Combine that with the betting odds having us at around $4.50 and the odds getting very short $1.80 for the tigers to win, and you just know that we are going to get up tomorrow night.
I think we can expect about 8 (total) goals from the following players:
Levi Jones (if he plays) Kreuzer Wright Everitt Walker
None of them are world beaters, but they can all kick a goal in the right situations. If we get first use, they will get more opportunities which should lead to goals.
From there, its just a matter of whether or not we can get others to chime in with a couple as well. If we can get one or more from the following players (not every week, but a mix of them):
Cripps Gibbs Tuohy Murphy Simpson Docherty Byrne Kerridge Murphy Thomas
Then we can score enough to win games. Its all about how well we use the footy. If we are in last seasons form we wont win many, but last season we were clearly underdone and ill prepared for a full season. We seem to be in better overall condition but the real stuff is just about to start and things might change... Who knows. A bit of luck will be needed too obviously. Richmond are the most overated team in the AFL bar North Melbourne, and are missing 2 players who are barometers for whether or not they win games. Combine that with the fragility they frequently remind everyone of having, and the fact that they have a soft backend to the season, they will come good later but are ripe for the picking this week.
Blues by 10 points. We wont win easy, but Im confident we can and will win.
Your memory must be faulty Thry. Indeed, one of Wallsy's comments was about Daisy pulling his head in and setting a better example.
Nah, that's retrospective.
He wasn't a party boy with a bad attitude at Collingwood which is what we are talking about here. That was the rat pack. Blokes with tattoos shooting with bikies hits and runs and what not.
Walls was talking about Daisy going down media Street and getting out on the field and letting football do the talking. Hard to do when your injured. I think you're mixing up your discussion points a little bit.
Quote
Anyway, it's not possible to defend the indefensible and I'm not going to bother to read any more of the lame (sorry about the pun!) justifications for the club recruiting Thomas. It happened and we're stuck with an overpaid list clogger. As I've said many times before, I'd love to see him recapture some form but I'm less optimistic of it happening than ever before.
Something I've come around to this year. But that's the point. This year.
It's impossible to know what you're going to get until you get it, and what you're really frustrated about was a risk that we didn't need to take that didn't work.
retrospective frustration is fine, but you can't project that back to three years ago based on different opinions it's impossible to know what was right or wrong and the truth was somewhere in between. One of them was going to be right, and in time, both could be.
Daisy is/was cooked. We have seen him play roughly 15 matches coming into his third year. We will see but ultimately it doesn't matter. He will do what he will do, it's not going to effect our flag chances.
That's all well and good but remember that Collingwood was concerned about Daisy's party boy behaviour and its detrimental impact on leadership. The idea that he was recruited to address a leadership deficiency is speculative if not fanciful. His alleged on field leadership is a moot point if he can't get on the field.
I suspect that the favourable fitness reports are after the fact and an attempt to justify Daisy's recruitment and over payment. I'm more inclined to accept that Phil Baressi resigned because his advice was ignored.
I reckon you might have this bit confused. I don't recall Daisy being linked to the party boy stuff in any way shape or form.
I reckon Robert Walls has a pretty good handle on how much Thomas is being paid and I accept his assertion that Thomas is our highest paid player on at least $700K.
Even if he was on $450K for four years with an option for a fifth year, it would still rate as on of our worst list management decisions.
Is that with or without excess loading on a contract?
Hypothetically speaking its possible that he was right in that particular 12 month period, but if rumours are to be believed, the captain is actually the highest paid player at the club, and not Daisy. That might not have been true of 2015, but it would have been true of their total contractual amount.
Which means we have been front loading Daisy's contract, which might explain why he is on 700k per year. We might have given him an entire year of his contract in the last 2. Given where our list is at, I would expect this to be the case because we dont have that many high earners at the club and the ones we do, would also be on front loaded contracts.
This means that Walls can be right, and LP's point might also be accurate.
I suspect that the dollar values of contract don't necessary coincide with what we pay in wages per season, and we must be due to have a fair chunk of salary cap space available for use in a year or two to put towards a Treloar type player.
Keep in mind his last two coaches were Mick Malthouse and McCartney.
Either way, we are looking at draft pick 1-8 at best this season. More likely top 5. Might as well let the team work out the role of the bloke playing key forward and worry about who it is next year.
Mate I beg to differ. We had already recovered from that under Ratts, the decision to sack him and appoint Mick, or moreover (IMO) the move to get Swann over from Collingwood, was the beginning of the end.
Differ all you like. Sticks pause regarding Rattens future if Malthouse wasnt available spoke volumes about the footy club. The decision was not made in isolation to Swann.
At the end of the day we have moved on. Forget these fossils, they are in the past, and thats where they are staying.
The answer to that is quite simple, he is Mick and Swann's son and Swanny wanted to complete the quinella re looking after his favourite people.
maybe Carrots, but if its true, then our club was in dire straights and had no hope of pulling out of that mess with any credibility.
I don't know an organisation that is run by a CEO in isolation without input from many people which indicates we had multiple points of failure regarding all those poor decisions made.
In any case we have put it behind us, and no matter how bad these decisions were:
1. We have moved on. 2. It wont be a millstone that plagues us for more than a couple of years. 3. We shouldnt lose any young talent on the back of not having cap room as we frankly have SFA players left worth paying big dollars to anyway. 4. Regardess of what has happened, our future is looking up with SOS driving our policies in similar fashion to last year.
last but most importantly:
5. As abysmal as our decision making has proven to be, nothing has/or ever will hurt us as much as the decisions that the Collins administration made on the back of the poor decisions made by Elliott which has brought our club to the position its in today. We may have navagated out of our current mess much earlier with some better administration, but nothing compares to what happend back in 2004. The decision to cut ties with Brittain was just one poor decision in a long line of other poor decisions, but the breaches and penalties have rendered us a basket case beyond anything else we have or ever will experience ever again.
I reckon there is some dodgy mathematics being applied with regards to these contracts.
I think people are looking at the years of contract combined with a figure we might have paid in one particular year (where front loading may have been performed) and multiplying by 5 to end up with a result that gives them ammunition to sling mud at our club.
Daisy is rumoured to have been on anywhere between 600k and 750 a season.
That doesnt mean he will get that money every season, but it might have been a figure he was on at this point. When you consider he was a restricted free agent, and Collingwood were only offering 450k a year plus bonuses (using this article as a relevant point) why would we indeed have gone double?
The answer is most likely that we havent. I believe his actual contract would be closer to 600k a year (still too much for what we have gotten/getting) and that there is a bit of creative accounting being used everywhere to simply pot the club like people are used to doing.
Front loading may have put him on a big packet in one season, but that would have had as much to do with us having cap wiggle room as anything else. We had Fev on 750k odd a few years ago, and we lured Judd at that time on a similar number, the cap space has increased quite signficantly since then, and we have no where near the salaries now that we did then. We must have heaps of room. We may have our biggest contracts being paid out as we speak leaving us signficant room available to play with moving forward which is all Im genuinly concerned about.
Its possible that Daisy's 5th year might only cost us a few of hundred thousand as we have paid him the rest of his money already. We probably wont find out for sure but no doubt some will use this as ammunition against our footy club as there are certain media types that are constantly having a go at our footy club. They are effectively kicking us whilst we are down, and Daisy is an easy target because the footy he is producing is putrid, and he is on a high price even for a good ordinary footballer.
