If we had have traded Fyfe?

[Wobbly Punt]

Forgive me Gungho, all due respect to the interesting topic you raise, but please can you/Mods tweak heading?
There's no 'could of'- ever - it's always boringly eternally 'could have'.

I was only coming on here to give kudos to the OP for having "Had Have" in the title instead of "Had Of", and now I find it's only becasue you picked it up. I'm glad I'm not the only one it irks.

Its pretty clear when you crunch the phrase its not "could'f" or "would'f". It's could've or would've. The "ve" is a dead giveaway.

Anyway, I'm off to get some kids off my lawn now. But please folks, remember what SiempreFreo has just said, it's important and easy gear.

Oh yeah...trading Fyfe would have been a horrible idea for us. not for him but it would have sucked for us. Culture is key. The Clarkson example is proof of it actually. Look at the Hawks run and what insiders are saying about why the change was made and the need for a culture shift since he pushed out some of their guns and bought in younger replacements. The OP example shows not why we should have, but instead why its good we did not.

 

[Yeti]

 

[WilloTree]

If Hitler had surrendered after the Seige of Warsaw...

 

[stax on the mull]

So 2019 ends with sacking the coach, the CEO and the Brownlow Medallist captain. Destination club for sure.

 

[IAMPURPLEPOWER]

Not sure trading out the best leader and one of the hardest workers in the game, at the height of our rebuild, would have been good for our culture, regardless of if he never played a game for us again from that season onward.

People writing off the great man way too early.

 

[Dockeroo]

Just no.

No.
That’s all.

 

[gungho]

I was only coming on here to give kudos to the OP for having "Had Have" in the title instead of "Had Of", and now I find it's only becasue you picked it up. I'm glad I'm not the only one it irks.

Its pretty clear when you crunch the phrase its not "could'f" or "would'f". It's could've or would've. The "ve" is a dead giveaway.

Anyway, I'm off to get some kids off my lawn now. But please folks, remember what SiempreFreo has just said, it's important and easy gear.

Oh yeah...trading Fyfe would have been a horrible idea for us. not for him but it would have sucked for us. Culture is key. The Clarkson example is proof of it actually. Look at the Hawks run and what insiders are saying about why the change was made and the need for a culture shift since he pushed out some of their guns and bought in younger replacements. The OP example shows not why we should have, but instead why its good we did not.

Watch out - you’ll be hit by that terrible culture that delivered 3 premierships.

 

[clivenator26]

Gotta love the off season.

 

[sabre_ac]

It's certainly an interesting "what if", particularly when you consider our drafting success of late.

I suspect we'll never really see the old Fyfe again and worse still, he may retire at some stage during 2023 without really playing again. I'm not hoping for this, but he's got a lot of life to lead and he's got to consider life after football. We'd almost certainly have a more talented squad if we traded him, I assume the salary cap release would have some impact as well.

All that said, as a club that has spent most of its history searching for that elusive "winning culture", trading your greatest-ever player shouldn't ever really be in consideration.

 

[freo84]

Nah I love Fyfe and wouldn't trade him for all the first round picks in GWS.

But definitely food for thought.

 

[Rob]

Trading your best player and captain out of the club against their will definitely wouldn't have any negative impact on the culture or the rest of the playing group.

 

[Wobbly Punt]

Watch out - you’ll be hit by that terrible culture that delivered 3 premierships.

Was it that culture that won those flags? All of them were delivered before he got rid of the guns as you're suggesting we could have done with Fyfe.

My suggestion is that it is entirely likely the moves he made, and you're suggesting we could have followed, could well have contributed to the fracturing of the culture that delivered those flags as opposed to being proof of said great culture.

In fact, given he was effectively sacked not long after making those moves and before he had a chance to win any more flags I'd argue there's more evidence to suggest the culture he built beforehand and that delivered those flags was a better way to go.

During the period he built towards those flags, he hung on to the guys you're suggesting should be traded. Shane Crawford (who was there for the first one) for example.

When he changed it up and did what you're suggesting he delivered very little and developed a culture that even those inside it have said needed to change.

You're attaching causation of the early success to events which happened later and which led to no success.

Show which top level guys he traded away in the 2006-2008 period that collected some top picks and young guns who played in their flags and you'll have a point. His top picks on which the flags were built were all from the lean years he followed and then endured for a brief period as he started. Not because he traded away top line guys.

 

[anchor man]

If is in the middle of stiff.
And if ifs and ands were pots and pans , we would have a blood big kitchen.
If ya Aunty had balls, she would be your Uncle.
I shake my head in bewilderment.

 

[King Huskii]

Trading your best player and captain out of the club against their will definitely wouldn't have any negative impact on the culture or the rest of the playing group.

It worked for Western Bulldogs

 

[Rob]

It worked for Western Bulldogs

Griffen? He wanted out.

 

[Paracleet]

 

[King Huskii]

Griffen? He wanted out.

Yes he did but Fyfe also questioned Lyon and the clubs future. He demanded a report on it before signing.

 

[ignoramus]

Yes he did but Fyfe also questioned Lyon and the clubs future. He demanded a report on it before signing.

Do you have a link to that? I have no recollection of such a thing being even hinted at in a Hagdon / Gossage clickbait piece, let alone being reported as fact.

 

[s_wd6]

Someone mentioned it here already but the obvious answer is that it's essentialy fyfe for Jackson.

Whatever draft picks we got for him would've either been traded for a top 3 pick, or would've been around that range already. So we would've ended up with Jackson, Serong, Young at best. We currently have them all AND fyfe.

Don't think anyone has left since then because of the money he was on either. Acres and Logue were the only ones that left for money and we could afford Acres anyway, and Logue was never getting that money here at all.

 

[AstonSouffle]

Eh tbh silly take, vast majority of all of our current young guns talk about the smaller aspects that Fyfe educated them on so that they could attain the work ethic that they have.

It was known that Fyfe was always a tad frustrated in the past that the squad wasn't quite on his level, and the rhetoric that gets pushed out is that he's either an elite winner who sets the standard or a reclusive FIGJAM who should be stripped of his captaincy. Depends if we're winning and Fyfe is playing, if the bloke gets on the park expect the discussion to lean towards positive.

Do we really think that our younger blokes are as far along as they are if Fyfe wasn't here?

Everyone was 18 once, you need the right people in your life to help you along - it's all well and good being a fantastically talented unit but lord you need an environment that allows you to check yo'self before you wreck yo'self.

 

[Taylor]

Trading Fyfe in 2019 is very different to losing Fyfe as an Unrestricted Free Agent to Gold Coast end of 2023 as a three time Brownlow Medalist when they offer him $900,000 a year for three seasons.

 

[Arcassius]

Trading Fyfe in 2019 is very different to losing Fyfe as an Unrestricted Free Agent to Gold Coast end of 2023 as a three time Brownlow Medalist when they offer him $900,000 a year for three seasons.

That went without saying

Sent from my XQ-BC72 using Tapatalk

 

[Frigate]

Nice click bait thread IMO. Say, in hindsight, us choosing to trade out Clive, Pav or Mundy. Sometimes, if your gems want to hang around and be committed, you keep them. Builds a strong culture. Fyfe is all Freo, he wants to stay, he stays, because he is a champion that loves our club, and only wants the success of FFC. 2023 will be the year that defines this. I think it will be a good one for Nate! He has good boys around him in the mid, so he can concentrate on the forward line. I would not want to line up on him in the forward pocket!

 

[Superkoops]

Nice click bait thread IMO. Say, in hindsight, us choosing to trade out Clive, Pav or Mundy. Sometimes, if your gems want to hang around and be committed, you keep them. Builds a strong culture. Fyfe is all Freo, he wants to stay, he stays, because he is a champion that loves our club, and only wants the success of FFC. 2023 will be the year that defines this. I think it will be a good one for Nate! He has good boys around him in the mid, so he can concentrate on the forward line. I would not want to line up on him in the forward pocket!

Agreed. I like that he is trimming down a little. How he managed to massively bulk up after his infection 13-months ago and his shoulder rehab and back injury astounds me. He was massive last year and looked to be covering the ground too slowly (ie less agile).

He had some moments in the midfield but struggled to get into forward-line groove. Having a much better pre-season, trimming down and after at least playing some games in the forward-line last year with a new group I’m expecting a much better Fyfe.

 

[Taylor]

...as long as his back, shoulder, shoulder, quad, elbow, hamstring and hamstring are all good.