News Gold Coast approach 211

[Clems Knee]

Sandi is 32, he takes up a lot of salary space. All I'm saying is that if GCS are interested, then I'd be more than happy letting him finish off on a big payday. I don't know why you're bringing Cox into this.



Duffield has been good the past few years, but hardness isn't a natural instinct for him and he gives our defence a soft underbelly that we can fix with some of the players coming through. They have been loyal servants, but loyal servants can also be taken care of off the field, we don't have to compromise our list just because we feel obliged to them. That's suicide.

How old was Paul Salmon when he retired? 37. That's who Sandilands should be comparing his career to.
Sandilands takes up a lot of salary space because he is worth it. If you can't see that have no idea.
The Cox reference was because someone made a comment that Cox played a year too long, and they'd rather not see their hero playing in decline. I can't see any decline for a few years yet.

Yes we will have to let some older players go. I hope our younger players push them out this year.

 

[rodney hoo]

Look if he were to leave it would be a travesty if he went anywhere other than GWS. Marketing gold for the Giants

Sandi & Mumford now there is two real Giants.

 

[Apenesslike]

If they are still able to get selected on form in the 22 it's a no brainer. Saves the club holding onto a player that is not pushing for selection. You delist the players that least likely to make you a better team.

If they have long term injuries or struggling with form, workload, weight etc, then it's a no brainer to have the hard discussion with them.

 

[Apenesslike]

How old was Paul Salmon when he retired? 37. That's who Sandilands should be comparing his career to.
Sandilands takes up a lot of salary space because he is worth it. If you can't see that have no idea.
The Cox reference was because someone made a comment that Cox played a year too long, and they'd rather not see their hero playing in decline. I can't see any decline for a few years yet.

Yes we will have to let some older players go. I hope our younger players push them out this year.

I agree on principle with this, however Salmon was always a stronger mark and longer and straighter kick, and Sandilands height advantage is less of benefit with all the athletic 200cm key defenders around that can beat him on the lead, and reach the ball to spoil when it's dropped on his head.

 

[Unique Name]

Then the club leaves itself open to all of them retiring in a block and having a gaping hole in the list.

If most of the over thirties want to play on then hard decisions have to be made. I'd keep the ones who are good at roles that are difficult to replace.

This, we have to avoid 6 best 22 players all retiring at one. To do that we need a few to retire/leave each year.

 

[ImperialPurple]

So your're in favour of a graduated release of players that still fill a hole in our list IN CASE they all leave at the same time creating a hole in our list?

IF our list is good enough when those 5 or 6 players move on (Sandi, McPharlin, Pavlich, Duffield Crowley and MJ) we should have players that can step in.

I think you may see graduated retirements but I would be against them being given their books by the club just for strategic list management either financial or physical.

I think a graduated release of players also helps to retain the players who might be stuck at Peel, waiting for an opportunity, and who - given that opportunity - would have a further 6-8+ years at the club, rather than someone who is post 30 and on a year by year contract.

Given no opportunity, they might well say - stuff that, I'm off - and then we've got a situation where we go to the draft to get a kid, to put the 3-4 years development into that we just have put in to the guys who rack off due to lack of opportunity. Then Crowley / Duff retire and bang - a HUGE hole waiting for the 18-19 y.o kids to develop, rather than a smaller hole with a 22 year old ready to step in.

I agree with Clay - hard decisions need to be made and sadly that means some of the long term servants might need to get that dreaded tap on the shoulder. If they're good enough, they might get a 2 year FA offer from StK or GWS or WB or whoever, if not - well they can look back on a fine career with Freo. But not everyone is Boo-hoomer Harvey or Dustin Fletcher.

Having said that - Sandi can stay for as long as he thinks he can play on.

 

[Clems Knee]

I agree on principle with this, however Salmon was always a stronger mark and longer and straighter kick, and Sandilands height advantage is less of benefit with all the athletic 200cm key defenders around that can beat him on the lead, and reach the ball to spoil when it's dropped on his head.

Well yes, Salmon was a much better full forward, especially in his early years. But after a knee reconstruction and ankle problems, he became solely a ruckman. He kicked 53 goals in his last 115 games (post Essendon). And Sandi is taller than Salmon was, and a more dominant ruckman. Plus, if the umpires actually call free kicks when Sandilands gets his arms chopped, he can equal or better Salmon's goal output over that time.
Shipping him off to a new club at this stage? Crazy.

 

[Sweetback]

How old was Paul Salmon when he retired? 37. That's who Sandilands should be comparing his career to.
Sandilands takes up a lot of salary space because he is worth it. If you can't see that have no idea.
The Cox reference was because someone made a comment that Cox played a year too long, and they'd rather not see their hero playing in decline. I can't see any decline for a few years yet.

Yes we will have to let some older players go. I hope our younger players push them out this year.

Anyone can pull a player out of their arse and make a comparison but there's no evidence to suggest he'll be anything like Salmon. Maybe if they were related there would be a link. We've got five main list players competing for two ruck positions, that's the reality. If the opportunity comes that Sandi wants to leave, I wouldn't be too fussed.

 

[Mr Peabody]

Duffield has been good the past few years, but hardness isn't a natural instinct for him and he gives our defence a soft underbelly that we can fix with some of the players coming through. They have been loyal servants, but loyal servants can also be taken care of off the field, we don't have to compromise our list just because we feel obliged to them. That's suicide.

Duffield has looked very solid and cool headed during the intra clubs. Along with Sutcliffe, I've been impressed with both their natural instincts - they both find the time to execute effective decision making and delivery amongst congestion. To date, I do not see any of the others players pushing up and we should not feel obliged to makes changes just for the sake of age.

We're rated as No.1 defence in the comp in 2014 and I'm all for improvement but softness doesn't strike me as an issue with our defensive group. It's a blend of experience, leadership and class. Plenty of natural instinct there and I've been impressed with Silvagni this time in - he'll add some hardness if that's lacking.

It's form that warrants selection and a spot on the list. I do not think the club will compromise our performance to just get the average age of the list down when some of these experienced guys are still our best option.

 

[Sweetback]

Duffield has looked very solid and cool headed during the intra clubs. Along with Sutcliffe, I've been impressed with both their natural instincts - they both find the time to execute effective decision making and delivery amongst congestion. To date, I do not see any of the others players pushing up and we should not feel obliged to makes changes just for the sake of age.

We're rated as No.1 defence in the comp in 2014 and I'm all for improvement but softness doesn't strike me as an issue with our defensive group. It's a blend of experience, leadership and class. Plenty of natural instinct there and I've been impressed with Silvagni this time in - he'll add some hardness if that's lacking.

It's form that warrants selection and a spot on the list. I do not think the club will compromise our performance to just get the average age of the list down when some of these experienced guys are still our best option.

You're confusing natural instinct with fear of being dropped by Ross for being soft. The players who have exhibited softness in our backline are Duffield, Ibbo and MJ. The first two have been dropped for it during Ross's tenure, the other no longer defends one on one. Duffield is the worst of them all. I don't have confidence that when the pressure is on, he will back into a pack, much like how he let us down a couple of times during the 2013 GF. But I'm not saying get rid of him altogether. The discussion is in the context of free agency. If someone else wants any of our free agents, bar Pav, I would be happy to see them take a bigger payday somewhere else.

 

[Kram]

Must be the off-season still.

 

[Sweetback]

We still have another good year of Sandi on the list to look forward to.

 

[Taylor]

If a player offers as much as one of our older free agents the younger will cost far, far more.

 

[yakamoto]

We should have traded Sandi three years ago to GWS or GCS for a couple of their gun mids. Say Swallow and Bennell.

 

[Apenesslike]

Well yes, Salmon was a much better full forward, especially in his early years. But after a knee reconstruction and ankle problems, he became solely a ruckman. He kicked 53 goals in his last 115 games (post Essendon). And Sandi is taller than Salmon was, and a more dominant ruckman. Plus, if the umpires actually call free kicks when Sandilands gets his arms chopped, he can equal or better Salmon's goal output over that time.
Shipping him off to a new club at this stage? Crazy.

If Pav is still playing, they'll put the taller defender on Sandi, but if Apeness and Taberner are both in the forward line, then they have not choice but to use an undersized defender or resting ruckman. Pav is the key to this working, he's undersized so the taller defenders will go to Sandi. As much as I hate to say it, I think we can ill afford to have both in the same forward line. Pav still offers mare as he is stronger, and a superior mark and kick.

Still laughing at that joke about the umps paying Sandi those chopping free kicks.

 

[mustlovepurple]

I totally get all the comments of our posters regarding our possible free agency players,and I understand their need to possibly secure themselves financially for the future etc,etc...but..i will hereby put my hand up now for future ridicule...cos....
It would break my heart to see any of them in anything other than purple,no,just,nooooo...full blown 5yr old tantrum,hell no!!!!catatonic rocking in a corner no!..tearfully no!..these young boys have grown up with us to execptional men..though the worst times to the best times..so Im happy to be lead with my purple beating heart over a rational head.. please boys resign with us soon! ,Im too young for this kind of emotional breakdown.

 

[Clems Knee]

Anyone can pull a player out of their arse and make a comparison but there's no evidence to suggest he'll be anything like Salmon. Maybe if they were related there would be a link. We've got five main list players competing for two ruck positions, that's the reality. If the opportunity comes that Sandi wants to leave, I wouldn't be too fussed.

For chrissakes, you must be arguing just for the sake of arguing.
I used Salmon and Cox as examples because their careers are in some way comparable. Cox was a premier ruckman, but the way he played meant that age caught up with him. Salmon was a monster of his time, and played to a ripe old age despite suffering more injuries than Sandilands has.

Sandilands is a multiple All Australian ruckman. Over his career, only injuries have prevented him from being an AA more often. Of the other Ruckmen on our list, no one even comes close to his abilities. Certainly not Hannath or Moller, and since his knee, not Griffin. Clarke and Sandilands make a good combination in particular, and I see no reason why that doesn't continue.

Nobody can be 100% sure of the future, but there are no signs of Sandilands declining. And you want to sign his papers at the end of the year. Along with McPharlin, Johnson, Duffield, Crowley and (maybe) Pav.

 

[Simmofreo]

Look if he were to leave it would be a travesty if he went anywhere other than GWS. Marketing gold for the Giants

Mumford won the B&F at the Giants last year, and Phillips is an up and coming ruckman that they will use a lot this year. They won't need Sandi

 

[Sweetback]

For chrissakes, you must be arguing just for the sake of arguing.
I used Salmon and Cox as examples because their careers are in some way comparable. Cox was a premier ruckman, but the way he played meant that age caught up with him. Salmon was a monster of his time, and played to a ripe old age despite suffering more injuries than Sandilands has.

Sandilands is a multiple All Australian ruckman. Over his career, only injuries have prevented him from being an AA more often. Of the other Ruckmen on our list, no one even comes close to his abilities. Certainly not Hannath or Moller, and since his knee, not Griffin. Clarke and Sandilands make a good combination in particular, and I see no reason why that doesn't continue.

Nobody can be 100% sure of the future, but there are no signs of Sandilands declining. And you want to sign his papers at the end of the year. Along with McPharlin, Johnson, Duffield, Crowley and (maybe) Pav.

Not Pav, as I clearly said, but yeah, everyone else. They are old and most still have currency. I never said I want to sign his papers, I said if he and his manager want to chase coin elsewhere, I'd be fine with it. You're not upset with me, you're upset with sandi letting GCS have a sniff.

 

[Clems Knee]

Not Pav, as I clearly said, but yeah, everyone else. They are old and most still have currency. I never said I want to sign his papers, I said if he and his manager want to chase coin elsewhere, I'd be fine with it. You're not upset with me, you're upset with sandi letting GCS have a sniff.

Seriously? Upset?
If Sandilands is offered a lot more than we can fit in, good luck to him. But Fremantle will suffer as a result. The club should be doing what it can to keep Sandi. And I think they probably are. I doubt very much that he is giving Gold Coast a sniff. That's just a blow up.
I think Sandilands has a few more good years in him. You don't. You want to ditch five of our six most experienced players at the end of the year. That's on top of normal attrition. I think that is ridiculous.

 

[Sweetback]

Seriously? Upset?
If Sandilands is offered a lot more than we can fit in, good luck to him. But Fremantle will suffer as a result. The club should be doing what it can to keep Sandi. And I think they probably are. I doubt very much that he is giving Gold Coast a sniff. That's just a blow up.
I think Sandilands has a few more good years in him. You don't. You want to ditch five of our six most experienced players at the end of the year. That's on top of normal attrition. I think that is ridiculous.

I never said he doesn't have a few more good years left, in fact I've said the opposite. You're obviously not very good at reading so I'll just leave this to a difference of opinion.

 

[Freofalcon]

Wasn't written by Hackdorn.

Must be true.

Thanks for the memories 211.

 

[Clems Knee]

I never said he doesn't have a few more good years left, in fact I've said the opposite. You're obviously not very good at reading so I'll just leave this to a difference of opinion.

Patronising prat.

We still have another good year of Sandi on the list to look forward to.

Just the one?

I think at the end of the year we're going to have to make some hard decisions to rejuvenate the list anyway. Players like Sandi get to the point where they're holding up the development of younger players who might get itchy feet. Clarke is coming out of contract. I'd rather lose Sandi than Clarke.
Funnily enough, of all our available free agents, the only one I'd keep after this year is Pav, with the expectation that McPharlin will retire at year's end:

Ryan Crowley - Unrestricted (13 years)
Paul Duffield - Unrestricted (12 years)
Michael Johnson - Unrestricted (11 years)
Luke McPharlin - Unrestricted (14 years)
Matthew Pavlich - Unrestricted (16 years)
Aaron Sandilands - Unrestricted (14 years)

So Sandi is going to be holding up the development of younger players by being on the list? But still have a few more good years of Sandi? Riiight. Sounds like I can read what you write just fine.

When you start digging a hole for yourself, you don't need to keep digging.
Perhaps you are not very good at writing what you mean.

 

[PurpleGreenRed]

I never said he doesn't have a few more good years left, in fact I've said the opposite. You're obviously not very good at reading so I'll just leave this to a difference of opinion.

You actually said we had one more good year of Sandi. One. I reckon he may have three to four. And hopefully they are all with us.

 

[Sweetback]

Patronising prat.


Just the one?



So Sandi is going to be holding up the development of younger players by being on the list? But still have a few more good years of Sandi? Riiight. Sounds like I can read what you write just fine.

When you start digging a hole for yourself, you don't need to keep digging.
Perhaps you are not very good at writing what you mean.

Just the one because he's only contracted to us for the one for the time being.

Yeah, he may still have a couple of years left, which is why he has currency, but his use by date is sooner rather than later, hence why he's holding up the development of the younger players.

I'm sorry that I'm patronizing but you can't say that it's not true.