| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
themonk
Joined: 02 Mar 2004
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
| Flashman wrote: | | Not going to happen. |
I think you're right but this is real talent, a midfield of Pendlbury, Broomhead, Swan, Adams & Dangerfield would be amazing.
Getting Sanderson may increase our chances of getting Patrick? |
|
|
|
 |
jackcass 
Joined: 01 Mar 2005
Location: Bendigo
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| themonk wrote: | | Flashman wrote: | | Not going to happen. |
I think you're right but this is real talent, a midfield of Pendlbury, Broomhead, Swan, Adams & Dangerfield would be amazing.
Getting Sanderson may increase our chances of getting Patrick? |
Unless the Crows had to get rid of Sando to ensure Dangerfield stayed? |
|
|
|
|
Flashman
Joined: 11 Aug 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| themonk wrote: | | Flashman wrote: | | Not going to happen. |
I think you're right but this is real talent, a midfield of Pendlbury, Broomhead, Swan, Adams & Dangerfield would be amazing.
Getting Sanderson may increase our chances of getting Patrick? |
Mate I'd absolutely love it to happen and would say prayers, dedicate my life to charity and even make animal sacrifices to make it so but I just can't see it happening at all.
Dangerfield would be the hottest talent on the market in years (Franklin and Ablett were only interested in going to one club) probably since Judd and I just can't see us being the strongest contender amongst the 17 clubs chasing him.
Personally I wouldn't be surprised if he stays a Crow as he seems a loyal type but with what happened to Sanderson who knows?
Maybe I should get my prayer mat out and start building a sacrifice altar now  |
|
|
|
|
mattdally
Joined: 21 Feb 2003
Location: Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| He is more likely to remain a Crow now that Sanderson is gone. I think it was Graeme Cornes on the radio this morning talking about the leadership group (including Sloane and Danger) that wanted him out. Club had a pretty easy choice to get rid of him if that was the case. |
|
|
|
|
themonk
Joined: 02 Mar 2004
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Flashman wrote: | | themonk wrote: | | Flashman wrote: | | Not going to happen. |
I think you're right but this is real talent, a midfield of Pendlbury, Broomhead, Swan, Adams & Dangerfield would be amazing.
Getting Sanderson may increase our chances of getting Patrick? |
Mate I'd absolutely love it to happen and would say prayers, dedicate my life to charity and even make animal sacrifices to make it so but I just can't see it happening at all.
Dangerfield would be the hottest talent on the market in years (Franklin and Ablett were only interested in going to one club) probably since Judd and I just can't see us being the strongest contender amongst the 17 clubs chasing him.
Personally I wouldn't be surprised if he stays a Crow as he seems a loyal type but with what happened to Sanderson who knows?
Maybe I should get my prayer mat out and start building a sacrifice altar now |
Let's pray together then.
I thought Dangerfield had stated during the year that he had no intention of leaving Adelaide as long as Sanderson stays and yet we now hear reports that the leadership group got rid of him.
Patrick is either behind it or is very pissed off, either way we need to investigate quickly. |
|
|
|
|
Az
Joined: 25 Sep 2013
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Interesting also I thought Sando and Sloan were tight as well. Pretty crazy |
|
|
|
|
themonk
Joined: 02 Mar 2004
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Az wrote: | | Interesting also I thought Sando and Sloan were tight as well. Pretty crazy |
Let's hope it's all Ricciuto and we reap the rewards.
I've hear that Walker is also unhappy. |
|
|
|
|
Az
Joined: 25 Sep 2013
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| themonk wrote: | | Az wrote: | | Interesting also I thought Sando and Sloan were tight as well. Pretty crazy |
Let's hope it's all Ricciuto and we reap the rewards.
I've hear that Walker is also unhappy. |
That's what makes this coaching exodus so interesting. There's reports it was driven by these senior players like Danger etc, then reports that they are disgruntled at how this has happened. Very confusing but hopefully all is revealed soon. |
|
|
|
|
Geek
geek
Joined: 06 Apr 2006
Location: Jacana
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| themonk wrote: | | Flashman wrote: | | Not going to happen. |
I think you're right but this is real talent, a midfield of Pendlbury, Broomhead, Swan, Adams & Dangerfield would be amazing.
|
Agreed. Couldn't even find room for Beams in there |
|
|
|
|
swoop42 
Whatcha gonna do when he comes for you?
Joined: 02 Aug 2008
Location: The 18
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Flashman wrote: | | Not going to happen. |
Why?
If he wants to leave and Collingwood is in a position to offer him big bucks then there is nothing Adelaide can do to stop his move should he wish to sign with us given his free agent status.
We should be making a massive play for him with Swan just about finished.
_________________
He's mad. He's bad. He's MaynHARD! |
|
|
|
|
Flashman
Joined: 11 Aug 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| swoop42 wrote: | | Flashman wrote: | | Not going to happen. |
Why?
If he wants to leave and Collingwood is in a position to offer him big bucks then there is nothing Adelaide can do to stop his move should he wish to sign with us given his free agent status.
We should be making a massive play for him with Swan just about finished. |
We should but I'd imagine every other club including Adelaide will be doing likewise so I don't rate our chances any better than 1 in 18 and you'd think at least a couple of clubs would be able to offer a more enticing package for Dangerfield than we could.
Considering we went all out for Jonathon Brown and Chris Judd and had a flutter at Nick Riewoldt last year and couldn't get any of them I'm starting to think a precedent has begun to be set.
Call me pessimistic if you like. |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw 
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
I'm going to say it again, from the "Great Big Dayne Beams thread":
| Pies4shaw wrote: | | Straight swap for Dangerfield? They need a mid who will go into a pack and we need a mid who can run away from one. |
Perhaps everyone thinks I'm jesting about this - but the thing we most obviously lack in the mid-field is a true star player who is also extremely fast. In order to get one of those, something extra good has to be offered up (and, in any event, you typically need to dispose of a good player to create the salary cap room to be able to offer to pay the target player well enough to attract him in the first place). The real problem with trying to do this as a free agency deal is that one has to pay overs to get the free agent and if you keep all your other really high-quality, high-paid talent, I'm not sure how the "overs" can be paid (unless you have COLA, which the 'Pies don't). Thus, even the Swans had to move Mumford on to make room for Tippett and possibly also moved on White to make a little of the room required for Buddy.
Pendlebury is untouchable and none of our other mids apart from Beams is good enough to support a Dangerfield deal (Sidey is, of course, better than all three IMO but I wouldn't trade him for anything and, in any event, I know that almost no-one on Nick's, except possibly An Inkling, shares my view of Sidey's place in the pecking order at Collingwood, so I'm excluding Sidey from the debate). It may be that the deal isn't a direct swap (it could be a trade to Brisbane for a high pick, passed on to Adelaide, with some sweeteners, for Dangerfield). But I don't think we should exclude the possibility of doing a deal that would lose Beams (and perhaps picks or other players) if it involves getting Dangerfield. |
|
|
|
|
AN_Inkling
Joined: 06 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
^^On player value I'd definitely do this deal. Some thought does need to be given to team fabric though, and Beams would need to agree to it. Fully agree with the Sidey aside as well .
_________________
Well done boys! |
|
|
|
|
swoop42
Whatcha gonna do when he comes for you?
Joined: 02 Aug 2008
Location: The 18
|
| Post subject: | |
|
I'd rather wait to the end of 2015 and get him at no cost to our playing list.
Beams is a gun so all you'd be doing is robbing Peter to pay Paul.
_________________
He's mad. He's bad. He's MaynHARD! |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Well, certainly both would be preferable but, really, how are you going to pay Dangerfield what he's worth as a free agent if we don't make salary cap space by moving out a player on significant money? Don't we just get gazumped in the free agency race, as Flashman suggests? We might love to get him at no cost to our playing list but, if we do, where do we get the salary cap room? |
|
|
|
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
