Talking Carlton Index Lochie O'Brien Kerryn Harrington Lochie O'Brien Kerryn Harrington CFC Home CFC Membership CFC Shop CFC Fixture Blueseum
It is currently Sun Jul 13, 2025 5:30 am

All times are UTC + 10 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 132 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 15, 2005 4:02 pm 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko

Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 2:15 pm
Posts: 21650
Location: North of the border
Headplant wrote:
Sydney Blue wrote:
jbee wrote:
Yeh Sydney you are correct again. Clubs were queing up to get there hands on Campo. That pick 52 and Campo would definitely have got a Campo deal over the line.

Its funny, I heard Neil Balme the other day trying to respond to all these Collingwood supporters saying Campo is the best player in the draft, the Pies should pick him up and stuff Essendon* up at the same time. Neil Balme said he wanted too much money.

Perhaps what we should have done is what the Western Bulldogs did with Jade Rawlings, sign him up on a huge 4 year contract and then offload him in the last two years of his contract and pay his full wage whilst he plays for another club and chuck in a late draft pick whilst we are at it.


We only needed pick 50 or 51 and that gave us a third rounder. Laidley would have took it.


This does not alter the fact that no-one really wanted to give anything for Campo (not even Laidley) given his history and demands. Sheedy is only taking him cos he's going for nothing (but at a high cost and how does this really benefit Essendon* long term?).

Doesn't matter how much you wanted another Club to trade a 3rd round pick for him, no-one did.


Assumption again how do you know we were not asking to much for him

_________________
If you allow the Government to change the Laws in an emergency
They will create an Emergency to change the Laws


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 15, 2005 4:03 pm 
Offline
Stephen Kernahan
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 11:17 am
Posts: 18762
Location: threeohfivethree
Blue Vain wrote:
GWS wrote:
BTW Blue Vain - what would you do differently this year? I'm not unhappy with Saddington, 1, 4, 20, 36 and McLaren.

Certainly I would have been happy to get a great trade of high picks for Whitnall, Campo etc but that didn't eventuate.

What else would you have done given free reign (whilst acknowledging your decisions are only effective if another club comes to the party when trading)?


What point are you trying to make GWS?
I've said previously I would have traded Whitnall.
You can say there was no interest and we'll both have no idea. :?

I'm happy with Saddington but I would drop 2 more off our list eg. Prender, Davies.
I know they may be contracted but that is poor list management if so.
I would put Jesse Smith on our list, pick an extra kid and take an extra rookie.
If Michael Stevens were available at our 6th pick, I'd take him.

I would have used the cash from Campo and Red going to throw at an uncontracted player, if no one better was available, I'd commit to McLaren.

You've asked what I'd do. To use your words, "I'm not unhappy with Saddington, 1,4,20,36 and McLaren" but I'd prefer a couple more kids.


Not trying to make a point BV - just interested in what you would have done.

Basically from what you've said you would have done what I would have done.

The only difference between where we're at seems to be expectations.

Mine are lower perhaps than yours. I can't speak for you and why yours might be higher than mine but I can speak for me.

At the moment I'm happy that the key decision (keeping the top 4 picks) has been taken and taken in a manner of which I approve. That's a huge improvement on where we were at pre-Pagan. Anything after that involves outside influences that by their very nature aren't under our control. I really wanted to trade Lance and keep Fev. The club seemed to be of the opposite opinion. We ended up with both either through ineptitude or accident. From what I understand you felt the same. It didn't happen their way or ours in the end and the final result is a nil all draw.

The thing is it's always unlikely that the club is going to do exactly what we want. It can't. None of us agree so it's impossible for them to satisfy all of us. However, providing the basics are there such as keeping the quality picks when you get them (which is a decision made by the board some time back) then I'm 90% happy. I'm sure there are things I'd do differently but I'm not doing it and providing they're doing the basics as I want it then I'm happy to allow them the latitude to do it their way for the rest even though I'm going to disagree with them about specific decisions at times.

_________________
“When a clown moves into a palace, he doesn't become a king. The palace turns into a circus.”
Turkish Proverb


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 15, 2005 4:09 pm 
Offline
Robert Walls
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 8:50 am
Posts: 3194
Location: Whistler
Sydney Blue wrote:


Assumption again how do you know we were not asking to much for him


1stly cos I don't think the Club is that dumb.

2ndly cos I don't think the other clubs are that dumb.

3rdly cos my info back in August from a reliable source was that no-one wanted him.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 15, 2005 4:14 pm 
Offline
Bert Deacon

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 3:29 pm
Posts: 534
Headplant wrote:
Sydney Blue wrote:


Assumption again how do you know we were not asking to much for him


1stly cos I don't think the Club is that dumb.

2ndly cos I don't think the other clubs are that dumb.

3rdly cos my info back in August from a reliable source was that no-one wanted him.


But Headplant that is because we did not chuck in pick 52. They would have been busting our doors down to get Campo and pick 52 :P


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 15, 2005 4:20 pm 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko

Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 2:15 pm
Posts: 21650
Location: North of the border
jbee wrote:
Headplant wrote:
Sydney Blue wrote:


Assumption again how do you know we were not asking to much for him


1stly cos I don't think the Club is that dumb.

2ndly cos I don't think the other clubs are that dumb.

3rdly cos my info back in August from a reliable source was that no-one wanted him.


But Headplant that is because we did not chuck in pick 52. They would have been busting our doors down to get Campo and pick 52 :P


Hey 52 got Saddington didn't it :roll:

_________________
If you allow the Government to change the Laws in an emergency
They will create an Emergency to change the Laws


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 15, 2005 4:46 pm 
Offline
Mike Fitzpatrick
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 8:15 pm
Posts: 4842
I agree with Blue Vain. It seems for the sake of positive thinking we can argue ourselves into believing anything. It's like self-delusional justification instead of looking at things from a larger perspective. To me it has become a sort of a modern Carlton myth that we had no choice in taking the recruiting actions we took. As for myself, I cannot begin to understand why the greater majority of us can't see that the methods we chose in recruiting were not at least heavy-handed.

As I keep saying you chase after the best available talent. I don't think recruiting is as much of a lottery as the burnt would make you think it is but if it was, wouldn't you at least think the best thing to do would be to improve your odds? You have to at least be in the game to be any chance at all. Investing your faith in those that are 'capable' at best only gets you so far. You also have to be able to bear the burden of the odd mistake for the sake of greater returns in the long run. So while I believe that a good 60% of the decisions made were justifiable and, given I was not privy to what else was on the cards, perhaps even the right ones, but the other 40 odd % was not. When you consider our ladder predicament I don’t consider it acceptable.

I know this is all very negative and I’m sorry but I think we have not seriously begun rebuilding yet and I am one fan who is very restless.

_________________
Just because I'm offended, doesn't mean I'm wrong.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 15, 2005 5:14 pm 
Offline
Garry Crane

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 12:14 pm
Posts: 217
Sydney Blue wrote:
GWS wrote:
BTW Blue Vain - what would you do differently this year? I'm not unhappy with Saddington, 1, 4, 20, 36 and McLaren.

Certainly I would have been happy to get a great trade of high picks for Whitnall, Campo etc but that didn't eventuate.

What else would you have done given free reign (whilst acknowledging your decisions are only effective if another club comes to the party when trading)?


Campo should have been parcelled up with pick 52 if they were not going to keep him and traded for a 1/3 rd rounder some where . Which could have used for one of these potential F/S that are floating around. We have all seen Saddington his best is behind him. Bannister and either Prendagast or Davies ,or Wiggens should have been delisted and chances should have been taken with late picks, try and net another simpson, Fisher type player or even someone like Raso . although Maclaren is not everyone first choice for a PSD No 1 -(it would have been good to coax Kosi over) at least he is a ruckman


I believe all those guys mentioned are contracted.

Still delisting them?????


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 15, 2005 5:26 pm 
Offline
Mike Fitzpatrick
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 8:15 pm
Posts: 4842
I don't know about Wiggins, but we still could have payed out one of their contracts. It would not suprise me if at least one player who could have been chosen by us with what would have been our next pick goes on to be a champ' at another club.

We have got to at least start taking some kinds of risks or we are not worth the bread we're buttered on (so to speak :? ).

_________________
Just because I'm offended, doesn't mean I'm wrong.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 15, 2005 5:42 pm 
Offline
Bert Deacon

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 3:29 pm
Posts: 534
Sydney Blue wrote:
jbee wrote:
Headplant wrote:
Sydney Blue wrote:


Assumption again how do you know we were not asking to much for him


1stly cos I don't think the Club is that dumb.

2ndly cos I don't think the other clubs are that dumb.

3rdly cos my info back in August from a reliable source was that no-one wanted him.


But Headplant that is because we did not chuck in pick 52. They would have been busting our doors down to get Campo and pick 52 :P


Hey 52 got Saddington didn't it :roll:


Not in August :P


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 15, 2005 5:52 pm 
Offline
Ken Hunter
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 11:12 am
Posts: 10414
Location: Coburg
with sydney picking up 50% of his salary - so much of all this is about the finacial state of the club. Just as Fitroy's decisions were all heavily influenced by finances, so is Carlton's which is why it is such a terrible state and why it can easily turn into that gurgling sound you hear when the bath is emptying.

_________________
This type of slight is alien in the more cultured part of the world - Walsh. Its up there with mad dogs, Englishmen and the midday sun!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 15, 2005 6:28 pm 
Offline
Stephen Kernahan
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 9:47 am
Posts: 18288
Location: talkingcarlton.com
Dukes wrote:

Stinear - not good enough, playing in Qld = GONE

At least come up with some examples of players that have kicked on in a lower league or have gone to another club and succeeded..


:evil:


MMM was one of them.


Quote:
The young and very talented Mick Stinearwon the AFLQ's most prestigious award and became Mt Gravatt’s second player ever to win the award at the AFLQ's night of nights.
The 59th J.A. Grogan Medal was presented to rover Mick Stinear by last year's winner Jacob Gough at the Sheraton Hotel, Brisbane. Not only was this Mick's first year in the AFLQ senior competition, but winning the medal at the ripe age of 20 years old means that he is one of the youngest ever players to receive the honour of best and fairest as voted by the umpires.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 17, 2005 5:29 pm 
Offline
Stephen Silvagni
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2005 3:49 pm
Posts: 27793
Location: Southbank.
Mrs Caz wrote:

Quote:
The young and very talented Mick Stinearwon the AFLQ's most prestigious award and became Mt Gravatt’s second player ever to win the award at the AFLQ's night of nights.
The 59th J.A. Grogan Medal was presented to rover Mick Stinear by last year's winner Jacob Gough at the Sheraton Hotel, Brisbane. Not only was this Mick's first year in the AFLQ senior competition, but winning the medal at the ripe age of 20 years old means that he is one of the youngest ever players to receive the honour of best and fairest as voted by the umpires.


I'm pretty sure Brett Backwell's Dad won the Grogan Medal....I know he was in the AFLQ Team of the Century.

_________________
No ones listening till you make a mistake.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 132 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

All times are UTC + 10 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 27 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group