- Joined
- Mar 23, 2007
- Posts
- 34,932
- Reaction score
- 23,550
- Location
- Where Premiership dreams are made...
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Man U, Canucks and 49ers
All clubs have made them but which are the ones that really hurt a club?
Both the Hawks and the Pies made bad choices in Vickery and Mayne, but neither has had or will have a long term impact. Not sure what the Pies were thinking with Mayne, but with Ceglar out with a serious knee injury and no-one knowing if and how Rough would return, Vickery was handy insurance who turned out to be not so handy.
Some will point the finger at the Bulldogs for their Boyd deal, but for a club that went a long time without a flag, Boyd was an instrumental part, particularly on Grand Final day, in getting them a flag, so I don't see that being a bad decision.
For mine, it's got to be the Swans. No, not the Tippett or Franklin deals, but the choice to extend both Jack's and Rohan's contracts and then not have the money to keep Tom Mitchell. Jack looks absolutely cooked and Rohan has averaged a staggeringly-low 9.97 touches through-out his 100 game career. To put it into context, people say Cyril doesn't get enough of it and he averages 50% more of the ball than Rohan, plus the tackles, goals, delcisiousness, etc.
Now my mate 'Jerry the Swan', who used to support the Eagles, said that Mitchell "has little impact on games". I'd suggest that Jerry needs to get over the offended posts on the Swans board, for letting Mitchell walk for pick 14, and acknowledge that Tommy 'Gun' Mitchell received the fifth most coaches votes last year and was an All Australian, and is equal first for coaches votes with Nat Fyfe this year. The coaches obviously feel he impacts games, Jerry. Even Nathan corrected himself after Mitchell tore the Pies apart in Round 1 this year.
So, are there any list management mistakes that rival this beauty by Horse and Harley?
Both the Hawks and the Pies made bad choices in Vickery and Mayne, but neither has had or will have a long term impact. Not sure what the Pies were thinking with Mayne, but with Ceglar out with a serious knee injury and no-one knowing if and how Rough would return, Vickery was handy insurance who turned out to be not so handy.
Some will point the finger at the Bulldogs for their Boyd deal, but for a club that went a long time without a flag, Boyd was an instrumental part, particularly on Grand Final day, in getting them a flag, so I don't see that being a bad decision.
For mine, it's got to be the Swans. No, not the Tippett or Franklin deals, but the choice to extend both Jack's and Rohan's contracts and then not have the money to keep Tom Mitchell. Jack looks absolutely cooked and Rohan has averaged a staggeringly-low 9.97 touches through-out his 100 game career. To put it into context, people say Cyril doesn't get enough of it and he averages 50% more of the ball than Rohan, plus the tackles, goals, delcisiousness, etc.
Now my mate 'Jerry the Swan', who used to support the Eagles, said that Mitchell "has little impact on games". I'd suggest that Jerry needs to get over the offended posts on the Swans board, for letting Mitchell walk for pick 14, and acknowledge that Tommy 'Gun' Mitchell received the fifth most coaches votes last year and was an All Australian, and is equal first for coaches votes with Nat Fyfe this year. The coaches obviously feel he impacts games, Jerry. Even Nathan corrected himself after Mitchell tore the Pies apart in Round 1 this year.
So, are there any list management mistakes that rival this beauty by Horse and Harley?











