Big Boy McEvoy
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1081
- Joined: Sat 27 Apr 2013 7:44pm
- Been thanked: 52 times
Re: Big Boy McEvoy
Can't believe Mcevoy is playing so effectively up forward! He handly ever showed any attacking prowess for us, was far better as a defensive ruckman floating back into space and chopping off forward 50 entries - I seriously didn't think he had the attributes to be a ruck who can go forward...it should give us hope that with patience and optimism, our young, developing, did I say young rucks can also learn to be better up forward. Hopefully this coincides/adds to our improvement as a side.
- ShanghaiSaint
- Club Player
- Posts: 1911
- Joined: Thu 24 Mar 2005 7:43pm
Re: Big Boy McEvoy
listered to the game dring down the coast.. cracker match... Big Boy by sounds of it did a lot of good things. seems to be coming on well at the hawks.
Fortius Quo Fidelius
Re: Big Boy McEvoy
Can't believe Hawthorn fits all its players under the salary cap.Saint wagga wrote:Can't believe Mcevoy is playing so effectively up forward! He handly ever showed any attacking prowess for us, was far better as a defensive ruckman floating back into space and chopping off forward 50 entries - I seriously didn't think he had the attributes to be a ruck who can go forward...it should give us hope that with patience and optimism, our young, developing, did I say young rucks can also learn to be better up forward. Hopefully this coincides/adds to our improvement as a side.
Re: Big Boy McEvoy
FQF wrote:Can't believe Hawthorn fits all its players under the salary cap.Saint wagga wrote:Can't believe Mcevoy is playing so effectively up forward! He handly ever showed any attacking prowess for us, was far better as a defensive ruckman floating back into space and chopping off forward 50 entries - I seriously didn't think he had the attributes to be a ruck who can go forward...it should give us hope that with patience and optimism, our young, developing, did I say young rucks can also learn to be better up forward. Hopefully this coincides/adds to our improvement as a side.
Its called great management. Something we couldn't do when we were a chance.
Re: Big Boy McEvoy
Clearly great management but Hawthorn's list has significantly better players than ours did so it's truly astounding. The bottom 6 of our best 22 from that period would get SMASHED by Hawthorn's bottom 6, not to mention to players they have who can't make their 22.plugger66 wrote:FQF wrote:Can't believe Hawthorn fits all its players under the salary cap.Saint wagga wrote:Can't believe Mcevoy is playing so effectively up forward! He handly ever showed any attacking prowess for us, was far better as a defensive ruckman floating back into space and chopping off forward 50 entries - I seriously didn't think he had the attributes to be a ruck who can go forward...it should give us hope that with patience and optimism, our young, developing, did I say young rucks can also learn to be better up forward. Hopefully this coincides/adds to our improvement as a side.
Its called great management. Something we couldn't do when we were a chance.
Many of them must be getting far less than their market worth.
Re: Big Boy McEvoy
FQF wrote:Clearly great management but Hawthorn's list has significantly better players than ours did so it's truly astounding. The bottom 6 of our best 22 from that period would get SMASHED by Hawthorn's bottom 6, not to mention to players they have who can't make their 22.plugger66 wrote:FQF wrote:Can't believe Hawthorn fits all its players under the salary cap.Saint wagga wrote:Can't believe Mcevoy is playing so effectively up forward! He handly ever showed any attacking prowess for us, was far better as a defensive ruckman floating back into space and chopping off forward 50 entries - I seriously didn't think he had the attributes to be a ruck who can go forward...it should give us hope that with patience and optimism, our young, developing, did I say young rucks can also learn to be better up forward. Hopefully this coincides/adds to our improvement as a side.
Its called great management. Something we couldn't do when we were a chance.
Many of them must be getting far less than their market worth.
Winning flags is also a key. Players are renowned for taking pay cuts to stay together when you win flags. That doesn't happen when you don't quite get there. Also they got rid of Franklin which also must have helped. It would have been the same as us getting rid of Rooy when we were up the top. I certainly have no issues with their SC and have never heard anyone in the know suggest otherwise.
- Life Long Saint
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5509
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 12:54pm
- Has thanked: 62 times
- Been thanked: 480 times
- Contact:
Re: Big Boy McEvoy
And many of ours would be getting far over their market value...As we have to pay 95% of the cap.FQF wrote:Many of them must be getting far less than their market worth.
Not sure we have a team worthy of a $9.5M payroll.
Re: Big Boy McEvoy
Life Long Saint wrote:And many of ours would be getting far over their market value...As we have to pay 95% of the cap.FQF wrote:Many of them must be getting far less than their market worth.
Not sure we have a team worthy of a $9.5M payroll.
Jack and Armo would be loving that rule. However cant they now pay a bit less as long as they make it up the next year. The problem is we couldn't make it up the next year at the moment.
Re: Big Boy McEvoy
Hopefully most of our contracts from the future fest, and especially Jack's, were heavily front loaded so that in a couple of years we will have an enormous warchest with which to raid the comp. Money talks.plugger66 wrote:Life Long Saint wrote:And many of ours would be getting far over their market value...As we have to pay 95% of the cap.FQF wrote:Many of them must be getting far less than their market worth.
Not sure we have a team worthy of a $9.5M payroll.
Jack and Armo would be loving that rule. However cant they now pay a bit less as long as they make it up the next year. The problem is we couldn't make it up the next year at the moment.
- The Fireman
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 13243
- Joined: Mon 08 Mar 2004 11:54pm
- Has thanked: 644 times
- Been thanked: 1907 times
- The Fireman
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 13243
- Joined: Mon 08 Mar 2004 11:54pm
- Has thanked: 644 times
- Been thanked: 1907 times
Re: Big Boy McEvoy
![Wink :wink:](./images/smilies/icon_wink.gif)
loris wrote:And by his lean frame this season, he has been doing a fair bit of the latterThe Fireman wrote:he wears pee and poo
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4885
- Joined: Fri 05 Jun 2009 3:05pm
- Has thanked: 328 times
- Been thanked: 465 times
Re: Big Boy McEvoy
I posted about this a couple of years ago. A few years ago I coached Mark Evan's daughter in netball in a local comp out our way. (He's a ripper bloke actually) Anyway during the Presentation night, as you can imagine not a lot of guys around to talk to. It was the same night as the Freo/cats 1st semi final, Freo playing in their first final series under Ross Lyon. We were sitting together watching the game on his mobile phone and got talking about footy. He was remarkably candid with me about a lot of things to do with the Hawks. He disclosed that only two players at the hawks were on over $500k. One obviously being Buddy and the other being Hodge. He mentioned that Mitchell was very close, possibly just over. The point was, that guys like Lewis, Roughead Rioli etc were on b/w 300-400k. He claimed it simply couldn't work if they were all on big money, as the minnows coming through would simply leave. He then asked me what I thought BJ was worth (it was when BJ was looking at leaving, and eventually did leave) I told him I thought maybe $500k. He told me that he would love to have him at the hawks, and then told me what he believed he would get paid if he did got to the hawks. Lets just say the in his opinion the bombers were paying way over the odds.plugger66 wrote:FQF wrote:Can't believe Hawthorn fits all its players under the salary cap.Saint wagga wrote:Can't believe Mcevoy is playing so effectively up forward! He handly ever showed any attacking prowess for us, was far better as a defensive ruckman floating back into space and chopping off forward 50 entries - I seriously didn't think he had the attributes to be a ruck who can go forward...it should give us hope that with patience and optimism, our young, developing, did I say young rucks can also learn to be better up forward. Hopefully this coincides/adds to our improvement as a side.
Its called great management. Something we couldn't do when we were a chance.
Now I don't post this to big note, to embarrass Mark Evans, or to even ridicule the saints or the bombers. Just to show the difference a consistently successful club views good footballers but also how they view team success. Bottom line is, P66 is spot on with his comment imo.
- The Fireman
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 13243
- Joined: Mon 08 Mar 2004 11:54pm
- Has thanked: 644 times
- Been thanked: 1907 times
Re: Big Boy McEvoy
Enlightening post Moods but with respect, P66"s comment is far from an epiphany as far as Saints fans are concerned. We have suffered poor management over the journey but then again so have other clubs.....we live in hope that we'll get it right. We need to learn from the clubs that have. If only we had the experts here on the forums putting their hands up at the AGM's , our prospects would be tenfold.Moods wrote:I posted about this a couple of years ago. A few years ago I coached Mark Evan's daughter in netball in a local comp out our way. (He's a ripper bloke actually) Anyway during the Presentation night, as you can imagine not a lot of guys around to talk to. It was the same night as the Freo/cats 1st semi final, Freo playing in their first final series under Ross Lyon. We were sitting together watching the game on his mobile phone and got talking about footy. He was remarkably candid with me about a lot of things to do with the Hawks. He disclosed that only two players at the hawks were on over $500k. One obviously being Buddy and the other being Hodge. He mentioned that Mitchell was very close, possibly just over. The point was, that guys like Lewis, Roughead Rioli etc were on b/w 300-400k. He claimed it simply couldn't work if they were all on big money, as the minnows coming through would simply leave. He then asked me what I thought BJ was worth (it was when BJ was looking at leaving, and eventually did leave) I told him I thought maybe $500k. He told me that he would love to have him at the hawks, and then told me what he believed he would get paid if he did got to the hawks. Lets just say the in his opinion the bombers were paying way over the odds.plugger66 wrote:FQF wrote:Can't believe Hawthorn fits all its players under the salary cap.Saint wagga wrote:Can't believe Mcevoy is playing so effectively up forward! He handly ever showed any attacking prowess for us, was far better as a defensive ruckman floating back into space and chopping off forward 50 entries - I seriously didn't think he had the attributes to be a ruck who can go forward...it should give us hope that with patience and optimism, our young, developing, did I say young rucks can also learn to be better up forward. Hopefully this coincides/adds to our improvement as a side.
Its called great management. Something we couldn't do when we were a chance.
Now I don't post this to big note, to embarrass Mark Evans, or to even ridicule the saints or the bombers. Just to show the difference a consistently successful club views good footballers but also how they view team success. Bottom line is, P66 is spot on with his comment imo.
![Wink ;)](./images/smilies/icon_wink.gif)
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23010
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 3:53pm
- Has thanked: 8904 times
- Been thanked: 3883 times
Re: Big Boy McEvoy
Gee, I would be prepared to bet that the Hawks players would be far from impressed to learn that some loose lipped fool from their club was prepared to discuss with an opposition supporter, details of their finances and that said opposition supporter wasMoods wrote:I posted about this a couple of years ago. A few years ago I coached Mark Evan's daughter in netball in a local comp out our way. (He's a ripper bloke actually) Anyway during the Presentation night, as you can imagine not a lot of guys around to talk to. It was the same night as the Freo/cats 1st semi final, Freo playing in their first final series under Ross Lyon. We were sitting together watching the game on his mobile phone and got talking about footy. He was remarkably candid with me about a lot of things to do with the Hawks. He disclosed that only two players at the hawks were on over $500k. One obviously being Buddy and the other being Hodge. He mentioned that Mitchell was very close, possibly just over. The point was, that guys like Lewis, Roughead Rioli etc were on b/w 300-400k. He claimed it simply couldn't work if they were all on big money, as the minnows coming through would simply leave. He then asked me what I thought BJ was worth (it was when BJ was looking at leaving, and eventually did leave) I told him I thought maybe $500k. He told me that he would love to have him at the hawks, and then told me what he believed he would get paid if he did got to the hawks. Lets just say the in his opinion the bombers were paying way over the odds.plugger66 wrote:FQF wrote:Can't believe Hawthorn fits all its players under the salary cap.Saint wagga wrote:Can't believe Mcevoy is playing so effectively up forward! He handly ever showed any attacking prowess for us, was far better as a defensive ruckman floating back into space and chopping off forward 50 entries - I seriously didn't think he had the attributes to be a ruck who can go forward...it should give us hope that with patience and optimism, our young, developing, did I say young rucks can also learn to be better up forward. Hopefully this coincides/adds to our improvement as a side.
Its called great management. Something we couldn't do when we were a chance.
Now I don't post this to big note, to embarrass Mark Evans, or to even ridicule the saints or the bombers. Just to show the difference a consistently successful club views good footballers but also how they view team success. Bottom line is, P66 is spot on with his comment imo.
prepared to disclose said fool's mutterings to the whole world via an opposition teams supporters forum.
Re: Big Boy McEvoy
Very interesting. The big question is, how did Hawthorn manage to retain all these players (aside for Buddy) when they were being significantly underpaid? Especially prior to their premierships in the last 2 years?Moods wrote:I posted about this a couple of years ago. A few years ago I coached Mark Evan's daughter in netball in a local comp out our way. (He's a ripper bloke actually) Anyway during the Presentation night, as you can imagine not a lot of guys around to talk to. It was the same night as the Freo/cats 1st semi final, Freo playing in their first final series under Ross Lyon. We were sitting together watching the game on his mobile phone and got talking about footy. He was remarkably candid with me about a lot of things to do with the Hawks. He disclosed that only two players at the hawks were on over $500k. One obviously being Buddy and the other being Hodge. He mentioned that Mitchell was very close, possibly just over. The point was, that guys like Lewis, Roughead Rioli etc were on b/w 300-400k. He claimed it simply couldn't work if they were all on big money, as the minnows coming through would simply leave. He then asked me what I thought BJ was worth (it was when BJ was looking at leaving, and eventually did leave) I told him I thought maybe $500k. He told me that he would love to have him at the hawks, and then told me what he believed he would get paid if he did got to the hawks. Lets just say the in his opinion the bombers were paying way over the odds.plugger66 wrote:FQF wrote:Can't believe Hawthorn fits all its players under the salary cap.Saint wagga wrote:Can't believe Mcevoy is playing so effectively up forward! He handly ever showed any attacking prowess for us, was far better as a defensive ruckman floating back into space and chopping off forward 50 entries - I seriously didn't think he had the attributes to be a ruck who can go forward...it should give us hope that with patience and optimism, our young, developing, did I say young rucks can also learn to be better up forward. Hopefully this coincides/adds to our improvement as a side.
Its called great management. Something we couldn't do when we were a chance.
Now I don't post this to big note, to embarrass Mark Evans, or to even ridicule the saints or the bombers. Just to show the difference a consistently successful club views good footballers but also how they view team success. Bottom line is, P66 is spot on with his comment imo.
-
- SS Hall of Fame
- Posts: 2131
- Joined: Fri 22 Jul 2005 9:27am
- Location: Rockville
- Has thanked: 567 times
- Been thanked: 178 times
Re: Big Boy McEvoy
It was similar at Geelong. Nobody was one more than $600k a year until G Ablett jnr got a pay rise. And even that had to get the approval of the leadership group.
We went the other way of paying whatever it took to keep out 'stars' togetherand the rest of the list had to fight for what was left over.
We went the other way of paying whatever it took to keep out 'stars' togetherand the rest of the list had to fight for what was left over.
Opinions are like arseholes, everybody's got one.
Re: Big Boy McEvoy
FQF wrote:Very interesting. The big question is, how did Hawthorn manage to retain all these players (aside for Buddy) when they were being significantly underpaid? Especially prior to their premierships in the last 2 years?Moods wrote:I posted about this a couple of years ago. A few years ago I coached Mark Evan's daughter in netball in a local comp out our way. (He's a ripper bloke actually) Anyway during the Presentation night, as you can imagine not a lot of guys around to talk to. It was the same night as the Freo/cats 1st semi final, Freo playing in their first final series under Ross Lyon. We were sitting together watching the game on his mobile phone and got talking about footy. He was remarkably candid with me about a lot of things to do with the Hawks. He disclosed that only two players at the hawks were on over $500k. One obviously being Buddy and the other being Hodge. He mentioned that Mitchell was very close, possibly just over. The point was, that guys like Lewis, Roughead Rioli etc were on b/w 300-400k. He claimed it simply couldn't work if they were all on big money, as the minnows coming through would simply leave. He then asked me what I thought BJ was worth (it was when BJ was looking at leaving, and eventually did leave) I told him I thought maybe $500k. He told me that he would love to have him at the hawks, and then told me what he believed he would get paid if he did got to the hawks. Lets just say the in his opinion the bombers were paying way over the odds.plugger66 wrote:FQF wrote:Can't believe Hawthorn fits all its players under the salary cap.Saint wagga wrote:Can't believe Mcevoy is playing so effectively up forward! He handly ever showed any attacking prowess for us, was far better as a defensive ruckman floating back into space and chopping off forward 50 entries - I seriously didn't think he had the attributes to be a ruck who can go forward...it should give us hope that with patience and optimism, our young, developing, did I say young rucks can also learn to be better up forward. Hopefully this coincides/adds to our improvement as a side.
Its called great management. Something we couldn't do when we were a chance.
Now I don't post this to big note, to embarrass Mark Evans, or to even ridicule the saints or the bombers. Just to show the difference a consistently successful club views good footballers but also how they view team success. Bottom line is, P66 is spot on with his comment imo.
They won one in 2008. There would still be a few of those playing which again helps.
-
- SS Hall of Fame
- Posts: 2131
- Joined: Fri 22 Jul 2005 9:27am
- Location: Rockville
- Has thanked: 567 times
- Been thanked: 178 times
Re: Big Boy McEvoy
The key point is that all the top players agree to accept less in order to stay together. I remember Pelchan saying at one point that we needed to get the relativities (if there is such a word) of our salary cap in order because it was out of wack with how the other top clubs went about it.
Opinions are like arseholes, everybody's got one.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4885
- Joined: Fri 05 Jun 2009 3:05pm
- Has thanked: 328 times
- Been thanked: 465 times
Re: Big Boy McEvoy
Yes. You're right. All highly confidential stuff. Pretty sure no-one on here would have guessed that Buddy was on more than $500k.saynta wrote:Gee, I would be prepared to bet that the Hawks players would be far from impressed to learn that some loose lipped fool from their club was prepared to discuss with an opposition supporter, details of their finances and that said opposition supporter wasMoods wrote:I posted about this a couple of years ago. A few years ago I coached Mark Evan's daughter in netball in a local comp out our way. (He's a ripper bloke actually) Anyway during the Presentation night, as you can imagine not a lot of guys around to talk to. It was the same night as the Freo/cats 1st semi final, Freo playing in their first final series under Ross Lyon. We were sitting together watching the game on his mobile phone and got talking about footy. He was remarkably candid with me about a lot of things to do with the Hawks. He disclosed that only two players at the hawks were on over $500k. One obviously being Buddy and the other being Hodge. He mentioned that Mitchell was very close, possibly just over. The point was, that guys like Lewis, Roughead Rioli etc were on b/w 300-400k. He claimed it simply couldn't work if they were all on big money, as the minnows coming through would simply leave. He then asked me what I thought BJ was worth (it was when BJ was looking at leaving, and eventually did leave) I told him I thought maybe $500k. He told me that he would love to have him at the hawks, and then told me what he believed he would get paid if he did got to the hawks. Lets just say the in his opinion the bombers were paying way over the odds.plugger66 wrote:FQF wrote:Can't believe Hawthorn fits all its players under the salary cap.Saint wagga wrote:Can't believe Mcevoy is playing so effectively up forward! He handly ever showed any attacking prowess for us, was far better as a defensive ruckman floating back into space and chopping off forward 50 entries - I seriously didn't think he had the attributes to be a ruck who can go forward...it should give us hope that with patience and optimism, our young, developing, did I say young rucks can also learn to be better up forward. Hopefully this coincides/adds to our improvement as a side.
Its called great management. Something we couldn't do when we were a chance.
Now I don't post this to big note, to embarrass Mark Evans, or to even ridicule the saints or the bombers. Just to show the difference a consistently successful club views good footballers but also how they view team success. Bottom line is, P66 is spot on with his comment imo.
prepared to disclose said fool's mutterings to the whole world via an opposition teams supporters forum.
![Rolling Eyes :roll:](./images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif)
You need to stop being so sensitive. So I had a go at you on another thread. As I said on that thread to you. Grow up!