Saintsational Fan Forum - A passionate community of St Kilda Football Club fans discussing news, history, players, trade rumours, results, AFL stats and more.
ripplug66 wrote:
I would doubt Goddard will play much next year. Second year blues and also a better backline means he really needs to play well to get in.
You have got to be kidding. What rubbish.
speaking of rubbish - you need to back up your claim JC has off field issues - with facts.
I don't need to back up anything. I have said that he is a sook.He has shown that. Sooked when he was told to play forward. Sooked towards the end of this season, Told other clubs that he wanted out and that the club was f***ed.
I have said he is bad tempered. And he is .He punched BJ in the head.
Someone else , maybe you suggested I sad Carlisle had off field issues. I have never used those words.
But he is bad news as far as I'm concerned. He has a two year suspension hanging over his head.
ripplug66 wrote:
I would doubt Goddard will play much next year. Second year blues and also a better backline means he really needs to play well to get in.
You have got to be kidding. What rubbish.
Care to explain why its rubbish that he needs to play well to get in the side. Sounds like common sense.
You stated that you doubt that Goddard will play much next year. That is a very stupid statement to make.
ripplug66 wrote:
I would doubt Goddard will play much next year. Second year blues and also a better backline means he really needs to play well to get in.
You have got to be kidding. What rubbish.
Care to explain why its rubbish that he needs to play well to get in the side. Sounds like common sense.
He does need to play well but I don't see why he won't.
Second year blues does not affect every player and more likely to affect midfielders who receive a tag in their second year.
Having said that Bontempelli didn't seem to be affected!
No they don't but they may of course. I think my point is if we get carlisle he wont be gifted games next season. If we don't he will be given games he may not deserve. There is no rush with Goddard or McCartin.
Personally I think it is still a case of essendon's best poker face determining to keep saying nay for as long as he can before saying Ok then and agreeing to the general perception of J.Cs' points rating. Plenty of commentators are rating J.C. @ 12 or so in this years' 'weak' draft! I don't think there is anything too complex about the D-man. One simple strategy that could end up sinking D-man by delivering J.C. to the PSD where Carlton, Bris & GWS are rumoured to be not that interested or not ready to out-spend St.Kilda. The wash up if this scenario eventuates is Carlisle and Pick 5 to the Saints. Maybe this is too big a story to happen.
G O S A I N T S !
the dome wrote:Personally I think it is still a case of essendon's best poker face determining to keep saying nay for as long as he can before saying Ok then and agreeing to the general perception of J.Cs' points rating. Plenty of commentators are rating J.C. @ 12 or so in this years' 'weak' draft! I don't think there is anything too complex about the D-man. One simple strategy that could end up sinking D-man by delivering J.C. to the PSD where Carlton, Bris & GWS are rumoured to be not that interested or not ready to out-spend St.Kilda. The wash up if this scenario eventuates is Carlisle and Pick 5 to the Saints. Maybe this is too big a story to happen.
G O S A I N T S !
the dome wrote:Personally I think it is still a case of essendon's best poker face determining to keep saying nay for as long as he can before saying Ok then and agreeing to the general perception of J.Cs' points rating. Plenty of commentators are rating J.C. @ 12 or so in this years' 'weak' draft! I don't think there is anything too complex about the D-man. One simple strategy that could end up sinking D-man by delivering J.C. to the PSD where Carlton, Bris & GWS are rumoured to be not that interested or not ready to out-spend St.Kilda. The wash up if this scenario eventuates is Carlisle and Pick 5 to the Saints. Maybe this is too big a story to happen.
G O S A I N T S !
It would serve them right to end up with nothing!
The charades will end very quickly if Carlisle's camp come out publicly and say its trade or I walk to PSD and I won't play for anyone else but Saints. We hold all the aces if this happens and Dildo will have no choice but to deal or start looking for another job. Im starting to wonder if all this holding out is because he does have some indication that Carlisle will contemplate going to Hawks. Nothing else explains his stubborness
saynta wrote:
And Carlisle doesn't have any off field issues?
I would call punching a team mate at training an issue. Maybe not off field be an issue nevertheless.
And he does risk being suspended for two years. That would really give him something to sook about.
It is what it is. He's a terrible risk for pick 5.
I remember that post now and aplogise for nothing. It was a valid comment.
oh, and he has a dodgy knee which is an off field issue, a health
I guessed that 5 was never going to go to Essendon. Now I'm sure. I always thought Essendon's desire for 5 made Carlisle a bargaining tool to get 2 players for 5 and If its traded to anyone we will. I believe the plan was always to fall back on the PSD if we have to but not before Dodoro makes a total ass of himself and he has. Off field issues? Not sure. But there is no doubt in my mind that he has been thoroughly checked out and has history with at least 2 of our coaches and that we have pursued him vigorously. He cant be that bad. Having said that I dont really care as long as he trains hard, plays hard and holds down fullback.
Completely different deal mentioned on AFL.com today. We give Port pick 5 and they give us Pick 10 and their 2016 first rounder.
We trade pick 10 to dildo for Carlisle. Port give pick 5 to the Suns for Dixon.
The Saints are under review, will it make any difference to the underachievers ?
Wayne42 wrote:Completely different deal mentioned on AFL.com today. We give Port pick 5 and they give us Pick 10 and their 2016 first rounder.
We trade pick 10 to dildo for Carlisle. Port give pick 5 to the Suns for Dixon.
yep. There are rumours circulating that Dodoro has already rejected it, no real indication it has even been tabled. Just alot of journos and supposedly 'In the knows' speculating cause they have nothing better to report.
the dome wrote:Personally I think it is still a case of essendon's best poker face determining to keep saying nay for as long as he can before saying Ok then and agreeing to the general perception of J.Cs' points rating. Plenty of commentators are rating J.C. @ 12 or so in this years' 'weak' draft! I don't think there is anything too complex about the D-man. One simple strategy that could end up sinking D-man by delivering J.C. to the PSD where Carlton, Bris & GWS are rumoured to be not that interested or not ready to out-spend St.Kilda. The wash up if this scenario eventuates is Carlisle and Pick 5 to the Saints. Maybe this is too big a story to happen.
G O S A I N T S !
It would serve them right to end up with nothing!
The charades will end very quickly if Carlisle's camp come out publicly and say its trade or I walk to PSD and I won't play for anyone else but Saints. We hold all the aces if this happens and Dildo will have no choice but to deal or start looking for another job. Im starting to wonder if all this holding out is because he does have some indication that Carlisle will contemplate going to Hawks. Nothing else explains his stubborness
He thinks he has until 2PM Thursday and that St Kilda will give in at the last minute.
What he has not contemplated is St Kilda moving on, getting involved in other trades and then at the last minute St Kilda tell him our cupboard is bare but there is always the PSD.
Dildo has been infected by James Hird and thinks he is the centre of the universe.
The more you know, the more you know you don't know.
When I was a young child, I knew that I knew so much about so much.
Now that I am old and know so much more, I know that I know so much about so little, and so little about so much.
If you are not engaging AI actively and aggressively, you are doing it wrong.
You are not going to lose your job to AI.
You are going lose your job to somebody who uses AI.
Your company is not going to go out of business because of AI.
Your company is going to go out of business because another company used AI.
- Jensen Huang, CEO of NVIDIA
SuperDuper wrote:If the 4 way deal with GC and Port ends with us giving 10 to Essendon for Carlise.. then surely we simply do the rest of the deal..
Dorado cant ask for 5 if GC have it.... we will only have 10 to give
We then just hold out our offer of 10 until he takes it... presumably at the last minute
We can't give that which we don't have.
The more you know, the more you know you don't know.
When I was a young child, I knew that I knew so much about so much.
Now that I am old and know so much more, I know that I know so much about so little, and so little about so much.
If you are not engaging AI actively and aggressively, you are doing it wrong.
You are not going to lose your job to AI.
You are going lose your job to somebody who uses AI.
Your company is not going to go out of business because of AI.
Your company is going to go out of business because another company used AI.
- Jensen Huang, CEO of NVIDIA
I thought that Essendon and Hawthorn were mortal enemies - not that Hawthorn are anything other than the prime enemy to the entire competition.
So why would any club, knowing full well how Hawthorn go about constructing their side each year, aid and abet Hawthorn continuing to so construct their side to position for yet another premiership?
And particularly Essendon?
As the former very successful Manchester United manager once said - I am not concerned with what the clubs that I do not see as challenging us are doing. I am concerned with what the clubs that are challenging us are doing.
So why give Hawthorn something the other clubs then have to catch up with - including Essendon who are a sworn enemy of Hawthorn?
I don't think any club should entertain any dealings with Hawthorn - except for taking players.
To the top wrote:I thought that Essendon and Hawthorn were mortal enemies - not that Hawthorn are anything other than the prime enemy to the entire competition.
So why would any club, knowing full well how Hawthorn go about constructing their side each year, aid and abet Hawthorn continuing to so construct their side to position for yet another premiership?
And particularly Essendon?
As the former very successful Manchester United manager once said - I am not concerned with what the clubs that I do not see as challenging us are doing. I am concerned with what the clubs that are challenging us are doing.
So why give Hawthorn something the other clubs then have to catch up with - including Essendon who are a sworn enemy of Hawthorn?
I don't think any club should entertain any dealings with Hawthorn - except for taking players.
Many AFL coaches and list managers are more interested in self interest - retaining their extremely high paying jobs especially in the case of senior coaches.
It is about winning enough to keep your job even if that means trading weapons to your enemy.
They don't lose their jobs for not winning the premiership but for poor results that embarrass the board.
When the board says publicly you have their full confidence you know you are going to be knifed real soon.
The more you know, the more you know you don't know.
When I was a young child, I knew that I knew so much about so much.
Now that I am old and know so much more, I know that I know so much about so little, and so little about so much.
If you are not engaging AI actively and aggressively, you are doing it wrong.
You are not going to lose your job to AI.
You are going lose your job to somebody who uses AI.
Your company is not going to go out of business because of AI.
Your company is going to go out of business because another company used AI.
- Jensen Huang, CEO of NVIDIA
Sydney's first-round pick has become the latest bargaining chip in negotiations between Essendon and St Kilda over Jake Carlisle.
The Swans would be prepared to help the deadlock if it would allow the club to turn their No. 14 pick (worth 1161 points on the draft value index) into multiple selections, or extra draft points.
The three clubs have begun exploring a trade that in essence would see Sydney switch pick 14 for St Kilda's pick 24 and another selection or two. The Saints would then send pick five to Essendon for Carlisle.
The problem is that Essendon's third round pick is not sufficient compensation for the Swans, with Sydney only willing to move pick 14 if it receives an adequate number of points.
Trading pick 14 for picks 24 and pick 44 (the Bombers' third round pick) would see the Swans lose, not gain, points. The Bombers have so far not been willing to give up either pick 23 or 25.
The Saints are under review, will it make any difference to the underachievers ?
Wayne42 wrote:Here you go, here's another theory..
Sydney's first-round pick has become the latest bargaining chip in negotiations between Essendon and St Kilda over Jake Carlisle.
The Swans would be prepared to help the deadlock if it would allow the club to turn their No. 14 pick (worth 1161 points on the draft value index) into multiple selections, or extra draft points.
The three clubs have begun exploring a trade that in essence would see Sydney switch pick 14 for St Kilda's pick 24 and another selection or two. The Saints would then send pick five to Essendon for Carlisle.
The problem is that Essendon's third round pick is not sufficient compensation for the Swans, with Sydney only willing to move pick 14 if it receives an adequate number of points.
Trading pick 14 for picks 24 and pick 44 (the Bombers' third round pick) would see the Swans lose, not gain, points. The Bombers have so far not been willing to give up either pick 23 or 25.
Doesn't make a lot of sense.. So we we still give pick 5 to Essendon.. Essentially they're two seperate deals. Don't like it.
Wayne42 wrote:Here you go, here's another theory..
Sydney's first-round pick has become the latest bargaining chip in negotiations between Essendon and St Kilda over Jake Carlisle.
The Swans would be prepared to help the deadlock if it would allow the club to turn their No. 14 pick (worth 1161 points on the draft value index) into multiple selections, or extra draft points.
The three clubs have begun exploring a trade that in essence would see Sydney switch pick 14 for St Kilda's pick 24 and another selection or two. The Saints would then send pick five to Essendon for Carlisle.
The problem is that Essendon's third round pick is not sufficient compensation for the Swans, with Sydney only willing to move pick 14 if it receives an adequate number of points.
Trading pick 14 for picks 24 and pick 44 (the Bombers' third round pick) would see the Swans lose, not gain, points. The Bombers have so far not been willing to give up either pick 23 or 25.
Doesn't make a lot of sense.. So we we still give pick 5 to Essendon.. Essentially they're two seperate deals. Don't like it.
This one could be the real deal
The Saints are under review, will it make any difference to the underachievers ?
Possible hypothetical (or not): If we get Carlisle for say $700,000 per year what happens if he is suspended for 6 months? He would not be able to train with us and he is not supposed to be paid by us. Does that mean we would only fork out $350K for the next 12 months?
As ex-president Peter Summers said:
“If we are going to be a contender, we may as well plan to win the bloody thing.”
Jacks Back wrote:I never got an answer to this so I'll try again:
Possible hypothetical (or not): If we get Carlisle for say $700,000 per year what happens if he is suspended for 6 months? He would not be able to train with us and he is not supposed to be paid by us. Does that mean we would only fork out $350K for the next 12 months?
If suspended, the contracted amount counts in the salary cap BUT would not actually be paid in my understanding of the rules
AwayInUSA no longer ... have based myself back in Melbourne for a decade of Saintsational Success (with regular trips back to the USA)
Jacks Back wrote:I never got an answer to this so I'll try again:
Possible hypothetical (or not): If we get Carlisle for say $700,000 per year what happens if he is suspended for 6 months? He would not be able to train with us and he is not supposed to be paid by us. Does that mean we would only fork out $350K for the next 12 months?
If suspended, the contracted amount counts in the salary cap BUT would not actually be paid in my understanding of the rules
Okay thanks for that BFUSA.
As ex-president Peter Summers said:
“If we are going to be a contender, we may as well plan to win the bloody thing.”
