11 minutes ago, Kev said:

I haven't read much of this thread.

My thoughts on Kossie is we paid too much and for too long.

Geelong became a destination club partly due to the stars not getting the most out of their salary. Sacrifice led to success. I think there is alot of selfishness in our club, many playing for themselves.

We have an overblooted top end and Kossie now joins them.

If they were getting us wins when needed I wouldn't be so critical.

We are underachievers, the players are comfortable, and lack the ability to make each other better.

They sell this year as being of love, previous years it was brand or cohesion. Seems like they continue to fail at the rhetoric. Having an unequal approach to the players in terms of enumerations, will end in vexation from a few.

The club only succeeds when we are less selfish, difficult for the 43 to be in it together.

Will we be a destination club, with a restricted cap?

We have become a get out here type of club.

The level of bottom 6 of the best 22, is often a determinant of success.

Past evidence of Tracc and Clarry have shown that these kind of contracts haven't worked out well. Beyond the effect on the other players, those on that kind of contract become a disruption and unappreciative.

I think he is worth that wage now. Imagine what his equivalent salary will be paid when he is in his prime.

‘Bloated top end’ to me says Star players that require being paid appropriately.

Regardless of what the salary cap cheaters are gifting to their ‘underpaid’ stars down the highway…

2 minutes ago, rpfc said:

I think he is worth that wage now. Imagine what his equivalent salary will be paid when he is in his prime.

‘Bloated top end’ to me says Star players that require being paid appropriately.

Regardless of what the salary cap cheaters are gifting to their ‘underpaid’ stars down the highway…

Elitism has got the whole world into trouble.

They aren't much better than others.

We succeed when we work well together.

59 minutes ago, Ghostwriter said:

Barrett’s nickname is “Purple”

I knew that :). I was referring to the inference made that purple represented dumb :)

40 minutes ago, Kev said:

The level of bottom 6 of the best 22, is often a determinant of success.

Dusty and Riewoldt made Jason Castagna a triple premiership player, not Kamdyn McIntosh and Ivan Soldo.

5 minutes ago, Axis of Bob said:

Dusty and Riewoldt made Jason Castagna a triple premiership player, not Kamdyn McIntosh and Ivan Soldo.

So are we Premiership favourites next year, with the big buck players?

We cannot even get in the top 8, with the big buckers!

Why are we underachievers?

Edited June 13Jun 13 by Kev

5 minutes ago, Kev said:

So are we Premiership favourites next year, with the big buck players?

Do you think we'd be a better chance of winning a flag with Kozzie Pickett or with two Charlie Spargos and a Marty Hore?

1 minute ago, Axis of Bob said:

Do you think we'd be a better chance of winning a flag with Kozzie Pickett or with two Charlie Spargos and a Marty Hore?

A team that want to play for each other.

The club is always bigger than the individual.

8 minutes ago, Kev said:

A team that want to play for each other.

The club is always bigger than the individual.

Why wouldn't they want to play with Kozzie Pickett? He seems like a great young man who is well liked through the club, plus he's a superstar player.

Why does 'playing for each other' have to be associated with having less talent on your list?

2 minutes ago, Axis of Bob said:

Why wouldn't they want to play with Kozzie Pickett? He seems like a great young man who is well liked through the club, plus he's a superstar player.

Why does 'playing for each other' have to be associated with having less talent on your list?

Enumerational equality could smooth out the conflicts humans have. The bigger the gap in enumerations and status then the more likelihood of disturbances.

Edited June 13Jun 13 by Kev

40 minutes ago, Katrina Dee Fan said:

I knew that :). I was referring to the inference made that purple represented dumb :)

I meant that he is a Richard Head.

12 minutes ago, Kev said:

Enumerational equality could smooth out the conflicts humans have. The bigger the gap in enumerations and status then the more likelihood of disturbances.

It’s a nice thought Kevin but elite sports people cannot survive in a socialistic system where everyone gets the same pay, they strive for fame, popularity and fortune , that’s what makes them stand out. There is enough cash in the system to reward players 16-36 but your top five get the cream, then 6-15 are well remunerated and the rest share what’s left. There is a pecking order that all the players recognise and understand the mechanism to climb the ladder, just as most workplaces.😁👍

25 minutes ago, Kev said:

Enumerational equality could smooth out the conflicts humans have. The bigger the gap in enumerations and status then the more likelihood of disturbances.

Demonland straying into economic theory here with the Gini coefficient.

4 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Demonland straying into economic theory here with the Gini coefficient.

The question is though, does the Gini Coefficient correlate with more or less dissatisfaction and success within the group.

5 minutes ago, DeeZone said:

It’s a nice thought Kevin but elite sports people cannot survive in a socialistic system where everyone gets the same pay, they strive for fame, popularity and fortune , that’s what makes them stand out. There is enough cash in the system to reward players 16-36 but your top five get the cream, then 6-15 are well remunerated and the rest share what’s left. There is a pecking order that all the players recognise and understand the mechanism to climb the ladder, just as most workplaces.😁👍

Players play for the glory. It’s not that long ago Aussie rules was amateur. players still gave there all back then

6 minutes ago, DeeZone said:

It’s a nice thought Kevin but elite sports people cannot survive in a socialistic system where everyone gets the same pay, they strive for fame, popularity and fortune , that’s what makes them stand out. There is enough cash in the system to reward players 16-36 but your top five get the cream, then 6-15 are well remunerated and the rest share what’s left. There is a pecking order that all the players recognise and understand the mechanism to climb the ladder, just as most workplaces.😁👍

When you cut up the pie, some get more than what is expected (not saying even distribution), it will lead to rocking the boat and jumping off it.

We had to big salaried players who became entitled and did that anyway.

Can we keep the likes of Rivers, McVee, Turner, Bowey, Lindsay, Langford, who look like they may take the next step and become elite?

Can we afford and will we attract elite players to our club, without a "war chest"?

Edited June 13Jun 13 by Kev

4 minutes ago, Kev said:

The question is though, does the Gini Coefficient correlate with more or less dissatisfaction and success within the group.

It's also irrelevant to the idea that success is about your bottom 6 players, not your top 6.

The top players create the highest differentiation between teams because the value of replacing them is so high when there are only a finite number of places on the field at any time, and fewer in the most impactful, premium playing positions. Koz plays in a premium position, is probably the best at it in the league, and his presence is therefore far more important to our success than the quality of our depth 'replacement-level' players. Kozzie is worth 10 Spargos in terms of his ability to affect the results of games over the next available VFL player.

I think you're arguing a bunch of unrelated stuff based off your feelings of discomfort about the money. That's fine but the idea that someone getting paid a lot of money for being a star player is going to make players play worse because they're jealous of him is both irrelevant to what I was saying and also a bit off the deep end.

2 minutes ago, Kev said:

When you cut up the pie, some get more than what is expected (not saying even distribution), it will lead to rocking the boat and jumping off it.

We had to big salaried player who became entitled and did that anyway.

Can we keep the likes of Rivers, McVee, Turner, Bowey, Lindsay, Langford, who look like they may take the next step and become elite?

I believe so Kev they will all work their way into the 6-15 mark if they aren’t already in it and then with the way the Cap is forecast to grow they can get their lick of the ice cream and eventually replace those ahead of them. That’s the nature of the beast.

11 minutes ago, BDA said:

Players play for the glory. It’s not that long ago Aussie rules was amateur. players still gave there all back then

That’s true BDA but even in the suburban leagues the best players reap the majority of the rewards these days. It has all changed.

19 minutes ago, Kev said:

The question is though, does the Gini Coefficient correlate with more or less dissatisfaction and success within the group.

I suspect it is relevant. So too, though, might be the amount of non-financial resources required to manage players such as stroking egos, keeping players "on the straight and narrow" and maintaining standards of professionalism.

Edited June 13Jun 13 by La Dee-vina Comedia
typo

28 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Demonland straying into economic theory here with the Gini coefficient.

We all know that those from higher Ginis want to go to those with lower Ginis.

Those who belong in higher Ginis are vulnerable to exploitation from those who are at the top within the Ginis.

Edited June 13Jun 13 by Kev

If I could climb into a delorean and go back 25 years to convince the MFC brains trust to hold onto the wizard for life on a long term deal, I’d jump at the chance.

Glad I don’t have to this time around

16 minutes ago, Axis of Bob said:

I think you're arguing a bunch of unrelated stuff based off your feelings of discomfort about the money. That's fine but the idea that someone getting paid a lot of money for being a star player is going to make players play worse because they're jealous of him is both irrelevant to what I was saying and also a bit off the deep end.

Sure, I am coming with views and opinions based on my life's experience.

To call them "Deep end", or "unrelated", is just personal attacks.

1 minute ago, Kev said:

Sure, I am coming with views and opinions based on my life's experience.

To call them "Deep end", or "unrelated", is just personal attacks.

Would you have preferred the option of Kozzie Signing a long term deal with Fremantle?

All this talk about Gini this and Gini that. I don't want to hear about Jack Ginnivan on a Demons forum.

🤣🤣🤣