Game Day 2023 AFL DRAFT

Remove this Banner Ad

Yeah they had 2 opportunities

They could have signed him to their main list as a delisted free agent or taken him with their first pick in the Rookie Draft (we selected Hamill with our first pick) so he was available to them when they selected Xavier Walsh
I'm happy he is still on our list. He performed well in his limited matches last season.
 
From NSW only though wasn't it? NSW Scholarship.

We also had some kid who ran long distance really fast.
That's right .....had forgotten how it was we took him so late as a 17 yo ......yes, it was a NSW zone program
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Just wanted to make some points regarding giving Sloane 1 more year .
We could have sent him off at last home game as a champion of the club .
Can anyone seeing him getting picked every week so apart from where club tag as resting him I wonder how he and club will handle him being dropped to SANFL .
It just isn't going to end up nicely for club or Sloane who will not play regularly in SANFL .
It is just going to look like Crows handling badly there champions . AGAIN
Sloane has every opportunity to make as much of this year as he can. He isn't being gifted anything, and has to fight for his spot.

We're giving him the exit he wants and the chance to work with our younger players, and write his own finale.

There's no reason this ends sadly, as it might have if he was pushed out of the club before he was ready. Now he has the chance to prove what he still has.
 
Last edited:
What were the options to get back into the draft?

We already used 1 of our future 2nds to move up the draft. We had to keep our future 1st and 2nd to leave the option open to get a pick in before Welsh. So we're talking about trading back in with a future 3rd or 4th.

You're advocating for more picks in the 40s/50s/60s whilst the club are actively trading up in the draft.

I wouldn't have given Sloane a contract but I'm fine with the strategy of concentrating at the early part of the draft.

Is there an element of FOMO at play here? You were watching the coverage, hearing that these picks in the 50s/60s are complete steals etc. They say that every year.
George is just overwhelmingly obsessed with how disastrous the Sloane return is.

He needs to create a narrative that we've made an extraordinary error by doing it. It doesn't suit his perspective to just move on.

He can't understand that the club clearly didn't want more picks, and if they did they had lots of options other than not re-signing Sloane.

I wouldn't have signed him, but I'm not at the club and have no idea what else he is contributing for player and club development.
 
At this point, the only way I see Sloane getting a gig is injuries or Matt Crouch reverts to being a crab again.

However, this is on the money. We've chosen a path that no matter what we likely do, we're handling the end of Sloane career at Adelaide poorly. Plays best 22 and is a liability because he was borderline it this year and it's clearly father time that's caught up with him - i.e we're selecting him because we can't let go. Plays SANFL and that's an undignified end to what has been a good servant for Adelaide. Something which shouldn't have happened to Thommo and shouldn't to Sloane.

The only way I reckon it doesn't end badly is if Sloane becomes a professional sub, however, the AFL community seems very resistant to the idea of having someone play every week as a substitute.
The sub is likely to be eliminated next year, and we will have five on the bench.

The clubs have resoundingly said that in their meetings with AFL House - it's been reported a little bit on Fox.
 
I’ll refer back to Ogilvie pre draft:

“We have no capacity to take a 4th player even if we wanted to pick up a slider like Dowling last year”

He didn’t need to mention it, clearly it was on his mind.

Why do you keep raising that? It doesn't seem very relevant - he was explaining to a pretty uneducated Facebook audience that we have exactly the list spots as we do picks.

FAR more relevant is the fact that he said there was a strong likelihood that, if we traded up, we might only use two early picks.

We were never wanting four picks if Hamish said there was a likelihood we'd only take two.

"Even if we wanted to"? Well, obviously we didn't want to, if he was planning scenarios where we didn't even fill out the three vacant spots we had at the draft.
 
Why do you keep raising that? It doesn't seem very relevant - he was explaining to a pretty uneducated Facebook audience that we have exactly the list spots as we do picks.

FAR more relevant is the fact that he said there was a strong likelihood that, if we traded up, we might only use two early picks.

We were never wanting four picks if Hamish said there was a likelihood we'd only take two.

"Even if we wanted to"? Well, obviously we didn't want to, if he was planning scenarios where we didn't even fill out the three vacant spots we had at the draft.
Yeah nah, the fact you’re still struggling to get it, well the threads been cluttered enough. It’s not that hard.
 
Yeah nah, the fact you’re still struggling to get it, well the threads been cluttered enough. It’s not that hard.

Neither of you think Sloane should have been signed. Why bother spending so much time on this? One of you is disappointed with the club, that we didn't pick someone up in the 50s instead...

I know we're always looking for ways to be pissed at the club, but not getting 'unknown X player in the 50s' feels a bit of a stretch.

Sloane's list spot will be filled next off season by someone anyway, we'll get 'unknown X player in the 50s' then.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

The sub is likely to be eliminated next year, and we will have five on the bench.

The clubs have resoundingly said that in their meetings with AFL House - it's been reported a little bit on Fox.
Then in a couple of years we will have 5 & sub.

Then we will have 6 player bench.

Then we will have 6 players & sub.

Etc...
 
Here's a Club that committed to Rookie McKenzie after delisting .....then had a change of heart ....will not go down well inside the changerooms

View attachment 1858873
Well Ross isn't the most trustworthy guy...

At the end of the day they need to pick the best available, but should be transparent with everyone.
 
It will be forgotten in a nanosecond once they meet the new guys.....especially those that like to party with Arie Schoenmaker:drunk::D incoming.
Have browsed some reddit threads. Testimonies that sound pretty reliable from people from his school make it seem like he's an A grade campaigner.
 
Here's a Club that committed to Rookie McKenzie after delisting .....then had a change of heart ....will not go down well inside the changerooms

View attachment 1858873

Clubs delist players and even pay out their contracts pretty often. Not sure they'd care for too long
 
From that list;
cook : keep 1 year contract
burgess : keep 1 year contract
himmelberg: traded , 3rd round pick
Bond: rookied
Gollant: 2 year contract if he wants it, second round pick if he wants to leave
Sholl: traded third round pick
Parnell: delisted
Berry: 1 year contract if he wants it, 3rd round pick if he wants to leave

borlase , hammill delisted

sloane retired

gives us 4 main list spots, couple of rookie picks
With a midseason trade period touted, it looks like our list management has played our hand well.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Game Day 2023 AFL DRAFT

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top