Roast Cripps - time to go

Remove this Banner Ad

Noble wasn't in Collingwood's best 22 for the 23 Grand Final and Collingwood have pretty much traded him for almost the same as the best pick we got for Houston. How did that work?

Gold Coast seem to be pretty happy to throw around the picks when dealing with Vic clubs but when it comes to us we pay full value plus more. I don't like the Gold Coast part of the deal more than the Collingwood part. Which I don't like too.
 
Did Collingwood have a F1?
Season 19 Episode 10 GIF by The Simpsons
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Fair play to Cripps, a lot of normies up and about on socials defending him with the enduring mythology that Wingard got us Rozee/Butters, or Polec got us Butters.

If only the coaches box and footy team were as effective as our propaganda machine.
 
Didn't Wingard net us Durrsma and Burton?
Both clubs lost that trade.

Plus Mayes.

Oh and Pick 35, which we magicked into Rozee AND Butters!

That’s right Wingard = Rozee, Butters, Duursma, Burton and Mayes. How f@&ken good is our list management team?!
 
Fair play to Cripps, a lot of normies up and about on socials defending him with the enduring mythology that Wingard got us Rozee/Butters, or Polec got us Butters.

If only the coaches box and footy team were as effective as our propaganda machine.
How dumb are people lol
 
Curious.. Would we have got more from a compensation pick if Houston was a free agent?

Comp pick at band 1 would have been the pick behind Port's first rounder this year which was pick 18.

So would have ended up getting pick 19 in this draft for Houston as compo.
 
TBH, I am disappointed to lose Houston but the personnel needs to change. I hope they have a player in mind at our first pick. The list is lacking X factor because we haven't had top picks in a while. Hopefully we look at a young key position defender. Invest in Sinn as a rebounding defender and have smart picks with our later picks.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

IMG_1725.jpeg
IMG_1724.jpeg

So, despite being given ample warning, and Melbourne casually deciding to risk the life of their best player in a game they were heavily losing;

And North Melbourne is still [wrongly] considered to be the destination equivalent of Terminal Fitzroy;

We lost the best halfback in the league for comical unders to Collingwood, and made Justin Leppitsch look like a master negotiator.

How good’s footy.
 
Houston is such a dumbass, why would you say that about an opposition club.

I don't know what is worse - Houston's intelligence (or lack thereof) in conjunction with the way he's handled himself during this trade fiasco, or the fact he was in Port's leadership group despite his history of being quite a loose unit with no obvious showing to suggest that had changed.
 
Last edited:
View attachment 2147310
View attachment 2147311

So, despite being given ample warning, and Melbourne casually deciding to risk the life of their best player in a game they were heavily losing;

And North Melbourne is still [wrongly] considered to be the destination equivalent of Terminal Fitzroy;

We lost the best halfback in the league for comical unders to Collingwood, and made Justin Leppitsch look like a master negotiator.

How good’s footy.

Lol opened everything up. More like closed everything down.
 
Houston is such a dumbass, why would you say that about an opposition club.

So far then next season he can expect a rough reception from

Port fans
Adelaide fans
Melbourne fans.

Anyone else he wants to offend while he's on a roll?
 
Definitely an element to that. I also am not quite sure how much more they could have gotten out of Collingwood in the deal. This again brings up the whole trading players to any team without their permission. I certainly think in the future that a compromise will be had whereby any players wanting to play in a specific city can only nominate the city, and then their current team can trade that player to any team in that city, and then their contract simply rolls over from one team to the next with the same existing terms (and perhaps a clause saying that contracts can't be restructured until at least 12 months after the trade or a variation thereof).

The moment we get players being able to be traded to teams without their permission per se will be a massive moment for equalisation across the league and will likely result in even more player movement which the AFLPA seems to love.



The Lukosius deal was essentially done in the first few days of the trade period - along the lines of Luko and a late pick (such as 50) for a future 1st and pick 58. But given the Houston deal was connected to Gold Coast because of pick 13, they amalgamated the trades into one big mega trade so to speak.

They looked at multiple variations of splitting first round picks to get a better deal, even considered shutting Gold Coast out of the deal and instead turn to Freo who had 3 first rounders which could have been split a few ways, but they were headstrong on using them solely for Bolton and/or Baker given their current list profile and current pressure on their footy department to get immediate results in 2025.

It was only the last 18 hours or so before the Houston trade got done that things really accelerated to a point that they decided to do the deal. They wanted more on the Monday night and revisited things with all of Gold Coast, Collingwood, Carlton and North on Tuesday morning, but there was nothing left to extract from any party in any potential deal, and so they took it


Bailey Smith is an absolute head case with mental health and substance abuse issues in conjunction with coming off an ACL injury and not having played footy in over 12 months. So I'm not surprised Geelong didn't have to pay a lot for him.

You mention the idea of taking both Ratugolea and Richards to the PSD in consecutive seasons. "Walking" a player to the PSD has got to be the biggest load of veiled threatened BS any list manager presents. In the last 2 years how many deals didn't get done which resulted in a player being "walked" ?? Can't think of any of consequence that's for sure.

As for BZT - they didn't think he could play on the bruisers like Hawkins etc. No one could have foreseen that BZT was going to play to the level he did this year. That's why they went after Ratugolea. If they don't get Ratugolea they're essentially entering season 2024 in the same defensive position they were the year prior (with a massive hole not having a KPD to take on the Hawkins bodies of the league).

Going into a season with Sweet (a massively unproven ruck), Sam Hayes (an absolute spud) and/or Teakle (another spud) and Visentini (a promising young player but a few years away at least from playing consistent AFL footy) would have been beyond a joke given how they were affected by having such a poor ruck situation. At least Soldo was someone who had shown they could be a lead ruck if given the opportunity, though I agree that trading out a first to get the Ratugolea and Soldo moves done was egregious, though I'm not sure what the alternatives could have been outside of not getting those deals done and having gaping holes on the list entering season 2024.

The Lukosius deal was essentially independent of the Houston deal anyway - they were just executed in the same trade.

As for the Houston deal, it got done because of draft position in combination with the current personnel Port have in that position is pretty strong already, and so moving him on gives them an opportunity to re-balance the list a bit. I know that you and I will never agree to the rationale behind the trade, and that's ok. I'm never going to say I'm happy with the deal - like you, I still think it was unders, but I'm not going to bring up the Soldo and Ratugolea deals in conjunction with the Houston trade given the circumstances of 12 months prior as to where the list was at.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing and if we all knew that Sweet and BZT would play to the level they did in 2024, there's no way the Ratugolea and Soldo deals get done.
Agree we had to get a big bodied key defender & and at least a competent durable ruckman. Getting 2 of each was insurance to some extent. The issue I have is the type of players we have drafted during Kens tenure has caused this constant filling of gaps plus the slow development of our non elite players.
 
This is all based on win rate and nothing else. Might as well just say Kent Hinkley is a good coach.

Parker only drafts unaccountable flankers so yeah he is going to be more consistent than other recruiters

and because we refuse to do the hard work replacing our key players we are forced to play the corpse of Jonas, McKenzie, Lycett, Dixon, etc. to give a contest

None of that is good management
Ken Hinkley is an average coach - that is a fair statement. He's not good & not bad, just average. This is consistent with our whole approach.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Roast Cripps - time to go

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top