Zac Clarke

Remove this Banner Ad

Delist now. The guy is a hopeless liability. There are enough "insurance" ruckmen floating around in the PSD that will give Freo so much more skill and effort than him - at half the price and contract length!
FFS...... Mickey Barlow would produce more as a ruckman than this numpty.
 
But clarke got some kind of ability other dont have :cool:
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Don't understand the 1 year deal. Glad we've got a back-up ruckman though as Sandi and Griff are both getting on.
 
freo_leo29 said:
Leaves him open to leave again which sucks, I was hoping to lock him away so we can continue to play Sandi and Apeness until Sandi retires then we could bring in Clarke
Click to expand...
I think 1 year makes a lot of sense for Freo. I could see Sandi going another year in to 2018, in which case you'd expect Clarke to leave. If Sandi doesn't and retires, then I could see Clarke staying. But either way you'd think we'll trade in a ruck at the end of next year to either replace Clarke or be in competition with Clarke for the #1 spot. Win-win I think.
 
Pretty happy for both parties .:):D give clarke and freo plenty option to move on .
 
wayToGo_ said:
I think 1 year makes a lot of sense for Freo. I could see Sandi going another year in to 2018, in which case you'd expect Clarke to leave. If Sandi doesn't and retires, then I could see Clarke staying. But either way you'd think we'll trade in a ruck at the end of next year to either replace Clarke or be in competition with Clarke for the #1 spot. Win-win I think.
Click to expand...
I think Sandi will go another which is why I wanted Clarke for 2/3 years, he would be locked away for when Sandi retires and wouldn't leave after he becomes the number 1 ruck, now he may either force Sandi's retirement or we will lose him, it also means we actually have to give him some gametime this season whereas we could have let him build in the WAFL after surgery until he deserves it.

Contrary to what people on here think we won't be finding some magical replacement that is any better then Clarke at his best, we have also comitted to attracting specifically WA talent which further closes the door on a bunch of ruck talent and by the way that is a confirmed directive from the club...
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

freo_leo29 said:
I think Sandi will go another which is why I wanted Clarke for 2/3 years, he would be locked away for when Sandi retires and wouldn't leave after he becomes the number 1 ruck, now he may either force Sandi's retirement or we will lose him, it also means we actually have to give him some gametime this season whereas we could have let him build in the WAFL after surgery until he deserves it.

Contrary to what people on here think we won't be finding some magical replacement that is any better then Clarke at his best, we have also comitted to attracting specifically WA talent which further closes the door on a bunch of ruck talent and by the way that is a confirmed directive from the club...
Click to expand...
I think the exciting part is can freo play bulldog style in the ruck without sandi and clarke.
 
freo_leo29 said:
I think Sandi will go another which is why I wanted Clarke for 2/3 years, he would be locked away for when Sandi retires and wouldn't leave after he becomes the number 1 ruck, now he may either force Sandi's retirement or we will lose him, it also means we actually have to give him some gametime this season whereas we could have let him build in the WAFL after surgery until he deserves it.

Contrary to what people on here think we won't be finding some magical replacement that is any better then Clarke at his best, we have also comitted to attracting specifically WA talent which further closes the door on a bunch of ruck talent and by the way that is a confirmed directive from the club...
Click to expand...
That's the issue though. Would he get back to his best if he was given a longer contract? What would motivate him if he had 2 or 3 years locked in? I think the one year contract is for him to prove he can back to his best and earn becoming our #1 when Sandi retires. I agree Clarke isn't terrible but there are quite a few backup rucks that have gone past him this year imo. I'd also rather trade in someone who was motivated even if they were behind him rather than keep someone who didn't really want to be there.
 
wayToGo_ said:
That's the issue though. Would he get back to his best if he was given a longer contract? What would motivate him if he had 2 or 3 years locked in? I think the one year contract is for him to prove he can back to his best and earn becoming our #1 when Sandi retires. I agree Clarke isn't terrible but there are quite a few backup rucks that have gone past him this year imo. I'd also rather trade in someone who was motivated even if they were behind him rather than keep someone who didn't really want to be there.
Click to expand...
I agree Way to go. I think this is a good outcome for all. Leaves Zac available for FA at end of 2017. If he has a brilliant year he is likely to resign with us anyway. If not we get some compo. Zac heavily tested the market and came up short probably due to his injury troubles and to be honest I can see why clubs left him alone. If he shows he is getting through the knee troubles then we revisit at end of next season. If he struggles through 2017 then his career is likely shot and we avoid a payout. Ruthless but good outcome.
 
Really glad the club has taken the hard-line with Zac here.

We could have taken the bait and offered him a 3-year deal, but why do that for a man that's given us such little output over the last few years? (crap knees or good knees)

He has one year to give his everything - in that time we may be able to develop a new ruck or hunt around the market for an existing one. Or - maybe Zac will turn his game around and stamp his authority as a genuine ruckman for the next 3-5 years.
 
1 year extension is perfect from the clubs perspective. He has a 1 year to prove he is worthy of a multi year extension. If he has a good year and wants to leave we could pick up a nice draft pick for him.
 
Tested the market. No takers. So he has signed on for one year backing himself when fit to be worth a bigger contract.

We should see a very motivated Clarke this year trying to prove his worth.
 
StingBitten said:
Really glad the club has taken the hard-line with Zac here.

We could have taken the bait and offered him a 3-year deal, but why do that for a man that's given us such little output over the last few years? (crap knees or good knees)

He has one year to give his everything - in that time we may be able to develop a new ruck or hunt around the market for an existing one. Or - maybe Zac will turn his game around and stamp his authority as a genuine ruckman for the next 3-5 years.
Click to expand...
this was my thought too
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top