TexForPM
Premiership Player
Top 10... piss off!?
Luke Edwards Father/Son Discussion
- Thread starter Apsaalooke
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Jun 15, 2005
- 69,233
- 60,483
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- AUFC, Everton, Sturt
At this stage he's around the 10-15 range but as we know, a lot happens in 12 months.
His brother looked a certainty to be drafted as an underager but now look.
TexForPM
Premiership Player
I was more in disbelief.
Top 10 pick, puck yeah!
I remember some phantom draft had Jackson as a pick in the mid 20s to early 30s but given no-one has listed him after his delisting......
Considering the club is a clusterfk off field, and the coach, assistant coach and head of football were all sacked for turning our clubs culture into a laughing stock that has cost us player after player, I would be pretty satisfied to believe that players like Jackson were treated uprofessionally and his father might have taken an issue with it. Reality is that our admin has shown more negatives signs that Tyson ever has.
We are just lucky that Tyson and Nicks are mates and we have improved our chances of getting him.
- Sep 23, 2012
- 3,973
- 6,150
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Sturt, Ozark Mountain Daredevils
- Thread starter
- #281
'Still in with a chance?'
How do we change the title?
- Jun 15, 2005
- 69,233
- 60,483
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- AUFC, Everton, Sturt
Tinfoil hat stuff.
If he was that good how come he made it to our rookie picks ?? He didn't get the preferential treatment Tyson wanted and the family sooked up.
It's that simple.
- Jun 15, 2005
- 69,233
- 60,483
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- AUFC, Everton, Sturt
Gary Buckenara..... says it all really.
This has nothing to do with if Jackson was worth keeping or not. It has to do with how he was treated and his father's views on that. And treated doesnt mean getting delisted. Lots of players at the club wernt delisted, yet felt the club didn't do the right thing by them.
It's simple really.
- Jun 15, 2005
- 69,233
- 60,483
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- AUFC, Everton, Sturt
Yet most were happy to stay and have done so. Tyson has had an axe to grind for years, and in some ways I understand that.
He came out of that worse than the club did IMO.
jackster83
The Feats of Strength
It's pretty clear that we are currently the least desirable club in the whole competition to play for (or work for). People leave us to go to the Suns FFS.
Getting rid of cancers in Pyke, Campo and Burton is a big, big step forward. We have a new coach, will have a new captain, different looking side, etc.
We need to be perceived in a different light come the end of 2020 if we're going to start attracting players, coaches, etc.
- Oct 3, 2003
- 26,916
- 30,910
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Soft spot for Brisbane
That's a pretty dumb comment.
Greenwood wanted to stay. Keath wanted to stay. Jacobs wanted to stay. Etc etc.
If the club had paid up and kept those players, the usual suspects on here would have been crying out for their blood.
So the club chooses to not keep any of them, and the usual suspects see it as evidence no one wants to stay here.
It's completely ridiculous. The Crows are a wealthy club with great facilities (admittedly in a town that's difficult to attract people to).
Every club sacks staff members who don't perform. It happens every year. No one is steering clear of coming here because we once hired Brett Burton, or held a camp one time where the Richmond theme song was played too often.
And here comes Mr Poppins.
Players who really want to stay at a club do take unders, but not at our club. Oh and this ain’t the first year we’ve lost players.
Have you seen our facilities? Our oval is a wasteland.
Of course quality staff would look at our club and think what a shit show and whether they want to be part of it. The people who hired Burton are still there. We just had a review FFS, that’s well we are going.
But then again you believe the spin like “less voices”
Tyson believes/believed if Jackson wasn't a F/S selection for us another club would have drafted him and he'd still be on an AFL list. Not even being able to make Werribee's team in the VFL may have opened up his eyes on where he is at.
- Jun 15, 2005
- 69,233
- 60,483
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- AUFC, Everton, Sturt
Our ovals always been in a wasteland
- Sep 5, 2017
- 1,980
- 4,180
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Which part do you believe is incorrect?
FR0GGY
From a cartel villa in Tuscany
100% of it
OK, but really Keath, Greenwood and Jacobs are hardly good examples of players who "would have taken unders to stay, if we were a good club".
Every one of those players was being offered significantly more money and/or contract length, more than we were (quite reasonably) willing to offer. There's "unders" and there's "unders". A player who has been offered, say, 3 years at one club and 5 years at another, when they are in the 27-28 age group, is not going to take the 3 year offer "because good club".
But that’s not the situation, we offered both 2 years and the other clubs 4 years with triggers. Had we offered 3 years both players would have been 31, big deal.
The facts are there have been plenty of players who have taken less to stay at good clubs, but not at our club, players only stay if they bleed us dry, even legends like Rory.
So, 2 years from us, 4 years from the other club, they took the MUCH better offer. It was our choice to offer them 2, their choice (quite reasonably) to move on. Now, the argument over what we should have offered them has been had, but let's suppose we offered them 3 because we wanted to keep them (which we clearly didn't). If they had still gone to the club offering them 4, would that be a case of "would have stayed for unders, if we were a good club"?
We're talking Alex Keath, Hugh Greenwood and Sam Jacobs, here. Not Josh Kennedy and Jeremy McGovern.
I think you're stretching to find reasons to be down on the club at this point.
I’m talking about the first 2 players. I would have driven Jacobs to the airport.
And yes they would have been examples of players who chose to leave instead of staying, which doesn’t happen as much at the good clubs. How is that difficult to understand?
Im stretching nothing, it seems some choose to ignore reality in their defence of the club, a club mind you that has been a basket case and one of the worst run clubs in the comp the last couple of years.
Bovo
Brownlow Medallist
Besides the son of god (please excuse me if you are religious). Has there been any real FS standouts in the modern game
Golumless
A bigger deal out west.
Also, this whole "players take unders to stay" is disingenuous. The offers are always close. They may give up 1-200 k, or a year of security. No player is going to give up multiple years of security, nor > 300k. Not for us. Not for Hawthorn. Careers are finite after all.
There is a point unders is just the club you are at doesn't value you anywhere near someone else does. We've seen that a few times here recently with Lyons, Lever, Keath, Greenwood. Whether that's us being ahead of the curve, having a mismanaged cap, or missing something in our ratings, is another question entirely.
The more concerning point is why are we developing players with a now decently high level of frequency that we don't care to retain/rate anywhere near other clubs. Especially defensively. Are we incapable of producing shutdown defenders right now? Is it just other clubs overvaluing players who are only capable of being an intercept defender (which is my though with it, as I have little time or trust for intercept defenders), are we undervaluing it? The other elephant in the room is from if this is inflated by us hitting the end of our window early?
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Poll
