Rumour The Thread formerly known as the rumour file, now with zero rumours

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Is the club confident of getting Higgins despite Norf's interest? Thanks :)
Not according to this...

Shaun Higgins tells teammates he is likely to leave Western Bulldogs

It's understood Higgins and his management will next week ramp up discussions with North Melbourne, which could be willing to offer a longer deal. It emerged on Wednesday Carlton was no longer interested in Higgins, having made initial inquiries to his management about three weeks ago.
http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...o-leave-western-bulldogs-20140924-10le23.html
 
Check Smurf's post, a 'hypothetical' trade involving Levi to St Kilda.

Which makes sense. I'd wager we'd have multiple possibilities on our whiteboard, most of which would never see the light of day.
 
Agreed, I'm just trying to separate smurf's personal opinion on what might happen from 'inside information'.

i.e. Levi was happy to remain at Carlton rather than be packaged up pick 6 for St Kilda's pick 1, as speculated.


It's his opinion but we still have to keep in mind it is a Rumour thread. ;)

TBH can't see Levi going anywhere. He just re-signed not long ago.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Yes, and then we freak out at how many games it cost us and go out and recruit 3 more ruckmen next year.

Oh yea of little faith....!!!

I think the Club under Malthouse is a totally different animal - prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt re Thomas signing - for another year. Lets see how Thomas goes after a proper pr-season to get right and fit.

As for crazy Vossy type drafts/trades I think Malthouse is a cut above - Docherty/Everitt were good value - Menzel was a brave pick working out so far and Cripps too early to tell.

Carlton will be a lot stronger if we manage another three good trades this year...Higgins for example is a big improvement on a Lucas.


hmmm I could go on...maybe better suited for Malthouse thread.
 
It's his opinion but we still have to keep in mind it is a Rumour thread. ;)

Definitely. The rumour is that both the NSW clubs are after our pick 6, as I'm sure 15 other clubs would be delighted to receive also.

Neither Mitchell nor Jaksch cut the mustard, if McKay and Trigg wish to drive a hard bargain - Which where his post drifted towards the trade hypotheticals side of things.
 
Ignoring the best available for a needs based selection nearly always comes back to bite you. I do agree that in later picks in a draft needs come into it more, but early picks should always be best available.

I don't agree. I think a flexible approach that balances a range of factors is better than a rigid approach. Hughes went with the "best available" mantra and IMO it resulted in too many structural holes in our line up. It's a team game, it's all about team and recruitment should be no different. I don't care if we have a list full of good players or not, I just want a good team that works well together and wins flags.
 
Last edited:
I don't agree. I think a flexible approach rather than a rigid approach is better. Hughes went with the "best available" mantra and IMO it resulted in our biggest weakness ... too many structural holes in our line up. It's a team game, it's all about team and recruitment should be no different. So we should be open to going with the player who is the best fit for building a premiership unit; again, no hard and fast rule, but the flexibility of being at least able to entertain this approach depending on a balance of factors is important I think.

Can see where you're coming from but will have to agree to disagree. If it's a choice between two players with negligible difference in talent then sure, have some flexibility and draft for best fit. Poor recruiting of best available created the holes in the list, not the concept of drafting best available itself! Look at Lucas for example.. had the right idea by going for best available but just didn't get that choice right (nearly every club would have rated him higher than Talia at the time by the way).
 
Blaming hughes is silly.

Blame the development.

Hughes had the easiest job in the business recruiting high draft picks. The club didnt have the right leadership to develop them.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I'd be inclined to blame both, TBH.


No matter which way you want to look at things, it has to come back to the top.

Hughes didn't hire himself and the development program was ticked off by the board that were happy with who they put in place as coach and support.

The test starts now.
 
It's all over the joint. Collingwood official press release too.

Geez, after spending 9 kajillion to keep Cloke, everyone else has walked.

3 years ago they carried on like it was Camelot...............plenty of empty seats at the Round Table now.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top