On 17/10/2017 at 23:28, bush demon said:

A charming, charismatic guy. A wonderful sportsman and good bloke. Earning top $$$ doing what he loves. But the $$$ stops with Goodwin and he has made a judgement call, that's what he's paid to do. Good luck to Jack,will always remember you icing it v. The pies, erasing the memory of your first game where you were put in before you were ready.

about right. everytime the footy department makes calls on blokes careers its them putting their balls on the line, and not unlike putting ya hard urn on a bet, once its done, its done. as they say in the classic's, LET IT RIDE.

  On 17/10/2017 at 23:24, chook fowler said:

Quite happy for Jack to be traded but really object to the return in terms of the pick gained and livid at us having to pay part of his salary. I don't buy a membership and raffle tickets etc to subsidise opposition players. Someone needs to be held accountable for this. Pick 31 better land us a gem.

No stress, TPP is covered by the AFL I'm pretty sure so your membership and raffle dollars won't be subsidising his salary ?

  On 17/10/2017 at 10:07, Roost It said:

We have the players to win the flag, doesn't mean we will but we have them. Our list is far superiors to Richmonds. We still need some more years under the belt I would think 

I'm not saying you're wrong, but I think you should exercise some caution with this angle given your comments about Watts.

Having seen Hardwick (and others) interviewed on what changed this year, he said that it was after enormous self-reflection and conversations with other players that he quite deliberately amended his ways, showed vulnerability, and invested in the human stuff including the strengths/positives about his players, not so much their weaknesses. This created a great bond and culture at the club.

I'm presently trying to recall which long term MFC players over the years have really exited the club well. The MFC seems to lack EQ. And, for much of the past decade prior to the appointment of PJ and Roos, IQ as well.

I'm sure there are some valuable lessons to be borne out of the Dogs and Tigers' recent flag successes, which have to do with player engagement, and not the overtly technically stuff.

 

  On 18/10/2017 at 00:41, leucopogon said:

Disappointed to see him leave, but more so disappointed that Jack has seemingly cruised through 2017 and obviously didn't uphold his end of the bargain with the coaching group. My prediction is he'll be struggling to get a regular game at Port.

Wanna bet?

Bet a buck....go on...

 

  On 18/10/2017 at 01:04, Ron Burgundy said:

I'm not saying you're wrong, but I think you should exercise some caution with this angle given your comments about Watts.

Having seen Hardwick (and others) interviewed on what changed this year, he said that it was after enormous self-reflection and conversations with other players that he quite deliberately amended his ways, showed vulnerability, and invested in the human stuff including the strengths/positives about his players, not so much their weaknesses. This created a great bond and culture at the club.

I'm presently trying to recall which long term MFC players over the years have really exited the club well. The MFC seems to lack EQ. And, for much of the past decade prior to the appointment of PJ and Roos, IQ as well.

I'm sure there are some valuable lessons to be borne out of the Dogs and Tigers' recent flag successes, which have to do with player engagement, and not the overtly technically stuff.

 

From what I hear the players like and respect Goodwin. Of course he has plenty still to learn. What he has done is clearly define expectations of the group. Those that don't buy in will find the door

Bloody hope so.

I've been very impressed with him as a coach. He's not afraid to take a calculated risk. I agree that the players also seem to respond very well to him (with the possible exception of Watts, obviously).

This has been the first big issue during his time here which has caused me to exercise some caution in my assessment of him.

I hope he manages to settle and regain the focus of the player group very effectively prior to Christmas, as I expect there'll be plenty of attention on him and not a great deal of wriggle room if there are any ongoing player commitment/engagement type issues.

 

Goodbye and Good Luck Jack you were one of my families favourites , we hope that you will do well for Port, we may even meet you in the 2018 final series.

Go Jack, GoDee's....,,,!!!!!!!!

  On 18/10/2017 at 00:27, qwerty7 said:

https://www.3aw.com.au/jack-watts-says-its-been-an-emotional-few-weeks-following-his-trade-to-port-adelaide/

I'd recommend listening to this interview from this morning. Such a great guy and only wished the best for the club. 

None of us can comment yet whether this was or wasn’t the right decision by the club – this time next year we should. However, I think it is fair to say that it is all a very sad situation. He loved the club and wanted to stay, but the coaches didn’t see him being part of the success the hopefully not-so-distant future entails. I hope they are right that Watts might have been the anchor keeping us at the shore, but I am not convinced.

Good luck, Wattsy, and thanks for everything! Go Dees

 

Stands out in stark contrast to the way MFC have handled the whole ugly matter. Jack handled it as a man - with dignity and respect to all involved. Mahoney and Goodwin have handled it like a couple of schoolboys. Man up guys. You can do it. 

  On 18/10/2017 at 00:47, Ron Burgundy said:

This is a needlessly gratuitous post. How is it productive to post this stuff?

 

This is my jerky response. And this is the post ProDee was 'gratuitously' responding to, from a poster who's been here five minutes and fanned the flames just about moreso than anyone else:

'Watts all the fuss about? Pick 31 is a ripper. From 2004 to 2013 here is the stellar line up of pick 31's:

Jarrad Moore 68 games no longer playing

Trent West 70 games no longer playing

Clayton Collard 1 game no longer playing

John Mcarthy 39 games no longer playing

Jordan Roughead 126 games still playing

Jason Tuff 4o games no longer playing

Ariel Steinberg 10 games no longer playing 

Jackson Mcarit 54 games no longer playing

Kamdyn Mcintosh 53 games still playing

Malcolm Karpanny 7 games no longer playing

Conclusion: Jack Watts may have had his flawed, but really do you really want to trade him for a Clayton Collard?

But then again......

  On 17/10/2017 at 23:53, Vogon Poetry said:

Wrong take I reckon TGR.  Whilst the majority here think we are soft and can't negotiate I reckon we've had the balls to see what we need and go and get it.  We've not been worried about the marginal costs of playing top dollar for what we need.  We've not been worried that the journo's and keyboard warriors will ridicule us for paying "overs" or taking "unders".

The safe thing would have been to say Lever was overs and Watts was unders and not do the deal.  If we did that we'd be playing with a list we saw as inadequate.  The courageous thing to do was to pay what it took and risk being wrong.  Many a sook here would lament finishing 4th in a few years wishing we had a Lever to solidify the backline.

This FD have a vision and are following it fearlessly.  They aren't taking the easy option.  Good on them.

As for Watts I regret what we've done to a rare person in footy because Jack is a decent, honest and loyal person dealt cards that cruelled him.  Good luck Jack, I'll always wish you the best and always feel we've let you down very badly.

 

The "like" button was not strong enough to express my agreement with all aspects of this post, including the sentiments in the last paragraph. 

I would add that the Lever/Watts deals are two sides of the same coin in terms of making sure you get what you want to build a list that can challenge for the flag. The pencil counters may cry "too much" or "not enough" paid for what we got/gave away, but I think it was the tough thing to do. Time will tell whether it was the right thing; mind you, entrenched positions are unlikely to be shifted whatever the football outcomes.  

Having set a clear path with these moves the task for the FD is to ensure that the Jack exit is well managed with the playing group.

I want a Clayton Collard and a Jason Tuff!!!

Can they kick?

  On 18/10/2017 at 00:47, Ron Burgundy said:

This is a needlessly gratuitous post. How is it productive to post this stuff?

Everyone here knows the currency of pick 31 - I expect the original post was intended to illustrate the historical value of pick 31, which is not great. That elite players might've been picked up after it from time to time is widely known and not worthy of a response like this. It's just divisive.

That some people have 'liked' it though illustrates how unnecessarily partisan this 'debate' has become. It's like observing the masses in a fairground in Manassas, Virginia, roar in furious acceptance of anything Trump has to say on anything. They simply believe in the quest.

Many here have argued (correctly in my view) that pick 31 reflects Watts' current trade value.

For an experienced and skilled player, who only last year knocked back several other clubs to then sign a 3 year deal with the MFC on very good terms, pick 31 is an indictment. On Watts. I've come to side with this view.

I think the club has however handled this situation very poorly. To date at least. I hope the club now seeks to re-built some trust with a sizeable chunk of its supporter base (and possibly some players), and we now set sail for the top 4 in 2018.

No doubt this will attract some jerky responses from the usual suspects, but I simply cannot see how this is a remotely remarkable (or controversial) view to hold in the circumstances.

 

 

Pick 21, 31, 41, or 51, the club and leadership group wanted him out.  

We allowed him to choose a preferred club and got the best pick available under the circumstances.

Deal with it.  Or don't.  Preferably don't.

  On 18/10/2017 at 01:42, ChewyOnMyBoot said:

Stands out in stark contrast to the way MFC have handled the whole ugly matter. Jack handled it as a man - with dignity and respect to all involved. Mahoney and Goodwin have handled it like a couple of schoolboys. Man up guys. You can do it. 

Posting drunken videos calling out the club for not being interested in having players who can kick is not a dignified response. Nor is that the behaviour of a man, rather the behaviour of a child who still can't accept the reason he got the boot.

  On 18/10/2017 at 01:54, jumbo returns said:

I want a Clayton Collard and a Jason Tuff!!!

Can they kick?

Don't know if Collard can kick but he's got the illustrious golden hair to fill the void left by Jack.

 

Listen to Chris Pelchen on SEN this morning...thinks we have done incredibly well with our trades ...felt that Jack had enough chances under different coaches etc & remember that draft no’s = points so we may

not necessarily pick up

a pick at 31....so refreshing to hear positivity from an expert who has no  

 vested interest in this club 

  On 17/10/2017 at 10:23, ChewyOnMyBoot said:

So if thats the logic I'd be concermed about Lever because he had only one club after his services. And they're going to pay him a sh#tload. Seems strange to me.

If I was you I'd abandon logic as a reference point.

There wouldn't have been a club in Victoria who wouldn't want Lever on their list, although for some, like Carlton, he wouldn't be a priority.

The final 3 clubs interested in Lever were the Dees, Pies, and Dogs, but others had shown interest back in March.

But you'd know this even if you just took a passing interest in footy.

Tom Browne 

 

✔@TomBrowne7

 

Understand @CollingwoodFC @stkildafc @NMFCOfficial have all made significant indicative offers on @Adelaide_FC Jake Lever

7:09 PM - Mar 7, 2017

•  
   66 Replies
•  
•  
   99 Retweets
•  
•  
   2323 likes

  On 18/10/2017 at 02:01, ProDee said:

Pick 21, 31, 41, or 51, the club and leadership group wanted him out.  

We allowed him to choose a preferred club and got the best pick available under the circumstances.

Deal with it.  Or don't.  Preferably don't.

I've dealt with it.

Find someone else to argue with. Preferably online.

 

  On 18/10/2017 at 00:27, Vogon Poetry said:

Gosh jnr, you needed to go to the B&F to see what the coaching staff thought of Watts?

I got a pretty good idea when they put him up for trade with two years to run on his contract.

No I don't. I was responding to a post about the BnF not being a valid measure of a players performance. 

And a gold star for you seeing through the ruse of Goodwin....

  On 18/10/2017 at 00:14, jumbo returns said:

You are duplicitous

There was a time, that I can so fondly remember, when you held the B & F in the same high esteem as Colin Sylvia

Keep up the good work

Really? I'd like to see you find a post that says that. I am calling bs on you my fellow supporter.

I hold Sylvia in a similar regard to Watts by the way. Wasted talent. They are a dime a dozen.

 

  On 17/10/2017 at 22:08, sue said:

If it was any other player you would have said that was a  professional thing to do showing great self-awareness and maturity.  There are many good arguments in support of removing Watts, but that is not one.

Clutching at straws now Sue? I dodn't make that statement as a reason for getting rid of Watts. Rather I was responding to a poster that said Watts had been dropped by every coach. 

Best you don't let your emotions cloud your thinking. ALthough that might be too late.

  On 18/10/2017 at 00:47, Ron Burgundy said:

This is a needlessly gratuitous post. How is it productive to post this stuff?

Everyone here knows the currency of pick 31 - I expect the original post was intended to illustrate the historical value of pick 31, which is not great. That elite players might've been picked up after it from time to time is widely known and not worthy of a response like this. It's just divisive.

That some people have 'liked' it though illustrates how unnecessarily partisan this 'debate' has become. It's like observing the masses in a fairground in Manassas, Virginia, roar in furious acceptance of anything Trump has to say on anything. They simply believe in the quest.

Many here have argued (correctly in my view) that pick 31 reflects Watts' current trade value.

For an experienced and skilled player, who only last year knocked back several other clubs to then sign a 3 year deal with the MFC on very good terms, pick 31 is an indictment. On Watts. I've come to side with this view.

I think the club has however handled this situation very poorly. To date at least. I hope the club now seeks to re-built some trust with a sizeable chunk of its supporter base (and possibly some players), and we now set sail for the top 4 in 2018.

No doubt this will attract some jerky responses from the usual suspects, but I simply cannot see how this is a remotely remarkable (or controversial) view to hold in the circumstances.

 

 

Trade period is a journey for you Ron isn't it?

  On 18/10/2017 at 02:25, jnrmac said:

Clutching at straws now Sue? I dodn't make that statement as a reason for getting rid of Watts. Rather I was responding to a poster that said Watts had been dropped by every coach. 

Best you don't let your emotions cloud your thinking. ALthough that might be too late.

No need to get personal jnrmac.  There was certainly an earlier post, presumably from someone else, which tried to put the boot into Watts for dropping himself. I just hastily read that into your post.  My humblest apologies.

Just because someone disagrees with you on some points is no reason to write your last sentence.  If you actually read my posts for content rather than simply dismissing them as 'fanboy' remarks (what an insulting phrase that is by the way) you will find there is little emotion in my comments other than disgust with some of the over-the-top rude and unecessary posts made about Watts.  You might also find I was not religiously opposed to Watts being traded though I question how well this was handled.

  On 18/10/2017 at 02:33, sue said:

No need to get personal jnrmac.  There was certainly an earlier post, presumably from someone else, which tried to put the boot into Watts for dropping himself. I just hastily read that into your post.  My humblest apologies.

Just because someone disagrees with you on some points is no reason to write your last sentence.  If you actually read my posts for content rather than simply dismissing them as 'fanboy' remarks (what an insulting phrase that is by the way) you will find there is little emotion in my comments other than disgust with some of the over-the-top rude and unecessary posts made about Watts.  You might also find I was not religiously opposed to Watts being traded though I question how well this was handled.

Fair call. Apologies from me as well.

  On 18/10/2017 at 01:32, Ron Burgundy said:

Bloody hope so.

I've been very impressed with him as a coach. He's not afraid to take a calculated risk. I agree that the players also seem to respond very well to him (with the possible exception of Watts, obviously).

This has been the first big issue during his time here which has caused me to exercise some caution in my assessment of him.

I hope he manages to settle and regain the focus of the player group very effectively prior to Christmas, as I expect there'll be plenty of attention on him and not a great deal of wriggle room if there are any ongoing player commitment/engagement type issues.

 

I hope I'm as impressed with Goodwin as you seem to be by the time he leaves, but so far he's achieved nothing other than fail to get us into the finals. Watts has paid the price for that - deservedly, perhaps, but there are plenty of other mediocrities in our team.