Jump to content


Recommended Posts


Posted
7 hours ago, Ethan Tremblay said:

He signed a five year deal at the end of 2018 for a reported $3.5 million. Yes I understand contracts can be broken but this one isn’t going to be. Plus, he’s ordinary and I wouldn’t want him anyway.

North shot themselves in the footy, now trying to do everything to get rid of him to target Williams.

Would rather we just target Williams

  • Like 2

Posted
5 hours ago, spirit of norm smith said:

Dees culture will sort him out.  

Hmmm... his fourth club will sort out his issues. I wouldn't put money on it. 

  • Like 4

Posted (edited)

I'm not a huge fan to be honest.  I know he's done well against us, but we play to his strengths.  He's fast and can do some damage on the outside, but I think his disposal is suspect under pressure (so doesn't fix one of our big problems) and I think he's a bit soft.  Let North keep paying his salary and poach their #2 pick from this draft in two years. 

Edited by RalphiusMaximus
Posted

NO, NOTNOW, NOT THIS WEEK. NO !!!

Posted
10 hours ago, picket fence said:

Mentioned in Hun today could be out of favour at Norf, Outside runner, gets plenty of it, played well against us. Could we be interested? Thoughts

when? this year? no he didnt. VDB did a number on him and he had limited input. he was also dropped following our game. 


Posted
14 minutes ago, Stevienic23 said:

Don't we have enough crap players?

there is a reason why he has been dropped a few times. his defensive efforts and running is non existent this year. 


Posted
6 minutes ago, BAMF said:

there is a reason why he has been dropped a few times. his defensive efforts and running is non existent this year. 

Would be perfect for our forward line then

  • Haha 1
Posted
10 hours ago, grazman said:

Hmmm... his fourth club will sort out his issues. I wouldn't put money on it. 

Martin Pike mkll?

  • Like 3
Posted (edited)
20 hours ago, whatwhatsaywhat said:

he's a very good wingman, quick, hits the scoreboard, and exactly what we need

north want at least half of his contract off the books but will pay the other half

he'd fill the exact need that we have imo

If Nth will pay half of 700-800K its a yes form me if you can get it done for anything other than the Haw 2nd round pick. The more we want nth to pay of his salary the better pick they will want.

Edited by Grimes Times
Posted
42 minutes ago, Grimes Times said:

If Nth will pay half of 700-800K its a yes form me if you can get it done for anything other than the Haw 2nd round pick. The more we want nth to pay of his salary the better pick they will want.

Yeah that’s the thing, I think it’ll be a sliding scale based upon the total amount that the Kangas contribute to his salary 

  • Like 1
Posted

The problem with Polec is that he looks good to spectators but terrible to coaches. That's because coaches know a lot more about what things a player does away from the ball (they have vision, GPS data etc), especially this year when spectators can only watch the game on TV. Spectators only watch the player with the football or in the direct contest, often yelling "kick the bloody thing!" without realising that there's nobody to kick to (which is either outside of screen or they just don't notice). 

Polec is not a team first footballer, and he's not good enough or impactful enough for coaches to tolerate that. Especially new coaches rebuilding a club that requires good habits to be instilled first (like Shaw is trying to do at North). Polec gets good numbers, but but there's a reason why teams haven't tried especially hard to keep him.

Think about it this way: In round 8 he had 25 touches (16 contested) and a goal in a close loss to Carlton where he will probably poll 3 Brownlow votes. He was immediately dropped, and North beat Adelaide by 10 goals!! He came back in, played two ordinary games,  was dropped and was has been out of the side since. The overwhelming likelihood is that he is not following the coach's instructions (probably defensively) and that is a massive red flag in an AFL environment that requires team defence and attack more than ever. Clearly the coaches don't trust him to play his part in that.

I don't want him because he's doesn't bring enough to the team to outweigh the many red flags that his career has raised to this point. 

  • Like 6

Posted (edited)

He was a gun at Port and I was stunned we didn’t go hell for leather for him. I s’pose we couldn’t match what North were offering, which was overs, so no contest. Now that he realises Norf is nowhere near what he expected, his performances have dropped, but his competitive spirit might still crave a club that needs him and could help him reach his potential. MFC should do all they have to to get him and Zac Williams.

Edited by Grr-owl
Posted
3 hours ago, Axis of Bob said:

The problem with Polec is that he looks good to spectators but terrible to coaches. That's because coaches know a lot more about what things a player does away from the ball (they have vision, GPS data etc), especially this year when spectators can only watch the game on TV. Spectators only watch the player with the football or in the direct contest, often yelling "kick the bloody thing!" without realising that there's nobody to kick to (which is either outside of screen or they just don't notice). 

Polec is not a team first footballer, and he's not good enough or impactful enough for coaches to tolerate that. Especially new coaches rebuilding a club that requires good habits to be instilled first (like Shaw is trying to do at North). Polec gets good numbers, but but there's a reason why teams haven't tried especially hard to keep him.

Think about it this way: In round 8 he had 25 touches (16 contested) and a goal in a close loss to Carlton where he will probably poll 3 Brownlow votes. He was immediately dropped, and North beat Adelaide by 10 goals!! He came back in, played two ordinary games,  was dropped and was has been out of the side since. The overwhelming likelihood is that he is not following the coach's instructions (probably defensively) and that is a massive red flag in an AFL environment that requires team defence and attack more than ever. Clearly the coaches don't trust him to play his part in that.

I don't want him because he's doesn't bring enough to the team to outweigh the many red flags that his career has raised to this point. 

i doubt he got dropped after 25 possessions, 16 contested, for football reasons......it just doesn't pass the pub test

Posted
10 hours ago, Pollyanna said:

Martin Pike mkll?

I was thinking more Justin Murphy... but yeah Pike had his issues too.

  • Like 1

Posted
On 8/26/2020 at 2:13 PM, whatwhatsaywhat said:

he's a very good wingman, quick, hits the scoreboard, and exactly what we need

north want at least half of his contract off the books but will pay the other half

he'd fill the exact need that we have imo

If North pay 1/2 his contract for the length of the contract then yes providing he doesn't cost much in draft picks say a third round. If he's on 800k then we get him for 4. Otherwise nothing to see move on.

Posted
Just now, cantstandyasam said:

If North pay 1/2 his contract for the length of the contract then yes providing he doesn't cost much in draft picks say a third round. If he's on 800k then we get him for 4. Otherwise nothing to see move on.

According to some North supporters on BF his contract was heavily front ended - however you have to wonder why a club that recruited him on a five year contract wants to offload him 2 years after it signed him.  He can play however, number one for metres gained in 2018 at North, but due diligence obviously required. 

  • Like 1

  • 2 weeks later...
Posted

Would complement Ed Langdon beautifully and give Clarry et al someone to give the ball to! 

  • Like 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, Moonshadow said:

Picket, do you realise there's a draft and trade board with a Polec thread?

Sorry please merg mods apologies

  • Like 1

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...