by the big fella » Wed Feb 15, 2012 11:59 am
by in and under » Wed Feb 15, 2012 12:57 pm
by Gervais » Wed Feb 15, 2012 1:06 pm
in and under wrote:Think Mt lofty will struggle this year, no money, no recruits and exodus of quality players.
Heard that out of last years side are peterson-grey, brown, mcdonald, gordon, k.artis, m.artis, r.wait, t.white, oconnor, luitjes, crabb, chapman... and thats just thinking off the top of my head. Long season ahead at mt lofty.
Think Bridgewater and lobethal will be the big improvers, young kids getting some games under the belt and a sprinkling of a few quality new heads.
With mt lofty, TV and Hahndorf to be at the bottom.
by Zipper » Wed Feb 15, 2012 2:26 pm
in and under wrote:Think Mt lofty will struggle this year, no money, no recruits and exodus of quality players.
Heard that out of last years side are peterson-grey, brown, mcdonald, gordon, k.artis, m.artis, r.wait, t.white, oconnor, luitjes, crabb, chapman... and thats just thinking off the top of my head. Long season ahead at mt lofty.
Think Bridgewater and lobethal will be the big improvers, young kids getting some games under the belt and a sprinkling of a few quality new heads.
With mt lofty, TV and Hahndorf to be at the bottom.
by dangermouse » Thu Feb 16, 2012 9:02 am
by From The Outer » Thu Feb 16, 2012 9:53 am
by dangermouse » Thu Feb 16, 2012 5:30 pm
by Dutchy » Thu Feb 16, 2012 7:16 pm
From The Outer wrote:Very noble of Mt Lofty not to pay players. History shows however that no club has been successful without the inclusion of some paid outside players. I would like someone to suggest a premiership team made up of unpaid locals. If Mt Lofty are doing this for financial reasons that is fine but I think you will find this decision will result in a very quick slide down the ladder.
by spot on » Thu Feb 16, 2012 11:44 pm
From The Outer wrote:Very noble of Mt Lofty not to pay players. History shows however that no club has been successful without the inclusion of some paid outside players. I would like someone to suggest a premiership team made up of unpaid locals. If Mt Lofty are doing this for financial reasons that is fine but I think you will find this decision will result in a very quick slide down the ladder.
by in and under » Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:27 am
by always there » Sun Feb 19, 2012 7:30 pm
by hotstuff! » Mon Feb 20, 2012 12:59 pm
by Champ » Mon Feb 20, 2012 2:38 pm
hotstuff! wrote:Karma Mt lofty, You wrote the book on paying players and it has given you sucess in the past. You have changed the hills football league forever for the worse, now you find yourself in your current position.
The only positive I can see for Mt lofty is now they have sorted out who wants to play for the club and who was only interested in the coin.
Build from there dont go back to your old ways.
by StickyFingers » Mon Feb 20, 2012 4:51 pm
Champ wrote:hotstuff! wrote:Karma Mt lofty, You wrote the book on paying players and it has given you sucess in the past. You have changed the hills football league forever for the worse, now you find yourself in your current position.
The only positive I can see for Mt lofty is now they have sorted out who wants to play for the club and who was only interested in the coin.
Build from there dont go back to your old ways.
I'm positive Bridgewater were more than happy to follow the trend of paying players for success and still do quite willingly. Does that mean they'll now stop and follow Lofty?
by hotstuff! » Mon Feb 20, 2012 5:49 pm
Champ wrote:hotstuff! wrote:Karma Mt lofty, You wrote the book on paying players and it has given you sucess in the past. You have changed the hills football league forever for the worse, now you find yourself in your current position.
The only positive I can see for Mt lofty is now they have sorted out who wants to play for the club and who was only interested in the coin.
Build from there dont go back to your old ways.
I'm positive Bridgewater were more than happy to follow the trend of paying players for success and still do quite willingly. Does that mean they'll now stop and follow Lofty?
by One Club Player » Mon Feb 20, 2012 10:41 pm
by overthehill » Tue Feb 21, 2012 8:47 am
hotstuff! wrote:Champ wrote:hotstuff! wrote:Karma Mt lofty, You wrote the book on paying players and it has given you sucess in the past. You have changed the hills football league forever for the worse, now you find yourself in your current position.
The only positive I can see for Mt lofty is now they have sorted out who wants to play for the club and who was only interested in the coin.
Build from there dont go back to your old ways.
I'm positive Bridgewater were more than happy to follow the trend of paying players for success and still do quite willingly. Does that mean they'll now stop and follow Lofty?
Bridgewater have maybe 5 paid players? Those players aren't only selected on ability but how they will influence culture.
Mt lofty back in the day had locals who couldn't get a game and loved the club, players that would make A grade at ANY other club, how would that influence culture? Yet Mt lofty would still pay 80-90% of the team. The locals who couldn't get a game went to Echunga and won a premiership.
As said above Mt Lofty following on our example, culture is the priority.
by Gervais » Tue Feb 21, 2012 9:01 am
overthehill wrote: So your saying Bridgewater recruited Adam Curkpatrick based on cultural influence?
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |