- Aug 22, 2009
- 24,506
- 28,840
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Surprised he has never finished in the top 10 for the pies B & F.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
AFLW 2024 - Round 9 - Indigenous Round - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
The reality for Wellers is that his opportunities have been limited in a team boasting so many competent midfielders. On the few occasions that he has had opportunities he has performed very well. Hardly surprising he sees his best interests to be served by moving on.Surprised he has never finished in the top 10 for the pies B & F.
Noone's saying you've shafted anyone...just that some clubs find it easier to trade and are a bit wary of others. Hasnt been easy for anyone to trade with Essendon for a long time now..so if one of our guys for instance wanted to go there at the moment we'd know its not going to be easy...but if it was Saints/Cats/Pies would be much easier.
Eddie just likes to wave an unloaded gun around when any of "his boys" are being targetted or up for a move. Likes to be involved in everything and doesnt mean much in the long term.
His mantra is that you're lucky to get to the Pies...you dont leave the Pies. Just continuing their tradition.
Carlton also petulantly refused to deal with Collingwood over Fevola in 2009.
So we didn't want Williams at a time when we we a mid range side? And after just missing out on winning a flag we were happy to see the back of a Talented player in Davis? Doesn't sound right. Both wanted to go one because he wanted a fresh start and the other who wanted to go back to family. How did we stand in their way? They both got to the home they wanted with little fuss. Maybe I'm seeing it wrong.
What makes you think we didn't want Nick Davis? Nick Davis was a better player at Collingwood than at Sydney, if the infamous preliminary final performance is removed from the Sydney chapters of his biography. Nick was homesick, wanting to go home to mummy and daddy. We lost him for pick 28, which was an outrage.
I guess that depends on whether you look at it from the perspective of the buying club or the selling club
Stevens was a decent player, but history shows we made the right call ... We genuinely didn't believe we were making an unfair offer or grandstanding/holding something in reserve at the time.
Collingwood weren't sad to see the back of Davis. They thought he was a knobhead. What they were sad about was the fact he'd walk out them no matter what and that they had to settle for unders in the trade. They were in no position to be acting tough. Davis was already gonzo!
So you think picking and choosing who you negotiate with is fair trading?And yet that doesn't change my statement one little bit.
Absolutely! The club getting those picks would be laughing to Sunday. Which is why if Wellingham goes for under pick 20-25 someone should lose their job; history says it wouldn't be a smart move.
Never said you didn't. Although Stevens was always a better player than Didak IMO. At the time, your offer really was considered pretty low and you wouldn't budge as much as Port wouldn't as I recall. Oh well, as I said, you were under no obligation to trade.
Absolutely! The club getting those picks would be laughing to Sunday. Which is why if Wellingham goes for under pick 20-25 someone should lose their job; history says it wouldn't be a smart move.
Never said you didn't. Although Stevens was always a better player than Didak IMO. At the time, your offer really was considered pretty low and you wouldn't budge as much as Port wouldn't as I recall. Oh well, as I said, you were under no obligation to trade.
Thinking a player is a knobhead is not motivation for wanting them gone. Travis Cloke is a knobhead too.
Davis was a required player. But he couldnt be talked into staying so a trade was reluctantly agreed to.
So you think picking and choosing who you negotiate with is fair trading?
The offer was pick 17 and Heath Scotland or 17 and 35, Port wanted neither option.
You say it wouldnt be a smart move and youre entitled to your opinion, but history says nothing of the sort.
And I'll say it again, the Blues have been one of the more fair and even traders in AFL over the last five years. We held held players or clubs over a barrel and not wanting to gift Fev to the old enemy doesn't compromise that statement anywhere like you hope it might.
Oh dear, you have NFI mate, let the grown ups speak.
Sure it does. That list of players SOS put up - history - shows how trading such a high pick for mid-list players just doesn't yield great returns.
You have had nothing tradeworthy for so long that doing a deal is pretty easy. Other clubs dont mind giving Carlton good players because they know that they will finish their career at an unsuccesful club.
You need to compare it to the hit-miss ratios of top 20 draftees. And thats a lottery too.
And rightly so. They were both rubbish offers and the Pies wouldn't budge to anything more reasonable. Just as Port pushed the Didak line.
.
This is a lovely story ... and that's about all. I've never been all that interested in fiction though.
History shows Heath Scotland to be a very good offer. And you seem to fancy yourself as a historian
Teams in the premiership window dont want to deal with clubs who have a chance of winning premierships. They are happy to deal with clubs who are not in that window.
Yes mate ... I get it. You overrate Wellingham. I think we all get it. Now move along!
You might as well go back to telling me how Jimmy Clement was better than Bruce Doull
Why wasn't it an option? You traded him to Brisbane, and we hadn't even had the chance to put up an offer.I have no issue with the club not wanting to trade Fev to Collingwood. We didn't try to dick anyone, or negotiate unfairly; we simply said from the outset that it wasn't an option.
And I'll say it again, the Blues have been one of the more fair and even traders in AFL over the last five years. We held held players or clubs over a barrel and not wanting to gift Fev to the old enemy doesn't compromise that statement anywhere like you hope it might.
Yes. From a 10 year hindsight perspective, Scotland and pick 17 may have only been a little under, rather than the unfair offering it was deemed at the time.