Rumour 2024 Rumours and Speculation Part 2

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Reader mode
I've deleted confirmed information

Rumors from September 30
  • FiveAA claims we are after Scott Borlace, current Head of Development at Brisbane (link)
  • Claims of Rory Sloane heading to Melbourne Demons as a development coach, but maybe not before asking for a job at the Crows first?
  • Inside Trading suggests we are interested in Gold Coast's pick 12 (link)
  • Inside Trading also suggests Clayton Oliver is possibly back on the trade table, but doesn't link him to any specific clubs

Rumors from October 1
  • We have offered Darcy Fogarty a five year contract extension early ahead of free agency (link)
  • We are attempting to lure Graham Wright to our football department (link)

Rumors from October 2-3
  • Graham Wright, who we are chasing as a head of football, is also being chased by Carlton for a CEO position (link)

Rumors from October 4-5
  • Gettable claiming pick 25 for Neal-Bullen and a future 2nd for Peatling (link)

Rumors from October 6
  • Tom Morris claims we are open to splitting pick 4 (link)

Rumor summary October 8
  • Jon Ralph claims we are not prepared to use a future 2nd on Peatling (link)

Rumor summary October 9
  • Graham Wright will not join Adelaide, instead taking up the Carlton CEO role (link)
  • Tom Morris claims the Peatling trade will involve future 2nd and 3rd round picks, and we have offered him a four year deal at about $600k per season (link)
  • Riley Beveridge claims we asked GWS if they were interested in one of our players in the Peatling trade (link)

Rumor summary October 10

  • Collingwood are interested in Justin Reid as their new head of football (link)
  • GWS want our future 2nd and pick 46 for Peatling (link)

Rumor summary October 11

  • Poster claims we are attempting to lure Nasiah Wanganeen-Milera, maybe in 2025 (link)
  • Tom Morris claims we will do the Peatling deal for pick 46 and a future 2nd provided there are other late pick swaps (link)

Rumor summary October 13

  • Tom Morris suggests we have offered a trade involving a swap of future 2nds for Peatling (link)

Rumor summary October 15

  • After West Coast got absolutely rogered, Cal Twomey claims we have offered either two future 3rds for Peatling, or a swap of 2nds and a future 3rd (link)
  • We have interest in Sam Davidson from Richmond VFL (link)
  • Mitch Cleary claims some GWS players are facing suspensions from the AFL due to behaviour at an end of season event (link)
  • Brett Montgomery is staying at GWS, meaning we were unsuccessful at luring him (link)

Rumor summary October 16

  • Stalemate on the Peatling trade as of 4pm, with us threatening to send him to the PSD (link)
 
Last edited:
I'm guessing if Dew is willing to move back to Adelaide, it makes sense to sit down to the Power and see what they have to offer.

If Jenny is expecting an announcement this week, a Tuesday Powe meeting seems unusual timing.

There can only be one conclusion, it's actually Fagan who we are getting.
 
George Kramer said:
So let’s reasses tonight’s events shall we.

I make a well known statement that Nicks changed our game plan and instead of taking ownership he blamed the players.

You jump in and ask for proof and tell me to shove it.

You have been provided proof by 2 posters.

Instead of admitting your error you’ve gone into full knobhead mode and you reckon you’re the one who should be take the moral high ground?

As I asked, is it a full moon?
Click to expand...

Well known by who?

What the proof he changed the game plan?

Why is "they played badly" so unimaginable, considering they didn't play very well?

It seemed like Nicks wanted mature bodies around the ball (Soligo was a bit undercooked), but that doesn't seem to contradict the gameplan they'd been running with, that was focused on pressure-forced turnovers leading to quick deep forward entries.

It just didn't work.

But often that's true when you lose - what you were trying to do isn't successful.
 
If we are looking to bring in wright, dew, montgomery, or anyone else we must be sacking some guys surely?

Of all these to me Wright is the only one that matters. He can cleanout the rest of the deadwood
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Peter Doherty said:
I'm guessing if Dew is willing to move back to Adelaide, it makes sense to sit down to the Power and see what they have to offer.

If Jenny is expecting an announcement this week, a Tuesday Powe meeting seems unusual timing.

There can only be one conclusion, it's actually Fagan who we are getting.
Click to expand...

I’m not sure

Port are pitching an Assist role, Dew will be chasing a Snr Asst role

Unless Hinkley decides to quit and Josh Carr gets elevated, I’m not sure Dew will move for an Asst role and pay

This is why he didn’t take the crows offer last year


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
Peter Doherty said:
I'm guessing if Dew is willing to move back to Adelaide, it makes sense to sit down to the Power and see what they have to offer.

If Jenny is expecting an announcement this week, a Tuesday Powe meeting seems unusual timing.

There can only be one conclusion, it's actually Fagan who we are getting.
Click to expand...
We already had him as CEO once... which was enough. ;)
 
crow2crow said:
If we are looking to bring in wright, dew, montgomery, or anyone else we must be sacking some guys surely?

Of all these to me Wright is the only one that matters. He can cleanout the rest of the deadwood
Click to expand...
We don't believe in sacking people not up to their jobs, we just restructure & create new roles for them...
 
Peter Doherty said:
I'm guessing if Dew is willing to move back to Adelaide, it makes sense to sit down to the Power and see what they have to offer.

If Jenny is expecting an announcement this week, a Tuesday Powe meeting seems unusual timing.

There can only be one conclusion, it's actually Fagan who we are getting.
Click to expand...
I have noticed Jenny has strategically never responded yes or no when asked about Dew (unless I missed it).

But specifically mentioned it wasn't Montgomery or Borlace. If it's Dew, would be a great get.
 
crow2crow said:
If we are looking to bring in wright, dew, montgomery, or anyone else we must be sacking some guys surely?

Of all these to me Wright is the only one that matters. He can cleanout the rest of the deadwood
Click to expand...

C2C, this is really difficult to say. We've really appreciated your work here, we just think it's time to make a change and bring in some fresh ideas.

I really didn't want to you to find out like this. We wish you the best, please leave your pass at reception on the way out.
 
crowcaine said:
I have noticed Jenny has strategically never responded yes or no when asked about Dew (unless I missed it).

But specifically mentioned it wasn't Montgomery or Borlace. If it's Dew, would be a great get.
Click to expand...
If we’re going to fit dew in the box, 2 are going to have to go out, who would they be?
 
Shifty Crow said:
I’m not sure

Port are pitching an Assist role, Dew will be chasing a Snr Asst role

Unless Hinkley decides to quit and Josh Carr gets elevated, I’m not sure Dew will move for an Asst role and pay

This is why he didn’t take the crows offer last year


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
Click to expand...

Not a lot of roles at AFL level and if he wants to stay involved he may have to accept assistant coaching roles.
 
Mostyn said:
Well known by who?

What the proof he changed the game plan?

Why is "they played badly" so unimaginable, considering they didn't play very well?

It seemed like Nicks wanted mature bodies around the ball (Soligo was a bit undercooked), but that doesn't seem to contradict the gameplan they'd been running with, that was focused on pressure-forced turnovers leading to quick deep forward entries.

It just didn't work.

But often that's true when you lose - what you were trying to do isn't successful.
Click to expand...
FFS... anyone who is a half decent judge of football knows we clearly changed the game plan.

Don't treat us like fools.
 
Mostyn said:
Well known by who?

What the proof he changed the game plan?

Why is "they played badly" so unimaginable, considering they didn't play very well?

It seemed like Nicks wanted mature bodies around the ball (Soligo was a bit undercooked), but that doesn't seem to contradict the gameplan they'd been running with, that was focused on pressure-forced turnovers leading to quick deep forward entries.

It just didn't work.

But often that's true when you lose - what you were trying to do isn't successful.
Click to expand...
My god man, what lengths will you go to.

I know you don’t live here so I’ll give you a tiny bit of slack, 5aa interviewed Burns during the preseason and said the focus of the preseason had been defence. 5aa talked about it repeatedly during the preseason and beginning of the season.

Now you might just dismiss it, but go back and look at the replays of our game and count how many times we played on and took the game on, here’s the answer we didn’t. We stopped, went back behind the mark and looked for a player and then eventually we bombed it when we ran out of options. It was all designed not to get exposed on the turnover. If you can’t understand this basic change in game plan and the implications perhaps you should follow soccer.

Further, again, I dont expect you to believe me, but I did talk to a Crows official at the Crows v North Adelaide SANFL game after we beat North Melbourne in Tassie. We actually had a decent chat and I challenged him why they changed our gameplan and his response “because we couldn’t defend it”. I provided an account of my conversation in a private PM at the time.

Now I know I can be many things, funny, annoying, sexy, a shithead, but I’m pretty sure not many would think I’m a liar given I’ve shown no evidence of being a liar. Plus to back it up we’ve got the changed game plan, coaches and media observers commenting on the change.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

George Kramer said:
My god man, what lengths will you go to.

I know you don’t live here so I’ll give you a tiny bit of slack, 5aa interviewed Burns during the preseason and said the focus of the preseason had been defence. 5aa talked about it repeatedly during the preseason and beginning of the season.

Now you might just dismiss it, but go back and look at the replays of our game and count how many times we played on and took the game on, here’s the answer we didn’t. We stopped, went back behind the mark and looked for a player and then eventually we bombed it when we ran out of options. It was all designed not to get exposed on the turnover. If you can’t understand this basic change in game plan and the implications perhaps you should follow soccer.

Further, again, I dont expect you to believe me, but I did talk to a Crows official at the Crows v North Adelaide SANFL game after we beat North Melbourne in Tassie. We actually had a decent chat and I challenged him why they changed our gameplan and his response “because we couldn’t defend it”. I provided an account of my conversation in a private PM at the time.

Now I know I can be many things, funny, annoying, sexy, a shithead, but I’m pretty sure not many would think I’m a liar given I’ve shown no evidence of being a liar. Plus to back it up we’ve got the changed game plan, coaches and media observers commenting on the change.
Click to expand...
Sexy?

Not the 1st word which would come to mind the time we met at the airport lol...
 
Kane McGoodwin said:
FFS... anyone who is a half decent judge of football knows we clearly changed the game plan.

Don't treat us like fools.
Click to expand...

I agree. A troll turns up, says a few stupid things, gets the board riled up disappears than the pro nicks crew come on to argue the insane. I dont get why this even has to be a discussion. It was discussed at length by 3 qtrs of the posters on Adelaide bigfooty for months, at length. Never once was it even questioned by anyone really. Only now its questioned? for what purpose. Its going to literally prove nothing. As the moron whose our coach will change it again over summer and probably try again with that game plan.
 
adelaidecrows said:
I agree. A troll turns up, says a few stupid things, gets the board riled up disappears than the pro nicks crew come on to argue the insane. I dont get why this even has to be a discussion. It was discussed at length by 3 qtrs of the posters on Adelaide bigfooty for months, at length. Never once was it even questioned by anyone really. Only now its questioned? for what purpose. Its going to literally prove nothing. As the moron whose our coach will change it again over summer and probably try again with that game plan.
Click to expand...
Where' Wayne?
 
George Kramer said:
My god man, what lengths will you go to.

I know you don’t live here so I’ll give you a tiny bit of slack, 5aa interviewed Burns during the preseason and said the focus of the preseason had been defence. 5aa talked about it repeatedly during the preseason and beginning of the season.

Now you might just dismiss it, but go back and look at the replays of our game and count how many times we played on and took the game on, here’s the answer we didn’t. We stopped, went back behind the mark and looked for a player and then eventually we bombed it when we ran out of options. It was all designed not to get exposed on the turnover. If you can’t understand this basic change in game plan and the implications perhaps you should follow soccer.

Further, again, I dont expect you to believe me, but I did talk to a Crows official at the Crows v North Adelaide SANFL game after we beat North Melbourne in Tassie. We actually had a decent chat and I challenged him why they changed our gameplan and his response “because we couldn’t defend it”. I provided an account of my conversation in a private PM at the time.

Now I know I can be many things, funny, annoying, sexy, a shithead, but I’m pretty sure not many would think I’m a liar given I’ve shown no evidence of being a liar. Plus to back it up we’ve got the changed game plan, coaches and media observers commenting on the change.
Click to expand...

100% this. We changed the game plan up to a counter attacking team defense game plan to nullify the oppositions attack. Our whole game plane was designed to simply stop the other team scoring....at all. Nicks I believe was willing to keep us to 10 goals a game if he could keep the opposition to 5. It was straight out of the paul roos boring the AFL world to death circa 2004 and 2005 play book.
 
Reader mode
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Similar threads

ams4crows
Rumour 2024 Rumours and Speculation Part 3
95 96 97 98 99
Replies
2K
Views
46K
baldandbroke
baldandbroke
ams4crows
  • Locked
  • Poll
Rumour 2024 Rumours and Speculation (Rumours total 25, last 28th August)
405 406 407 408 409
Replies
10K
Views
576K
Drugs Are Bad Mackay?
Drugs Are Bad Mackay?
ams4crows
Game Day AFL Finals 2024 - Match discussion party thread
280 281 282 283 284
Replies
7K
Views
150K
Moonwatcher
Moonwatcher
1990crow
List Mgmt. 2024 List Mismanagement and Trading Part 2
150 151 152 153 154
Replies
4K
Views
119K
PeterSalt
P
Danger in Texas
Game Day Brownlow Night 2024
9 10 11 12 13
Replies
306
Views
7K
Drugs Are Bad Mackay?
Drugs Are Bad Mackay?
ams4crows
  • Locked
Rumour 2023 Rumours and Speculation (Rumours total 37!, 1 (busted) BIG FISH ALERT last October 9th) (9 confirmed! 17 Busted!)
350 351 352 353 354
Replies
9K
Views
441K
Scorpus
Scorpus
dogs105
Review 2024 Season Review - The Goodest, Baddest and Ugliest from the season
5 6 7 8 9
Replies
203
Views
10K
Anzacpaul
Anzacpaul

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top