SA Footy

mots02 wrote:

morell wrote:

Dutchy wrote:It seems a set strategy not to pay big $ to individuals and spread the $ amongst the group. The $'s need to go somewhere so it must mean their below average/average (McKay/Otten) players are getting very well compensated for their standing in the club.

You could take from this strategy that they are happy to do this to remain very competitive in the competition, but possibly never go to the next level of success.

Correct. Adelaide have a reasonably widely known culture of flat payments. It's obviously worked, they're perhaps one of the very few clubs to have never bottomed out in the modern era.

But the con to that it is... they've got the second longest grand final drought in the AFL.

If it were Port, I'd be hoping my club did absolutely everything possible to keep Lever, not just for his output, but culturally as well.

'
Do you have a ridiculous amount of stats to valid these statements or are they merely your opinion>

* I actually have this pinned up at my desk. Opinions are a scourge on modern society.

I'd be really disappointed if we lost Lever. We were in this position with Talia but obviously he was a bit older. I wonder if he's been talking to Lever about it? A bit of advice from a Vic boy that's been through it already.
Also hoping the fact the Crows took a punt on him after he done his knee and missed a lot footy may come into his thinking. We need to keep both Magoven and Lever while we're in a window of opportunity.

morell wrote:

mots02 wrote:

morell wrote:

Dutchy wrote:It seems a set strategy not to pay big $ to individuals and spread the $ amongst the group. The $'s need to go somewhere so it must mean their below average/average (McKay/Otten) players are getting very well compensated for their standing in the club.

You could take from this strategy that they are happy to do this to remain very competitive in the competition, but possibly never go to the next level of success.

Correct. Adelaide have a reasonably widely known culture of flat payments. It's obviously worked, they're perhaps one of the very few clubs to have never bottomed out in the modern era.

But the con to that it is... they've got the second longest grand final drought in the AFL.

If it were Port, I'd be hoping my club did absolutely everything possible to keep Lever, not just for his output, but culturally as well.

'
Do you have a ridiculous amount of stats to valid these statements or are they merely your opinion>

* I actually have this pinned up at my desk. Opinions are a scourge on modern society.

** over analysis of footy is a scourge on modern society

Nah

We're actually a fair way short of other sports, especially in the US.

reppoh_eht wrote:
Reckon he was referring to the power of said pussy... Not the fact he is one...

This. Only left because of his wife. Don't begrudge him that. Sorry I didn't make that clear

Brodlach wrote:

amber_fluid wrote:

Brodlach wrote:Probably gained as many as they have lost. All teams lose players

Quantity wise but not quality wise.

Other than Dangerfield (his balls belong to his wife) and Gunston the others in the end haven't been huge at other clubs, Tippett, Lyon, Davis (injury prone) and Bock.

Jacobs, Jenkins and Eddie in

Don't forget Tom lynch

bennymacca wrote:Don't forget Tom lynch

Can you please provide a detailed, in depth statistical analysis on your reasoning to include this name?

Brodlach wrote:

amber_fluid wrote:

Brodlach wrote:Probably gained as many as they have lost. All teams lose players

Quantity wise but not quality wise.

Other than Dangerfield (his balls belong to his wife) and Gunston the others in the end haven't been huge at other clubs, Tippett, Lyon, Davis (injury prone) and Bock.

Jacobs, Jenkins and Eddie in

Yeah fair call there.
And other than Eddie you didn't really pay much for Jacobs or Jenkins either.

Zartan wrote:

bennymacca wrote:Don't forget Tom lynch

Can you please provide a detailed, in depth statistical analysis on your reasoning to include this name?

Second best Tom lynch in the afl

bertiebeatle wrote:

amber_fluid wrote:The lure of family and friends wins out most times.
And if you're from Melbourne why on earth would you want to live in Adelaide?

Wouldn't necessarily think that this is the issue. I know I am a Port fan, but so far we haven't had the issue of losing players interstate and generally keep most players. I'd say its more of a money thing, and in recent times Port represent that by over paying certain players!

The only players that come to mind recently are Chaplin (left cos it was all to hard) & Burgoyne who got shafted when they signed Primus. Before that it was Stevens i reckon?

The Crows have lost players more frequently and at the moment are talked about every 1-2 years in regards to key players leaving

Could it be that these young players want to be part of a club with history and tradition and not just a franchise. Do the Crows have an identity asnymore? To start with they were the team for all South Australians and that was true to an extent when largely made up of South Aussies out of the SANFL. How relevant is that now? Maybe the club song needs to change to make it more relevant to the demographic of the players in the squad and get away from the whold representing South Australia that it portrays

I wondered that too (singing the pride of South Australia as a non-South Australian seems pretty stupid for eg), but it wouldn't be enough in isolation to make people want to go home you'd think. But there doesn't seem to be the same problem at Alberton

JK wrote:I wondered that too (singing the pride of South Australia as a non-South Australian seems pretty stupid for eg), but it wouldn't be enough in isolation to make people want to go home you'd think. But there doesn't seem to be the same problem at Alberton

Obviously its not the only reason but it may play a small part. Think the whole experience of playing football in Melbourne at a traditional club is a big carrot compared to the manufactured tradition of the Crows.

they are not a newly formed club anymore. 27 years now.

MW wrote:they are not a newly formed club anymore. 27 years now.

So no need to sell themselves as a state team anymore? (not a dig btw)

JK wrote:

MW wrote:they are not a newly formed club anymore. 27 years now.

So no need to sell themselves as a state team anymore? (not a dig btw)

Do they still sell themselves as a state team? Ever since the state jumper debacle I haven't heard anything of the sort

bennymacca wrote:

JK wrote:

MW wrote:they are not a newly formed club anymore. 27 years now.

So no need to sell themselves as a state team anymore? (not a dig btw)

Do they still sell themselves as a state team? Ever since the state jumper debacle I haven't heard anything of the sort

Nor should you. It is beyond belief that people still have this mindset today.
It is a club competition, not state vs state.

mighty hounds wrote:I'd be really disappointed if we lost Lever. We were in this position with Talia but obviously he was a bit older. I wonder if he's been talking to Lever about it? A bit of advice from a Vic boy that's been through it already.
Also hoping the fact the Crows took a punt on him after he done his knee and missed a lot footy may come into his thinking. We need to keep both Magoven and Lever while we're in a window of opportunity.

I am not convinced any defender is worth $850K per year. Right now he doesnt ever go to the oppositions best forward. Even Hartigan was given more roles. His game style is suited so well to the Crows defense. When you have a Talia shutting down the oppositions best forward you get the freedom to do what he does. Alex Rance would be the best at both shutting down and getting off and he does that mostly alone at Richmond. Most other clubs Lever has to go to the best forward, not saying he wont beat them, I just havent been able to see it yet because of the current support he has. 100% agree though - we do need to keep him, I am just not sure of the cost.

TEX07 wrote:

mighty hounds wrote:I'd be really disappointed if we lost Lever. We were in this position with Talia but obviously he was a bit older. I wonder if he's been talking to Lever about it? A bit of advice from a Vic boy that's been through it already.
Also hoping the fact the Crows took a punt on him after he done his knee and missed a lot footy may come into his thinking. We need to keep both Magoven and Lever while we're in a window of opportunity.

I am not convinced any defender is worth $850K per year. Right now he doesnt ever go to the oppositions best forward. Even Hartigan was given more roles. His game style is suited so well to the Crows defense. When you have a Talia shutting down the oppositions best forward you get the freedom to do what he does. Alex Rance would be the best at both shutting down and getting off and he does that mostly alone at Richmond. Most other clubs Lever has to go to the best forward, not saying he wont beat them, I just havent been able to see it yet because of the current support he has. 100% agree though - we do need to keep him, I am just not sure of the cost.

Best post I've seen regarding Lever. 100% agree.

He wouldn't ever go to the best defender though, his worth is in his intercept play.

I must say that I'm looking forward to the Blueprint being applied yet again this Friday night gentlemen. I also can't thank you blokes enough for moving to a ground that has similar dimensions to Cat Park (never mind the data bollocks it's long and skinny close enough) and moving away from the Cat Graveyard Football Park. Next time I'm in town I might head out to West Lakes just to dance on its grave with devilish glee!

Cats by 19.

regards,

REB