Clinton Jones

[bergholt]

We had a bit of a clean-out this year with younger duds (Al Smith etc.) and with probably a couple of retirements, we shouldn't need to cut 10-12 as some have suggested, to really rejuvinate the list. We can fill some holes with trades/mature recruits, and pick talented kids.

not 10-12 but we'll need to lose at least 7. work out the numbers and you'll realise that some mid-range players have to go given the expected rookie promotions. i reckon it's something like this:

OUT: Blake/Kosi, Clarke, Crocker, Jones, Peake, Polo, Winmar
IN: Curren, Dunell, Ferguson, Draft Pick 1, Draft Pick 2, Draft Pick 3, Mature Recruit 1

if you want three good kids, one mature recruit and to hang onto curren and ferguson then this is the minimum number gone. of course, they might choose to shaft dunell and leave him on the rookie list for another year - but i don't think that option exists with the other two. and this means andreoli gets let go, but i've never seen him play so i don't know if that's a good thing or not. and archer goes as well.

i don't think there'll be more retirements than one of blake and kosi; we couldn't lose them both as we have no ruck cover. hayes and milne shouldn't retire.

i might be wrong about any of the individuals cut there, but i don't think i'm far wrong on the overall number.

[plugger66]

We had a bit of a clean-out this year with younger duds (Al Smith etc.) and with probably a couple of retirements, we shouldn't need to cut 10-12 as some have suggested, to really rejuvinate the list. We can fill some holes with trades/mature recruits, and pick talented kids.

not 10-12 but we'll need to lose at least 7. work out the numbers and you'll realise that some mid-range players have to go given the expected rookie promotions. i reckon it's something like this:

OUT: Blake/Kosi, Clarke, Crocker, Jones, Peake, Polo, Winmar
IN: Curren, Dunell, Ferguson, Draft Pick 1, Draft Pick 2, Draft Pick 3, Mature Recruit 1

if you want three good kids, one mature recruit and to hang onto curren and ferguson then this is the minimum number gone. of course, they might choose to shaft dunell and leave him on the rookie list for another year - but i don't think that option exists with the other two. and this means andreoli gets let go, but i've never seen him play so i don't know if that's a good thing or not. and archer goes as well.

i don't think there'll be more retirements than one of blake and kosi; we couldn't lose them both as we have no ruck cover. hayes and milne shouldn't retire.

i might be wrong about any of the individuals cut there, but i don't think i'm far wrong on the overall number.

Winmar does have a contract so he would have to be put on the rookie list if we delist him. Also i still dont know if they will upgrade 3 players from the rookie list. They may keep one or two of them as rookies next year. It isnt as if any of the 3 would be walk up starts for round one next season.

[StPeter]

I would definitely keep Jones and Ray. Jones has tapered off a bit this year but I agree he was badly missed against North Melb.

Ray has been underplayed this year but surely has done enough to keep his place.

I have always been a Raph fan but was most disappointed with his effort for Sandy this week.
Maybe his time is up although I would still like to see him play a full year without injury before axing him.

[Con Gorozidis]

Jones simply has to go. 28-29.

Just no point keeping him on. I would much rather see Curren and Newnes play 20 games each next year.

Had a good innings. 114 AFL games. Great effort from Clint.

[The Redeemer]

Jones simply has to go. 28-29.

Just no point keeping him on. I would much rather see Curren and Newnes play 20 games each next year.

Had a good innings. 114 AFL games. Great effort from Clint.

I would be nicer to Jones if he could kick. Unfortunately he cannot kick so bugger off.

[Con Gorozidis]

We had a bit of a clean-out this year with younger duds (Al Smith etc.) and with probably a couple of retirements, we shouldn't need to cut 10-12 as some have suggested, to really rejuvinate the list. We can fill some holes with trades/mature recruits, and pick talented kids.

not 10-12 but we'll need to lose at least 7. work out the numbers and you'll realise that some mid-range players have to go given the expected rookie promotions. i reckon it's something like this:

OUT: Blake/Kosi, Clarke, Crocker, Jones, Peake, Polo, Winmar
IN: Curren, Dunell, Ferguson, Draft Pick 1, Draft Pick 2, Draft Pick 3, Mature Recruit 1

if you want three good kids, one mature recruit and to hang onto curren and ferguson then this is the minimum number gone. of course, they might choose to shaft dunell and leave him on the rookie list for another year - but i don't think that option exists with the other two. and this means andreoli gets let go, but i've never seen him play so i don't know if that's a good thing or not. and archer goes as well.

i don't think there'll be more retirements than one of blake and kosi; we couldn't lose them both as we have no ruck cover. hayes and milne shouldn't retire.

i might be wrong about any of the individuals cut there, but i don't think i'm far wrong on the overall number.

im looking at in a similar way to bergholt. has to be 7 or 8 changes. i think 3 rookies will get promoted.
and your 'outs" look right to me. Winmar and Kosi might get spared the axe due to their (bloody lucky) contractual situations. And we all know the BJ situation is a 50:50 at this stage.

[8856brother]

Jones will go. Even when he has played this year, on good players, he has been smashed more times than he has beaten his opponant. That wouldn't be the case a few years back.
He simply can't kick and is now too scared to even try. Ross got the best out of him but that role no longer has a part in the game. You have to be able to kick. Great clubman.

[PJ]

We had a bit of a clean-out this year with younger duds (Al Smith etc.) and with probably a couple of retirements, we shouldn't need to cut 10-12 as some have suggested, to really rejuvinate the list. We can fill some holes with trades/mature recruits, and pick talented kids.

not 10-12 but we'll need to lose at least 7. work out the numbers and you'll realise that some mid-range players have to go given the expected rookie promotions. i reckon it's something like this:

OUT: Blake/Kosi, Clarke, Crocker, Jones, Peake, Polo, Winmar
IN: Curren, Dunell, Ferguson, Draft Pick 1, Draft Pick 2, Draft Pick 3, Mature Recruit 1

if you want three good kids, one mature recruit and to hang onto curren and ferguson then this is the minimum number gone. of course, they might choose to shaft dunell and leave him on the rookie list for another year - but i don't think that option exists with the other two. and this means andreoli gets let go, but i've never seen him play so i don't know if that's a good thing or not. and archer goes as well.

i don't think there'll be more retirements than one of blake and kosi; we couldn't lose them both as we have no ruck cover. hayes and milne shouldn't retire.

i might be wrong about any of the individuals cut there, but i don't think i'm far wrong on the overall number.

Winmar does have a contract so he would have to be put on the rookie list if we delist him. Also i still dont know if they will upgrade 3 players from the rookie list. They may keep one or two of them as rookies next year. It isnt as if any of the 3 would be walk up starts for round one next season.

Maybe not walk up starts but if you're looking at holes in our list then 194cm defenders are looking like diamonds.

[bergholt]

Winmar does have a contract so he would have to be put on the rookie list if we delist him. Also i still dont know if they will upgrade 3 players from the rookie list. They may keep one or two of them as rookies next year.

dunell could definitely stay on the list for another year, but that seems a bit unfair given he played 5 afl games this year. still, it's probably for the best, as you say he's not really that close to the best 22 at this point.

both curren and ferguson have had two years on the rookie list so i thought that meant they couldn't have another - but that said, archer's had three years. is there some rule which says it's ok for them to stay on the list up to three years if they agree to it? in that case i suppose we'd expect to see curren promoted and ferguson stay rookie, since he's presumably further from afl standard at this point in his career.

i think it would make sense to demote one of winmar and crocker, i have no problem with winmar staying around but he doesn't seem to have shown a massive amount as yet.

[plugger66]

Winmar does have a contract so he would have to be put on the rookie list if we delist him. Also i still dont know if they will upgrade 3 players from the rookie list. They may keep one or two of them as rookies next year.

dunell could definitely stay on the list for another year, but that seems a bit unfair given he played 5 afl games this year. still, it's probably for the best, as you say he's not really that close to the best 22 at this point.

both curren and ferguson have had two years on the rookie list so i thought that meant they couldn't have another - but that said, archer's had three years. is there some rule which says it's ok for them to stay on the list up to three years if they agree to it? in that case i suppose we'd expect to see curren promoted and ferguson stay rookie, since he's presumably further from afl standard at this point in his career.

i think it would make sense to demote one of winmar and crocker, i have no problem with winmar staying around but he doesn't seem to have shown a massive amount as yet.

They get 3 years now if the club want to keep them that long unless of course some other club wants them on their main list.

[bergholt]

They get 3 years now if the club want to keep them that long unless of course some other club wants them on their main list.

really? how does that work? they still have to go in the draft then, right?

[plugger66]

They get 3 years now if the club want to keep them that long unless of course some other club wants them on their main list.

really? how does that work? they still have to go in the draft then, right?

I dont know for sure. I suppose the main draft is before the rookie draft so if they are gone then bad luck. Maybe clubs have to trade for them.

[mad saint guy]

i think it would make sense to demote one of winmar and crocker, i have no problem with winmar staying around but he doesn't seem to have shown a massive amount as yet.

Crocker has to be a certain delisting but I agree it'd be worth keeping Winmar on the rookie list. We either keep him on the senior list despite never getting close to senior selection (other than those random stints that Lyon gave him for no apparent reason), delist and pay him out or delist and rookie him. He's a very long shot at making it in the AFL but with skills, pace and height we might as well keep him around as long as he's contracted. Certainly doesn't deserve a spot on the senior list ahead of Dunell or Curren though.

[Freebird]

Clint will be 29 next year, I'd like to think a team could turn him into an inside mid that could dish it off....he is actually a very good ball winner/contested footy player.

+1

[mad saint guy]

Clint will be 29 next year, I'd like to think a team could turn him into an inside mid that could dish it off....he is actually a very good ball winner/contested footy player.

Surely the benefit of giving kids like Ledger, Newnes and Ross opportunities as well as stepping up the responsibility of Steven and Armo would outweigh any output Jones could have as a midfielder for the next two years. Our midfield is slowly slipping down the AFL pecking order and the only way to get it back to the top is to inject new talent, not try to reinvent 29 year olds who can't kick or make a decision under pressure.

[dragit]

Clint will be 29 next year, I'd like to think a team could turn him into an inside mid that could dish it off....he is actually a very good ball winner/contested footy player.

Surely the benefit of giving kids like Ledger, Newnes and Ross opportunities as well as stepping up the responsibility of Steven and Armo would outweigh any output Jones could have as a midfielder for the next two years. Our midfield is slowly slipping down the AFL pecking order and the only way to get it back to the top is to inject new talent, not try to reinvent 29 year olds who can't kick or make a decision under pressure.

Think shes talking about another club reinventing him... not the saints.

[Bernard Shakey]

Clint will be 29 next year, I'd like to think a team could turn him into an inside mid that could dish it off....he is actually a very good ball winner/contested footy player.

He can get plenty of it, but his disposal is possibly the worst in the comp. Bye bye CJ back to WAFL probably.

[SainterK]

Clint will be 29 next year, I'd like to think a team could turn him into an inside mid that could dish it off....he is actually a very good ball winner/contested footy player.

He can get plenty of it, but his disposal is possibly the worst in the comp. Bye bye CJ back to WAFL probably.

I don't think Luke Ball is the best user either, but Collingwood have worked him into their midfield.

Just think a side could use him purely as an engine room, you may be right though, and it may end up being at a lower grade.

[Bernard Shakey]

Clint will be 29 next year, I'd like to think a team could turn him into an inside mid that could dish it off....he is actually a very good ball winner/contested footy player.

He can get plenty of it, but his disposal is possibly the worst in the comp. Bye bye CJ back to WAFL probably.

I don't think Luke Ball is the best user either, but Collingwood have worked him into their midfield.

Just think a side could use him purely as an engine room, you may be right though, and it may end up being at a lower grade.

You cannot possibly compare CJ to Luke Ball. I'm starting to lose faith in your judgement lately, please get glasses or remove the rose coloured ones.

[SainterK]

I'm not comparing him to Luke Ball, I'm using it as example of how teams can enhance strengths and eliminate weaknesses, and someone could do that with Jones.

If that's AFL level or WAFL will remain to be seen, the fact he is contracted...the Saints would hope someone is interested?

I made a call on Clinton about 2 months ago on here, that we couldn't carry him anymore.

I don't think they had a rose tinge then.

Really don't care if you rate my judgement or not, I'm just a average supporter with an opinion....

[saintly]

Clint will be 29 next year, I'd like to think a team could turn him into an inside mid that could dish it off....he is actually a very good ball winner/contested footy player.

He can get plenty of it, but his disposal is possibly the worst in the comp. Bye bye CJ back to WAFL probably.

maybe lyon will pick him up for a year or two.

[spert]

I supppose if CJ is fit, but can't get a gig in the seniors where he used to be an automatic selection, then his days are numbered at the club. One of our big problems this season is that our losses were due a lot to superior clearance work by opposition midfields/ onballers with superior skills by hand and foot- especially going into the forward line, so if we want to compete with the current top teams, then we need to pick up in that area.

[matrix]

gawn
one way of another

is he out of contract at the end of this year??

[Old Mate]

gawn
one way of another

is he out of contract at the end of this year??

Agreed and unfortunately for Jones I cannot see him continuing his afl career beyond this season. To the scrap heap with Polo and Peake. I reckon Ray was heading the same way until mid season.

[matrix]

going by brattys post over on saintsational web i think cj is signed till the end of next year

Clint Jones - No official announcement but told us at B&F he had just signed 2 year deal
so we think he signed for two years

2013
Nick Riewoldt
Nick Dal Santo
Nicholas Winmar
David Armitage
Tom Simpkin
Jack Steven (dont hold me to this, but assuming got 2 year min extension)
Clint Jones - No official announcement but told us at B&F he had just signed 2 year deal
Terry Milera
Ahmed Saad
Farren Ray - Led to believe signed 2 year deal
Sean Dempster - Could have got 3 years as was talk of 2 or 3 year deal
Sebastian Ross
Daniel Markworth
Jack Newnes
Jimmy Webster
Jay Lever

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=58352