I’m rather skeptic you feel that wayskeptic wrote:I feel unfairly implicated by the use of the word skeptic
the Jaxons skeptics thread, only for the enlightened ones
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
- skeptic
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 17048
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 7:10pm
- Has thanked: 3663 times
- Been thanked: 2927 times
Re: the Jaxons skeptics thread, only for the enlightened one
loris wrote:I’m rather skeptic you feel that wayskeptic wrote:I feel unfairly implicated by the use of the word skeptic
As always Loris, you read me like a book
- cowboy18
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5795
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 1:05pm
- Location: in my duffle coat
- Has thanked: 3 times
- Been thanked: 5 times
Re: the Jaxons skeptics thread, only for the enlightened one
You could also start "the skeptic's Jaxons thread, only for the enlightened ones"skeptic wrote:I feel unfairly implicated by the use of the word skeptic
It wouldn't be the most stupid thread on the front page at the moment.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 784
- Joined: Tue 13 Sep 2011 7:36pm
- Has thanked: 40 times
- Been thanked: 340 times
Re: the Jaxons skeptics thread, only for the enlightened one
Vazelos wrote:If he is that strong with the ITK space then he is someone you want to stay in this forum.
He should not be smashed but at the same time he should not carry on like some Alpha male super star either.
I had some information via a close media friend who knew a board member well that advised me on some news & I shared it 6 months later when it was no longer relevant & Jaxons dismissed it like he knew better.
My guess is the following:
He is not employed in the AFL industry as he would be compromising his job.
I do not think he would be getting it from someone employed inside the club as he would be seriously jeopardizing that person's position by sharing ITK information on here.
I believe he is either a friend of a well connected players agent or someone in the media.
Either way if his mail is reasonably good that is great but that does not make him a messiah or everything he says is 100% correct or that other people don't have strong connections also.
At one stage people were feeding his ego & he got a rise out of it & we were enjoying some good mail...
All good.... we all want the scoop, everyone wants to know what our club is up to and lets just keep it all in perspective.
Sorry Vazelos what information did I dismiss that I apparently knew better?
- Spinner
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 8502
- Joined: Sat 02 Dec 2006 3:40pm
- Location: Victoria
- Has thanked: 185 times
- Been thanked: 133 times
Re: the Jaxons skeptics thread, only for the enlightened one
Lol I havnt used the term crybaby in a long long time... and I won't start now.Vazelos wrote:If he is that strong with the ITK space then he is someone you want to stay in this forum.
He should not be smashed but at the same time he should not carry on like some Alpha male super star either.
I had some information via a close media friend who knew a board member well that advised me on some news & I shared it 6 months later when it was no longer relevant & Jaxons dismissed it like he knew better.
My guess is the following:
He is not employed in the AFL industry as he would be compromising his job.
I do not think he would be getting it from someone employed inside the club as he would be seriously jeopardizing that person's position by sharing ITK information on here.
I believe he is either a friend of a well connected players agent or someone in the media.
Either way if his mail is reasonably good that is great but that does not make him a messiah or everything he says is 100% correct or that other people don't have strong connections also.
At one stage people were feeding his ego & he got a rise out of it & we were enjoying some good mail...
All good.... we all want the scoop, everyone wants to know what our club is up to and lets just keep it all in perspective.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1265
- Joined: Sun 12 Sep 2010 1:17am
- Has thanked: 12 times
- Been thanked: 319 times
Re: the Jaxons skeptics thread, only for the enlightened one
We approached Brisbane for Armitage to be swapped for Rockliff but were turned down instantly.jaxons wrote:Vazelos wrote:If he is that strong with the ITK space then he is someone you want to stay in this forum.
He should not be smashed but at the same time he should not carry on like some Alpha male super star either.
I had some information via a close media friend who knew a board member well that advised me on some news & I shared it 6 months later when it was no longer relevant & Jaxons dismissed it like he knew better.
My guess is the following:
He is not employed in the AFL industry as he would be compromising his job.
I do not think he would be getting it from someone employed inside the club as he would be seriously jeopardizing that person's position by sharing ITK information on here.
I believe he is either a friend of a well connected players agent or someone in the media.
Either way if his mail is reasonably good that is great but that does not make him a messiah or everything he says is 100% correct or that other people don't have strong connections also.
At one stage people were feeding his ego & he got a rise out of it & we were enjoying some good mail...
All good.... we all want the scoop, everyone wants to know what our club is up to and lets just keep it all in perspective.
Sorry Vazelos what information did I dismiss that I apparently knew better?
You told me that didn't happen. I know it did at end of last year.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 84
- Joined: Mon 22 May 2017 11:02pm
Re: the Jaxons skeptics thread, only for the enlightened one
He will love it
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1265
- Joined: Sun 12 Sep 2010 1:17am
- Has thanked: 12 times
- Been thanked: 319 times
Re: the Jaxons skeptics thread, only for the enlightened one
Strange interpretation of what I wrote there, not much emotion in my post but more analysis and opinion based.Spinner wrote:Lol I havnt used the term crybaby in a long long time... and I won't start now.Vazelos wrote:If he is that strong with the ITK space then he is someone you want to stay in this forum.
He should not be smashed but at the same time he should not carry on like some Alpha male super star either.
I had some information via a close media friend who knew a board member well that advised me on some news & I shared it 6 months later when it was no longer relevant & Jaxons dismissed it like he knew better.
My guess is the following:
He is not employed in the AFL industry as he would be compromising his job.
I do not think he would be getting it from someone employed inside the club as he would be seriously jeopardizing that person's position by sharing ITK information on here.
I believe he is either a friend of a well connected players agent or someone in the media.
Either way if his mail is reasonably good that is great but that does not make him a messiah or everything he says is 100% correct or that other people don't have strong connections also.
At one stage people were feeding his ego & he got a rise out of it & we were enjoying some good mail...
All good.... we all want the scoop, everyone wants to know what our club is up to and lets just keep it all in perspective.
I understand the average punter gets a little carried away with ITK stuff just need to keep it real...
We are all Saints people here and good information is appreciated by all...
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1423
- Joined: Thu 22 Apr 2004 5:35am
- Location: Done with MN. Happily retired in Vic.
- Has thanked: 1309 times
- Been thanked: 239 times
Re: the Jaxons skeptics thread, only for the enlightened one
The red part is round, the white part is flat, and the black part is both. Easy.dragit wrote:Jaxons, is the earth really round or actually flat?
Nothing better than a good Dad Joke.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 784
- Joined: Tue 13 Sep 2011 7:36pm
- Has thanked: 40 times
- Been thanked: 340 times
Re: the Jaxons skeptics thread, only for the enlightened one
Vazelos wrote:We approached Brisbane for Armitage to be swapped for Rockliff but were turned down instantly.jaxons wrote:Vazelos wrote:If he is that strong with the ITK space then he is someone you want to stay in this forum.
He should not be smashed but at the same time he should not carry on like some Alpha male super star either.
I had some information via a close media friend who knew a board member well that advised me on some news & I shared it 6 months later when it was no longer relevant & Jaxons dismissed it like he knew better.
My guess is the following:
He is not employed in the AFL industry as he would be compromising his job.
I do not think he would be getting it from someone employed inside the club as he would be seriously jeopardizing that person's position by sharing ITK information on here.
I believe he is either a friend of a well connected players agent or someone in the media.
Either way if his mail is reasonably good that is great but that does not make him a messiah or everything he says is 100% correct or that other people don't have strong connections also.
At one stage people were feeding his ego & he got a rise out of it & we were enjoying some good mail...
All good.... we all want the scoop, everyone wants to know what our club is up to and lets just keep it all in perspective.
Sorry Vazelos what information did I dismiss that I apparently knew better?
You told me that didn't happen. I know it did at end of last year.
I agree with you comments that we are all Saints people and should not attack each other.
So lets move on mate.
I will say that Armitage and Rockliff deal was never discussed at all.
Rockliff's management came to us last year and tried to see if we were interested in him.
We were not for the dollars he was on plus the trade required to get him.
Armo was never discussed as it never went that far.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1233
- Joined: Fri 04 Nov 2011 3:00pm
- Has thanked: 16 times
- Been thanked: 62 times
Re: the Jaxons skeptics thread, only for the enlightened one
So Jaxons calls everything spot on for years and there are still skeptics because 1-2 things didnt come off but were clearly in play at the time?? Joking or what??
How many years does he have to nail it before you morons accept it?
How many years does he have to nail it before you morons accept it?
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23247
- Joined: Sat 13 Mar 2004 11:44pm
- Has thanked: 741 times
- Been thanked: 1800 times
Re: the Jaxons skeptics thread, only for the enlightened one
It's overrated trust me...The Fireman wrote:I wish I was famous here on SS.
“Yeah….nah””
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1265
- Joined: Sun 12 Sep 2010 1:17am
- Has thanked: 12 times
- Been thanked: 319 times
Re: the Jaxons skeptics thread, only for the enlightened one
Happy to move on Jaxons...jaxons wrote:Vazelos wrote:We approached Brisbane for Armitage to be swapped for Rockliff but were turned down instantly.jaxons wrote:Vazelos wrote:If he is that strong with the ITK space then he is someone you want to stay in this forum.
He should not be smashed but at the same time he should not carry on like some Alpha male super star either.
I had some information via a close media friend who knew a board member well that advised me on some news & I shared it 6 months later when it was no longer relevant & Jaxons dismissed it like he knew better.
My guess is the following:
He is not employed in the AFL industry as he would be compromising his job.
I do not think he would be getting it from someone employed inside the club as he would be seriously jeopardizing that person's position by sharing ITK information on here.
I believe he is either a friend of a well connected players agent or someone in the media.
Either way if his mail is reasonably good that is great but that does not make him a messiah or everything he says is 100% correct or that other people don't have strong connections also.
At one stage people were feeding his ego & he got a rise out of it & we were enjoying some good mail...
All good.... we all want the scoop, everyone wants to know what our club is up to and lets just keep it all in perspective.
Sorry Vazelos what information did I dismiss that I apparently knew better?
You told me that didn't happen. I know it did at end of last year.
I agree with you comments that we are all Saints people and should not attack each other.
So lets move on mate.
I will say that Armitage and Rockliff deal was never discussed at all.
Rockliff's management came to us last year and tried to see if we were interested in him.
We were not for the dollars he was on plus the trade required to get him.
Armo was never discussed as it never went that far.
Unless your there I would not 100% know but I was told we threw Armitage'a name up for a straight swap and were quickly dismissed but take on board what you say and it's irrelevant now anyway.
I will say re Dunstan( our initial debate) that after 3 demotions last year my fears for him seemed to come to fruition but his comeback the last month gives me great hope for him. You did mention his great character and he showed that after struggling at one stage. I hope goes on with it next year.. we need all our young boys to take the next step.
- Drake Huggins
- Club Player
- Posts: 906
- Joined: Wed 04 Oct 2017 4:28pm
- Location: The G.G. Huggins Stand
- Been thanked: 1 time
Re: the Jaxons skeptics thread, only for the enlightened one
Dunstan's a beauty, trust me. I'm no itk, but I'm told he's very highly regarded internally, a future leader, maybe even as captain. His first year was very good and probably raised expectations too high. Second-year blues, then a significant shoulder injury slowed his progress, but getting dropped three times in a year was probably the kick up the backside he needed. I noted he was seeing a psych about his body language and demeanour earlier in the year. It seems to have done the trick. He could end up our premier inside mid.
"Is this the right room for an argument?"
"I told you once."
"No, you didn't."
"Yes, I did."
"Listen, an argument isn't just the automatic gainsaying of anything the other person says, it's a series of statements designed to support a particular conclusion."
"No, it isn't."
"Oh, I've had enough of this."
"No you haven't"
"Oh shut up."
"I told you once."
"No, you didn't."
"Yes, I did."
"Listen, an argument isn't just the automatic gainsaying of anything the other person says, it's a series of statements designed to support a particular conclusion."
"No, it isn't."
"Oh, I've had enough of this."
"No you haven't"
"Oh shut up."
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 784
- Joined: Tue 13 Sep 2011 7:36pm
- Has thanked: 40 times
- Been thanked: 340 times
Re: the Jaxons skeptics thread, only for the enlightened one
Vazelos wrote:Happy to move on Jaxons...jaxons wrote:Vazelos wrote:We approached Brisbane for Armitage to be swapped for Rockliff but were turned down instantly.jaxons wrote:Vazelos wrote:If he is that strong with the ITK space then he is someone you want to stay in this forum.
He should not be smashed but at the same time he should not carry on like some Alpha male super star either.
I had some information via a close media friend who knew a board member well that advised me on some news & I shared it 6 months later when it was no longer relevant & Jaxons dismissed it like he knew better.
My guess is the following:
He is not employed in the AFL industry as he would be compromising his job.
I do not think he would be getting it from someone employed inside the club as he would be seriously jeopardizing that person's position by sharing ITK information on here.
I believe he is either a friend of a well connected players agent or someone in the media.
Either way if his mail is reasonably good that is great but that does not make him a messiah or everything he says is 100% correct or that other people don't have strong connections also.
At one stage people were feeding his ego & he got a rise out of it & we were enjoying some good mail...
All good.... we all want the scoop, everyone wants to know what our club is up to and lets just keep it all in perspective.
Sorry Vazelos what information did I dismiss that I apparently knew better?
You told me that didn't happen. I know it did at end of last year.
I agree with you comments that we are all Saints people and should not attack each other.
So lets move on mate.
I will say that Armitage and Rockliff deal was never discussed at all.
Rockliff's management came to us last year and tried to see if we were interested in him.
We were not for the dollars he was on plus the trade required to get him.
Armo was never discussed as it never went that far.
Unless your there I would not 100% know but I was told we threw Armitage'a name up for a straight swap and were quickly dismissed but take on board what you say and it's irrelevant now anyway.
I will say re Dunstan( our initial debate) that after 3 demotions last year my fears for him seemed to come to fruition but his comeback the last month gives me great hope for him. You did mention his great character and he showed that after struggling at one stage. I hope goes on with it next year.. we need all our young boys to take the next step.
Dunstan will be a jet trust me.
Think of some Aussie cricketers who made the Test side early on talent then got dropped and came back after some shield games and then became stars.
Dunstan had a few issues this year that affected his form and then lost some confidence.
He started to show his real talent at the end of the year and I expect him to be a star for many years.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1265
- Joined: Sun 12 Sep 2010 1:17am
- Has thanked: 12 times
- Been thanked: 319 times
Re: the Jaxons skeptics thread, only for the enlightened one
I saw enough in the last 4 games to have some confidence in what you are saying.
I have spoken to him and he seems a strong character with good traits.
I have been critical of him but he is now entering that phase of 60-100 games 4/5 year player where we should expect a higher and consistent output.
Fingers crossed for the boy.
I have spoken to him and he seems a strong character with good traits.
I have been critical of him but he is now entering that phase of 60-100 games 4/5 year player where we should expect a higher and consistent output.
Fingers crossed for the boy.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1165
- Joined: Tue 11 Apr 2006 9:45pm
- Location: Tassies Wild West
- Been thanked: 1 time
Re: the Jaxons skeptics thread, only for the enlightened one
Teflon wrote:It's overrated trust me...The Fireman wrote:I wish I was famous here on SS.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 878
- Joined: Sun 27 Mar 2016 8:05pm
- Has thanked: 7 times
- Been thanked: 94 times
- parkeysainter
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 2696
- Joined: Thu 20 Jul 2017 2:59am
- Location: Brighton Beach Mansion
- Has thanked: 84 times
- Been thanked: 177 times
Re: the Jaxons skeptics thread, only for the enlightened one
A double agent is running around on Saintsational.net?The_President wrote:MG & Jaxsons are the same person.
Try to be a rainbow in someone's cloud
In this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death, taxes and the St Kilda FC
In this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death, taxes and the St Kilda FC
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23157
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 3:53pm
- Has thanked: 9106 times
- Been thanked: 3948 times
Re: the Jaxons skeptics thread, only for the enlightened one
parkeysainter wrote:A double agent is running around on Saintsational.net?The_President wrote:MG & Jaxsons are the same person.
Well now I think he is claiming to be Bains or at least his best mate.
Complete bull crap artist if you ask me.
"' jaxons » Wed 18 Oct 8:22 am
cwrcyn wrote:
This forum is becoming less pleasant by the day. So many people just sticking the boots in constantly. The criticism of Jaxons and Ameet Bains has been deplorable...and by the usual suspects, of course. Really disappointing. It's no wonder I barely post on here these days. I notice quite a few have dropped off in recent times, too. Probably for the same reason, i suspect.
And if only you knew the link between Ameet and Jaxons it is quite ironic".
- degruch
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 8948
- Joined: Mon 19 May 2008 4:29pm
- Location: Croydonia
- Has thanked: 146 times
- Been thanked: 237 times
Re: the Jaxons skeptics thread, only for the enlightened one
I got slapped on the wrist for (rightly) potting a poster a few months back, yet there's effectively a whole thread for it here...
...mods awake? This is BS.
...mods awake? This is BS.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23157
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 3:53pm
- Has thanked: 9106 times
- Been thanked: 3948 times
Re: the Jaxons skeptics thread, only for the enlightened one
I agree with you there, but sadly, in my defense I was only following orders from the forum gods, or at least the guys who believe that they are in control.degruch wrote:I got slapped on the wrist for (rightly) potting a poster a few months back, yet there's effectively a whole thread for it here...
...mods awake? This is BS.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1318
- Joined: Sun 25 Mar 2012 9:45pm
- Has thanked: 24 times
- Been thanked: 101 times
Re: the Jaxons skeptics thread, only for the enlightened one
No.. this is a thread to keep muppets like you out of the other thread... Yet instead if using it you want to draw attention to yourself so you go to the inappropriate thread.degruch wrote:I got slapped on the wrist for (rightly) potting a poster a few months back, yet there's effectively a whole thread for it here...
...mods awake? This is BS.