List Mgmt. Luke Jackson - Yay or Nay?

Do you want to pay the high price tag for Luke Jackson?

  • YAY

  • NAY


Results are only viewable after voting.

Remove this Banner Ad

Luke Jackson doing the job for us. Lowering his value for us so we won't have to pay out the arse to bring him in, my man.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Look I dislike your mob as much as you all dislike Cripps... But seriously this could be one of the worst moves of all time. I sort of enjoy our little bitter rivalry and I don't want to see you crippled by a deal for Jackson rivalling Ned Guy levels of stupidity.

On another note please bury the Pies tomorrow and ideally bury Ginnivans smirking little face 10 foot deep.
 
I'll just say this since I've already stated before that I don't value draft picks as much as some, so that part of the trade isn't an issue to me - but he isn't worth whatever $ we're dangling in front of him that's also creating collateral damage on the contracts of current players.

I know he's 21 soon but I seriously hope he's been carrying an injury. This finals series I saw him do nothing remotely eye catching with the ball or within congestion w/ supposed aThLeTiCiSm - went the easiest and worst option by hand nearly every time at best. You can tell from a mile out when he's in a contest contending a mark that he's never a chance either. Just a garbage read of the ball and body work every time.
 
What I've really enjoyed this year is the almost complete lack of whipping boys. Sure, a few blokes have copped it here or there but in general, we don't have any spuds regularly getting games. So much so that I think our bottom 6 is the best in the league.

Then we drop wages on Jackson that presumably make him our 2nd/3rd highest player and you can just see him slotting straight into that role. Dead set, Wallsy must be 100% he just becomes great from here because you can't rationalise this trade off anything other than assuming he improves out of sight.
 
Yeah, nah. Would I like to get Luke Jackson? Yes indeed.

The poll asks "Do you want to pay the high price tag for Luke Jackson?". No thanks.
 
This deal has probably been sorted a long way out they aren’t reneging on it now.
Exactly. It's locked in because I thought the whole point of low-balling guys like Acres/Logue is to make enough cap space to bring in Jackson.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Exactly. It's locked in because I thought the whole point of low-balling guys like Acres/Logue is to make enough cap space to bring in Jackson.
Fremantle will regret that.
Need to keep much of the depth as possible. Not Lobb, Logue, Acres, Meek leaving and have what? Jackson and a few second rounders in? We go back to the start and have to regenerate.
 
Man, getting a scapegoat name before even joining the club, yeesh...

But in all seriousness, there has to be a way to shield ourselves here, honest conversations need to be had. I still want him, but on a wage commensurate to his actual output, not best case scenario output
 
Man, getting a scapegoat name before even joining the club, yeesh...

But in all seriousness, there has to be a way to shield ourselves here, honest conversations need to be had. I still want him, but on a wage commensurate to his actual output, not best case scenario output
Can you become a whipping boy before you even put the jumper on?
 

Remove this Banner Ad

List Mgmt. Luke Jackson - Yay or Nay?

Back
Top