Rob Eddy - His view ( new Audio)

[noob]

I thought pattinson warranted another year. I think if Gardiner retired this year he maybe would have stayed on the list.

[Bernard Shakey]

I thought pattinson warranted another year. I think if Gardiner retired this year he maybe would have stayed on the list.

No he wouldn't. He was a one year filler.

[rexy]

I think you are harsh on the list management. Even if took all young guys last year it was a 99% chance that none of them would have helped us this year and probably still a 90% chance that they wouldnt next year. We took a punt because of the window we are at. it didnt pay off but it was mighty close. As for the salary cap we chose to keep every star when 2 new teams were starting. That was always going to get us to 100% of the salary cap. The other option was to lose a star and then can you imagine the whinging then. When you are up the top of the ladder for a period and with an ageing side then you will always struggle to keep the stars as per Geelong. We managed to which is a great effort.

If I'm harsh on management it's because I'm not particularly impressed with the moves that we've made. The Lovett and Peake moves turned us from a flag contender to a flag contender at the cost of picks. I don't think that's particularly inspired list management.

I have a hard time believing that we kept our guns because of superior list management either. Our guys either weren't targetted or signed for less than they would have got from GC because they wanted to stay. We haven't made tough decisions. We've kept every one of our older players who aren't retiring, no matter how underwheling their performance has been. The list has managed itself.

I don't count delisting Eddy or Miles as tough decisions. Cutting two of the (presumably) cheaper players from your list isn't inspired management. Cutting overpaid underacheivers and replacing them with cheaper, younger alternatives is. [Insert obligatory reference to Collingwood turnover here.] If we're that close to the cap, then cutting some surplus coin would have given us flexibility. As is, we have none.

Everyone here knows the names. We have guys who have done relative nothing for the longest time. They'll be here next year in the blind hope that they finally achieve what we once thought they could have. Chances are, they won't. We'll win despite them as we have forever. And we'll still only have Winmar, Peake and Lovett shaped hole to show for the 2009 draft.

Written Winmar off already?

Lovett has gone and i admit that Peake is not getting any better and in reality is probably not best 22 if we are to improve, but a bit rough on the kid Winmar dont you think?

[meher baba]

I thought pattinson warranted another year. I think if Gardiner retired this year he maybe would have stayed on the list.

No he wouldn't. He was a one year filler.

So he filled in while we waited for....

McEvoy to come on? (He was already better than Pattison at the start of 2010 IMO)

Stanley to come on? He's still not quite there and probably isn't a ruckman)

Kosi?

Seriously, who was he "filling in" for? With King retiring, you'd have thought we needed him more in 2011 than in 2010.

And would anyone disagree with the proposition that he went considerably better than expected?

Boy our salary cap situation must be a mess if we have no choice but to cut good value cheapies like Eddy and Pattison. Does Lovett's contact still affect us in 2011?

[plugger66]

I think you are harsh on the list management. Even if took all young guys last year it was a 99% chance that none of them would have helped us this year and probably still a 90% chance that they wouldnt next year. We took a punt because of the window we are at. it didnt pay off but it was mighty close. As for the salary cap we chose to keep every star when 2 new teams were starting. That was always going to get us to 100% of the salary cap. The other option was to lose a star and then can you imagine the whinging then. When you are up the top of the ladder for a period and with an ageing side then you will always struggle to keep the stars as per Geelong. We managed to which is a great effort.

If I'm harsh on management it's because I'm not particularly impressed with the moves that we've made. The Lovett and Peake moves turned us from a flag contender to a flag contender at the cost of picks. I don't think that's particularly inspired list management.

I have a hard time believing that we kept our guns because of superior list management either. Our guys either weren't targetted or signed for less than they would have got from GC because they wanted to stay. We haven't made tough decisions. We've kept every one of our older players who aren't retiring, no matter how underwheling their performance has been. The list has managed itself.

I don't count delisting Eddy or Miles as tough decisions. Cutting two of the (presumably) cheaper players from your list isn't inspired management. Cutting overpaid underacheivers and replacing them with cheaper, younger alternatives is. [Insert obligatory reference to Collingwood turnover here.] If we're that close to the cap, then cutting some surplus coin would have given us flexibility. As is, we have none.

Everyone here knows the names. We have guys who have done relative nothing for the longest time. They'll be here next year in the blind hope that they finally achieve what we once thought they could have. Chances are, they won't. We'll win despite them as we have forever. And we'll still only have Winmar, Peake and Lovett shaped hole to show for the 2009 draft.

So when we keep our good players it isnt because of any reason but they want to stay but if we did lose a star you would probably have a go at list management. How can the win? The fact is they all stayed and you and I dont know why so we can only say it is good list management especially as the other top 3 sides lost someone to GC.

And instead of saying we know who has underperformed and should have been traded, how about telling us who they are and when they should have been traded.

[SaintPav]

I thought pattinson warranted another year. I think if Gardiner retired this year he maybe would have stayed on the list.

No he wouldn't. He was a one year filler.

So he filled in while we waited for....

McEvoy to come on? (He was already better than Pattison at the start of 2010 IMO)

Stanley to come on? He's still not quite there and probably isn't a ruckman)

Kosi?

Seriously, who was he "filling in" for? With King retiring, you'd have thought we needed him more in 2011 than in 2010.

And would anyone disagree with the proposition that he went considerably better than expected?

Boy our salary cap situation must be a mess if we have no choice but to cut good value cheapies like Eddy and Pattison. Does Lovett's contact still affect us in 2011?

Fingers crossed we have a fairly good run with injuries because this does not sound good.

[Dr Spaceman]

I thought pattinson warranted another year. I think if Gardiner retired this year he maybe would have stayed on the list.

No he wouldn't. He was a one year filler.

So he filled in while we waited for....

McEvoy to come on? (He was already better than Pattison at the start of 2010 IMO)

Stanley to come on? He's still not quite there and probably isn't a ruckman)

Kosi?

Seriously, who was he "filling in" for? With King retiring, you'd have thought we needed him more in 2011 than in 2010.

And would anyone disagree with the proposition that he went considerably better than expected?

Boy our salary cap situation must be a mess if we have no choice but to cut good value cheapies like Eddy and Pattison. Does Lovett's contact still affect us in 2011?

Imagine what our cap would be like if the experts on here were right and we'd picked up Judd (instead of Ball), Rioli (instead of McEvoy) and Riewoldt (instead of Armo), to name but a few.

You'd need more than Waldron and a fleet of speedboats to keep that team together

[ChicagoSaint]

You'd need more than Waldron and a fleet of speedboats to keep that team together

or you could just do a fishlips and jump when it gets hot.

[Dr Spaceman]

You'd need more than Waldron and a fleet of speedboats to keep that team together

or you could just do a fishlips and jump when it gets hot.

As I often say,

When the going gets tough.....








........I'm outta here!!!

[ChicagoSaint]

You'd need more than Waldron and a fleet of speedboats to keep that team together

or you could just do a fishlips and jump when it gets hot.

As I often say,

When the going gets tough.....








........I'm outta here!!!

or as cartman would say:
'you're breaking my balls man you're breaking my balls'

[SainterK]

I thought pattinson warranted another year. I think if Gardiner retired this year he maybe would have stayed on the list.

No he wouldn't. He was a one year filler.

So he filled in while we waited for....

McEvoy to come on? (He was already better than Pattison at the start of 2010 IMO)

Stanley to come on? He's still not quite there and probably isn't a ruckman)

Kosi?

Seriously, who was he "filling in" for? With King retiring, you'd have thought we needed him more in 2011 than in 2010.

And would anyone disagree with the proposition that he went considerably better than expected?

Boy our salary cap situation must be a mess if we have no choice but to cut good value cheapies like Eddy and Pattison. Does Lovett's contact still affect us in 2011?

Fingers crossed we have a fairly good run with injuries because this does not sound good.

It sounds very good to me, if all of the following are locked away until the end of 2012.



We can't have it both ways, how would people feel if Goddards name was being whispered around with the likes of Selwood and Swan right now?

Not sure the club can win sometimes, most of our bright stars and core group have recommited to this club until the end of 2012 or further.

[saintbrat]

Rob ws on SEN this afternoon and they have uploaded the interview- or part there of ( was there more)
http://www.sen.com.au/audioplayer/Audio ... -Eddy/1417
a very down to earth young man-

[Moods]

I thought pattinson warranted another year. I think if Gardiner retired this year he maybe would have stayed on the list.

No he wouldn't. He was a one year filler.

So he filled in while we waited for....

McEvoy to come on? (He was already better than Pattison at the start of 2010 IMO)

Stanley to come on? He's still not quite there and probably isn't a ruckman)

Kosi?

Seriously, who was he "filling in" for? With King retiring, you'd have thought we needed him more in 2011 than in 2010.

And would anyone disagree with the proposition that he went considerably better than expected?
Boy our salary cap situation must be a mess if we have no choice but to cut good value cheapies like Eddy and Pattison. Does Lovett's contact still affect us in 2011?

Pattison is a veru ordinary footballer. Why would any of us complain that he got the chop? It was a poor decision to recruit him, and a good decision to delist him.

Considerably better than expected. Well he played 4-5 games so I guess he went better than expected..

[stinger]

Rob ws on SEN this afternoon and they have uploaded the interview- or part there of ( was there more)
http://www.sen.com.au/audioplayer/Audio ... -Eddy/1417
a very down to earth young man-

worth the listen.....thanks for that st brat...makes you wonder but...

[sunsaint]

direct download if you prefer:
http://sen.sportal.com.au/site/_content ... source.mp3

[ChicagoSaint]

Rob ws on SEN this afternoon and they have uploaded the interview- or part there of ( was there more)
http://www.sen.com.au/audioplayer/Audio ... -Eddy/1417
a very down to earth young man-

worth the listen.....thanks for that st brat...makes you wonder but...

like i said, berbakov didn't want him and while there are others on the list they don't come under berbakov's department.

[plugger66]

Rob ws on SEN this afternoon and they have uploaded the interview- or part there of ( was there more)
http://www.sen.com.au/audioplayer/Audio ... -Eddy/1417
a very down to earth young man-

worth the listen.....thanks for that st brat...makes you wonder but...

like i said, berbakov didn't want him and while there are others on the list they don't come under berbakov's department.

Complete crap but at least you are consistant with your crap.