Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="Sproj, post: 3469087, member: 8423"] The Cows also just lost their brightest young half prospect to the Dogs. Do you suspect that is because the Cows didn’t consider the player’s best interests as well? I think the reasons these conversations are going around in circles is because there seem to be two opposing views that aren’t that opposing. I think most of us agree that the club has probably done something poorly here. I can’t explain why Kevvie didn’t meet this kid, that seems a big error but this leads into an issue on this forum of Kevvie bashing at every opportunity by the same few and I think a lot of us are sick of reading this in every thread. For all we know, Kevvie may have planned to meet the kid but this kid had already checked out because he was getting bigger offers and advice from a new manager to agitate for a release. Maybe Kevvie didn’t plan to meet him and if not, that’s appalling from the coach, we just don’t know. If you are off Kevvie, you will assume he’s made the mistake here, if like me you still aren’t sure on Kevvie, you likely want to give him the benefit of the doubt but would believe it if he has stuffed up here. Of course it seems like the club could have done something better in all of this and given the manager status at time of contract signing, seemed to take advantage of a situation they were blindsided by and didn’t create. Who knows, maybe this kid and his bro went in to sign the contract and pushed to make it happen so this could come out later. If what we’ve read is true, it is implied his new manager was already trying to pull some strings in the background. This is all he said, she said. Basically, what we want acknowledged is that whatever happened, this kid has treated the club very poorly and should not be absolved of responsibility. The same posters that say we should have kept Dearden, Coates, the Vaa brothers and so on ignore reality. The reality is you can’t keep them all and this side of the argument refuses to acknowledge the wins we have had with Mam, Mozer, Piakura, Hetherington, Cobbo and so on. Yet we continue to pump out gun kids despite the fact those that do Jack all keep poaching some. Given the kids we’ve kept and the fact Walsh has returned, is losing Kylo, an unproven kid who thought he was bigger than the club really worth all the doom and gloom? At the end of the day, the club probably should have done something different and no doubt they are doing that, I have more faith in this under Donuts than I did under White. I also don’t expect them to come out and announce this to the public. What we can’t condone is a kid who hasn’t played first grade trying to dictate terms to the club, no matter how promising he is, it speaks to a bad work ethic and promotes the culture the club is trying to stamp out. What I would like to know is who has apparently promised him a starting spot, this part I don’t believe. And if they did want him to become a 9 or 13, I’m ok with that, Mam looks our future in the 6, maybe even 7. Kylo by his own admission was unwilling to do what the team wanted, again alarm bells about his attitude. It isn’t like the club hadn’t outlined their planned pathway for him, they clearly had and he didn’t like it. It is reported The flouted the rules and then the agitation started. In the end, neither he nor the club are innocent most likely but I’m always going to support the club over a cry baby and at the end of the day also, he isn’t at the club he wants to be at, let’s see how long he lasts there and regardless, we’ve made the most out of a bad situation. I think a few of us are just sick of the constant Kevvie / club / Billy bashing from the same posters and probably overreact when a good point is made in relation to these points. [/QUOTE]

Verification

Active Now

No members online now.

Total: 269 (members: 0, guests: 269)

Reply to thread

Log in

Active Now