He’s had a lousy 2 years and would benefit from a change of scenery.

If someone like a Carlton feels the need to recycle a Francis Evans for the third time, then there should be a club willing to give a proven premiership player a second chance, even if it’s just as SSP bargain pick.

11 hours ago, picket fence said:

He is probably a ripper bloke, I don't personally dislike him at all, and I was responding to the thread. I.M.O he is a very limited footballer.

That's the reality

Nice bloke, but not in the best 22

Might be in our best 25 though. Perhaps that says something about our list.

Rule 1 in footy is get the ball and at his stage in his career not often enough.

More than happy if he looks elsewhere. Or if he stays.

All aspects are below average or just average

Slow

Small

Not strong overhead

Cannot kick 35 metres

A small fwd who doesn't score

Ok, he has 2 goal assists and from his 4 kicks per game, “50%” hit a target

Thanks Charlie for your 100 games in red and blue but it’s time to move on

I’m not sure that any of the 17 clubs would trade for him

I’d happily offer to trade Spargo for Wade Derksen (giants).

12 minutes ago, spirit of norm smith said:

All aspects are below average or just average

Slow

Small

Not strong overhead

Cannot kick 35 metres

A small fwd who doesn't score

Ok, he has 2 goal assists and from his 4 kicks per game, “50%” hit a target

Thanks Charlie for your 100 games in red and blue but it’s time to move on

I’m not sure that any of the 17 clubs would trade for him

I’d happily offer to trade Spargo for Wade Derksen (giants).

Spargo is not averaging 2 goals assists a game. Makes for an even poorer argument to his output.

His only strength is his neat kicking and even then he can barely kick over 35 meters. Way too slow for a player of his size.

I was shocked when I saw he has played 100 games. Delist.

Career averages:

0.6 goals

0.5 behinds

11.1 disposals (breakdown: 6.7 kicks and 4.4 handballs)

3.3 marks

2.4 tackles

Edited Friday at 13:502 days by PlayHardDeemons
added career stats

On 07/08/2025 at 11:15, old dee said:

No he can go. However I have never been a fan. We need change and IMO he is one of the not required.

you have never been a fan?

you have worn that mask well my friend

has had a tough 3 years with injury but in 21 and 22 was effective

tidy skills and composure in the fwd half which is a major weakness we have

Good pressure and tackling

Maybe not best 22 but a million miles away from a delisting

2 minutes ago, DubDee said:

Maybe not best 22 but a million miles away from a delisting

this doesnt just come down to on the list or off the list, hes probably asking for 2 maybe 3-4 years as a free agent. he will argue 100 games and a premiership he deserves 600k a year (above afl average) as has always been selected when fit, or mayve he wants 1 year and to then reassess his free agency next year.

IMO sharp has offered more goals per game, better leg speed in his games and even his sub games this year, tholstrup they will hope gets better again next year, maybe kynan brown gets a look in if he keeps his spot, maybe we have a target either in teh draft like dovaston or from another club who will cost lest for a similar or better output next year.

if theres a combination of factors here we need to move on. we still employ and play 16 players from 2021, 4 years later! not many premiership sides would look like that and be delivering the results we do

On 07/08/2025 at 11:42, whatwhat say what said:

father-son rule is going to be killed, sadly, so of course any children he has are going to be superstars

just another way for the afl to encourage the mfcss

Unless the current or future Mrs Spargo is a giant I can’t see this being an issue 😂

1 hour ago, PlayHardDeemons said:

His only strength is his neat kicking and even then he can barely kick over 35 meters. Way too slow for a player of his size.

I was shocked when I saw he has played 100 games. Delist.

Career averages:

0.6 goals

0.5 behinds

11.1 disposals (breakdown: 6.7 kicks and 4.4 handballs)

3.3 marks

2.4 tackles

He was an integral part of the team in 2021 but in reality since that time he has done very little to warrant his place in the team apart from those runs on the board. I have to admit that he was one of our best players against Carlton in that fateful final, but aside from that he's been injury riddled and done little to demand a spot.

If another club offered us a relatively cheap trade option for another player we feel could be fringe/best 23 I'd jump at it.

1 hour ago, PlayHardDeemons said:

His only strength is his neat kicking and even then he can barely kick over 35 meters. Way too slow for a player of his size.

I was shocked when I saw he has played 100 games. Delist.

Career averages:

0.6 goals

0.5 behinds

11.1 disposals (breakdown: 6.7 kicks and 4.4 handballs)

3.3 marks

2.4 tackles

Putrid stats for a bloke that has played nearly 100 games. The fact that he has played so many is testimony to our list!

On 07/08/2025 at 09:08, BLWNBA said:

Charlie, Paul and Bob are also all members of the 'first kick, first goal' club. Extremely unique!

Just asking for a pedantic friend - can there be degrees of uniqueness? Surely one cannot be just a bit unique just as one cannot be extremely unique. Just unique.

Would rather keep him as depth than dump him for a 3rd or 4th rounder

Just had a really valuable game for Casey today. 22 touches, 8 inside 50s, 6 tackles.

Ran hard all day and showed good leadership too.

excellent today in a quality vfl game

he's too good not to be playing in afl

On 07/08/2025 at 22:08, titan_uranus said:

I disagree with almost every part of this post.

I will concede I haven't got the data and so can't say whether Spargo is indeed "far and away our best kick inside 50". So let's assume he is.

IMO, that's useless because Spargo's unable to run or spread to AFL standard, which means he can't get separation or into space, so he can't get the ball enough, and so he can't make use of that skill.

He also has no other strings to his bow - he isn't a long kick, he doesn't kick goals, he doesn't apply strong forward pressure (or at least no better than the other players vying for his spot in the 23 already on our list), he's slow, he's short, and he can't/doesn't play midfield.

IMO Spargo is the quintessential example of our poor list management. We take and hold too many players who we laud for having a known or potential elite AFL trait, but who can't impact games because they lack too much in other areas.

So for mine, it's not Spargo's decision, it's ours, and the decision should be to let him go.

Spot on tu. Covered it perfectly.

3 hours ago, MrFreeze said:

Just had a really valuable game for Casey today. 22 touches, 8 inside 50s, 6 tackles.

Ran hard all day and showed good leadership too.

Nobody is questioning his ability to dominate at VFL level, however I note he still didn't hit the scoreboard with those 22 touches.

33 minutes ago, poita said:

Nobody is questioning his ability to dominate at VFL level, however I note he still didn't hit the scoreboard with those 22 touches.

Did you watch the game?

Charlie has been a good servant of the club and the clubs been good to him. Time to trade or find a new approach to the team output.

12 hours ago, monoccular said:

Just asking for a pedantic friend - can there be degrees of uniqueness? Surely one cannot be just a bit unique just as one cannot be extremely unique. Just unique.

As a grammophile, yes you are correct. ‘Unique’ is a binary concept. Something is either unique, or it isn’t.

But I would expect that my learned colleague would understand that in informal language, or as a rhetorical tautology, the use of ‘unique’ is often used a scalable term to convey how strikingly different something feels. Therefore, something can be:

• Unique: in a literal sense, no other is like it;

• Extremely unique: so different that concept or item feels more exceptional than other ‘unique’ things one has seen;

• Somewhat unique: unusual traits, but not essentially one of a kind.

So whilst your learned colleague may frown on “extremely unique”, for many the use of term would act as an intensifier for emotional impact, rather than the mathematical application of binary logic.

Though for the sake of sanity, would it please my esteemed colleague if I referred to items as:

1. Barely distinctive;

2. Mildly unusual;

3. Distinctive;

4. Remarkably distinctive;

5. Rare;

6. Singular;

7. Astoundingly singular; and

8. World-changing singular.

If we wish to be strict about our interpretation, points 6 - 8 are the only true indicators of “uniqueness”. Points 1 - 5 would typically refer to degrees of distinctiveness (cf. uniqueness).

I’ve enjoyed this exchange on this forum.