Now, I'm not mathematician, but so far we've:

De-listed: Bowyer (ret), Clarke, Norman, Morrell, Johnson, Campo (??)
Acquired: Saddington, Setanta

Therefore, it seems we'll have picks:

1, 4, 20, 36

and no pick in the PSD, or we PASS ON PICK 36 and pick someone in the PSD.

Obviously Lappin is another who might get chopped, but we're trying to avoid that (if what's in here is to be believed)

Sorry, but I have to ask, WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON????

HOW CAN IT BE THAT THE WORST SIDE IN THE AFL, WITH THE WORST BLOODY LIST IN ITS HISTORY (well... almost), IN A GARGANTUAN FITZROY-ESQUE LOSING PERFORMANCE, FEELS IT ONLY NEEDS TO ADD 3 or 4 YOUNG PLAYERS TO ITS LIST????

GET REAL CARLTON!

THE FOLLOWING PLAYERS ARE NOT GOOD AND NEVER WILL BE:

Prendergast, Bannister, Chambers, Davies, Longmuir, Sporn, Wiggins.

There ya go.. they could even keep 3 of that lot and we'd still have made some significant cuts.

shit teams need to add talent. If we have some late picks in the PSD, we can take a few chances on some talents and maybe pay off. I cannot see the value any of those guys offer, besides Pagan's utterly insane "we need experience" motto, which wantonly glosses over the fact that experience has no value without ability.

GET REAL PAGAN, AND START CHOPPING!!!!! If we passed on pick 36 that would be one of the stupidest thing this club has ever done.

_________________
Love Cricket? Love me

We don't have the $$$$ to pay out those guys contracts. We need/want to reduce payments outside the cap (legal payments).....

_________________
"You are being watched. The government has a secret system. A machine that spies on you every hour of every day. I know because I built it." - Finch

You can add Livo to that list as well

actually, I'd prefer to see improvements to the list at any cost.

I'd ultimately have prefered to see Bannister and Prendergast delisted and Whitnall traded (and not paid $350k) to accomodate this.

_________________
Love Cricket? Love me

maybe it's a combination of we cannot delist some of these players because of player contracts $$$ and a strategy to remain on the bottom for the 'super' draft in 06.

_________________
For some silly reason, you people want to assassinate him, and it's just rubbish. You people. All of you, ALL of you!

we're tanking til 2009!

but seriously, i agree T, we must clear at least another 3 i would have thought.

_________________
This type of slight is alien in the more cultured part of the world - Walsh. Its up there with mad dogs, Englishmen and the midday sun!

dropping 3 and having 2 more picks in rounds 5 and 6 won't harm our chances of that though, and it might mean we have another couple of good-eggs when we are a good team.

_________________
Love Cricket? Love me

http://carltonfc.com.au/default.asp?pg= ... eid=234119

We have to lodge the list another 2 times. Have to depend on salary cap and who is available in the PSD and mature aged players in the National draft.
I doubt the number of delistings is complete.

you've got to be joking? A strategy to piss 06 off just to get bryce gibbs? i hope Bryce is busy doing a marketing degree so he can help us recoup the millions in lost membership and sponsorship

Bannister, Wiggins and Prendergast please!

Your maths are pretty good Tyrants......But here's the deal, whether we like it or not.......These are the facts of the matter.

Currently the structure of the list and our recent delistings (lack therof) comes about because of a number of factors.

1. What's out there as A) decent recycled players - B) decent new kids late in the draft
2. Salary cap pressures at the club
3. Seasoned bodies to play AFL
4. The overall Experience of a good proportion of our list.
5. Expectations vs Reality

Point 1 - The fact is that there are very little in the A) and B) categorys that is worth swapping for what we have in the bottom 3rd of our current list.

Regardless of what some may think, teams don't normally give away decent players for nothing. Those that have been delisted have been done so for a reason. I have always wondered why our delisted blokes are supposedly rubbish and yet other teams delisted blokes are diamonds in the rough ??????? Reality check needed on this one folks. Yes there are some POSSIBLES who may/may not be okay but there ain't many.

Point 2 - Is fairly obvious. We have little money and certainly not enough to cull players and pay them out. Those days are long gone.

Point 3 - When it is all said and done if a team has the normal run of injuries then it goes through 32-38 players a year. It might be all well and good to give a young kid a 10-12 games in his first year as a skinny 18 yr old but you also don't want to physically kill him in his 1st year. So a young players physical managment early in his career is a key to having him last 10 years.

This bring me to point 4 which is.......

Point 4 - If you look at last years real youngsters in Russell, Harlett, Setanta, AB, Eddie, Blackers and Raso and then you add Walks, Fisher, Simmo, Waite, Bryan, Deluca, Davies and Carrazzo and then on top of that you add 4 or 5 new kids this draft you end up with near on 20 players or 50% of your list who have had Sweet FA experience. There are barely any real leaders amongst them at this stage.

So even though you may wish to off-load Wiggo, Prender, Sporn, Bannister etc, realisticly it is not possible unless you want to end up with a team of TAC kids who can grow beards and drive cars.

List managment comes down to the difference between rebuilding slowly or simply turning out an Under 21 team each week who will be battered from pillar to post.

I know and except all the arguments for this and that player, but if CFC is not prudent in how it retains some experienced players (regardless of there abilties) to fall back on when injuries hit (and they will) then all we will see in 2006 is going to be very similar to what we all saw last night during the Ireland vs Australia game.

There will be 14 teams of Bullies vs the TAC teams from CFC and Hawthorn. Each week Murphy, Blackers, Russell, Eddie and co will be thrown around like rag dolls with no semblance of support.

Wiggo, Prender, Sporn, Bannister are not the answer to our woe's but they will give the club time to develope our next stars at their own pace.

Regards Cazzesman

_________________
Ricky Gervais - “Everyone has the right to hold whatever beliefs they want. And everyone else has the right to find those beliefs f***ing ridiculous.”

Poor list management over the years is the main problem..I would expect 2 more players to be delisted. I would think we would want to pick at No 36 and take advantage of our No 1 position in the PSD which looks like McLaren....Bannister and Sporn would be the two I would see going...
Simon Wiggins also has Jess Smith breathing down his neck for a spot as well. Longmuir and Chambers are only in their second season now and I would expect them to be retained...

_________________
"When you have the attitude of a champion, you see adversity as your
training partner."
- Conor Gillen

Very interesting Cazz,

50 games might be considered a rough estimate for an AFL hardened/experienced footballer

the 2005 list had 17 players with 50+ games at the start of the season and by the end of the season an extra 4 players gained enough games to get to 50 games (Bowyer, Waite, Prendergast, McGrath).

So by season's end the list consists of 21 player with 50+ games.

Since season's end 5 players have been lost from the list from this experienced group (Bowyer, Camporeale, Clarke, Morrell, Johnson).

Saddington has been gained.

So that makes 17 players again who will be on the list at the start of next year with 50+ games (given that Lappin signs).

We could maybe expect Livo, Fisher, Sporn, De luca and Walker to crack the 50 games next year, bringing the number of experienced players up to the 21-22 mark again.

I think replacing Bowyer, Camporeale, Clarke, Morrell, Johnson on the list as experienced players with Livo, Sporn, De Luca, Fisher, Walker and Saddington means that the list will probably be slightly improved in the experienced players department (debatable though).

Of course players like Kouta are on the downward trend in their career so that muddies the waters further.

Food for thought anyway.

_________________
|♥♥♥♥♥♥| http://www.blueseum.org |♥♥♥♥♥♥|

Behead them all and sundry.

Guilotine-au-go-go.

But they have contracts which the club are unlikely to want to pay out.

why the @#$%&! would we give Bannister, a tagger who played only a couple of good games, in a team full of taggers, a 2 year deal???

well, we can only hope next year's draft is a corker and we're shit again, because we'll have about 10 players to delist

Carlton list management?

_________________
Love Cricket? Love me

He did finish top 10 in our B&F the year he came out of contract. His last game that year was against Collingwood and he played on Buckley and not only did he tag him but he became a damaging player kicking two goals.

1 good game = 2 years?

the Best and Fairest in 2004 will forever be considered akin to the Brownlow in 2000. Some strange results that lead to some questionable decisions in hindsight.

I'd have said to Bannister: "yeah, mate, that was good... here's another year to improve on that or you're out the door"

Its hardly possible that:
a) another team will have wanted to steal him, and
b) we were rewarding him for his 1 season of wonderful loyalty.

We must still be afflicted with crazy-contract syndrome

We should be putting rockets up these guys by only ever giving them 1 year... unless they're reliable regulars in the team.

_________________
Love Cricket? Love me

It is no secret the club is struggling financially and have to play these players out.

I think of the players mentioned assuming they were on contracts finishing in 2005,Davies would be worth keeping because of his ability.

It may be a good thing that these guys play on in 2006 because unless they play good senior footy on a regular basis they know they are [REDACTED](assuming they are not on 3 year deals)
Assuming Lappin stays we are only really going to pick up 4 new guys and Saddington so be prepared for more pain in 2006.

Sporn has been a major disappointment,Prendegast just isnt skilful enough although I think he hasnt been used properly by DP all the same.

Quite frankly I believe nearly every player should be given a one year deal such is the fickle nature of the business.


The biggest disappointment post season was that we didnt get a deal done with Fev.His attitude is appalling and it cant have a good effect on the team.


Lets be honest with only 4 new bloods I cant see us moving up the ladder.And I have said this before Saddington will be a decision we will regret because of his age and his knees.


I think we can hopefully see some of the dead wood moved on at the end of 2006 assuming they stay at the same level

The positive is we didnt recruit Hay or Rawlings.the Kangas are rooted .