Moderator: bbmods
You're the one that said it was the last comment on the matter. No caveats about wanting to reply to other posts.RudeBoy wrote:You're encouraging me again roar.roar wrote:Except for the next 3, or more.RudeBoy wrote:I've said it before but I'll say it again, and this time I mean it. This is my last comment on this matter!
We might get our 2nd Choice anyway During the Trade PeriodPyreneesPie wrote:Yeah, it's starting to sound as if we drew the short straw with that first round pick in 2013.
Sheet happens and we'll just have to make the most of it. It will give Marsh a greater opportunity to develop his wares, without having to battle against Schazza for selection.
If the report is true, offer him 350K and see how he reacts. If he takes the money then he will have to justify his high salary by playing good footy. If he can't play good footy for that money he will have a very short career. If he goes to another football side he will be under the same pressure to produce. His best interest is staying at Collingwood where we have the best facilities and the best coaching staff and a young team of footballers his own age, some of whom come from his home state of Adelaide. The ball is in his court.Dave The Man wrote:CH 7 Reckons he wants 400k a Season.
IF he wants that then he can go somewhere who would Overpay for Him
If they want him, I hope they don't lose him over $50K. On the other hand, they obviously have to be careful not to pay more than they are paying the established young players (eg, Grundy, Langdon, Adams, Crisp, Elliott) or more than we can afford to offer Moore, De Goey and Maynard when they come out of contract (assuming that they will all be much better-performed than him at the end of their first two years).BucksIsFutureCoach wrote:If the report is true, offer him 350K and see how he reacts. If he takes the money then he will have to justify his high salary by playing good footy. If he can't play good footy for that money he will have a very short career. If he goes to another football side he will be under the same pressure to produce. His best interest is staying at Collingwood where we have the best facilities and the best coaching staff and a young team of footballers his own age, some of whom come from his home state of Adelaide. The ball is in his court.Dave The Man wrote:CH 7 Reckons he wants 400k a Season.
IF he wants that then he can go somewhere who would Overpay for Him
No trading is needed for danger, he's a restricted FA, either crows match the offer (which has never happened before) or they don't and get band 1 compo.Medieval wrote:Personally, I think we'll lose him. I think it's a bad thing because:
1. He is very highly rated by a lot of former football champions.
2. He's young.
3. He has great natural ability.
4. He could be anything!
I think it's a good thing because:
1. He could be anything, including a dud (see Jack Watts).
2. We have enough young players to cover the position he would play. Ramsey and Maynard are the first two that come to mind.
3. He's young enough that losing him wouldn't hurt us too much on the field. Beamsy hurt a lot because he was easily in our top 5. Shazz has played 4(?) games and hasn't cemented his spot yet, although that is mostly due to injury.
4. He is the key to us getting Dangerfield. He fits the Crows current player profile in terms of age, considering their window has just opened.
I've always thought our chasing Treloar was a ruse. I don't think we've been as heavily into him as the media makes out. I don't want to give Bucks and Hine too much credit, but could it be possible that they took Shazz in the draft knowing he was highly rated but conceding that he was heavily injured with the goal to have him fit in time for Danger to be out of contract?
IIRC, Adelaide can match the offer, and then trade him to whoever they want, to get what they want. Given that the compensation pick system has been pathetic, I think the Crows will most certainly match any offer and then go from there.Defender wrote:No trading is needed for danger, he's a restricted FA, either crows match the offer (which has never happened before) or they don't and get band 1 compo.Medieval wrote:Personally, I think we'll lose him. I think it's a bad thing because:
1. He is very highly rated by a lot of former football champions.
2. He's young.
3. He has great natural ability.
4. He could be anything!
I think it's a good thing because:
1. He could be anything, including a dud (see Jack Watts).
2. We have enough young players to cover the position he would play. Ramsey and Maynard are the first two that come to mind.
3. He's young enough that losing him wouldn't hurt us too much on the field. Beamsy hurt a lot because he was easily in our top 5. Shazz has played 4(?) games and hasn't cemented his spot yet, although that is mostly due to injury.
4. He is the key to us getting Dangerfield. He fits the Crows current player profile in terms of age, considering their window has just opened.
I've always thought our chasing Treloar was a ruse. I don't think we've been as heavily into him as the media makes out. I don't want to give Bucks and Hine too much credit, but could it be possible that they took Shazz in the draft knowing he was highly rated but conceding that he was heavily injured with the goal to have him fit in time for Danger to be out of contract?
Aren't we paying Clinton Young about 350K per year? So assuming we don't renew his contract we have about 350k to pay Scharenberg. Considering we potentially have a 10 year player on our hands, 350K doesn't seem too exorbitant to me. So let's say we offer Scharenberg a two year contract at 350K per year with incentives for an optional extension if he plays well, the most we lose is 700K which is the money we wasted on Young.Pies4shaw wrote:If they want him, I hope they don't lose him over $50K. On the other hand, they obviously have to be careful not to pay more than they are paying the established young players (eg, Grundy, Langdon, Adams, Crisp, Elliott) or more than we can afford to offer Moore, De Goey and Maynard when they come out of contract (assuming that they will all be much better-performed than him at the end of their first two years).BucksIsFutureCoach wrote:If the report is true, offer him 350K and see how he reacts. If he takes the money then he will have to justify his high salary by playing good footy. If he can't play good footy for that money he will have a very short career. If he goes to another football side he will be under the same pressure to produce. His best interest is staying at Collingwood where we have the best facilities and the best coaching staff and a young team of footballers his own age, some of whom come from his home state of Adelaide. The ball is in his court.Dave The Man wrote:CH 7 Reckons he wants 400k a Season.
IF he wants that then he can go somewhere who would Overpay for Him
Remind me, what are we paying Clinton Young to run around in the 2s? What are we paying Jesse White? The benchmark set by these contracts may be problematic.
