matrix wrote:gee barratts quick on the gossip huh
ive only been saying for a week he wants a four year deal
he will stay
he will accept 3 years
not
going
anywhere
especially to f****** freo
you had better be right, becuase if not .............
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
matrix wrote:gee barratts quick on the gossip huh
ive only been saying for a week he wants a four year deal
he will stay
he will accept 3 years
not
going
anywhere
especially to f****** freo
Great, so we can accept average performances for most of the year, knowing that if we make another grand final, he'll step up…CURLY wrote:dragit wrote:Agree, however if you can't produce it consistently then it counts for little. How many of his last 50 matches have been at a level which could be considered 'top 10 in the comp'? maybe a handful?fugazi wrote:Goddard sits in top 30 in the league very comfortably. On his day, top 10.
Id say he showed us all he produces when it counts.
So I don't know much about football eh Joffaboy hmmm. I reckon that in 45 years of following AFL very closely I have learned a bit.joffaboy wrote:Some people dont know much about football and here is a prime example.Gershwin wrote:Totally, totally, totally agree.Ralphy wrote:so how is everything going for dal santo would rather sign him then goddard at this point.
Goddard is not all that good !!!
This is almost as dumb a call as the "steven is a dud" statement made on this forum.
A utility the size of Goddard is vital to a football team nowdays. He will leave a gaping hole and our flexibility will be cut very short if he is not there.
To compare Dal Santo to him is just silly. Dal is a good midfielder who finds it difficult to break a tag, can only play midfield, and can be replaced in the team pretty seamlessly.
battye wrote:Goddard is worth 600k pa over 4 years. Very reasonable IMO.
Agree that saying Goddard is not all that good is off the mark. However the problem with Goddard as I see it is that he is a downhill skier. Went really well in 09 and 10 but leading up to 2009 many supporters and footy pundits where regularly debating why he was taken as a number 1 draft pick. It took a long time for BJ to get to a point where people weren't being constantly frustrated by his performances. Prior to Lyon arriving at the club he desperately wanted to play in the midfield but obviously Lyon loves his midfielders to be hard and under types so Goddard was never going to make that grade. He was a very important part of the Lyon game plan and during his good years he had Fisher, Dawson and Gwilt at their peaks so that allowed Goddard to excel as the roaming half back type and use his one real weapon, his kicking. To me Goddard is a little like Daniel Kerr. When Judd and Cousins played around him when he was considered elite, after they departed he struggled big time, coincidently he has returned to some form, arguably not the form or calibre of player he was in 2006 when he roamed the paddock with Judd and Cousins but he now has some genuine stars around him again. The fact of the matter is that the Saints aren't the team they were when Goddard produced his 2 best years and it's possible Goddard is not the type of player that can be any better than he was in 11/12 without some supporting players around him.joffaboy wrote:Some people dont know much about football and here is a prime example.Gershwin wrote:Totally, totally, totally agree.Ralphy wrote:so how is everything going for dal santo would rather sign him then goddard at this point.
Goddard is not all that good !!!
This is almost as dumb a call as the "steven is a dud" statement made on this forum.
A utility the size of Goddard is vital to a football team nowdays. He will leave a gaping hole and our flexibility will be cut very short if he is not there.
To compare Dal Santo to him is just silly. Dal is a good midfielder who finds it difficult to break a tag, can only play midfield, and can be replaced in the team pretty seamlessly.
Thought Dal was signed until the end of next year?Gershwin wrote:Totally, totally, totally agree.Ralphy wrote:so how is everything going for dal santo would rather sign him then goddard at this point.
Goddard is not all that good !!!
Thought he was a free agent?SainterK wrote:Thought Dal was signed until the end of next year?Gershwin wrote:Totally, totally, totally agree.Ralphy wrote:so how is everything going for dal santo would rather sign him then goddard at this point.
Goddard is not all that good !!!
Come on St. Trav, I think it's pretty clear that my tone is a speculative one.st_Trav_ofWA wrote:Wow skeptic are you the club accountant ? How else would you be so up to date with who is getting paid what ??
http://saintsational.net/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=77725Ralphy wrote: Thought he was a free agent?
I largely agree Skep'. I reckon he actually was clearly elite for several years, but we haven't seen that for two seasons, and given BJ's age, it's unlikely his form graph is heading up.skeptic wrote:... To me he's just another player that looked like he would be one of the very elite but is just a good player with the odd great game. Certainly wouldn't have him in the top 10...
Fair question Trav. Today I got to chat to my one source in the know at an AFL club, being at Girlong.st_Trav_ofWA wrote:Wow skeptic are you the club accountant ? How else would you be so up to date with who is getting paid what ??
Good post Dave. It is going to be interesting if Goddard stays. It will mean he had to settle for less than what he thought he was worth. A humbling experience you would think.Dave McNamara wrote:I largely agree Skep'. I reckon he actually was clearly elite for several years, but we haven't seen that for two seasons, and given BJ's age, it's unlikely his form graph is heading up.skeptic wrote:... To me he's just another player that looked like he would be one of the very elite but is just a good player with the odd great game. Certainly wouldn't have him in the top 10...
Fair question Trav. Today I got to chat to my one source in the know at an AFL club, being at Girlong.st_Trav_ofWA wrote:Wow skeptic are you the club accountant ? How else would you be so up to date with who is getting paid what ??
Everyone is on less than $500K a season. They understood Gablett leaving and he's always welcome back. The players know the value of 'team'. Loyal players are looked after after their careers. I was amazed how (relatively) little the Tomahawk is on... sorry BJ, but the Tomahawk now offers more to a side than you can.
Without my asking, it was mentioned that Collingwood's top mid fielders weren't on much more than Girlong's top earners. It was also 'believed' that Ego Buddy was on much less than his profile would make one expect.
Once again everyone, if the Saints are to compete with the likes of Girlong, Skunks and Skidmarks, we have to bring our salary scale closer to theirs. Doing so would pretty much put two Tomahawks into our froward line for the price BJ is asking...
I see it as not just a no-brainer, but an imperative.
Our list is not as good as Geelong's, Hawthorn's or the filth's and is at a different stage of development so we don't have to pay everyone the same.Dave McNamara wrote:I largely agree Skep'. I reckon he actually was clearly elite for several years, but we haven't seen that for two seasons, and given BJ's age, it's unlikely his form graph is heading up.skeptic wrote:... To me he's just another player that looked like he would be one of the very elite but is just a good player with the odd great game. Certainly wouldn't have him in the top 10...
Fair question Trav. Today I got to chat to my one source in the know at an AFL club, being at Girlong.st_Trav_ofWA wrote:Wow skeptic are you the club accountant ? How else would you be so up to date with who is getting paid what ??
Everyone is on less than $500K a season. They understood Gablett leaving and he's always welcome back. The players know the value of 'team'. Loyal players are looked after after their careers. I was amazed how (relatively) little the Tomahawk is on... sorry BJ, but the Tomahawk now offers more to a side than you can.
Without my asking, it was mentioned that Collingwood's top mid fielders weren't on much more than Girlong's top earners. It was also 'believed' that Ego Buddy was on much less than his profile would make one expect.
Once again everyone, if the Saints are to compete with the likes of Girlong, Skunks and Skidmarks, we have to bring our salary scale closer to theirs. Doing so would pretty much put two Tomahawks into our froward line for the price BJ is asking...
I see it as not just a no-brainer, but an imperative.
Here's a quote from a recent article by Paul Roos on the topic:bobmurray wrote:Would we really miss a player who prefers to be unaccountable... a free wheeler...someone who criticises team mates for things he doesn't do.
In the current situation i'd say NO..we wouldn't miss him
ready for incoming abuse
The operative word is "if". There is no question he has been a good player however part of the debate has to be about do you give him a 4 year deal and pay him overs on the speculation that he will return to being a good player again. And I question weather him returning to his best would be enough alone to help us move up the ladder in the next few years while we are in rebuild mode. And if that is the case wouldn't the huge some of money be better spent on recruiting and development of players that will be part of the next generation/flag tilt?suss wrote:Here's a quote from a recent article by Paul Roos on the topic:bobmurray wrote:Would we really miss a player who prefers to be unaccountable... a free wheeler...someone who criticises team mates for things he doesn't do.
In the current situation i'd say NO..we wouldn't miss him
ready for incoming abuse
Fix-it Now: They must sign Brendon Goddard. Even though he has come under some scrutiny about his form this year, quality players do not fall out of trees. We know Goddard's best is exceptional and he must stay a Saints player. If he regains the form of 2010, Saints will go back up the ladder quickly.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/paul-ro ... 6462704803
That's not abuse; just an observation from someone who knows a bit about the game.
I was also impressed with one of his performances against us this season and remember thinking at the time that he would be exactly the type of player we should be looking to include.DonBakes23 wrote:So what would the Saints have to give up get Hickey? I was impressed with his games against us, took a few nice contested marks and kicked a couple.
4 years isn't an unreasonable request from somebody who has been as durable as BJ has. 600K isn't particularly overpaying either. Even in his 'bad' years, he's still up toward the top of our possessions (.1 per game off Lenny for the lead) and he's our best user in terms of efficency. He's easily the most versatile player on our list. If he gets back to 2010 form, then $600K is a steal. It's hardly a disaster though if he stays at the current level.Cairnsman wrote:There is no question he has been a good player however part of the debate has to be about do you give him a 4 year deal and pay him overs on the speculation that he will return to being a good player again.