Goodvibes

Just now, demonzz said:

that's personal info, but I can tell you he came 3rd in peels b&f, only played 7 games with 6 bog's and he's only 20.

Can you imagine if we had a player at Casey who was best on in 6 of his 7 games? The hype would be enormous.

12 minutes ago, Travis16 said:

Name a single highlights package of any player that wouldn't impress?  Thats why it's called  "highlights" . MFC -destination club for the homesick

You get that I was joking right?

6 minutes ago, dl4e said:

We know nothing about him. At this stage pick 66 for a Casey player.  That is all you will get with that pick. Hope Goodwin and co can make him a better payer.

Speak for yourself, I've seen his pre-draft highlights package twice. Gun.

1 minute ago, Unleash Hell said:

Correct, am agreeing with you @Goodvibes

Without solid evidence one way or another it looks like Trolls have sucked some in.

This is not a pretty break up by any means, but saying one side is more wrong then the other side is just stupid (without actual facts)

The last time I felt like this was during the last days of Gutnick at the club. It's why I started posting on Demonology all those years ago. This has a similar feel although I'm still hopeful that once the trade happens of both parties have the opportunity to speak, we'll learn more and move on. I'm also hoping Mahoney makes another last day trade deal that reaffirms everyone's faith in the footy department.

1 hour ago, sue said:

I don't think those saying the club has handled this badly are referring to the decision, but the implementation of it (whatever one thinks of either issue).

Or those who are upset at the decision are using the perception of poor handling to muddy the waters.

My concern is that two or three new posters have gone further. They've introduced unsubstantiated allegations to make the club look bad because (I would assume) they're more attached to Jack than the club. I don't like how these posters have fuelled the fire so to speak and loyal supporters of this club (at an emotional time) have been manipulated.

Just now, jumbo returns said:

Right - as opposed to the JW haters?

Their eloquent prose about his misgivings have left me quite breathless

It's ugly on both sides Jumbo. Shame there has to be sides.

3 minutes ago, mauriesy said:

Time to draw the discussion back from "Jack haters" vs "fanboys". It's leading nowhere.

It's leading somewhere. Just not a very healthy or productive place.

19 minutes ago, Ron Burgundy said:

Quite frankly, that's not the issue.

Watts is one year into a three year contract (which the club didn't sign under duress), and it seems the club has now sought to exit him on 'made up' grounds i.e. they've manufactured events of default. 

It seems to me that his performance has been little different to what the club observed in 2016 following which it put a 3 year deal to him, which it is not now wishing to honour.

 

OK, this has to stop Ron. You're offering nothing new to this thread. All you are now doing is running with an anonymous allegation with no proof from someone who is clearly aggrieved with the club because of their personal connection with Jack. And regular pot shots at those with an alternative view to you who have the audacity to support their club also doesn't paint you in a good light. All of my fears from a week ago are certainly being realized when a good poster like you starts to deliberately post divisive material. We get that it's an emotional game and you love Jack but his defence has stumbled into murky ground.

16 minutes ago, sue said:

 

Sounds good to me. Though some may be outraged if Watts ends up worth as much as pick 21. 

You have every right to mount a strong defence of Jack Watts but this is just petty and unnecessarily provocative. We're all Melbourne aren't we?

1 hour ago, Nasher said:

People do go a little loopy though. In this thread alone, one of the posters participating in this thread accused me of deleting his posts because I'm not on the same side of the argument as him, when actually I have no idea what post he is talking about, who deleted it or why he would assume it was me when there are half a dozen people it could be. I'm pretty sure I haven't deleted any posts in this thread. 

Sorry I think I have to take the blame for that one. I'll do anything to score non-existent points in an anonymous argument on an internet footy forum.

Just now, Ron Burgundy said:

Yep, that they are. Diggers too.

But they're not quite as cool as meat-eating dinosaurs. And rocket ships.

In my house at least.

 

How about Veloci-tractor? Best of both worlds?

1 minute ago, Ron Burgundy said:

Henry will get over it.

His favourite player is Petracca.

I think he thinks Petracca is part T-Rex.

 

Petracca is just 'The Tractor' in our house. Tractors are cool when you're four.

1 hour ago, Ron Burgundy said:

Dunno. Kids love him.

My 4 year old will be upset (and confused) to see him playing for Port.

The point I'm making is not actually about jumper sales though. It's about broadening the lens on assessing a player's worth to a club.

 

My kids get it. I just told them he doesn't try hard enough. Kids don't respect lazy.

13 hours ago, DemonAndrew said:

I am okay with 30 - reluctantly - but if we are paying any of his salary regardless of where he goes I’ll be really annoyed

I would love for him to decide to stay and back himself in to prove to the club that he can fulfill the obligations he has failed, but I have no faith that he will

Do I think 30 is worth it? Absolutely not...but if we have to do so, in order to move forward as a club, so be it

The interview where he talked about how ‘comfortable’ and ‘easy’ it has been to stay at MFC really aggravated me

The speeches at the B&F summed up the sort of commitment I don’t have faith in Jack to make

At the same time I can complete empathise that he feels crushed but the fact that he doesn’t seem to understand why he’s in this position is really disappointing and sort of sums the whole thing up

There’s no way Port will give up the Hoff for him - that’s who they’ll want Watts to become, but the Hoff runs and works hard in a way that Watts has never really been able to do

I think you've done an awesome job summing up how most of us feel. Most people understand the reasons why the footy dept has made this move but equally Watt's journey is so obviously aligned with us that we'd like to see him enjoy our success. This thread has been dominated by those at either ends of the spectrum but I think this post really doesn't represent the prevailing mood of the vast majority.

25 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

You're better than the above, Ron, so don't stoop to a level that's beneath you.

You forgot to attach the 'Stay Classy' meme to your post.

4 hours ago, Clint Bizkit said:

Is Balic any good or will he just be another Michie/Newton/Kennedy/Riley?

Because I'm getting really sick of these type of players.

No, I have it on good authority that he's much more like a Josh Kennedy, Ben McGlynn or Ted RIchards type.

Sorry Clint, I'm not being very helpful. I guess the point I'm making is that you never really know with recycled players who've failed to make it with their original club. And if you did know, you'd be competing with a heap of other clubs and be paying a much higher price.

I like the way Balic moves. Michie, Newton, Riley were all solid footy players but no obvious elite attributes were apparent. Same could be said of Kennedy. Balic seems to have a few tricks. I'm intrigued by anyone who has the ability to buy themselves some time. Balic appears to have such moments. I don't think failing with the above quartet of recycled players is a reason to stop trying.

5 minutes ago, Dr.D said:

why would we get rid of watts, only to pick up Schache who reportedly has competitive and resilience issues himself. No thanks!

Because Schache has had two years in the system interstate and Watts has been playing in his home town for 9 years. I'm intrigued by the apparent lack of interest in Schache.

2 hours ago, Little Goffy said:

That backline starts to look bloody good.

Poor old Neville Jetta not having to cover opponents 20cm taller than him because Lever is there to provide the well-timed chop-out.

Oscar not having to think too hard because now he can focus more on controlling his direct opponent.

Hibberd, Hunt and Salem all having much better opportunities to rebound because instead of a messy scrap after a rough spoil that doesn't fully clear the danger area, the incoming ball has been decisively cut off and fed out to them.

Funny thing, I think Lever coming in might just be the difference that gets Jetta an All-Australian nod.

B:        Jetta         O.Mc      Frost

HB:     Hibberd     Lever      Hunt

C:       Tyson       Jones     Vince

HF:   Melksham  T.Mc  Petracca

F:      Hannan    Hogan    Garlett

Foll:   Gawn,      Viney,    Oliver

Int: Lewis, Neal-Bullen, Brayshaw, Pederson

With many depth options (Stretch, Bugg, Harmes, Wagner, Weideman, Kent, Smith, Vanders).

It actually looks pretty good, eh. Even with assuming that Watts is not there.

Looks good.

And you've overlooked Salem and not considered Balic.

And if you are going to question the Vince trade, surely you're going to make mention of Matt Crouch.

Just now, Clintosaurus said:

In Mahoney we trust. He will get something done.

True. But he already has. We now own the best young defender in the game.

49 minutes ago, Dee tention said:

Yeah I understand now. Wiseblood was reading from the AFL site. I am reading from the SEN site that states we lose our Pick 27 aswell.

No big deal... We are both correct. Conflicting reports. I am sure it will be clarified tomorrow.

I think we should do what we always do. Believe the source that has the information we want to hear. Go afl.com!

25 minutes ago, Rusty Nails said:

Some critics of Watts, who play down his 6th after round 14 in the bluey, also conveniently overlook the fact that he played much of the time in the ruck.  And he ain't no ruckman.  For him to be 6th after round 14 is the equivalent to anyone outside a dedicated ruckman being in the top 2 or 3 to that point, were he played in his more suited non-rucking roles prior to the injury.

There's some serious gilding of the lilly going on when it comes to his performance up to the injury both on here and within the FD it would seem.

Sorry, this has been repeated over and over again. During the Bluey thread someone suggested they thought they saw him siting sixth. At the time, I thought I saw the leaderboard showing him on the third line making him 11th (maybe). Does anyone have any concrete evidence of this 6th after round 14 claim or is this another example of a mistake or untruth being repeated so many time that posters start to accept it as given?

8 minutes ago, Dee tention said:

https://www.sen.com.au/news/2017/10/11/crows-dees-lions-three-way-trade-on-the-cards/

Haha

Read it again Wiseblood.

You either need to put your glasses on or get some sleep.

You sound tired...

Where are you reading from?

Ummm, you asked Wiseblood to read the AFL site. He did and quoted from it. Now you're quoting the SEN site. I'm guessing the final deal will be something like either of these scenarios but more likely something in the middle.

1 hour ago, ProDee said:

You do realise there's a difference between "90% have him gone" and "90% want him gone" ?

 

Why am I doing this ?

Your Foxtel broke?

9 minutes ago, robbiefrom13 said:

It is so disappointing to see diversity at MFC being flushed away in the general trend to right-wing thuggery that is ascendant in the western world today.  So disappointing.  I'm old, and I remember different times.

Please. I'm a lefty Green voter. ProDee's right wing views are well known here. It appears we are of a like mind on this issue. This is footy. Don't link this footy club decision with politics.