The club won't stand for so-so commitment anymore.  What's wrong with that?

We were all absolutely filthy with not only our end to the season, but some of our efforts within games.  The club, internally, has clearly identified that there were certain aspects that needed to change, especially within our senior players.  One of those was clearly Jack.  We can speculate and listen to some of the drivel that get's splattered all over this forum floor, but the fact is that behind closed doors the club weren't happy with the standards Jack was setting for those around him.  As a senior player that is unacceptable.

So the club was ruthless.  They basically said that they aren't going to accept that anymore, especially from someone as experienced as Jack, and instead of sitting on their hands and wondering what to do, they made the tough decision to move him on to better our club.  Our FD are the ones who see everything, and if they believe that moving Jack on makes us a better club in the long run then I'm happy to get behind that.

I'm sad to see Jack go, but I'm impressed with the club and it's willingness to make the tough decisions to ensure that the end to 2017 doesn't happen again and that our young players are looking up to veterans who set the right standards and drive them on to some sustained success.

4 minutes ago, Earl Hood said:

No Moons my discussion two days ago was with someone who taught Sam and spoke to him 2 weeks ago on his thoughts on JW. Doesn't mean a lot but I have some concern about the impact on the playing group so I hope a management plan is in place. 

If trading one player causes a big negative impact on the playing group then, I'm sorry, but Jack Watts being moved on to Port is the least of our problems.  They are welcome to be disappointed, but they need to see the bigger picture.

6 minutes ago, nosoupforme said:

I BAG YOU . for what you have written. NFI

I have a fairly good idea that anyone wishing a trade backfires on the coach of the Melbourne Football Club is not a supporter of the Melbourne Football Club.

Farewell No Soup.

8 minutes ago, Earl Hood said:

No Moons my discussion two days ago was with someone who taught Sam and spoke to him 2 weeks ago on his thoughts on JW. Doesn't mean a lot but I have some concern about the impact on the playing group so I hope a management plan is in place. 

That I'm quoting you is 3rd hand Earl. 

I am glad the playing group now knows the standards expected, despite Jacks dad's protestations 

Pick the odd one out!

Can't believe that anyone would be STUPID enough to think that Port would be in a position to bring anyone into their Club today on $500k  for the next 2 years.  FCS, have look at their list and who they've brought in this week. 

I texted SEN/David Schwartz during the Mahoney interview to make sure they asked Mahoney about how much Dees were paying of Watts' salary and Mahoney after a pause was VERY shifty & misleading. 

Can't believe Mahoney said that it would need to be worked out with his Manager.  It's got nothing to do with Paul Connors, it was agreed to with Cripps of PA that we are paying 40% for next 2 years  

Botom line is Dees are paying $200,000 per season for next 2 years. 

This is a statement trade by Dees but handled very poorly. 

I think if you wanted to write how to stuff up a trade/negotiation, look no further than the Dees & Bulldogs in 2017. 

I remember Kochie saying post Port finals loss that he didn't want guys there just for a pay check. From some of the comments it almost sounds like Watts just about fits into that basket. Especially with his perceived lack of commitment. 

1 hour ago, sue said:

Yes he may be trying to change the culture.  But surely the FD should make sure that the other players are  informed on why Watts was moved on before now.  Sam should not be confused if the CLub had explained the decision to the players.

Yeah. I said "If it is true".   I'm hoping it's not true, because I'll be depressed if it is.

But surely good communciation to the players should have happened already.  Sam should know before now why the Club was moving Watts on.   If he is bewildered then there is a big communcation failure.  What's the point of sending a message if you don't send it? 

The players are not involved in list management decisions. The leadership group would be consulted but the rest of them are currently on leave and there is no onus on the club to brief them all on every change as it happens. When they arrive back at the club for preseason there will likely be discussions but it's unlikely they'll sit down and say "this is why Jack was moved on" - they'll arrive as a new group looking to a new year.

Watts and Motlop will hardly prove to be the edge Port need. Contested footy is god these days. 

9 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

The club won't stand for so-so commitment anymore.  What's wrong with that?

We were all absolutely filthy with not only our end to the season, but some of our efforts within games.  The club, internally, has clearly identified that there were certain aspects that needed to change, especially within our senior players.  One of those was clearly Jack.  We can speculate and listen to some of the drivel that get's splattered all over this forum floor, but the fact is that behind closed doors the club weren't happy with the standards Jack was setting for those around him.  As a senior player that is unacceptable.

So the club was ruthless.  They basically said that they aren't going to accept that anymore, especially from someone as experienced as Jack, and instead of sitting on their hands and wondering what to do, they made the tough decision to move him on to better our club.  Our FD are the ones who see everything, and if they believe that moving Jack on makes us a better club in the long run then I'm happy to get behind that.

I'm sad to see Jack go, but I'm impressed with the club and it's willingness to make the tough decisions to ensure that the end to 2017 doesn't happen again and that our young players are looking up to veterans who set the right standards and drive them on to some sustained success.

Good post. Agree.  we've been crying out for leadership for years. Now we've got some and if players don't fully commit they'll soon be heading for the door if they don't turn it around. 

2 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

If trading one player causes a big negative impact on the playing group then, I'm sorry, but Jack Watts being moved on to Port is the least of our problems.  They are welcome to be disappointed, but they need to see the bigger picture.

OK I agree move on fine, why don't they FD say we don't want you for these reasons and want to move you on.

Don't give him some hope to stay. or some supporters who would like to see him stay.

1 hour ago, Farmer said:

And when Watts did get ready, for R1, he played well. Umpires gave him votes in R3

How many votes did they give him in round 4? 5? 6? et al

1 hour ago, Jack Jack Tappy said:

I think the most significant thing Josh Mahoney said today was this trade was all about Jacks ONFIELD performance.  Doesn't make sense to me given the bagging he's had about preparation?? Jacks onfield for 18 months prior to injury was good.  Mixed messages if you ask me

His preparation effects his infield performance. His 18 months prior to injury may have been "good" but it wasn't "great". 

7 minutes ago, Skuit said:

I have a fairly good idea that anyone wishing a trade backfires on the coach of the Melbourne Football Club is not a supporter of the Melbourne Football Club.

Farewell No Soup.

TILL WE MEET AGAIN.

4 minutes ago, nosoupforme said:

OK I agree move on fine, why don't they FD say we don't want you for these reasons and want to move you on.

Don't give him some hope to stay. or some supporters who would like to see him stay.

You honestly believe what's played out in the media is "real life"?

Watts knew he was gone from day dot. He was under no illusion.

1 hour ago, ChewyOnMyBoot said:

Unfortunately Sue, this is only scratching the surface. I think in earlier posts i 'predicted' that these (Weids) sentiments would be held by most of the players. But i got shouted down. Hahaha. Wonder how long it will be before more sentiments like this come out from other players

Yeah the players are clearly shattered. Gawn on the verge of re-signing. Hogan going nowhere. Jones & Viney clearly not unhappy with the decision and looking forward to crack in to preseason.

Jog on mate.

2 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Yeah the players are clearly shattered. Gawn on the verge of re-signing. Hogan going nowhere. Jones & Viney clearly not unhappy with the decision and looking forward to crack in to preseason.

Jog on mate.

He's just here to stir up some trouble.  Others have called him out for it days ago.  He's not worth giving air time to, Doc.

8 minutes ago, nosoupforme said:

OK I agree move on fine, why don't they FD say we don't want you for these reasons and want to move you on.

Don't give him some hope to stay. or some supporters who would like to see him stay.

For the 1000th time it was Jack's decision. He was contracted. he could have chosen to stay and work his bum off. Or stay and do nothing.  He made the decision they didnt want him and left.

10 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

His preparation effects his infield performance. His 18 months prior to injury may have been "good" but it wasn't "great". 

Who was great?

16 minutes ago, goodwindees said:

 

Botom line is Dees are paying $200,000 per season for next 2 years. 

 

Is that accurate or a guess?

If accurate it is extremely disappointing.

Edited October 17, 20177 yr by Redleg

2 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

For the 1000th time it was Jack's decision. He was contracted. he could have chosen to stay and work his bum off. Or stay and do nothing.  He made the decision they didnt want him and left.

I can read between the lines. How would you like to be treated like a piece of meat?  

2 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

For the 1000th time it was Jack's decision. He was contracted. he could have chosen to stay and work his bum off. Or stay and do nothing.  He made the decision they didnt want him and left.

 

1 hour ago, JV7 said:

I'm too pi$$ed off to write too much... But I am fuming at this, bloke has been their through thick & thin, stuck it out for years during the [censored] times only to be kicked to the kerb when he and the club have started to turn it around.. On top of this we then trade him for unders to a side who we will be directly battling for a spot in the 8, so we have boosted Ports list while damaging ours.. Good job Goodwin & Mahoney, d!ckheads

If no Watts is going to cause us to go backwards then we have massive problems. Finished 21st in the B&F that says it all, he's not consistent and that was his down fall.

Good luck Jack I just hope you don't play a blinder against us. 

All the best to Jack and I really do hope he makes a success of himself at his new home.  The trade has more than a hint of salary cap relief about it but that's the way it goes. 

In sports all around the world the trading of players that supporters have an attachment to is quite prevalent.  It's just a part of pro-sports and we're going to see more and more of it in the AFL.  To get better,  a club has to make changes.

 

Edited October 17, 20177 yr by Macca

50 minutes ago, ChewyOnMyBoot said:

Ahh. I see. Fair enough. And maybe you can also accept that Jack very well may have made it clear that he was going to Port Adelaide. Last week in fact.

It's easy to make it clear you want to go to Port when the two other clubs involved are only willing to take you on bargain basement prices and unlikely to get a deal done.

1 hour ago, Jack Jack Tappy said:

I think the most significant thing Josh Mahoney said today was this trade was all about Jacks ONFIELD performance.  Doesn't make sense to me given the bagging he's had about preparation?? Jacks onfield for 18 months prior to injury was good.  Mixed messages if you ask me

He said nothing specifically about ONFIELD. He said performance. That includes off field preparation as well.  

“It is a really important stage where Jack is at as an experienced player at the footy club with the amount of games he has played, with such a young list, he has a big influence on our young players. That’s what comes with being an experienced player ... he is very clear on our expectations about him.

“We don’t want to be having these discussions with Jack Watts after nine years. We want him to be the player he should be and that’s where these discussions have got to.”