| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Bob Sugar
Joined: 11 Feb 2010
Location: Benalla
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
| swoop42 wrote: | Well it's 6:15 and still no deal announced.
So either:
1.We've rejected the Lions revised offer.
2.Clubs are still haggling over the draft picks involved in the "mega club" deal.
3.The club is trying to save a little face in not being seen as signing off on this trade at the earliest opportunity.
I'm hoping for option 1 but expect it might be option 2. |
The club leaked the deal last night, now their giving us a few days to get used to it, they are treating us like muppets IMO, I'm over Edd and I'm over Pert and Buckley, they must go IMO.
_________________
Defender...........
On the day before the first, Daicos created God.
You like this. |
|
|
|
 |
AN_Inkling
Joined: 06 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| swoop42 wrote: | Well it's 6:15 and still no deal announced.
So either:
1.We've rejected the Lions revised offer.
2.Clubs are still haggling over the draft picks involved in the "mega club" deal.
3.The club is trying to save a little face in not being seen as signing off on this trade at the earliest opportunity.
I'm hoping for option 1 but expect it might be option 2. |
It's a 5 club deal, it'll take a while.
Both sides very quiet and I don't like the sound of that. I think this is going to get done unfortunately.
_________________
Well done boys! |
|
|
|
|
Domesticated_Ape 
Joined: 01 Oct 2012
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Defender wrote: | | Pies4shaw wrote: | | Good, we haven't had a "sack Buckley" post for a few minutes. |
Funny thing is if we sacked Buckley Beams would probably stay. |
Worked well for the Bulldogs didn't it? |
|
|
|
|
Collingwood Crackerjack
Joined: 28 Jul 2008
Location: Canberra
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Pies4shaw wrote: | | I drew a line through Beams' name after a series of poor finals performances. I will be pleased to see some players who might rise to the occasion given a chance. |
Drew a line through his name after hearing the court transcript from that case.
Unseemly at best; imagine if it was your daughter?
More Jamie Elliot's and fewer Dayne Beams, that's the ticket; I trust this Crisp is a good egg (or a least knows how to keep an egg good....in the crisper!)
_________________
"The last thing he expected WAS THE FIRST THING HE GOT!!!!!"
© Collingwood Crackerjack, 1992 |
|
|
|
|
Woods Of Ypres
Joined: 27 May 2003
Location: Yugoslavia
|
| Post subject: | |
|
'we hold the aces'  |
|
|
|
|
makri 
Joined: 29 Oct 2005
Location: Clifton Hill
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Woods Of Ypres wrote: | | 'we hold the aces' |
But we're gong to get screwed when the bears make a straight with a 3.
_________________
Magpie Jumper Gallery:
https://www.instagram.com/magpiejumpers/ |
|
|
|
|
Presti35 
Dick Lee for Legend Status
Joined: 05 Oct 2001
Location: London, England
|
| Post subject: | |
|
I still think this would be the best, even if its the slightest bit far fetched:
| Presti35 wrote: |
Beams and Pick 48 (Coll) to Lions.
Merritt and pick 5 (BL) to Dees. Harry to Dees.
Pick 3 (Melb) to Pies. Crisp & Pick 25 (BL) to Pies.
Pick 25 and 30 to North for Greenwood and Mullett.
Clark to Cats.
Varcoe to Pies.
--------------
Lions lose pick 5, pick 25, Merrett and Crisp. Gain Beams & Pick 48.
Pies lose Beams, Harry, pick 30, pick 48. Gain pick 3, Levi, Mullett, Varcoe, Crisp.
Dees lose pick 3, Clark. Gain Pick 5, Harry, Sauce.
North lose Levi and Mullett. Gain pick 25, pick 30.
Cats lose Varcoe. Gain Clark.
 |
Dees keep their pick in the 20's for the proposed Trengrove deal.
North may need something else to satisfy the loss of Mullett and Greenwood. (Unless of course Mullett and Pick 30 are not used in the above scenario).
Would leave us with Picks 3, 30 (or Mullett) & 67 in the draft. With pick 85 to upgrade Frost. (Also have picks 103 and 121, which would most likely pass, giving us 2 more rookie selections).
_________________
A Goal Saved Is 2 Goals Earned! |
|
|
|
|
Wokko 
Come and take it.
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
We said we would 'no longer negotiate' this doesn't mean we couldn't field offers and either accept or reject them.
That's if you accept it wasn't a load of bullshit to get the fans all gung ho and excited. |
|
|
|
|
MJ23
Joined: 28 Feb 2011
Location: Sydney
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Sen and 3aw reporting crisp passed medical at westpac ctr. Done deal. Crisp, 5, 25 fir beams.
25 to north for greenwood.
If we get McCartney, wright it trade pick 5 for a Shiel I'd just be ok with the deal.
Anything else is unders.
_________________
"Even when Im old and gray, I wont be able to play but Ill still love the game"
Michael Jordan |
|
|
|
|
Neil Appleby 
Joined: 11 Feb 1998
Location: Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Defender wrote: | | If Buckley brings Crisp in I think we have to seriously consider sacking him now! Crisp can't kick for shit! Buckley has completely £$%$ed our list. |
What makes you think Buckley makes all the decisions? Bucks would be one voice among many. Our entire recruiting team would have input into decisions to bring in players like Crisp, Varcoe and Greenwood.
I suspect they discussed the trade over the weekend and figured we get, 3 ready made players and draft pick 5 whilst we lose Beams & Lumumba. I'd back our recruiting team to get us a potential 200 game player at pick 5.
I think Crisp being offered up by the Lions looks like they are bending us over, but Collingwood probably wants the deal settled with Beams out of the club asap, despite what it has said publicly. Who knows, Crisp could turn out to be another steal like Taylor Adams 
_________________
After the epic draw comes the decisive knockout!
Collingwood rules the world again and Mick Malthouse fulfils his destiny with the twenty ten premiership and can you hear the people sing! |
|
|
|
|
Brenny
Joined: 05 Apr 2011
Location: Westpac Centre
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| slangman wrote: | | Defender wrote: | | Pies4shaw wrote: | | Good, we haven't had a "sack Buckley" post for a few minutes. |
Funny thing is if we sacked Buckley Beams would probably stay. |
Wow!!!!!
Buckley can cure his dad's cancer apparently.
Sad sad sad.😏 |
The fact that Beams, allegedly, has said he would be willing to go play at GWS with his mate, I'm believing the cancer thing is only a minor part of it.
Beams allegedly being photoed at some club in Kew when he was allegedly with his family... IMHO he dislikes Buckley and the direction the club was heading.
If the club were serious about the so called 'deadline' (which was never going to exist), then Beams would be still playing.
This is MY opinion and I'm entitled to it.
Opinions are like arseholes, everybody has one. |
|
|
|
|
Neil Appleby
Joined: 11 Feb 1998
Location: Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Defender wrote: | | swoop42 wrote: | Well it's 6:15 and still no deal announced.
So either:
1.We've rejected the Lions revised offer.
2.Clubs are still haggling over the draft picks involved in the "mega club" deal.
3.The club is trying to save a little face in not being seen as signing off on this trade at the earliest opportunity.
I'm hoping for option 1 but expect it might be option 2. |
The club leaked the deal last night, now their giving us a few days to get used to it, they are treating us like muppets IMO, I'm over Edd and I'm over Pert and Buckley, they must go IMO. |
Who is this Edd you speak of oh wise one?
_________________
After the epic draw comes the decisive knockout!
Collingwood rules the world again and Mick Malthouse fulfils his destiny with the twenty ten premiership and can you hear the people sing! |
|
|
|
|
Magpies Nest 
Joined: 10 Apr 2011
Location: Sydney, NSW
|
| Post subject: | |
|
I haven't posted here for a long time but I still read with interest and I would like someone who is disappointed in the clubs handling of this trade tell me how the following issues could have been overcome:
1. To open negotiations with other clubs, Beams would have to agree to go there. Clearly he didn't.
2. To "get" Aish, or Redden,or Rich, or Rockliff, they would have had to agree to come to Collingwood. Clearly they didn't.
The deal may not be your idea of acceptable, but when a player declares he wants to leave a club, it's a rare (not impossible) thing for that club to "win" the trade.
What else could the club have done? |
|
|
|
|
AN_Inkling
Joined: 06 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
They could have backed up their talk with action.
_________________
Well done boys! |
|
|
|
|
Wokko
Come and take it.
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Magpies Nest wrote: | I haven't posted here for a long time but I still read with interest and I would like someone who is disappointed in the clubs handling of this trade tell me how the following issues could have been overcome:
1. To open negotiations with other clubs, Beams would have to agree to go there. Clearly he didn't.
2. To "get" Aish, or Redden,or Rich, or Rockliff, they would have had to agree to come to Collingwood. Clearly they didn't.
The deal may not be your idea of acceptable, but when a player declares he wants to leave a club, it's a rare (not impossible) thing for that club to "win" the trade.
What else could the club have done? |
I've said all this previously but people just want to believe what they want to believe. Common sense and the truth just wont come into it. They'll shout NO DEAL and think they've got a direct line to the recruiting people.
If none of their players wanted to come here, then WTF could they do? Crisp volunteered but was happy to stay at Brisbane, maybe none of their other players wanted to come here?
I think we've broken even (Greenwood + Crisp) before even taking Pick 5 into the mix. If pick 5 is a star (Pendles was @ 5) then we'll come out way, way in front, much like the Eagles with Judd. |
|
|
|
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
