Howard the steal of the trade period
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 6072
- Joined: Sat 12 Sep 2015 1:03pm
- Has thanked: 336 times
- Been thanked: 1557 times
Re: Howard the steal of the trade period
It's just good to know that we are genuine players in trying to trade and asking questions far and wide. It feels good to have obtained 'the steal of the trade period'. Despite the sour reaction from Port towards Howard in.tbe last few games and a few on here because of it.
I admit I was just speculating and have no inside information on this matter. That's the 'perhap's' part.
I admit I was just speculating and have no inside information on this matter. That's the 'perhap's' part.
-
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 3266
- Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2007 4:05pm
- Been thanked: 390 times
Re: Howard the steal of the trade period
In the SANFL “the rivalry” is between Norwood and Port Adelaide
The CEO of Port Adelaide is a Norwood legend, Keith Thomas, who also played a season in the VFL (Fitzroy from memory) and in the twilight of his career which extended to over 300 games with Norwood
Those from Alberton have a word or two to say on Keith as well
But the facts are that Keith was blind sided in this by another Norwood legend who is now in the employ of St Kilda
But try telling that to those from the Wharves
All good fun!
The CEO of Port Adelaide is a Norwood legend, Keith Thomas, who also played a season in the VFL (Fitzroy from memory) and in the twilight of his career which extended to over 300 games with Norwood
Those from Alberton have a word or two to say on Keith as well
But the facts are that Keith was blind sided in this by another Norwood legend who is now in the employ of St Kilda
But try telling that to those from the Wharves
All good fun!
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1789
- Joined: Thu 10 Oct 2019 12:19pm
- Has thanked: 258 times
- Been thanked: 211 times
Re: Howard the steal of the trade period
Spot on. And that is my curiosity about the event, a zeroing even, but not about the club's decision to recruit him, but how he went from rooster to feather duster in remarkbly quick time after round 9 and his captaincy in that round. It's intersting to me that he was paraded by the head coach as an emerging leader, yet shortly after allegedly wanted out because the coach wasnt playing him in his preferred position. Something doesn't add up, you don't get made captain of a club if you have a Carslile attitude. Not unless the coach and club devalue the position of Captain at a club enough to play games. Doubt that happened.Joffa Burns wrote: ↑Thu 30 Jan 2020 8:32am I have no clue but I find it difficult to comprehend the logic around devaluation of a playing asset.
Common sense would assume a player showing form and leadership would be nurtured not marginalized whilst fulfilling the role where he is required by the team.
What ever happened it is now in the past and we have a potential 10 year tall defender if he can fulfill his early promise. Plenty have moved at his stage in the career and gone to great heights such as Mal Michael.
The kid has size and speed, whether he will be a player or not is yet to be determined, but he is not A grade overnight just because we recruited him.
There is a reason he finished the season in the SANFL but that is behind him now.
Time will tell if he makes the grade, and if he does become a player then his swift departure may reveal a simmering issue at Port.
However if he he is a failed recruit then his swift departure may reveal we rushed in hastily.
Last edited by Secret Kiel on Thu 30 Jan 2020 8:13pm, edited 2 times in total.
-
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 3266
- Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2007 4:05pm
- Been thanked: 390 times
Re: Howard the steal of the trade period
Just to add, after being de-listed by North Melbourne, David Trotter went to Norwood in 2008, playing with James Gallagher who played over 200 games at Norwood - following on a Grand father and other family members
I understand that Trotter is Howard’s Manager
I understand that Trotter is Howard’s Manager
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 462
- Joined: Sun 18 Aug 2019 12:53pm
- Has thanked: 10 times
- Been thanked: 49 times
Re: Howard the steal of the trade period
Not at all. I am very excited at the prospect of having these 2 guys in our backline. This frees up Carlisle to play that loose interceptor role that he excels at.SaintPav wrote: ↑Thu 30 Jan 2020 1:12pmIs that a problem for you, is it?Nick_BlueNRG wrote: ↑Thu 30 Jan 2020 10:11amAustin and Howard will be our 2 "A" grade KP defenders for the next 10 years. Ironically both recruited from Port Adelaide.Joffa Burns wrote: ↑Thu 30 Jan 2020 8:32am I have no clue but I find it difficult to comprehend the logic around devaluation of a playing asset.
Common sense would assume a player showing form and leadership would be nurtured not marginalized whilst fulfilling the role where he is required by the team.
What ever happened it is now in the past and we have a potential 10 year tall defender if he can fulfill his early promise. Plenty have moved at his stage in the career and gone to great heights such as Mal Michael.
The kid has size and speed, whether he will be a player or not is yet to be determined, but he is not A grade overnight just because we recruited him.
There is a reason he finished the season in the SANFL but that is behind him now.
(M)ake (S)t Kilda (S)elf (S)ustainable
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1013
- Joined: Tue 20 Oct 2015 5:52pm
- Has thanked: 170 times
- Been thanked: 234 times
Re: Howard the steal of the trade period
Still pinching myself that we were able to secure Dougal Howard......will be a beauty!
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1789
- Joined: Thu 10 Oct 2019 12:19pm
- Has thanked: 258 times
- Been thanked: 211 times
Re: Howard the steal of the trade period
Your 3rd and 4th sentence is more plausible than our club started the ball rolling on a trade early on in the season. However if your theory is remotely true then that is remarkably immature on Port's behalf. But I'm not convinced that the trade was due to engaging a trade early on in the season. The speculation in your 3rd and 4th sentence seems too petty and childish and surely elite clubs don't kick own-goals that recklessly.
We swooped late in the season and capitalised on a dramatic and sudden falling out between player and club towards the end of the season.
- SaintPav
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 18837
- Joined: Wed 16 Jun 2010 9:24pm
- Location: Alma Road
- Has thanked: 1568 times
- Been thanked: 1962 times
Re: Howard the steal of the trade period
Alrighty then, Kells.Nick_BlueNRG wrote: ↑Thu 30 Jan 2020 11:23pmNot at all. I am very excited at the prospect of having these 2 guys in our backline. This frees up Carlisle to play that loose interceptor role that he excels at.SaintPav wrote: ↑Thu 30 Jan 2020 1:12pmIs that a problem for you, is it?Nick_BlueNRG wrote: ↑Thu 30 Jan 2020 10:11amAustin and Howard will be our 2 "A" grade KP defenders for the next 10 years. Ironically both recruited from Port Adelaide.Joffa Burns wrote: ↑Thu 30 Jan 2020 8:32am I have no clue but I find it difficult to comprehend the logic around devaluation of a playing asset.
Common sense would assume a player showing form and leadership would be nurtured not marginalized whilst fulfilling the role where he is required by the team.
What ever happened it is now in the past and we have a potential 10 year tall defender if he can fulfill his early promise. Plenty have moved at his stage in the career and gone to great heights such as Mal Michael.
The kid has size and speed, whether he will be a player or not is yet to be determined, but he is not A grade overnight just because we recruited him.
There is a reason he finished the season in the SANFL but that is behind him now.
I accept your explanation.
Holder of unacceptable views and other thought crimes.
- Devilhead
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 8375
- Joined: Mon 08 Mar 2004 11:56pm
- Has thanked: 137 times
- Been thanked: 1169 times
Re: Howard the steal of the trade period
Saintmatt mentioned earlier in the thread that we were speaking with his manager early on in 2019 - Port absolutely very likely did not know thisSecret Kiel wrote: ↑Fri 31 Jan 2020 7:39amYour 3rd and 4th sentence is more plausible than our club started the ball rolling on a trade early on in the season. However if your theory is remotely true then that is remarkably immature on Port's behalf. But I'm not convinced that the trade was due to engaging a trade early on in the season. The speculation in your 3rd and 4th sentence seems too petty and childish and surely elite clubs don't kick own-goals that recklessly.
We swooped late in the season and capitalised on a dramatic and sudden falling out between player and club towards the end of the season.
I would say the sudden falling out was when Port found out that Howard or at least his manager had been talking with us
The fact that they were playing him all over the place helped justify his decision to want out of his contract
Port could have held him to his contract but it could be that the relationship between him and Hinkley was irrepairable
Seems like Port is not a very happy place currently - aging stars, a few bad trade ins, a coach that missed his window, 1 final in last 5 years, player scandals (Watts & SPP)
The Devil makes work for idle hands!!!
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1789
- Joined: Thu 10 Oct 2019 12:19pm
- Has thanked: 258 times
- Been thanked: 211 times
Re: Howard the steal of the trade period
Couple of points, firstly, how would a footy fan know if the club was speaking with his manager...full stop, let alone early in the season. So let's just put that part of the conversation in its right compartment.Devilhead wrote: ↑Fri 31 Jan 2020 8:43pmSaintmatt mentioned earlier in the thread that we were speaking with his manager early on in 2019 - Port absolutely very likely did not know thisSecret Kiel wrote: ↑Fri 31 Jan 2020 7:39amYour 3rd and 4th sentence is more plausible than our club started the ball rolling on a trade early on in the season. However if your theory is remotely true then that is remarkably immature on Port's behalf. But I'm not convinced that the trade was due to engaging a trade early on in the season. The speculation in your 3rd and 4th sentence seems too petty and childish and surely elite clubs don't kick own-goals that recklessly.
We swooped late in the season and capitalised on a dramatic and sudden falling out between player and club towards the end of the season.
I would say the sudden falling out was when Port found out that Howard or at least his manager had been talking with us
The fact that they were playing him all over the place helped justify his decision to want out of his contract
Port could have held him to his contract but it could be that the relationship between him and Hinkley was irrepairable
Seems like Port is not a very happy place currently - aging stars, a few bad trade ins, a coach that missed his window, 1 final in last 5 years, player scandals (Watts & SPP)
Secondly, if Howard spat the dummy ala Carslile style because the coach wouldn't pander to him then how the hell can he be seen as a leader.
If he's that precious then he's anything but a leader. Something doesn't add up on that score.
Happy we recruited him but he's more potential than steal at this stage of the year.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23010
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 3:53pm
- Has thanked: 8904 times
- Been thanked: 3883 times
Re: Howard the steal of the trade period
Hey guys bulls*** can never take the place of facts. True facts that is. Backed up by evidence, which I might add, is absent here.
- Devilhead
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 8375
- Joined: Mon 08 Mar 2004 11:56pm
- Has thanked: 137 times
- Been thanked: 1169 times
Re: Howard the steal of the trade period
Saintmatt and TotheTop will be pleased to know that they are in your bulls*** compartmentSecret Kiel wrote: ↑Fri 31 Jan 2020 9:01pmCouple of points, firstly, how would a footy fan know if the club was speaking with his manager...full stop, let alone early in the season. So let's just put that part of the conversation in its right compartment.Devilhead wrote: ↑Fri 31 Jan 2020 8:43pmSaintmatt mentioned earlier in the thread that we were speaking with his manager early on in 2019 - Port absolutely very likely did not know thisSecret Kiel wrote: ↑Fri 31 Jan 2020 7:39amYour 3rd and 4th sentence is more plausible than our club started the ball rolling on a trade early on in the season. However if your theory is remotely true then that is remarkably immature on Port's behalf. But I'm not convinced that the trade was due to engaging a trade early on in the season. The speculation in your 3rd and 4th sentence seems too petty and childish and surely elite clubs don't kick own-goals that recklessly.
We swooped late in the season and capitalised on a dramatic and sudden falling out between player and club towards the end of the season.
I would say the sudden falling out was when Port found out that Howard or at least his manager had been talking with us
The fact that they were playing him all over the place helped justify his decision to want out of his contract
Port could have held him to his contract but it could be that the relationship between him and Hinkley was irrepairable
Seems like Port is not a very happy place currently - aging stars, a few bad trade ins, a coach that missed his window, 1 final in last 5 years, player scandals (Watts & SPP)
Secondly, if Howard spat the dummy ala Carslile style because the coach wouldn't pander to him then how the hell can he be seen as a leader.
If he's that precious then he's anything but a leader. Something doesn't add up on that score.
Happy we recruited him but he's more potential than steal at this stage of the year.
![Rolling Eyes :roll:](./images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif)
The Devil makes work for idle hands!!!
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 6072
- Joined: Sat 12 Sep 2015 1:03pm
- Has thanked: 336 times
- Been thanked: 1557 times
Re: Howard the steal of the trade period
He was dropped. After kicking a quarter of their goals in a tight loss to GWS. In that game he may have won the game at either end.Secret Kiel wrote: ↑Fri 31 Jan 2020 9:01pmCouple of points, firstly, how would a footy fan know if the club was speaking with his manager...full stop, let alone early in the season. So let's just put that part of the conversation in its right compartment.Devilhead wrote: ↑Fri 31 Jan 2020 8:43pmSaintmatt mentioned earlier in the thread that we were speaking with his manager early on in 2019 - Port absolutely very likely did not know thisSecret Kiel wrote: ↑Fri 31 Jan 2020 7:39amYour 3rd and 4th sentence is more plausible than our club started the ball rolling on a trade early on in the season. However if your theory is remotely true then that is remarkably immature on Port's behalf. But I'm not convinced that the trade was due to engaging a trade early on in the season. The speculation in your 3rd and 4th sentence seems too petty and childish and surely elite clubs don't kick own-goals that recklessly.
We swooped late in the season and capitalised on a dramatic and sudden falling out between player and club towards the end of the season.
I would say the sudden falling out was when Port found out that Howard or at least his manager had been talking with us
The fact that they were playing him all over the place helped justify his decision to want out of his contract
Port could have held him to his contract but it could be that the relationship between him and Hinkley was irrepairable
Seems like Port is not a very happy place currently - aging stars, a few bad trade ins, a coach that missed his window, 1 final in last 5 years, player scandals (Watts & SPP)
Secondly, if Howard spat the dummy ala Carslile style because the coach wouldn't pander to him then how the hell can he be seen as a leader.
If he's that precious then he's anything but a leader. Something doesn't add up on that score.
Happy we recruited him but he's more potential than steal at this stage of the year.
It has been made public knowledge that he prefers the backline, it was also made public that Hinkley told him he would be playing forward and in the ruck after making him Captain because of his outstanding leadership and potential after 30 odd games in which he predominantly played back.. Are you really this niave?
Gallagher mentioned that his mamager didnt agree to terms til well into the trade period and the deal got done, so no dummy spits and an enormous amount of press on how Port made a bad decision. It looks like Howard made a business decision.
What qualifies your opinion? Are you a super fan?
- skeptic
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 16888
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 7:10pm
- Has thanked: 3580 times
- Been thanked: 2848 times
Re: Howard the steal of the trade period
I believe the answer to your question is contrarian’ismCQ SAINT wrote: ↑Sat 01 Feb 2020 9:27pmHe was dropped. After kicking a quarter of their goals in a tight loss to GWS. In that game he may have won the game at either end.Secret Kiel wrote: ↑Fri 31 Jan 2020 9:01pmCouple of points, firstly, how would a footy fan know if the club was speaking with his manager...full stop, let alone early in the season. So let's just put that part of the conversation in its right compartment.Devilhead wrote: ↑Fri 31 Jan 2020 8:43pmSaintmatt mentioned earlier in the thread that we were speaking with his manager early on in 2019 - Port absolutely very likely did not know thisSecret Kiel wrote: ↑Fri 31 Jan 2020 7:39amYour 3rd and 4th sentence is more plausible than our club started the ball rolling on a trade early on in the season. However if your theory is remotely true then that is remarkably immature on Port's behalf. But I'm not convinced that the trade was due to engaging a trade early on in the season. The speculation in your 3rd and 4th sentence seems too petty and childish and surely elite clubs don't kick own-goals that recklessly.
We swooped late in the season and capitalised on a dramatic and sudden falling out between player and club towards the end of the season.
I would say the sudden falling out was when Port found out that Howard or at least his manager had been talking with us
The fact that they were playing him all over the place helped justify his decision to want out of his contract
Port could have held him to his contract but it could be that the relationship between him and Hinkley was irrepairable
Seems like Port is not a very happy place currently - aging stars, a few bad trade ins, a coach that missed his window, 1 final in last 5 years, player scandals (Watts & SPP)
Secondly, if Howard spat the dummy ala Carslile style because the coach wouldn't pander to him then how the hell can he be seen as a leader.
If he's that precious then he's anything but a leader. Something doesn't add up on that score.
Happy we recruited him but he's more potential than steal at this stage of the year.
It has been made public knowledge that he prefers the backline, it was also made public that Hinkley told him he would be playing forward and in the ruck after making him Captain because of his outstanding leadership and potential after 30 odd games in which he predominantly played back.. Are you really this niave?
Gallagher mentioned that his mamager didnt agree to terms til well into the trade period and the deal got done, so no dummy spits and an enormous amount of press on how Port made a bad decision. It looks like Howard made a business decision.
What qualifies your opinion? Are you a super fan?
- skeptic
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 16888
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 7:10pm
- Has thanked: 3580 times
- Been thanked: 2848 times
Re: Howard the steal of the trade period
DeletedCQ SAINT wrote: ↑Sat 01 Feb 2020 9:27pmHe was dropped. After kicking a quarter of their goals in a tight loss to GWS. In that game he may have won the game at either end.Secret Kiel wrote: ↑Fri 31 Jan 2020 9:01pmCouple of points, firstly, how would a footy fan know if the club was speaking with his manager...full stop, let alone early in the season. So let's just put that part of the conversation in its right compartment.Devilhead wrote: ↑Fri 31 Jan 2020 8:43pmSaintmatt mentioned earlier in the thread that we were speaking with his manager early on in 2019 - Port absolutely very likely did not know thisSecret Kiel wrote: ↑Fri 31 Jan 2020 7:39amYour 3rd and 4th sentence is more plausible than our club started the ball rolling on a trade early on in the season. However if your theory is remotely true then that is remarkably immature on Port's behalf. But I'm not convinced that the trade was due to engaging a trade early on in the season. The speculation in your 3rd and 4th sentence seems too petty and childish and surely elite clubs don't kick own-goals that recklessly.
We swooped late in the season and capitalised on a dramatic and sudden falling out between player and club towards the end of the season.
I would say the sudden falling out was when Port found out that Howard or at least his manager had been talking with us
The fact that they were playing him all over the place helped justify his decision to want out of his contract
Port could have held him to his contract but it could be that the relationship between him and Hinkley was irrepairable
Seems like Port is not a very happy place currently - aging stars, a few bad trade ins, a coach that missed his window, 1 final in last 5 years, player scandals (Watts & SPP)
Secondly, if Howard spat the dummy ala Carslile style because the coach wouldn't pander to him then how the hell can he be seen as a leader.
If he's that precious then he's anything but a leader. Something doesn't add up on that score.
Happy we recruited him but he's more potential than steal at this stage of the year.
It has been made public knowledge that he prefers the backline, it was also made public that Hinkley told him he would be playing forward and in the ruck after making him Captain because of his outstanding leadership and potential after 30 odd games in which he predominantly played back.. Are you really this niave?
Gallagher mentioned that his mamager didnt agree to terms til well into the trade period and the deal got done, so no dummy spits and an enormous amount of press on how Port made a bad decision. It looks like Howard made a business decision.
What qualifies your opinion? Are you a super fan?
Last edited by skeptic on Sat 01 Feb 2020 10:16pm, edited 1 time in total.
- skeptic
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 16888
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 7:10pm
- Has thanked: 3580 times
- Been thanked: 2848 times
Re: Howard the steal of the trade period
DeletedCQ SAINT wrote: ↑Sat 01 Feb 2020 9:27pmHe was dropped. After kicking a quarter of their goals in a tight loss to GWS. In that game he may have won the game at either end.Secret Kiel wrote: ↑Fri 31 Jan 2020 9:01pmCouple of points, firstly, how would a footy fan know if the club was speaking with his manager...full stop, let alone early in the season. So let's just put that part of the conversation in its right compartment.Devilhead wrote: ↑Fri 31 Jan 2020 8:43pmSaintmatt mentioned earlier in the thread that we were speaking with his manager early on in 2019 - Port absolutely very likely did not know thisSecret Kiel wrote: ↑Fri 31 Jan 2020 7:39amYour 3rd and 4th sentence is more plausible than our club started the ball rolling on a trade early on in the season. However if your theory is remotely true then that is remarkably immature on Port's behalf. But I'm not convinced that the trade was due to engaging a trade early on in the season. The speculation in your 3rd and 4th sentence seems too petty and childish and surely elite clubs don't kick own-goals that recklessly.
We swooped late in the season and capitalised on a dramatic and sudden falling out between player and club towards the end of the season.
I would say the sudden falling out was when Port found out that Howard or at least his manager had been talking with us
The fact that they were playing him all over the place helped justify his decision to want out of his contract
Port could have held him to his contract but it could be that the relationship between him and Hinkley was irrepairable
Seems like Port is not a very happy place currently - aging stars, a few bad trade ins, a coach that missed his window, 1 final in last 5 years, player scandals (Watts & SPP)
Secondly, if Howard spat the dummy ala Carslile style because the coach wouldn't pander to him then how the hell can he be seen as a leader.
If he's that precious then he's anything but a leader. Something doesn't add up on that score.
Happy we recruited him but he's more potential than steal at this stage of the year.
It has been made public knowledge that he prefers the backline, it was also made public that Hinkley told him he would be playing forward and in the ruck after making him Captain because of his outstanding leadership and potential after 30 odd games in which he predominantly played back.. Are you really this niave?
Gallagher mentioned that his mamager didnt agree to terms til well into the trade period and the deal got done, so no dummy spits and an enormous amount of press on how Port made a bad decision. It looks like Howard made a business decision.
What qualifies your opinion? Are you a super fan?
Last edited by skeptic on Sat 01 Feb 2020 10:16pm, edited 2 times in total.
- skeptic
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 16888
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 7:10pm
- Has thanked: 3580 times
- Been thanked: 2848 times
Re: Howard the steal of the trade period
DeletedCQ SAINT wrote: ↑Sat 01 Feb 2020 9:27pmHe was dropped. After kicking a quarter of their goals in a tight loss to GWS. In that game he may have won the game at either end.Secret Kiel wrote: ↑Fri 31 Jan 2020 9:01pmCouple of points, firstly, how would a footy fan know if the club was speaking with his manager...full stop, let alone early in the season. So let's just put that part of the conversation in its right compartment.Devilhead wrote: ↑Fri 31 Jan 2020 8:43pmSaintmatt mentioned earlier in the thread that we were speaking with his manager early on in 2019 - Port absolutely very likely did not know thisSecret Kiel wrote: ↑Fri 31 Jan 2020 7:39amYour 3rd and 4th sentence is more plausible than our club started the ball rolling on a trade early on in the season. However if your theory is remotely true then that is remarkably immature on Port's behalf. But I'm not convinced that the trade was due to engaging a trade early on in the season. The speculation in your 3rd and 4th sentence seems too petty and childish and surely elite clubs don't kick own-goals that recklessly.
We swooped late in the season and capitalised on a dramatic and sudden falling out between player and club towards the end of the season.
I would say the sudden falling out was when Port found out that Howard or at least his manager had been talking with us
The fact that they were playing him all over the place helped justify his decision to want out of his contract
Port could have held him to his contract but it could be that the relationship between him and Hinkley was irrepairable
Seems like Port is not a very happy place currently - aging stars, a few bad trade ins, a coach that missed his window, 1 final in last 5 years, player scandals (Watts & SPP)
Secondly, if Howard spat the dummy ala Carslile style because the coach wouldn't pander to him then how the hell can he be seen as a leader.
If he's that precious then he's anything but a leader. Something doesn't add up on that score.
Happy we recruited him but he's more potential than steal at this stage of the year.
It has been made public knowledge that he prefers the backline, it was also made public that Hinkley told him he would be playing forward and in the ruck after making him Captain because of his outstanding leadership and potential after 30 odd games in which he predominantly played back.. Are you really this niave?
Gallagher mentioned that his mamager didnt agree to terms til well into the trade period and the deal got done, so no dummy spits and an enormous amount of press on how Port made a bad decision. It looks like Howard made a business decision.
What qualifies your opinion? Are you a super fan?
Last edited by skeptic on Sat 01 Feb 2020 10:15pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1789
- Joined: Thu 10 Oct 2019 12:19pm
- Has thanked: 258 times
- Been thanked: 211 times
Re: Howard the steal of the trade period
Free thinking alloud on the internet as opposed to swallowing line for line everything you read in the HS or watch on Fox Footy. Feel free to think.CQ SAINT wrote: ↑Sat 01 Feb 2020 9:27pmHe was dropped. After kicking a quarter of their goals in a tight loss to GWS. In that game he may have won the game at either end.Secret Kiel wrote: ↑Fri 31 Jan 2020 9:01pmCouple of points, firstly, how would a footy fan know if the club was speaking with his manager...full stop, let alone early in the season. So let's just put that part of the conversation in its right compartment.Devilhead wrote: ↑Fri 31 Jan 2020 8:43pmSaintmatt mentioned earlier in the thread that we were speaking with his manager early on in 2019 - Port absolutely very likely did not know thisSecret Kiel wrote: ↑Fri 31 Jan 2020 7:39amYour 3rd and 4th sentence is more plausible than our club started the ball rolling on a trade early on in the season. However if your theory is remotely true then that is remarkably immature on Port's behalf. But I'm not convinced that the trade was due to engaging a trade early on in the season. The speculation in your 3rd and 4th sentence seems too petty and childish and surely elite clubs don't kick own-goals that recklessly.
We swooped late in the season and capitalised on a dramatic and sudden falling out between player and club towards the end of the season.
I would say the sudden falling out was when Port found out that Howard or at least his manager had been talking with us
The fact that they were playing him all over the place helped justify his decision to want out of his contract
Port could have held him to his contract but it could be that the relationship between him and Hinkley was irrepairable
Seems like Port is not a very happy place currently - aging stars, a few bad trade ins, a coach that missed his window, 1 final in last 5 years, player scandals (Watts & SPP)
Secondly, if Howard spat the dummy ala Carslile style because the coach wouldn't pander to him then how the hell can he be seen as a leader.
If he's that precious then he's anything but a leader. Something doesn't add up on that score.
Happy we recruited him but he's more potential than steal at this stage of the year.
It has been made public knowledge that he prefers the backline, it was also made public that Hinkley told him he would be playing forward and in the ruck after making him Captain because of his outstanding leadership and potential after 30 odd games in which he predominantly played back.. Are you really this niave?
Gallagher mentioned that his mamager didnt agree to terms til well into the trade period and the deal got done, so no dummy spits and an enormous amount of press on how Port made a bad decision. It looks like Howard made a business decision.
What qualifies your opinion? Are you a super fan?
Hey just curious, does CQ stand for Central Queensland? If it does what part to you live in?
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 6072
- Joined: Sat 12 Sep 2015 1:03pm
- Has thanked: 336 times
- Been thanked: 1557 times
Re: Howard the steal of the trade period
I was in Rockhampton. Now I'm in Hervey Bay.Secret Kiel wrote: ↑Sun 02 Feb 2020 6:49amFree thinking alloud on the internet as opposed to swallowing line for line everything you read in the HS or watch on Fox Footy. Feel free to think.CQ SAINT wrote: ↑Sat 01 Feb 2020 9:27pmHe was dropped. After kicking a quarter of their goals in a tight loss to GWS. In that game he may have won the game at either end.Secret Kiel wrote: ↑Fri 31 Jan 2020 9:01pmCouple of points, firstly, how would a footy fan know if the club was speaking with his manager...full stop, let alone early in the season. So let's just put that part of the conversation in its right compartment.Devilhead wrote: ↑Fri 31 Jan 2020 8:43pmSaintmatt mentioned earlier in the thread that we were speaking with his manager early on in 2019 - Port absolutely very likely did not know thisSecret Kiel wrote: ↑Fri 31 Jan 2020 7:39amYour 3rd and 4th sentence is more plausible than our club started the ball rolling on a trade early on in the season. However if your theory is remotely true then that is remarkably immature on Port's behalf. But I'm not convinced that the trade was due to engaging a trade early on in the season. The speculation in your 3rd and 4th sentence seems too petty and childish and surely elite clubs don't kick own-goals that recklessly.
We swooped late in the season and capitalised on a dramatic and sudden falling out between player and club towards the end of the season.
I would say the sudden falling out was when Port found out that Howard or at least his manager had been talking with us
The fact that they were playing him all over the place helped justify his decision to want out of his contract
Port could have held him to his contract but it could be that the relationship between him and Hinkley was irrepairable
Seems like Port is not a very happy place currently - aging stars, a few bad trade ins, a coach that missed his window, 1 final in last 5 years, player scandals (Watts & SPP)
Secondly, if Howard spat the dummy ala Carslile style because the coach wouldn't pander to him then how the hell can he be seen as a leader.
If he's that precious then he's anything but a leader. Something doesn't add up on that score.
Happy we recruited him but he's more potential than steal at this stage of the year.
It has been made public knowledge that he prefers the backline, it was also made public that Hinkley told him he would be playing forward and in the ruck after making him Captain because of his outstanding leadership and potential after 30 odd games in which he predominantly played back.. Are you really this niave?
Gallagher mentioned that his mamager didnt agree to terms til well into the trade period and the deal got done, so no dummy spits and an enormous amount of press on how Port made a bad decision. It looks like Howard made a business decision.
What qualifies your opinion? Are you a super fan?
Hey just curious, does CQ stand for Central Queensland? If it does what part to you live in?
-
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 3266
- Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2007 4:05pm
- Been thanked: 390 times
Re: Howard the steal of the trade period
Whilst I believe Howard will line up at full back (maybe with Austin as the 3rd “tall” in the defensive 6 and Battle in the mid-field) I am of the belief that position is not an issue in Howard finding his way to St Kilda
Gallagher and Trotter were both instrumental - as former team mates - and Howard did not accept the offer Port Adelaide had on the table
St Kilda offered a longer term and more money - decision made
What happened on field from then happened
Port Adelaide were not amused and are spitting chips - still
They think we have “raided” them of 3 very good players - 2 long term prospects and Ryder still with something to offer
And they categorised Howard as a utility and the successor to Westhoff with his versatility - able to also line up on a wing or defensive flank noting his size
Hence spitting chips
All we have to do now is find a way to actually beat Port Adelaide which, unfortunately, has not been the case in a number of seasons
Fortunately Norwood usually have their measure!
Gallagher and Trotter were both instrumental - as former team mates - and Howard did not accept the offer Port Adelaide had on the table
St Kilda offered a longer term and more money - decision made
What happened on field from then happened
Port Adelaide were not amused and are spitting chips - still
They think we have “raided” them of 3 very good players - 2 long term prospects and Ryder still with something to offer
And they categorised Howard as a utility and the successor to Westhoff with his versatility - able to also line up on a wing or defensive flank noting his size
Hence spitting chips
All we have to do now is find a way to actually beat Port Adelaide which, unfortunately, has not been the case in a number of seasons
Fortunately Norwood usually have their measure!
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1789
- Joined: Thu 10 Oct 2019 12:19pm
- Has thanked: 258 times
- Been thanked: 211 times
Re: Howard the steal of the trade period
So you're claiming Howard had an offer on the table from the Saints before he accepted the Captaincy knowing he wasnt going to accept the Port offer and then leave the club anyway. I can see why chips were spat.To the top wrote: ↑Sun 02 Feb 2020 5:31pm Whilst I believe Howard will line up at full back (maybe with Austin as the 3rd “tall” in the defensive 6 and Battle in the mid-field) I am of the belief that position is not an issue in Howard finding his way to St Kilda
Gallagher and Trotter were both instrumental - as former team mates - and Howard did not accept the offer Port Adelaide had on the table
St Kilda offered a longer term and more money - decision made
What happened on field from then happened
Port Adelaide were not amused and are spitting chips - still
They think we have “raided” them of 3 very good players - 2 long term prospects and Ryder still with something to offer
And they categorised Howard as a utility and the successor to Westhoff with his versatility - able to also line up on a wing or defensive flank noting his size
Hence spitting chips
All we have to do now is find a way to actually beat Port Adelaide which, unfortunately, has not been the case in a number of seasons
Fortunately Norwood usually have their measure!
-
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 3266
- Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2007 4:05pm
- Been thanked: 390 times
Re: Howard the steal of the trade period
I normally do not respond to other contributors on this site - but where have I EVER mentioned Howard and his Captaincy of Port Adelaide?
And when have I EVER mentioned when Gallagher and Trotter met - and Howard was one of the subjects of that meeting?
Please do not misrepresent
And when have I EVER mentioned when Gallagher and Trotter met - and Howard was one of the subjects of that meeting?
Please do not misrepresent
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1789
- Joined: Thu 10 Oct 2019 12:19pm
- Has thanked: 258 times
- Been thanked: 211 times
Re: Howard the steal of the trade period
There was another poster in this thread claiming the deal was done early in the season. You've clearly missed a bit of the context derived from this thread.To the top wrote: ↑Sun 02 Feb 2020 5:56pm I normally do not respond to other contributors on this site - but where have I EVER mentioned Howard and his Captaincy of Port Adelaide?
And when have I EVER mentioned when Gallagher and Trotter met - and Howard was one of the subjects of that meeting?
Please do not misrepresent
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 6072
- Joined: Sat 12 Sep 2015 1:03pm
- Has thanked: 336 times
- Been thanked: 1557 times
Re: Howard the steal of the trade period
It's confusing for you isn't. It's ok, let me help [To the top] looks like that. [Saintmatt] looks like this. [Secret Kiel] that one is youSecret Kiel wrote: ↑Sun 02 Feb 2020 5:49pmSo you're claiming Howard had an offer on the table from the Saints before he accepted the Captaincy knowing he wasnt going to accept the Port offer and then leave the club anyway. I can see why chips were spat.To the top wrote: ↑Sun 02 Feb 2020 5:31pm Whilst I believe Howard will line up at full back (maybe with Austin as the 3rd “tall” in the defensive 6 and Battle in the mid-field) I am of the belief that position is not an issue in Howard finding his way to St Kilda
Gallagher and Trotter were both instrumental - as former team mates - and Howard did not accept the offer Port Adelaide had on the table
St Kilda offered a longer term and more money - decision made
What happened on field from then happened
Port Adelaide were not amused and are spitting chips - still
They think we have “raided” them of 3 very good players - 2 long term prospects and Ryder still with something to offer
And they categorised Howard as a utility and the successor to Westhoff with his versatility - able to also line up on a wing or defensive flank noting his size
Hence spitting chips
All we have to do now is find a way to actually beat Port Adelaide which, unfortunately, has not been the case in a number of seasons
Fortunately Norwood usually have their measure!
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1789
- Joined: Thu 10 Oct 2019 12:19pm
- Has thanked: 258 times
- Been thanked: 211 times
Re: Howard the steal of the trade period
Now you're being Nuffie.CQ SAINT wrote: ↑Sun 02 Feb 2020 6:21pmIt's confusing for you isn't. It's ok, let me help [To the top] looks like that. [Saintmatt] looks like this. [Secret Kiel] that one is youSecret Kiel wrote: ↑Sun 02 Feb 2020 5:49pmSo you're claiming Howard had an offer on the table from the Saints before he accepted the Captaincy knowing he wasnt going to accept the Port offer and then leave the club anyway. I can see why chips were spat.To the top wrote: ↑Sun 02 Feb 2020 5:31pm Whilst I believe Howard will line up at full back (maybe with Austin as the 3rd “tall” in the defensive 6 and Battle in the mid-field) I am of the belief that position is not an issue in Howard finding his way to St Kilda
Gallagher and Trotter were both instrumental - as former team mates - and Howard did not accept the offer Port Adelaide had on the table
St Kilda offered a longer term and more money - decision made
What happened on field from then happened
Port Adelaide were not amused and are spitting chips - still
They think we have “raided” them of 3 very good players - 2 long term prospects and Ryder still with something to offer
And they categorised Howard as a utility and the successor to Westhoff with his versatility - able to also line up on a wing or defensive flank noting his size
Hence spitting chips
All we have to do now is find a way to actually beat Port Adelaide which, unfortunately, has not been the case in a number of seasons
Fortunately Norwood usually have their measure!