keath" angle, then we should have done better on the trade table.
At least the 2nd round pick is looking ok right now, and not something like 35 + 54 for 39 + Keath.
Maybe work on your comprehension?
“ Mackay is the same as Lynch - we have him a generous contract because at the time, we were scared to lose him.
Can’t knock Mackay’s character.”
Pretty obvious I’m talking about the generous contract we gave him, AT THE TIME, when we were scared to lose him.
What does that have to do with the current discussion? It was done under completely different list management staff and Roo wasn’t at the club
Read it again, and the dozen or so posts before it.
- Aug 9, 2019
- 32,464
- 56,480
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Panthers, GWV Rebels, Central Augusta
And given the circumstances involved a pretty hard hearted decision. Wouldn't be holding that up as a plus for the Cats.
Fivel_79
Senior List
- Oct 18, 2013
- 156
- 435
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Norwood, Hull City AFC, Pacers
It’s one of the most frustrating double standards for me.
Tim Kelly or any Non-Victorian player at a Victorian team trying to move home.
AFL media response: “He’s a required player. They don’t have to sell, they’re well within their rights to hang on to him unless the buyer pays the price. You want the want the player you’ve got to pay the price. Two, maybe three first rounders plus “insert up and coming star player here”. Sure, it might be seen to be overs but you just do what it takes to get it done. I can’t fathom it”.
“Insert name here” Victorian player at Non-Victorian team wants to head back to Victorian club.
AFL Media response: “The player doesn’t want to be there, you’ve got to let them go. It’s not a good look making demands like two first round picks. You have to think about the players welfare and mental health. If they’ve checked out and don’t want to be there it’s a benefit to trade them now. Sure a second round pick is perhaps unders but you just get it done so the player and club can move on. I can’t fathom it”.
Tim Kelly or any Non-Victorian player at a Victorian team trying to move home.
AFL media response: “He’s a required player. They don’t have to sell, they’re well within their rights to hang on to him unless the buyer pays the price. You want the want the player you’ve got to pay the price. Two, maybe three first rounders plus “insert up and coming star player here”. Sure, it might be seen to be overs but you just do what it takes to get it done. I can’t fathom it”.
“Insert name here” Victorian player at Non-Victorian team wants to head back to Victorian club.
AFL Media response: “The player doesn’t want to be there, you’ve got to let them go. It’s not a good look making demands like two first round picks. You have to think about the players welfare and mental health. If they’ve checked out and don’t want to be there it’s a benefit to trade them now. Sure a second round pick is perhaps unders but you just get it done so the player and club can move on. I can’t fathom it”.
Captain Morgan
Club Legend
- Feb 3, 2015
- 2,273
- 4,068
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
<Insert Dangerfield reference here>
- Jul 22, 2013
- 18,820
- 27,478
- AFL Club
- Carlton
As is their right to do. What they didn't do was take a public dump on him.
I can understand that some fans would be happy to see their club do that. It is part of the tribalism. It is also bad for business in several ways.
We seemed to be on good terms with Keath when he was weighing up his options right up until he did that physical with the Bulldogs - I recall somewhere they told him we messed up the medical rehab of his leg injury. Then again, what swayed his mind may have been just the $$$...
From that point on his language specifically changed to saying he would never play for the Crows again, no matter what was offered. That put us into the spot again of trying to retain a player who did not want to be here, or get what we could, when we could - most of our leverage had basically disappeared, especially when we still bare the scars of the Tippett debacle.
- Jun 15, 2005
- 69,233
- 60,483
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- AUFC, Everton, Sturt
Actually Geelong were filthy, but they knew the risks when they drafted him.
He was never staying, and they didn't even let him go on compassionate grounds
Appreciate it's different with (hopefully) Father/Son and Academy picks we might have but generally a round pick for this year is seen as at least half a round more valuable than one the next year.
Golumless
A bigger deal out west.
Yup, I doubt either club would be using their 3rd round pick for anything other than an academy pick.
- Sep 30, 2014
- 18,956
- 40,126
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
It was refreshing on the weekend to see some normality return to the world, such as Sam Jacobs getting monstered in the ruck by a 22 year old
- Oct 7, 2018
- 1,345
- 2,735
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
My lip reading ain't great, but pretty sure qtr time break had slow mo of Cameron telling him to 'jump at the effing ball'.
Has he not seen him play?
With our injury & treatment history under the guidance of Burton & Haas, it was probably a very easy thing to sell...
Did you just post your own twitter post?
The thing with Gibbs is the list manager declined and then the CEO came over the top and ordered him to do it a year late for more.
A CEO who has no idea about football should stay well the fcuk away from list management.
Poor delineation of roles. Poor management. Chapman era crows to a tee.
What’s the proof for this claim about Fagan forcing the Gibbs trade?
It sounds about right given how Reid played it in 2016, but I’d like to know before before laying the blame for such a tactical shift in 2017.
(ftr, I was happy we landed Gibbs at the time although it has obviously proven to be a disaster)
We knew who was the biggest problem, that was pointed out by the review, they are gone, good thing. Now the focus is on the processes they implemented that need to be broken down and rebuilt, and the idiots who put those people in charge and backed them in.
The job isn't finished! it won't be finished for years. We aren't just rebuilding the team, we need to rebuild the structure around the team.
- Aug 7, 2015
- 10,634
- 17,351
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
I think it's likely Fagan did tell Reid to get the Gibbs trade done but I think Fagan was probably just the messenger and the decision to get Gibbs was made by other decision makers in the club.
I think Gibbs has been a bit of a monkey on the back of the club with many feeling he should have been our first Father-Son and getting him now puts that to right a little (also may be help our flag attempt too). Fagan being new to AFL/AFC would not have this feeling of injustice and wouldn't make sense why he would feel strongly about getting Gibbs.
He openly bragged about it in radio interviews at the time. Something like "sometimes you just have to come over the top and get things done".
I can't be bothered finding the interviews but there are articles out there that quote him:
ANDREW Fagan’s instructions to his list management team were loud and clear.
“Do not leave that meeting without a deal being done for Bryce Gibbs,’’ the Adelaide chief executive told Justin Reid, Brett Burton and Hamish Ogilvie.
“Order as many pizzas as you like and if it takes until 2am, so be it. We have to get this Gibbs deal finalised.’’
“We had got so close to signing Bryce that we just couldn’t let him go this time,’’ Fagan said.
Wasn’t that to do with the fitness department?
We can hardly defend that.
Similar threads
