Mitch McGovern (please read OP)

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Still waiting...can we start a counter of # of days since MM said he wanted to leave but hasn't nominated Carlton

He won't nominate until the trade period begins or just prior to. There's no point in him nominating now. And if there is it's just solely for the public's purposes. I'm certain he's told the AFC where he'd like to go to, and private meetings with that club are taking place.

We will most likely see a deal happen in the first 24-48 hours of trade period. And like Dangerfield's early deal, meetings took place many weeks prior to that being official.
 
I've been banging on about this recently, but the only way an equal pay structure like ours can work is if its coupled with a ruthless list turnover strategy like Geelong and Hawthorn have.

We hold onto Van Berlo, Thommo, Otten, Jacobs, Dmac, Douglas etc until they can't walk.

Geelong and Hawthorn don't flinch about moving on much higher quality players like Hodge, Mitchell, Chapman, Stevie J, Podsiadly while they can still play on elsewhere.

We're trying to copy their recipe but we only have 1 of the 2 required ingredients
Geelong and Hawthorn were in a position to do that because they had genuine stars or top quality recruits coming in (Dangerfield, Henderson, Touhy, O’meara, Mitchell etc.). Plus, the veterans they let go would have still been taking up a decent whack of salary cap. So there were actually ruthless decisions to be made in order to bring in younger guns.

This is in contrast to us, who have no big names lined up and whose veterans would be on waaaay less (I hope) than Stevie J and Hodge etc. would be. If we had Shiel lined up and we needed to make space in the cap, then you’d imagine some hard decisions would be made.

In the last couple of years we’ve seemingly become better at list decisions. Hendo and Lyon were let go to bring in Gibbs. Yes, we’ve kept veterans on the list for single year contracts but I’m happy with that as long as they have to earn their spot. For next year I’d probably prefer to have Douglas and Mackay rather than a speculative couple of picks in the 70s.

As long as when the time comes we can move on serviceable players in order to bring in better ones, then I can’t complain too much.
 
If causing turnovers via pressure in the forward half is the most critical component of today’s game (as Nick Riewoldt said last night on AFL 360), then losing Cameron one year and McGovern the next is not helping our cause. On balance in our forward line, we would be better off playing McGovern instead of Walker or Jenkins. Obviously off-field stuff matters too - but if Sydney are willing to move on someone like Hannebery - I think Walker is in a similar boat. You just couldn’t imagine the AFC doing this though and maybe rightly so.
This is why I see Rankine as so important. He has the tools to be Charlie on speed if correctly developed
 

Log in to remove this ad.

If causing turnovers via pressure in the forward half is the most critical component of today’s game (as Nick Riewoldt said last night on AFL 360), then losing Cameron one year and McGovern the next is not helping our cause. On balance in our forward line, we would be better off playing McGovern instead of Walker or Jenkins. Obviously off-field stuff matters too - but if Sydney are willing to move on someone like Hannebery - I think Walker is in a similar boat. You just couldn’t imagine the AFC doing this though and maybe rightly so.


To suggest playing Gov infront of walker, means you don't really follow football do you?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I would absolutely be happy for the club to play hardball on this even if we come out worse off by holding onto a disgruntled player.
It's time to draw a line in the sand and if we don't get the right price, then he's not for sale. He can stay and play or even quit football for all I care, but time to hold firm.

Yep. With 2 years left on his contract, his value is whatever we say it is, not what other clubs might want to pay.
 
I would absolutely be happy for the club to play hardball on this even if we come out worse off by holding onto a disgruntled player.
It's time to draw a line in the sand and if we don't get the right price, then he's not for sale. He can stay and play or even quit football for all I care, but time to hold firm.

We are in no obligation to trade him. If it’s not up to our standard, he stays. Unfortunately for him contracts mean something and he signed one last year.



On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
He will stay and play his heart out if he has too. Absolutely no doubt about it.
Gotta remember, if McGovern were to drop the ball, upon coming back to us .....then his next contract, with whichever team, would be less that this one .....and he's looking for the "big" contract after the next 2 years
 
Barratts lack of football knowledge is truly astonishing.

If the pick is less than what we got for Cameron then he stays, it's as simple as that.
Carlton want to make him one of their highest paid players... but Gov is only worth a 2nd rounder lol.

Something doesn't compute...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top