McGovern: 1 yr @ start of 2016, 3 years at the end of 2017 - confirmed legend

[The Sloane Ranger]

Pykey has really backed Shooter in and given him the confidence to play at this level

It will be interesting to see if Shooter repays this faith by signing a new agreement

 

[DD#23]

I've actually met Gov's family, had a beer with them in Gov's first year when he was named as an emergency vs WC at home. Nice people, they were all wearing guernseys that were half AFC and half WCE with McGovern on the back. Were very happy for him to be here, but I would guess that any family would prefer their kids to be at home if there was a choice. We just need to show him that he's better off here!

I've just thought of a theory actually, we seem to be targeting all these family types under the good-bloke, leadership, strong sense of community, support etc banner in the hope that putting them all together will produce a team of strong, united individuals that would take a bullet for each other...

now call me crazy, but how could you ever expect someone from such strong family environments to ever chose an entity like a football club they've only known for a couple of years over their family? You'd be mad to expect that from them wouldn't you? Sure some will, but you're facing an uphill battle for the most part aren't you?

maybe we need some more swashbuckling, own-man types. The Crouch brothers and Atkins for example strike me as the sort that wouldn't have been Skyping mum every night in his first preseason - but you can tell they love all the boys around the club. Or am I just reading into things too much?

 

[arrowman]

I've just thought of a theory actually, we seem to be targeting all these family types under the good-bloke, leadership, strong sense of community, support etc banner in the hope that putting them all together will produce a team of strong, united individuals that would take a bullet for each other...

now call me crazy, but how could you ever expect someone from such strong family environments to ever chose an entity like a football club they've only known for a couple of years over their family? You'd be mad to expect that from them wouldn't you? Sure some will, but you're facing an uphill battle for the most part aren't you?

maybe we need some more swashbuckling, own-man types. The Crouch brothers and Atkins for example strike me as the sort that wouldn't have been Skyping mum every night in his first preseason - but you can tell they love all the boys around the club. Or am I just reading into things too much?

Interesting thought. On the other hand - you'd like to think that just because they're good "family types" they're still capable of forming adult mateships and camaraderie etc in pursuit of team success, playing for a coach that they like/respect, yadayada, so that even though they love their family they're not going to turn that over just to move back to their home town and start again at a different club. Everyone's different of course.

If my son was drafted interstate, I'd be delighted if he bonded with his new club, striving for success etc, and didn't give a thought to "coming home". In fact, I'd be a little disappointed if he did want to "come home" after a few years, it would signal to me that it hadn't really worked out at his club. ANd conversely, if it does work out - they're not going home.

 

[DD#23]

Interesting thought. On the other hand - you'd like to think that just because they're good "family types" they're still capable of forming adult mateships and camaraderie etc in pursuit of team success, playing for a coach that they like/respect, yadayada, so that even though they love their family they're not going to turn that over just to move back to their home town and start again at a different club. Everyone's different of course.

If my son was drafted interstate, I'd be delighted if he bonded with his new club, striving for success etc, and didn't give a thought to "coming home". In fact, I'd be a little disappointed if he did want to "come home" after a few years, it would signal to me that it hadn't really worked out at his club. ANd conversely, if it does work out - they're not going home.

oh sure, but I think it might be in line with your modern "hover" parenting technique a bit too.

back in the day I feel like it used to be a bit more "I'm preparing my kids to fly off into the real world" where as now it seems more like "I don't want to let my baby go". Obviously like you say everyone's different of course. It's almost like city kids vs country kids too to generalise it - you see two completely different experiences for people who grew up in Adelaide compared to those who have had to move to Adelaide from a town a few hours away when they both start going to uni for example.

some like it some don't I guess. The main point is just that if it were a life or death situation family is going to beat footy club 100 times out of 100.

 

[Shaz2012]

some like it some don't I guess. The main point is just that if it were a life or death situation family is going to beat footy club 100 times out of 100.

How often are these things about life or death situations though? That would be the exception and not the rule. These players should embrace the adventure. I know a lot of negatives are said about millenials, but I am optimistic that one positive about this generation is that they are open to broadening their horizons and moving out of the city of their parents home to start their career. Whether this is out of uni for their first job, or if they get drafted interstate. I am highly optimistic that players will look for the career opportunity rather than being safely close to where their parents live. I dont buy this "nobody will come to Adelaide" bull either. We saw it with Seeds and Hampton and we will see it more and more I believe. As long as we have a team that has a good culture and is within striking distance of a flag, then I think we should be thinking that we can retain anyone on our list and we can attract anyone who is looking to move clubs.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Pykey has really backed Shooter in and given him the confidence to play at this level

It will be interesting to see if Shooter repays this faith by signing a new agreement

Who's idea was it to sign only a one year contract ? ......that may give you the answer ?

 

[Pdub]

Who's idea was it to sign only a one year contract ? ......that may give you the answer ?

He hadn't played a single game when he signed the extension, the club wasn't going to offer him more.

 

[DD#23]

How often are these things about life or death situations though? That would be the exception and not the rule. These players should embrace the adventure. I know a lot of negatives are said about millenials, but I am optimistic that one positive about this generation is that they are open to broadening their horizons and moving out of the city of their parents home to start their career. Whether this is out of uni for their first job, or if they get drafted interstate. I am highly optimistic that players will look for the career opportunity rather than being safely close to where their parents live. I dont buy this "nobody will come to Adelaide" bull either. We saw it with Seeds and Hampton and we will see it more and more I believe. As long as we have a team that has a good culture and is within striking distance of a flag, then I think we should be thinking that we can retain anyone on our list and we can attract anyone who is looking to move clubs.

easy to say, but not every individual will.

my initial point was if we target strong family types - which Haggis has all but said in a few of the behind the scenes draft related videos - are we not risking flying a little too close to the sun and increasing our chances of picking up a guy who will ultimately want to start a family and all the rest close to home a la Danger?

 

[Shaz2012]

my initial point was if we target strong family types - which Haggis has all but said in a few of the behind the scenes draft related videos - are we not risking flying a little too close to the sun and increasing our chances of picking up a guy who will ultimately want to start a family and all the rest close to home a la Danger?

No offense, but I personally think this is nonsense. The failure rate of draftees is really high. So many players end up playing little or no AFL football and are not even tradeable at the end of their contracts. We need to pick players that are most likely to be a success. Full stop.

If McGovern is a success in his time with us and is best 22 for a good part of that and then WCE or Freo come in and give us a high draft pick for him then he is a success. Danger was a success not a failure. We got good footy out of him and traded him for better than a first round pick. I want us to be going for more McGoverns and more Dangers, not less. Once we get them we might be able to convince them to stay, but if not we get back more than what we used to pick them up and use that for a new player.

 

[MRB37]

How often are these things about life or death situations though? That would be the exception and not the rule. These players should embrace the adventure. I know a lot of negatives are said about millenials, but I am optimistic that one positive about this generation is that they are open to broadening their horizons and moving out of the city of their parents home to start their career. Whether this is out of uni for their first job, or if they get drafted interstate. I am highly optimistic that players will look for the career opportunity rather than being safely close to where their parents live. I dont buy this "nobody will come to Adelaide" bull either. We saw it with Seeds and Hampton and we will see it more and more I believe. As long as we have a team that has a good culture and is within striking distance of a flag, then I think we should be thinking that we can retain anyone on our list and we can attract anyone who is looking to move clubs.

Curtly had his brother here and said it's closer to home in Adelaide (plus it probably helps when guys like Maccas and Betts try and recruit you) but Seeds did reportedly have the chance to stay in Melbourne, move to the Gold Coast or play in Adelaide, so there must have been something about us that appealed to him.

 

[MRB37]

I do wonder if we were to trade Gov to WC if we'd try and get someone like Tom Lamb back in the deal (depending on how many games he plays).

With how Lynch came on here once given a chance I reckon Lamb could do the same.

 

[DD#23]

No offense, but I personally think this is nonsense. The failure rate of draftees is really high. So many players end up playing little or no AFL football and are not even tradeable at the end of their contracts. We need to pick players that are most likely to be a success. Full stop.

If McGovern is a success in his time with us and is best 22 for a good part of that and then WCE or Freo come in and give us a high draft pick for him then he is a success. Danger was a success not a failure. We got good footy out of him and traded him for better than a first round pick. I want us to be going for more McGoverns and more Dangers, not less. Once we get them we might be able to convince them to stay, but if not we get back more than what we used to pick them up and use that for a new player.

ha! Go watch the videos mate, Hamish makes it very clear how important going for the good blokes from good families is for us. And if you don't think that has any effect on likelihood for success go review Reilly, VB and Mackay's careers.

I'm paraphrasing of course, but I haven't just made it up. How straight-laced have our last 3 crops of draftees been?

 

[Shaz2012]

Curtly had his brother here and said it's closer to home in Adelaide (plus it probably helps when guys like Maccas and Betts try and recruit you) but Seeds did reportedly have the chance to stay in Melbourne, move to the Gold Coast or play in Adelaide, so there must have been something about us that appealed to him.

Yes. I think Crows fans sell Adelaide way to short. I have lived in Perth and Melbourne and to be honest, I prefer both of those citys to Adelaide. Adelaide has got friends and family but otherwise the I have to say that the other two cities are, frankly, better. Although, if we are comparing Adelaide to Melbourne I would live anywhere in Adelaide CBD over the western suburbs of Melbourne. But you live where you have the best opportunity to work and enjoy your work too. Why would anyone who has a 5 to 10 year career choose to live in Melbourne and play for a cellar dwellar like Richmond or Carlton if they could go to GWS or Sydney and play in premierships for the same pay. Frankly, I have little respect for people that would make that choice.

On the other hand, if your choice was between two cellar dwellars with no hope in sight, sure take your pick. AFC are not always going to be attractive. But right now, we are as attractive as any club, and there is no reason we should not think we could not attract a Fyfe. As for a Shiel, why would he leave, but if he wants to sign a big contract now that he is at that age, then he may have to move. If we can afford him, there is no reason why he wouldn't come here so he could get paid and have a realistic chance to win a flag while doing it. Rather than go to Richmond and deal with ferals shouting abuse at him every other week. Melbourne does have post-career media opportunities though and that may come into a players thinking.

 

[Shaz2012]

ha! Go watch the videos mate, Hamish makes it very clear how important going for the good blokes from good families is for us. And if you don't think that has any effect on likelihood for success go review Reilly, VB and Mackay's careers.

I'm paraphrasing of course, but I haven't just made it up. How straight-laced have our last 3 crops of draftees been?

I think you are reading too much into that. What else do you expect him to say. You think any of the players that were drafted in and around these guys dont pass this test. Are you suggesting we passed up a better player who didn't meet this criteria?

In any case, my reply actually was angled towards your implication that we are looking at players that wont want to go home like Danger. Wouldn't such a guy with strong family ties pass the good bloke from good family test anyway?

I would want us to avoid players who are going to go out and get in fights at night clubs after curfew, or go around drink driving, or beating their girlfriends, or raping people. I am happy to have some kind of good bloke test for that. But the risk of them wanting to trade home is not something I would be overly concerned about. Obviously we should avoid the very soft ones, but the case of McGovern is one that I am happy to see repeated over and over again.

 

[DD#23]

In any case, my reply actually was angled towards your implication that we are looking at players that wont want to go home like Danger. Wouldn't such a guy with strong family ties pass the good bloke from good family test anyway?

that's exactly my point.

if you're interviewing a guy and ask what's most important to you and he says family, regardless of how good a quality that might be in someone its fair to say he's a greater flight risk than someone who says winning a premiership or something don't you think?

which is not to say that everyone with strong family ties is going to go home of course, but if you pick a lot of those guys it would make sense that over time the risk is greater right?

 

[Elite Crow]

He hadn't played a single game when he signed the extension, the club wasn't going to offer him more.

You don't know that. He is obviously highly rated that's why they backed him in so much in last year.

Good to see you are consistent though.

 

[Pdub]

You don't know that. He is obviously highly rated that's why they backed him in so much in last year.

Good to see you are consistent though.

Come on man, how many injury plagued players taken in the 40s have been offered multiple year extensions before they play their first game?

 

[Elite Crow]

Come on man, how many injury plagued players taken in the 40s have been offered multiple year extensions before they play their first game?

You mean one more year than the one he signed for. You are making it sound like we offered him a 5 year deal.

 

[Pdub]

You mean one more year than the one he signed for. You are making it sound like we offered him a 5 year deal.

What are you even talking about?

I said he was never going to get more than a 1-year extension at the time he signed. Any more than a 1-year extension would have been unheard of. I was responding to the insinuation that he may have been offered more but only wanted one.

You read this as me backing the club and only having the clubs opinion? seek help.

 

[MRB37]

You don't know that. He is obviously highly rated that's why they backed him in so much in last year.

Good to see you are consistent though.

So you're saying we would have done for McGovern what teams don't even do with top 10 picks who've had very good first years and offered a guy who hadn't played ANY AFL games and only 11 inconsistent SANFL games a multi year extension?

 

[Shaz2012]

that's exactly my point.

if you're interviewing a guy and ask what's most important to you and he says family, regardless of how good a quality that might be in someone its fair to say he's a greater flight risk than someone who says winning a premiership or something don't you think?

which is not to say that everyone with strong family ties is going to go home of course, but if you pick a lot of those guys it would make sense that over time the risk is greater right?

Hehehe. Well, I doubt anyone thinks winning a premiership is more important than their family. Pity anyone in a situation where that may be true. But my view remains, I would take 100 more Dangers and McGoverns even if they all want to go home. They help us when they are here, they help us as they leave.

 

[DD#23]

how many games had Lever played when he got his one-year extension?

 

[DD#23]

Hehehe. Well, I doubt anyone thinks winning a premiership is more important than their family. Pity anyone in a situation where that may be true. But my view remains, I would take 100 more Dangers and McGoverns even if they all want to go home. They help us when they are here, they help us as they leave.

I'm not disagreeing with you, merely making a suggestion as to why it always feels like its happening more to us than it is to other teams.

 

[MRB37]

how many games had Lever played when he got his one-year extension?

9.

 

[Elite Crow]

What are you even talking about?

I said he was never going to get more than a 1-year extension at the time he signed. Any more than a 1-year extension would have been unheard of. I was responding to the insinuation that he may have been offered more but only wanted one.

You read this as me backing the club and only having the clubs opinion? seek help.

So you're saying we would have done for McGovern what teams don't even do with top 10 picks who've had very good first years and offered a guy who hadn't played ANY AFL games and only 11 inconsistent SANFL games a multi year extension?

What I'm saying is we don't know. We could have offered him a 2 year deal if we rated him highly enough.

We re-signed him in March 2016, which means discussions would have started January/February 2016. We obviously rated him to give him another year before he had played a game.

What I picked up on was the fallback position of Pdub who automatically sided with the club without knowing what happened.