nutbean

The yuckier side of trade week - just got a picture through of Riv in a Geelong polo shirt - ewwww

from what I have seen of Cook, Davis and Sheahan - Sheahan was the best of three (I have seen nothing of Williams)

Whilst I dont think Grimes would be privvy to trading/delisting instructions it does seem odd that someone who is "apparently" close to being shown the door is training with the captain- coincidence or request from the heirachy ?

true, but on the other hand you are ready to trade out Tom Mc.

I know nothing about him except for the three clips above and he looks nice and agile and hits the ball hard.Whilst we are seeing a package I do like what I see

Being reported that Jai Sheahan has been moved on (Clark-HS tweeted). The bits I saw of him in the VFL I thought he looked clean and had upside.

yes - I forgot about that little pearl.

Agreed - again it may be the brain thing but Garland trails to a lot of contests

I don't - the most overused word on these boards are "star" and "champion" - words that have no relevance to our list today.

I dont think Garland is necessarily a bad decision maker I just think that on the odd occasion he makes a decision that is fifty miles past the town of "bad decision" and that decision is so bad that the taste stays in your mouth for days after like a 4 day old fried dim sim from a roadhouse bain marie. I thinks Garlands footskills are better than Rivers and better speed(for talls and smalls) but I think Rivers third up work and zoning off skills are better than Garlands- not much between them

Which is exactly why I didn't write catagorically - "Jared Rivers is going to Geelong for less money" - because I don't know. I am making assumptions that Geelong even though they have freed up some money with retirements have been struggling with their cap. It is not outside the realms that the offer we put on the table was low somewhat forcing his hand. You are right - I don't know (just tipping).

What does that tell you ? It isnt about money - it tells me its about playing finals next year.

I am tipping less coin at Geelong than Melbourne - they have much more talent they have to pay. Good luck Riv and wish you all the best.

I stand corrected -still a shortarse for a CHB. Who also cant forget Tiger Croswell giving the StKilda young gun Simon O'Donnell a decent bath at CHB ?

Barry Ough ?

Shane Mumford is a perfect example- Swans desperately needed a ruckman - paid pick 28 for Mumford who was 3rd choice ruckman and dangled a reported $3M contract for 3 years at him - I dont believe the money reported but i would suggest he got from day one in excess of $500K per year. Good deal or bad deal for the Swans ? I say a good deal but I have 3 years of history to look back on. Dawes a good deal or a bad deal ? the punt looks well worthwhile - give me a couple of years to come back to you if the punt paid off or not.

Without being too harsh - crap - it is UP TO GYSBERTS to realise his potential.

Not sure that I would trade him - want another year to see if the penny has dropped (nutbean = [censored]) However I couldnt agree more with your assessment on a players worth-doesnt matter how much you paid to get a player across or what draft pick he went at- he is worth what he is worth based on current history - not purchase price. Damn it - in 1973 I bought a brand new Leyland P76 for $3140 dollars - lo and behold I went to sell it one month later and it was worth $1.58.Go figure.

One of my favourites- a 5'11" centre half back- Steven Icke.

Absolutely does my head in- posters with zero clue pot an assistant coach with no more insight than the midfield is not performing. Posters here see the end result and bam - whack the coach. You cant pull your socks up if you arent wearing any. Lay blame squarely where it should be laid - at the feet of underperforming footballers not assistant coaches.(let someone who knows, the senior coach, make the assessment on his assistants)

Thats interesting. If true then it goes to show those who like to deflect from players underperforming and blame the coaches would be ummm wrong. We see the end result of our poor midfield and the first to cop the punch is the coach. Royal is out of contract I believe (yes?) - if Neeld doesnt move him on then our ex premiership midfield coach obviously rates him - but what the hell would he know ?

Can I correct this - there will be more competition for spots -add to that, for the first time in a long time we have a coach who will make players work harder to get into the 22, and even harder to stay in it. (could you imagine a Bailey or Daniher dropping Green, Moloney, Sylvia or Davey ?)

I have watched these boards go into meltdown for the last 4-5 years... "Why do we always draft kids that we have to wait to see the best of" "Why can't we draft anyone thats ready to go". Ï'm sick of being on a development curve" We have been let down by our lack of leadership for many years We have been let down by our mid/older players who have not provided guidance, leadership or backbone for our kids. Moloney gone, Green gone, Rivers probably gone, Davey and Sylvia dropped this year - what does this tell you about our past leaders at the club ? So Neeld comes in and lands us a premiership small forward/mid fielder who is ready to go, a premiership CHF who is ready to go and will straighten us up ( and apparently reeks leadership and work ethic which we have sorely been missing) and is looking to bring in more ready to go players and some posters are upset that we are trading away our draft picks ? I think Hogan could be a beauty but he is 17 - dont expect too much too early ( Jonno Patton - the next big thing - how was his first year ?). Viney looks he will be a man child from day one but that is an exception. Whether this strategy works and falls flat I say - more power to you Mr Neeld - you will not die wondering and have my full support !

One of the few players to progress under Neeld and there is so much more upside - a player that can progress to be the cornerstone of our backline - but lets trade him out for an untried. Just gosh.

Again, I can only go on what is reported (and we know how accurate journo's can be) - but there are a lot reporting the same thing - dogs offered pick 21 Collingwood (rightly) give scant regard to where the player wants to go - they want the best deal. If it is a deal for picks only can it be explained to me why Collingwood would happily take pick 27 from us over pick 21 from the dogs ?