Frawley puts contract talks on hold
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
- samuraisaint
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5927
- Joined: Sun 25 Sep 2011 3:23pm
- Location: Outside Lucky Burgers
- Has thanked: 857 times
- Been thanked: 800 times
Re: Frawley puts contract talks on hold
Ours - possibly Roberton, Newnes, Steven, Armitage, Hickey, Longer, etc etc
Theirs, possibly Hogan, Toumpas, Viney
The main reason I disagree with your post is that Melbourne until recently were still picking up blokes like Dawes, Rodan and Clarke from other clubs to top up their list. That does not indicate a club who are well and truly into a rebuild. The Bullies and Port are further along than us, yes. But Melbourne; no. Watts and Grimes have been dissappointing over the journey. Nathan Jones is a great clubman, but not a legitimate star.
I expect us to get over them quite easily round 1.
Theirs, possibly Hogan, Toumpas, Viney
The main reason I disagree with your post is that Melbourne until recently were still picking up blokes like Dawes, Rodan and Clarke from other clubs to top up their list. That does not indicate a club who are well and truly into a rebuild. The Bullies and Port are further along than us, yes. But Melbourne; no. Watts and Grimes have been dissappointing over the journey. Nathan Jones is a great clubman, but not a legitimate star.
I expect us to get over them quite easily round 1.
Your friendly neighbourhood samurai.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 6656
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 12:24pm
- Location: Hotel Bastardos
- Has thanked: 198 times
- Been thanked: 166 times
- Contact:
Re: Frawley puts contract talks on hold
This will happen. Of course he wont decide until the seasons over, by which time he's probably had some sort of disagreement with the coach/club.mr six o'clock wrote:frawley would go to colonwood as a replacement for maxwell .
*Allegedly.
Bring back Lucky Burgers, and nobody gets hurt.
You can't un-fry things.
Last Post
Bring back Lucky Burgers, and nobody gets hurt.
You can't un-fry things.
Last Post
- SaintPav
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 19096
- Joined: Wed 16 Jun 2010 9:24pm
- Location: Alma Road
- Has thanked: 1603 times
- Been thanked: 2018 times
Re: Frawley puts contract talks on hold
Based on what? Our first round performances the last two seasons when we were favourites?samuraisaint wrote:
I expect us to get over them quite easily round 1.
I wouldn't be surprised if they beat us, especially in round 1.
Silly comment.
Holder of unacceptable views and other thought crimes.
Re: Frawley puts contract talks on hold
The Silly comment is basing result around rd 1 from previous years. That makes no sense at all.SaintPav wrote:Based on what? Our first round performances the last two seasons when we were favourites?samuraisaint wrote:
I expect us to get over them quite easily round 1.
I wouldn't be surprised if they beat us, especially in round 1.
Silly comment.
Expectations are personal things, so to say expecting to beat Melbourne, isnt that silly.
There are a few months to go, lets see how the teams prepare and line up at that point.
P.S I expect to beat them based on the alignment of the planets and the fact that Melbourne are crap
- samuraisaint
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5927
- Joined: Sun 25 Sep 2011 3:23pm
- Location: Outside Lucky Burgers
- Has thanked: 857 times
- Been thanked: 800 times
Re: Frawley puts contract talks on hold
SaintPav wrote:Based on what? Our first round performances the last two seasons when we were favourites?samuraisaint wrote:
I expect us to get over them quite easily round 1.
I wouldn't be surprised if they beat us, especially in round 1.
Silly comment.
Okay, how's this
They haven't beaten us for seven years - and rarely in nine (when we had deep injury lists)
+Based on their terrible record at Etihad.
+Based on the unlikelyhood of Dawes, Clarke and Hogan playing round 1 and being underdone if they do.
...
Your friendly neighbourhood samurai.
Re: Frawley puts contract talks on hold
samuraisaint wrote:Ours - possibly Roberton, Newnes, Steven, Armitage, Hickey, Longer, etc etc
Theirs, possibly Hogan, Toumpas, Viney
The main reason I disagree with your post is that Melbourne until recently were still picking up blokes like Dawes, Rodan and Clarke from other clubs to top up their list. That does not indicate a club who are well and truly into a rebuild. The Bullies and Port are further along than us, yes. But Melbourne; no. Watts and Grimes have been dissappointing over the journey. Nathan Jones is a great clubman, but not a legitimate star.
I expect us to get over them quite easily round 1.
Well i could find most Melbourne supporters who say they possibly have 7 or 8 who are chance and we have only 2 or 3. I still say they have better first and second round picks than us for the last 2 or 3 years until the last draft which IMO puts then ahead of us on the rebuild. By the way if Clark gets fit it is an inspired pick IMO.
And us beating them in round one doesnt mean they arent head of us in the rebuild. it will probably mean Lenny, Rooy and Fish have been in the top 6 on the ground.
- samuraisaint
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5927
- Joined: Sun 25 Sep 2011 3:23pm
- Location: Outside Lucky Burgers
- Has thanked: 857 times
- Been thanked: 800 times
Re: Frawley puts contract talks on hold
Fair enough. I would argue though that when we play at our best it is when the younger players are amongst our best, especially in the midfield. I don't believe Melbourne are ahead of us in a rebuild because I think that Roos going to Melbourne puts them back at Year Zero. I agree that our rebuild is at a stage comparable to theirs, but we have already made a start, beginning with our ruck stocks and key defenders, due largely to necessity. Melbourne will be looking to offload a lot of their previous high draft pick selections for more early draft picks at the end of the year as Roos' philosophy is closer to Lyon's that that of the previous regimes.
I also believe that Melbourne is 'broken' as a footy club and a summer with Roos is not going to fix that. I base this on some of their performances which reminded me vividly of some of ours circa late 70's until 1987 when we became more competitive. Last year we weren't always great but at least we tried. Even against Geelong there was some semblence of brinkmanship and grit, despite the fact that it was a dog of a night (forgive the mixed metaphor there).
And look, just a comment but if you are going to reply, can you please post something original, rather than just a reposte of what I have said as, after all that is what vigorous discussion is all about.
I also believe that Melbourne is 'broken' as a footy club and a summer with Roos is not going to fix that. I base this on some of their performances which reminded me vividly of some of ours circa late 70's until 1987 when we became more competitive. Last year we weren't always great but at least we tried. Even against Geelong there was some semblence of brinkmanship and grit, despite the fact that it was a dog of a night (forgive the mixed metaphor there).
And look, just a comment but if you are going to reply, can you please post something original, rather than just a reposte of what I have said as, after all that is what vigorous discussion is all about.
Your friendly neighbourhood samurai.
Re: Frawley puts contract talks on hold
samuraisaint wrote:Fair enough. I would argue though that when we play at our best it is when the younger players are amongst our best, especially in the midfield. I don't believe Melbourne are ahead of us in a rebuild because I think that Roos going to Melbourne puts them back at Year Zero. I agree that our rebuild is at a stage comparable to theirs, but we have already made a start, beginning with our ruck stocks and key defenders, due largely to necessity. Melbourne will be looking to offload a lot of their previous high draft pick selections for more early draft picks at the end of the year as Roos' philosophy is closer to Lyon's that that of the previous regimes.
I also believe that Melbourne is 'broken' as a footy club and a summer with Roos is not going to fix that. I base this on some of their performances which reminded me vividly of some of ours circa late 70's until 1987 when we became more competitive. Last year we weren't always great but at least we tried. Even against Geelong there was some semblence of brinkmanship and grit, despite the fact that it was a dog of a night (forgive the mixed metaphor there).
And look, just a comment but if you are going to reply, can you please post something original, rather than just a reposte of what I have said as, after all that is what vigorous discussion is all about.
I dont even get what you are talking about in the last paragraph but maybe im not that smart. Well we agree to disagree on what stages the 2 clubs are at in the rebuild and because I still think our older players, apart from jack, Will still be our best players this season then we may not know for a couple of years who is at the better stage in the rebuild.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 259
- Joined: Fri 11 Nov 2005 12:54am
- Location: Chelsea Heights
Re: Frawley puts contract talks on hold
I understand about the salary cap being the same, I guess what I was getting at more was that the Hawks would've budgeted x amount of dollars to renew Buddy's contract - if he'd stayed.lloyd21 wrote:Johnny Favier wrote:I get the feeling he'd be more likely to go to Hawthorn - with the war chest they have now since Buddy left, I think they'd make him an offer that'd be hard to refuse.mr six o'clock wrote:frawley would go to colonwood as a replacement for maxwell .
Guys all clubs have same salary cap if any club has room it is the saints but more likely he would look for flag chance club.
Was wanting Stkilda when Neeld stuffed club up rumour was not started hear either .
Really hope Stkilda target Patton Plowman & Jaksch last 2 uncontracted from Gws myself
But now they have that "Buddy space" left after he walked, they'd be a major player in the next free agency period you'd think + they're still within their "premiership window" would also be a bonus.
Having said that, I'd still love to see him in a Saints guernsey next year - would settle out the back 6 nicely....not to mention the gun forwards we're gonna draft at the end of this year!
Re: Frawley puts contract talks on hold
I don't think that word means what you think it means.samuraisaint wrote:Even against Geelong there was some semblence of brinkmanship...
- SaintPav
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 19096
- Joined: Wed 16 Jun 2010 9:24pm
- Location: Alma Road
- Has thanked: 1603 times
- Been thanked: 2018 times
Re: Frawley puts contract talks on hold
You have missed the point. Maybe a lesson from the last two years is that we shouldn't just expect to win games based on past . Most people on here thought we would easily account for Port and GC.samuraisaint wrote:SaintPav wrote:Based on what? Our first round performances the last two seasons when we were favourites?samuraisaint wrote:
I expect us to get over them quite easily round 1.
I wouldn't be surprised if they beat us, especially in round 1.
Silly comment.
Okay, how's this
They haven't beaten us for seven years - and rarely in nine (when we had deep injury lists)
+Based on their terrible record at Etihad.
+Based on the unlikelyhood of Dawes, Clarke and Hogan playing round 1 and being underdone if they do.
...
Probability doesn't work that way either.
Holder of unacceptable views and other thought crimes.
- SaintPav
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 19096
- Joined: Wed 16 Jun 2010 9:24pm
- Location: Alma Road
- Has thanked: 1603 times
- Been thanked: 2018 times
Re: Frawley puts contract talks on hold
Sorry to break the news to you but we're not much chop either.falka wrote:The Silly comment is basing result around rd 1 from previous years. That makes no sense at all.SaintPav wrote:Based on what? Our first round performances the last two seasons when we were favourites?samuraisaint wrote:
I expect us to get over them quite easily round 1.
I wouldn't be surprised if they beat us, especially in round 1.
Silly comment.
Expectations are personal things, so to say expecting to beat Melbourne, isnt that silly.
There are a few months to go, lets see how the teams prepare and line up at that point.
P.S I expect to beat them based on the alignment of the planets and the fact that Melbourne are crap
The point was on expectation of victory in round 1 as in previous years. There are always plenty of upsets in round one for various reasons, not that a loss in round 1 would be considered a major upset given were we finished last year.
Holder of unacceptable views and other thought crimes.
- samuraisaint
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5927
- Joined: Sun 25 Sep 2011 3:23pm
- Location: Outside Lucky Burgers
- Has thanked: 857 times
- Been thanked: 800 times
Re: Frawley puts contract talks on hold
[
Okay, how's this
They haven't beaten us for seven years - and rarely in nine (when we had deep injury lists)
+Based on their terrible record at Etihad.
+Based on the unlikelyhood of Dawes, Clarke and Hogan playing round 1 and being underdone if they do.
...
[/quote]
You have missed the point. Maybe a lesson from the last two years is that we shouldn't just expect to win games based on past . Most people on here thought we would easily account for Port and GC.
Probability doesn't work that way either.[/quote]
We're not playing intertstate round one this year. I reckon we are a five goal better side at Etihad than we are interstate - and it is a fair bet that statistics would support this. I might even suggest that we are a better than five goal difference playing at home.
As for your comment about Port Adelaide - Why would most people on here think we would account easily for Port anywhere, but especially in Adelaide?!? We have hardly beaten them at all anywhere since the nineties
Melbourne at Etihad are a very different proposition to Adelaide in Adelaide, Geelong at the MCG and a game interstate against any club with Garry Ablett in it. You are not comparing apples with apples.
Okay, how's this
They haven't beaten us for seven years - and rarely in nine (when we had deep injury lists)
+Based on their terrible record at Etihad.
+Based on the unlikelyhood of Dawes, Clarke and Hogan playing round 1 and being underdone if they do.
...
[/quote]
You have missed the point. Maybe a lesson from the last two years is that we shouldn't just expect to win games based on past . Most people on here thought we would easily account for Port and GC.
Probability doesn't work that way either.[/quote]
We're not playing intertstate round one this year. I reckon we are a five goal better side at Etihad than we are interstate - and it is a fair bet that statistics would support this. I might even suggest that we are a better than five goal difference playing at home.
As for your comment about Port Adelaide - Why would most people on here think we would account easily for Port anywhere, but especially in Adelaide?!? We have hardly beaten them at all anywhere since the nineties
Melbourne at Etihad are a very different proposition to Adelaide in Adelaide, Geelong at the MCG and a game interstate against any club with Garry Ablett in it. You are not comparing apples with apples.
Your friendly neighbourhood samurai.
- samuraisaint
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5927
- Joined: Sun 25 Sep 2011 3:23pm
- Location: Outside Lucky Burgers
- Has thanked: 857 times
- Been thanked: 800 times
Re: Frawley puts contract talks on hold
bergholt wrote:I don't think that word means what you think it means.samuraisaint wrote:Even against Geelong there was some semblence of brinkmanship...
Brinkmanship means exactly what I think it means.
We had no choice but to roll the dice after losing all our key defenders including Roberton. We were always going to be on a hiding to nothing but at least the club had a go at attacking early before returning to damage control mode in order to attain best advantage. As opposed to melbourne, who are a rabble for much of the time.
Maybe you didn't understand the gist of what I was trying to say.
Your friendly neighbourhood samurai.
- kosifantutti
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 8582
- Joined: Fri 21 Jan 2005 9:06am
- Location: Back in town
- Has thanked: 527 times
- Been thanked: 1532 times
Re: Frawley puts contract talks on hold
I don't know if you're right or not but I love a good Inigo Montoya quote.bergholt wrote:I don't think that word means what you think it means.samuraisaint wrote:Even against Geelong there was some semblence of brinkmanship...
Macquarie Dictionary Word of the Year for 2023 "Kosi Lives"
- SaintPav
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 19096
- Joined: Wed 16 Jun 2010 9:24pm
- Location: Alma Road
- Has thanked: 1603 times
- Been thanked: 2018 times
Re: Frawley puts contract talks on hold
You have missed the point. Maybe a lesson from the last two years is that we shouldn't just expect to win games based on past . Most people on here thought we would easily account for Port and GC.samuraisaint wrote:[
Okay, how's this
They haven't beaten us for seven years - and rarely in nine (when we had deep injury lists)
+Based on their terrible record at Etihad.
+Based on the unlikelyhood of Dawes, Clarke and Hogan playing round 1 and being underdone if they do.
...
Probability doesn't work that way either.[/quote]
We're not playing intertstate round one this year. I reckon we are a five goal better side at Etihad than we are interstate - and it is a fair bet that statistics would support this. I might even suggest that we are a better than five goal difference playing at home.
As for your comment about Port Adelaide - Why would most people on here think we would account easily for Port anywhere, but especially in Adelaide?!? We have hardly beaten them at all anywhere since the nineties
Melbourne at Etihad are a very different proposition to Adelaide in Adelaide, Geelong at the MCG and a game interstate against any club with Garry Ablett in it. You are not comparing apples with apples.[/quote]
Ok, let play connect the dots... we dominated Port for a long time (and the GC) but we lost to them and that is my point with the Dees who we have smashed every year sine 2007.
There are usually upset results in round 1 (and the last round) as there is no reliable form guide.
I don't think any reasonable supporter on here is expecting us to just smash them. It's a bit too arrogant for my liking given where we're at.
Holder of unacceptable views and other thought crimes.
- samuraisaint
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5927
- Joined: Sun 25 Sep 2011 3:23pm
- Location: Outside Lucky Burgers
- Has thanked: 857 times
- Been thanked: 800 times
Re: Frawley puts contract talks on hold
We're not playing intertstate round one this year. I reckon we are a five goal better side at Etihad than we are interstate - and it is a fair bet that statistics would support this. I might even suggest that we are a better than five goal difference playing at home.SaintPav wrote:You have missed the point. Maybe a lesson from the last two years is that we shouldn't just expect to win games based on past . Most people on here thought we would easily account for Port and GC.samuraisaint wrote:[
Okay, how's this
They haven't beaten us for seven years - and rarely in nine (when we had deep injury lists)
+Based on their terrible record at Etihad.
+Based on the unlikelyhood of Dawes, Clarke and Hogan playing round 1 and being underdone if they do.
...
Probability doesn't work that way either.
As for your comment about Port Adelaide - Why would most people on here think we would account easily for Port anywhere, but especially in Adelaide?!? We have hardly beaten them at all anywhere since the nineties
Melbourne at Etihad are a very different proposition to Adelaide in Adelaide, Geelong at the MCG and a game interstate against any club with Garry Ablett in it. You are not comparing apples with apples.[/quote]
Ok, let play connect the dots... we dominated Port for a long time (and the GC) but we lost to them and that is my point with the Dees who we have smashed every year sine 2007.
There are usually upset results in round 1 (and the last round) as there is no reliable form guide.
I don't think any reasonable supporter on here is expecting us to just smash them. It's a bit too arrogant for my liking given where we're at.[/quote]
We have never dominated Port or the GC for a long time. They haven't even been around for a long time.
I never said we would smash the Dees either. I think we will account for them comfortably though.
Your friendly neighbourhood samurai.
- samuraisaint
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5927
- Joined: Sun 25 Sep 2011 3:23pm
- Location: Outside Lucky Burgers
- Has thanked: 857 times
- Been thanked: 800 times
Re: Frawley puts contract talks on hold
Who?kosifantutti wrote:I don't know if you're right or not but I love a good Inigo Montoya quote.bergholt wrote:I don't think that word means what you think it means.samuraisaint wrote:Even against Geelong there was some semblence of brinkmanship...
Your friendly neighbourhood samurai.