Welcome to Collingwood Travis Varcoe (Official)

All trade and draft talk here thanks..... this means you DTM!!!!

Moderator: bbmods

Post Reply
User avatar
Damien
Posts: 5718
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 1999 8:01 pm
Location: Croydon Vic
Has liked: 3 times
Been liked: 11 times

Post by Damien »

watt price tully wrote:
Breadcrawl wrote:We'll still get Greenwood.

The main reason Varcoe concerns me is Geelong wants to get rid of him. And not for the first time.

We are on our way to being a very bloody quick side though. There will be some softness out there, but we are going to have pace all over the ground.
Yes, we'll be able to chase our opponents even faster :wink:
..and we'll have another chance to win the half time sprint at next year's GF :lol:
'Collingwood are the Bradmans of Football'
The Herald - 1930
User avatar
GoWoodsmen
Posts: 1857
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2005 9:18 am
Location: Australia

Post by GoWoodsmen »

According to papers this morning if Beams stays we don't have room in the cap to accommodate Varcoe.

seems a little odd given the retirements of Q, Ball, Maxy and Huddo. We haven't signed that many contract extensions since those announcements were made - and certainly no big contracts, all young players etc.
Side By Side Forever
User avatar
thompsoc
Posts: 6357
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 8:28 pm

Post by thompsoc »

GoWoodsmen wrote:According to papers this morning if Beams stays we don't have room in the cap to accommodate Varcoe.

seems a little odd given the retirements of Q, Ball, Maxy and Huddo. We haven't signed that many contract extensions since those announcements were made - and certainly no big contracts, all young players etc.
Yes it appears pendles, cloke and swan are getting a lot!
If we can't get a dud like varcoe in under the cap then something is
truely wrong
we don't eat our own at collingwood we just allow them to foul our nest.
User avatar
themonk
Posts: 2225
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2004 4:12 pm

Post by themonk »

GoWoodsmen wrote:According to papers this morning if Beams stays we don't have room in the cap to accommodate Varcoe.

seems a little odd given the retirements of Q, Ball, Maxy and Huddo. We haven't signed that many contract extensions since those announcements were made - and certainly no big contracts, all young players etc.
So we asked about Dangerfield? WTF!
User avatar
Dave The Man
Posts: 45001
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 2:04 pm
Location: Someville, Victoria, Australia
Has liked: 2 times
Been liked: 21 times
Contact:

Post by Dave The Man »

GoWoodsmen wrote:According to papers this morning if Beams stays we don't have room in the cap to accommodate Varcoe.

seems a little odd given the retirements of Q, Ball, Maxy and Huddo. We haven't signed that many contract extensions since those announcements were made - and certainly no big contracts, all young players etc.
We rather have Beams then Varcoe :wink:
I am Da Man
AN_Inkling
Posts: 13521
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2007 11:29 am

Post by AN_Inkling »

Not signing Varcoe for salary cap reasons if Beams stays does not mean we are at or over the cap right now. It's more that it would no longer fit our salary plans going forward. Remember that we are also looking to bring in Greenwood.

The idea would be to bring in established players to replace Beams and Lumumba on either less or equivalent dollars so that our plans remain intact. If Beams stays we only have Lumumba to replace. If we sign both Greenwood and Varcoe this increases our TPP and affects our plans into the future.
Well done boys!
User avatar
Harvey
Posts: 997
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2003 9:14 pm

Post by Harvey »

Can' believe we're going for Varcoe. At 26/27 he has literally no upside left. He will be another NQR recruit like Young, Russell, Armstrong except this time we're giving up something good to get him. Would have preferred to keep Harry TBH.

If we're going for NQR recruits, at least go for players young enough to still improve like a Karnezis.
User avatar
RudeBoy
Posts: 22169
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2005 2:08 pm
Been liked: 146 times

Post by RudeBoy »

Harvey wrote:Can' believe we're going for Varcoe. At 26/27 he has literally no upside left. He will be another NQR recruit like Young, Russell, Armstrong except this time we're giving up something good to get him. Would have preferred to keep Harry TBH.

If we're going for NQR recruits, at least go for players young enough to still improve like a Karnezis.
I agree, but it seems the club is determined to recruit a couple of mature bodies, regardless of how good they actually are. It makes no sense to me, but what would I know?
User avatar
woftam
Posts: 7436
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 12:16 pm
Location: Carum Downs, Vic
Has liked: 1 time

Post by woftam »

Varcoe? It seems we have learned nothing from the past 2 years when it comes to trading. Lose very good players & replace them with softies. I have no idea why Bucks would want him.
Albert Parker
Posts: 2573
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 8:12 pm

Post by Albert Parker »

^I think there is a broad consensus on this call. Smacks of desperation.
One team, one dream - the Pies and this year's premiership
User avatar
Pies4shaw
Posts: 34875
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 2:14 pm
Has liked: 130 times
Been liked: 181 times

Post by Pies4shaw »

It appears that the Cats may need him out to accommodate Clark. Given that they've already thrown a spanner in the works by taking the pick 21 we wanted in the Beams deal, why would we be helping them to snatch Clark from under our nose?
User avatar
Collingwood Crackerjack
Posts: 3567
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 10:11 am
Location: Canberra

Post by Collingwood Crackerjack »

jackcass wrote:Jesus, all we need is a fringe softcok NQR outside runner from each of Freo and Port and we'll have the full suite...

Sydney - Armstrong (still hope for White)
Hawthorn - Young
Geelong - Varcoe
Port - ??
Freo - ??

Not to mention
Melbourne - S Buckley
Carlton - Russell
One can only assume they are a collectors item, and their collective value doubles once you get the full set. Smart way for the club to recoup costs I'd say 8)
User avatar
The Boy Who Cried Wolf
Posts: 4655
Joined: Thu Sep 26, 2013 10:24 am
Location: We prefer free speech - you know it's right

Post by The Boy Who Cried Wolf »

Do we really have to recruit this dud, we'd be much better off with the draft pick...? I still can't think of any upsides to recruiting him!!!
All Aboard!! Choo Choo!!!
AN_Inkling
Posts: 13521
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2007 11:29 am

Post by AN_Inkling »

I can understand those who don't like Varcoe in particular, but the strategy is perfectly logical and exactly in line with comments coming from the club before the trade period. We are, as much as possible, looking to keep our team development plan intact. That means bringing a player 25+ years of age in for Lumumba and one around 25 for Beams, that would be likely to play in our best 22. At the moment the two we are looking at are Greenwood (25) and Varcoe (26). Greenwood for the Beams-like inside work and Varcoe for Lumumba-like line-breaking. Neither are facsimiles of the players they are replacing, but they are of a broadly similar type.

For those who question Varcoe based on age, he is only 26 and we have 2/3 players over 28 in our entire squad. We are at no risk of being too old even for a team that is rebuilding.

So, question his ability if you like, that's completely legitimate. But in terms of age profile and type, his signing makes perfect sense, as does the list management strategy behind it.
Last edited by AN_Inkling on Sun Oct 12, 2014 6:48 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Well done boys!
Domesticated_Ape
Posts: 525
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 5:27 pm

Post by Domesticated_Ape »

AN_Inkling wrote:I can understand those who don't like Varcoe in particular, but the strategy is perfectly logical and exactly in line with comments coming from the club before the trade period. We are, as much as possible, looking to keep our team development plan intact. That means bringing a player 25+ years of age in for Lumumba and one around 25 for Beams, that would likely to play in our best 22. At the moment the two we are looking at are Greenwood (25) and Varcoe (26). Greenwood for the Beams-like inside word and Varcoe for the Lumumba-like line-breaking. Neither are facsimiles of the players they are replacing, but they are of a broadly similar type.

For those who question Varcoe based on age, he is only 26 and we have 2/3 players over 28 in our entire squad. We are at no risk of being too old even for a team that is rebuilding.

So, question his ability if you like, that's completely legitimate. But in terms of age profile and type, his signing makes perfect sense, as does the list management strategy behind it.
Yep, I agree. Not convinced his form will warrant a spot in the 22 every week, but he'll play some games and bring a level of professionalism to his training that should have a good effect on all our young guys. We don't have anyone out of the Geelong system, so it'll be good to get a bit of inside info there. And if we draft another young indigenous kid or two, Varcoe will be a good influence on them.

He's gotta come cheaply though. If Geelong really need him out to get Clarke, then really there should be no problem with using Lumumba and pick 30 to bring in both Greenwood and Varcoe. Pick 48 could be used as well, but not the Beams compo. That deal should be kept separate.
Post Reply