Redleg

How good is Danger? He made Buddy look like a waste of space. His aggression at the contest and his speed make him nearly unstoppable. He is a match winner. We don't have one.

We have the former Dogs Coach at our club and he would have several close contacts at the Dogs, including players and officials. If we don't go for Stringer, can we all rest assured that he would know something and that we would therefore know what we are doing. On a pure talent basis of course we would look at him. If we don't, then there would be a very good reason.

Not that this is the game breaker, but we just put Jack and Jesse front and centre of a sponsor's campaign. I don't think we would do that if we were contemplating getting rid of him. Then again, if the marketing department don't know what the FD is thinking, that could cause problems.

And what would we be getting?

AFL Tonight said in two different segments that Watts may be traded. Someone is pushing this scenario.

Yes it is. It refers to not recruiting d-kheads, not sacking every player on the list who gets reported or commits a misdemeanour. If that was the case we would have half a list left. Players are punished for their misdemeanours not automatically sacked as you suggest. There is also a difference between an isolated misdemeanour and a habitual d-ckhead.

So we should advertise for a friendless assistant coach.

Must have damaged a septum.

It is already in place.

He snores in his sleep.

Neither do I and neither do the club, they are just more pragmatic now. I think if you are seen as reasonable to deal with, clubs are more likely to steer leaving players to you instead of the ars-holes.

Not quite, but getting closer.

I wonder if something like this would work. Gibbs and Blues pick 21 or whatever Carlton's 2nd pick is to Crows. Pick 10 and MFC Player ( Watts/Kent?) to Blues Lever and 3rd round pick to Dees.

Over there.

I know for a fact that we don't think like that, as the List Managers know very well that what goes round comes round. The mantra is generally be fair in dealing, though of course at the same time trying to get the best deal, but the key word is "fair". The clubs that constantly try to screw other clubs are well known. I think this deal may get done early in trade week, thereby allowing the Crows to deal for Gibbs and others.

But we haven't made our plans public, Taylor isn't commenting, everyone else is.

Would suggest after trade week.

Hopefully.

This is the same Brian Waldron who said Lever was going to the Pies. PS. Sorry Demon 77, didn't see that you had posted this already.

He could be very interesting as an outside mid.

Scott played every game in 04 until he got injured, but played only 27 of the previous 66 and my recollection is that he was no fan of Daniher. He played several reserve games, but yes did have some injury concerns. I recall at the time that many were sceptical of the illness reason used for him to go home. My apologies to Scott if it was true, but many at the time thought it was untrue. You may have some more info on that. I think the info at the time was that his mother was unwell, but again you may have more info on that. I remember talk at the time that he wanted to be away from Daniher.

We got pick 12 for Scott, who at the time wasn't getting a game from Daniher. We were treated fairly by the Crows. They played him we didn't, much to the angst of several Demon supporters, myself included. Scott was not at the level of Lever when they got him.

I accept that you get monkeys for peanuts and for class you have to pay. I trust Taylor/ Mahoney etc to get a good deal done, but think the Danger deal, bearing in mind he was one for the best in the AFL at the time, does seem to set a benchmark and hopefully we can get Lever for a bit better than that deal as he is no Dangerfield, ( yet ).

Sorry to nit pick but Gus was pick 3.