Just read this article and at the bottom it says:

"Adelaide Crows fans feared their club had made an error when Bernie Vince finished third in the best and fairest in his first season with Melbourne before winning it in his second after being traded in 2013.

But a few years down the track the compensation this year’s premiership favourite received — the 23rd selection in the draft which they used on now All-Australian midfielder Matt Crouch — looks more than worth the early pain."

http://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/former-coach-says-mitchell-trade-cost-swans-premiership/news-story/b2bab3c1dc017b01e565e98f094b3b95

I wonder if we would still make the trade now, and i wonder how much more footy Vince has left at him at the top level.

  On 20/09/2017 at 03:23, Wunders said:

Just read this article and at the bottom it says:

"Adelaide Crows fans feared their club had made an error when Bernie Vince finished third in the best and fairest in his first season with Melbourne before winning it in his second after being traded in 2013.

But a few years down the track the compensation this year’s premiership favourite received — the 23rd selection in the draft which they used on now All-Australian midfielder Matt Crouch — looks more than worth the early pain."

http://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/former-coach-says-mitchell-trade-cost-swans-premiership/news-story/b2bab3c1dc017b01e565e98f094b3b95

I wonder if we would still make the trade now, and i wonder how much more footy Vince has left at him at the top level.

We needed the experience at the time, so can only see this as a good trade. Yes long term Adelaide have won the trade, but given the unpredictable nature of 2nd round picks, the next year Pat McKenna was taken at pick 23 - he's now on our list and hasn't played a single game yet. Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but we picked up a best and fairest winner who has played over 80 games for us. Think he'll play on next year, but honestly hope he only gets 15 games (max) and he's forced out of the team by younger guys. 

  On 17/09/2017 at 08:35, goodoil said:

Sorry just realised made same

point as made earlier!

But it was a good point.

  On 20/09/2017 at 03:23, Wunders said:

Just read this article and at the bottom it says:

"Adelaide Crows fans feared their club had made an error when Bernie Vince finished third in the best and fairest in his first season with Melbourne before winning it in his second after being traded in 2013.

But a few years down the track the compensation this year’s premiership favourite received — the 23rd selection in the draft which they used on now All-Australian midfielder Matt Crouch — looks more than worth the early pain."

http://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/former-coach-says-mitchell-trade-cost-swans-premiership/news-story/b2bab3c1dc017b01e565e98f094b3b95

I wonder if we would still make the trade now, and i wonder how much more footy Vince has left at him at the top level.

Short term decision that I was comfortable with at the time and still am. Ditto the Tyson trade.

Phase a) of Era Roos/Goodwin was to restore the club to competitiveness ASAP. I wouldn't support a trade like this for a 30ish year old now, but circumstances were different then.

Bernie has been a wonderful servant of our club. 100% the right decision at the time.

Just on Garland, if he retires we still have a cap hold for his salary. If we buy him out, same problem.

Geelong are going through this now with Bartel and his cap hold.

May as well go around another year if that is going to be the case.

  On 21/09/2017 at 11:00, Adzman said:

Just on Garland, if he retires we still have a cap hold for his salary. If we buy him out, same problem.

Geelong are going through this now with Bartel and his cap hold.

May as well go around another year if that is going to be the case.

Why keep a player who won't play senior football ahead of a rookie listed player who could be a potential star? Garland is just dead wood on our list.

  On 21/09/2017 at 11:27, mo64 said:

Why keep a player who won't play senior football ahead of a rookie listed player who could be a potential star? Garland is just dead wood on our list.

The real cost is integrity and culture. Garland deserves to play out the contract he signed in good faith. Imagine if players decided mid contact they wanted more money because their value went up. It works both ways. If you are mad he is on the list then your dissatisfaction should be directed at list management and not garland.

Was it Garlands dad in his tassie pub offering free drinks for the pre game of our match against the kangas? Surely thats reason enough to give Garland another season. 

Edited September 21, 20177 yr by Deeprived Childhood

  On 21/09/2017 at 15:07, Adzman said:

The real cost is integrity and culture. Garland deserves to play out the contract he signed in good faith. Imagine if players decided mid contact they wanted more money because their value went up. It works both ways. If you are mad he is on the list then your dissatisfaction should be directed at list management and not garland.

I think people are missing the point here.  Garland would not be "unceremoniously" dumped.  The club would work with him to find a win win situation.  If one couldn't be found his contract is honoured.

Garland will retire. 

I don't have a problem with Garland remaining on the list.

How different is it to Bernie Vince and his one year contract. Both would have been told that there are no guarantees of seniors, and why not set them both the task of 'development roles' with our younger players at Casey.

If they get games due to form or injury, then good on them! That's what depth on your list is all about.

As to the argument of him taking a rookie's spot, Meh!  Rookie picks are speculative at best, we know what we get with Garland, Vince... as we did with Trengove this year. I'm very comfortable having a couple of veteran players. 

If we need a place for a senior listed player (either via trade period or wanting to take a set number of players in the draft) and they negotiate an outcome for both parties that is mutually beneficial then great, but that would probably be unlikely as we will trade out some players as well... 

Edited September 22, 20177 yr by Ouch!

  On 22/09/2017 at 02:11, Ouch! said:

 

How different is it to Bernie Vince and his one year contract.

Very different. Bernie is a better player and more versatile than Garland and has 2 good knees.

  On 22/09/2017 at 02:49, Redleg said:

Very different. Bernie is a better player and more versatile than Garland and has 2 good knees.

Nah, respectfully disagree on the versatility. I think Garland still has versatility at his best (which we still need to assess) pretty certain. Vince can play the lock down role, but isn't really a midfield option any more. 

I don't expect either to be lock for the 22, but with a list size of 38-40 and then rookies on top I'd still prefer with our list demographic having some veteran players like Garland and Vince than an untried rookie.

Edited September 22, 20177 yr by Ouch!

@Ouch!

Other than defender what's Cols versatility ?  Curious 

Garland > Lever.

  On 22/09/2017 at 04:04, Wiseblood said:

Garland > Lever.

Which fairytale you referencing ?

Once upon a time ..

  On 22/09/2017 at 04:00, beelzebub said:

@Ouch!

Other than defender what's Cols versatility ?  Curious 

Fair question. Again, I think he can play small and tall defender at a pinch he plays a third tall. Admittedly I am probably thinking about him at his best which is behind him... that said I still see value keeping him on this list, and not as a delist and wipe contract.

  On 22/09/2017 at 04:00, beelzebub said:

@Ouch!

Other than defender what's Cols versatility ?  Curious 

Went forward a few times.

He is value if healthy and firing. But getting into that backline is about to get real hard...

  On 21/09/2017 at 15:51, Deeprived Childhood said:

Was it Garlands dad in his tassie pub offering free drinks for the pre game of our match against the kangas? Surely thats reason enough to give Garland another season. 

His brother.

So will BK get the boot? Kent? If Kent can have a good pre-season and given the rocket he deserves, he could be a handy addition to what we haven't had all year. We really need to build up our depth.

Don't know where else to put this, but just heard news of another delisting (can't say who until the official announcement)

  On 02/10/2017 at 06:02, Drunkn167 said:

Don't know where else to put this, but just heard news of another delisting (can't say who until the official announcement)

Ben Kennedy?

  On 02/10/2017 at 06:02, Drunkn167 said:

Don't know where else to put this, but just heard news of another delisting (can't say who until the official announcement)

You're such a tease. What does his name rhyme with? 

Is it Flem Xennedy?

Edited October 2, 20177 yr by Ethan Tremblay

  On 22/09/2017 at 10:46, rpfc said:

Went forward a few times.

*Facepalm* 

 

A serious facepalm.