Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board

Many here are speculating on the possible trade re Beams and how it might get Dangerfield to Collingwood.

I don't know of course, but I doubt Buckley would want Dangerfield after he was heavily involved/responsible in the Sanderson sacking. Kinda like bringing in a 'rat pack" player?? Of course, there is the loyalty to his best mate which might play a part too, albeit it a business decision admittedly.

If Dangerfield helps to get rid of Buckley I'd say bring it on!

If Dangerfield had a big say in Sanderson being sacked (seems at odds with statements earlier in the year), then there's very little chance he'd leave. You don't get a coach sacked then move on to another club.

The hope is that the push came from others and he's not entirely comfortable with it. If that's the case we'd be some chance of working a trade.

kymbo5@yahoo.com.au wrote:Many here are speculating on the possible trade re Beams and how it might get Dangerfield to Collingwood.

I don't know of course, but I doubt Buckley would want Dangerfield after he was heavily involved/responsible in the Sanderson sacking. Kinda like bringing in a 'rat pack" player?? Of course, there is the loyalty to his best mate which might play a part too, albeit it a business decision admittedly.

I suspect that Sanderson's sacking had more to do with members on the Adelaide board, than any discontent among the Adelaide players. Adelaide will regret their decision and that's their problem. If their situation leads to unrest and motivates Dangerfield wanting to leave Adelaide then Collingwood would be a great home for Dangerfield.

Ricciuto had a fair bit to do with Sanderson's sacking, so I'm told.

Dangerfield had nothing to do with Sanderson's sacking. You're closer to the mark BucksIsFutureCoach.

Would love Dangerfield at collingwood.

^^Let's hope you're right and that Paddy is P'd. If we could get him it would potentially be an upgrade on Beams.

Podpicken wrote:Dangerfield had nothing to do with Sanderson's sacking. You're closer to the mark BucksIsFutureCoach.

Would love Dangerfield at collingwood.

I'd rather have Rockliff if there was a choice of course.

If Dangerfield did have anything to do with Sanderson getting sacked it's unlikely that he would then come here and play under one of Sanderson's best mates.

makri wrote:If Dangerfield did have anything to do with Sanderson getting sacked it's unlikely that he would then come here and play under one of Sanderson's best mates.

Especially if Sanderson is one of Buck's assistants.

Losing Beams and getting Dangerfield using the Beams compensation should be the first option we try.

Get him to agree to our offer and we're half way there with the implied threat that he'll leave for the pies at the end of 2015 if a trade isn't done.

Pick 4 and a player off the Brisbane list that suits there needs and one there prepared to trade would be better compensation that what they'll receive via free agency.

Replace Beams immediately with Dangerfield and our hopes in the short term suddenly don't seem so bleak.

About time Ed pulled off another Malthouse style coup.

swoop42 wrote:Losing Beams and getting Dangerfield using the Beams compensation should be the first option we try.

Get him to agree to our offer and we're half way there with the implied threat that he'll leave for the pies at the end of 2015 if a trade isn't done.

Pick 4 and a player off the Brisbane list that suits there needs and one there prepared to trade would be better compensation that what they'll receive via free agency.

Replace Beams immediately with Dangerfield and our hopes in the short term suddenly don't seem so bleak.

About time Ed pulled off another Malthouse style coup.

Adelaide's recent professionalism means they'll probably offer us former number 1 pick Richard Tambling!

swoop42 wrote:Losing Beams and getting Dangerfield using the Beams compensation should be the first option we try.

Get him to agree to our offer and we're half way there with the implied threat that he'll leave for the pies at the end of 2015 if a trade isn't done.

Pick 4 and a player off the Brisbane list that suits there needs and one there prepared to trade would be better compensation that what they'll receive via free agency.

Replace Beams immediately with Dangerfield and our hopes in the short term suddenly don't seem so bleak.

About time Ed pulled off another Malthouse style coup.

I know I pooh poohed us ever getting Dangerfield in another thread but with the Beams situation arising the notion isn't as far fetched as it once was.

I doubt it will happen but if the club don't at least throw an offer out there re orchestrating a 3 way trade then I'd be surprised.

As great as getting Dangerfield the player is, in light of the year we've had on field and the discontent festering off, it would almost be as much of a coup for the clubs public relations.

Is Dangerfield a Victorian?I don't know much about him,except that he's a damn good player.

kymbo5@yahoo.com.au wrote:Many here are speculating on the possible trade re Beams and how it might get Dangerfield to Collingwood.

I don't know of course, but I doubt Buckley would want Dangerfield after he was heavily involved/responsible in the Sanderson sacking. Kinda like bringing in a 'rat pack" player?? Of course, there is the loyalty to his best mate which might play a part too, albeit it a business decision admittedly.

Why not, makes as much sense as bringing in Clark who by all reports (I'm led to believe his depression is only a part of the whole picture) is exactly the sort Bucks should stay away from.