One-Eyed Richmond Forum
Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: one-eyed on October 10, 2006, 12:55:53 AM
-
From the Age:
While the Tigers are the preferred club for Polak, football director Greg Miller said Richmond would have to lose a player to fit Polak into its budget — despite the club's anticipated profit of nearly $1 million.
He confirmed the Tigers were prepared to acquire him via exchanges of picks, such as trading down (from 8 to 13 and 26 to 31) in the draft's first two rounds. They have told other clubs they have a surplus of inside midfielders.
http://www.realfooty.theage.com.au/realfooty/articles/2006/10/09/1160246070787.html
-
Not sure if we have an excess but our inside midfielders would be Cogs, Tuck and Foley. Tivs played more inside this year too but he wouldn't have any trade value and Sugar is now mainly a tagger. Foley will be kept you would think so that leaves one of Cogs or Tuck going if the above is true.
-
In 2005 we were one of the top sides in contested footy won. It was once the ball was loose that we got cut to ribbons through lack of speed in our midfield. This year we dropped right away in contested footy won as the Essendon game showed.
-
that leaves one of Cogs or Tuck going if the above is true.
Well if Cogs is not on the table as SEN said then that leaves Tuck unless I'm missing out on someone who is classed as a inside midfielder. Polo would also be one but he isn't going anywhere either.
-
that leaves one of Cogs or Tuck going if the above is true.
Well if Cogs is not on the table as SEN said then that leaves Tuck unless I'm missing out on someone who is classed as a inside midfielder. Polo would also be one but he isn't going anywhere either.
Hyde?
-
that leaves one of Cogs or Tuck going if the above is true.
Well if Cogs is not on the table as SEN said then that leaves Tuck unless I'm missing out on someone who is classed as a inside midfielder. Polo would also be one but he isn't going anywhere either.
Hyde?
That's true WP. Hydey with his decent pace would probably suit the wide expanses of Subi better than Tucky too.
-
Would consider Hyde as far more expendable than Tuck.
The question is - Is he more tradeable ?
-
If it meant getting an extra first or second round pick in this draft I would give up Cogs or Tuck.
Neither are untouchables. We have the lowest clearance rates in the AFL. It can't get any worse giving these guys up.
The bottom line is our midfield sucks and is hugely overated.
-
Would consider Hyde as far more expendable than Tuck.
The question is - Is he more tradeable ?
Tuck would have more trade value but Hyde would attract interest as he's no hack. He did kick 4 goals and get 20-odd possies down at the Cattery.
-
You can bet that 1 of them will go with the Polak deal
-
You can bet that 1 of them will go with the Polak deal
Who Hyde or Tuck?
I wouldn't be surprised if nothing happens ;D
It seems no-one apart from the Doggies wants to give up draft picks and no one wants players because they want them pesky draft picks
-
You can bet that 1 of them will go with the Polak deal
If it's Hyde then we might have to accept just a direct swap :-\ but Freo should throw in a decent pick + Polak for Tuck or something along Ramps idea in the other thread of Tuck + pick 26 -> Polak + pick 13. Like I said I hope we know what we are doing :-\.
-
According to Greg Denham as well we wont be trading a "big name" player. He said after Monday there was talk of Tuck, Cogs and even Sugar being up for trade but that Gary March has said that won't happen on his watch.
-
According to Greg Denham as well we wont be trading a "big name" player. He said after Monday there was talk of Tuck, Cogs and even Sugar being up for trade but that Gary March has said that won't happen on his watch.
march should but out
he is president of teh club
not in charge of list management, and really what te f do presidents know about football and what is required. they are there 4 the business side of thongs not football issues or team lists
-
According to Greg Denham as well we wont be trading a "big name" player. He said after Monday there was talk of Tuck, Cogs and even Sugar being up for trade but that Gary March has said that won't happen on his watch.
march should but out
he is president of teh club
not in charge of list management, and really what te f do presidents know about football and what is required. they are there 4 the business side of thongs not football issues or team lists
And football clubs are in the business of winning games. I respect a president who has an interest in list management.
-
And football clubs are in the business of winning games. I respect a president who has an interest in list management.
exactly :thumbsup
And the players are one the assets of the business.
All Presidents take an interest in the list - it is proper business practice - you keep an eye on the company's assets ;)
-
It's a principle of management
-
Greg Denham isn't exactly super-reliable with info :nope
The WA footy site footygoss.com has the following spiel:
Richmond offer Tuck for Polak
Posted Oct 11, 2006 - 08:31 AM
Richmond has offered Shane Tuck as one player it is willing to trade to Fremantle in return for key position player Graham Polak.
The Tigers are one of several clubs interested in gaining Polak, who has made it clear to Fremantle he wants to be traded.
http://www.footygoss.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=30859&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0
-
Greg Denham isn't exactly super-reliable with info :nope
Yeah Greg Denham and some of his gems - Ottens to Sydney and Laidley to the Saints
:wallywink :wallywink
If Tuck is up for trade - fair enough but gee I'd want a little bit more than a straight swap - Polak and their 3rd round pick would do it for me :yep
-
Freo's 3rd rounder is 47 so IMHO we should be doing better than that. Tuck has played every game in the past 2 years (44) compared to Polak's 25 and only 11 this year and just one (R22) in Freo's long winning streak in the second half of the year and he didn't make any of their three finals sides. And that's forgetting off-field baggage. The Tuck's are physically reliable footballers. Get Polak cheap or at least something to make it worthwhile otherwise forget it IMO. Remember if Freo don't do a trade, Polak will walk to Carlton and Freo will get zilch.
-
Get Polak cheap or at least something to make it worthwhile otherwise forget it IMO. Remember if Freo don't do a trade, Polak will walk to Carlton and Freo will get zilch.
Exactly, basic rule of negotiation, never accept the first offer, second offer or third offer.
Which club has more to lose in this deal? Freo of course. Polak is leaving via trade or PSD.
By 1.30pm Friday, I think we might be able to get Polak in a straight swap for Humm.
-
By 1.30pm Friday, I think we might be able to get Polak in a straight swap for Humm.
LOL. We might not be that lucky :lol but agree LT that's the time when we make our offer when Freo will be desperate. I'd be happy with Ramps suggestion. We get a 50/50 player like Polak in exchange for a reliable, play every game midfielder like Tuck and as insurance we gain 13 spots in the draft.
-
This all couldnt come at a worst time for Shane Tuck, he got marrried last weekend and is currently on his honeymoon.
-
This all couldnt come at a worst time for Shane Tuck, he got marrried last weekend and is currently on his honeymoon.
He is aware of what's going on? We dont need a third PR stuff up in the space of 2 months :P.
-
Shane Tuck, who had been linked to the Polak deal on Tuesday, was taken off the table yesterday.
http://www.realfooty.theage.com.au/realfooty/articles/2006/10/11/1160246197572.html
-
If Miller does that deal he is a fool.
-
Shane Tuck, who had been linked to the Polak deal on Tuesday, was taken off the table yesterday.
http://www.realfooty.theage.com.au/realfooty/articles/2006/10/11/1160246197572.html
The media are saying one thing while others ;) are saying the opposite. Agree RR, we're dumb if that deal is true.
-
If what I read in the papers this morning is true then its a shameful performance from our footy department. If we lose 8 for Polak in any way shape or form it would be an outrage and a scandal and heads should roll. You dont give up 8 for Polak. If it wasnt so serious itd almost be funny.
if we gabe pick 8, and in return got pick 13 plus polak i would live with that. no prrof that the 8th pick would be better than the 13th pick. this is also meant to be a pretty even and super duper draft full of talent .
btw, pick 20 was polo iirc 2 yrs ago? who was pick 8? and who do u rate better ?
-
From SEN:
Tuck's name is still being mentioned in dispatches but he has a back-ended contract (Schwarz guessing said around 250k) so that comes in consideration in any trade.
-
From SEN:
Tuck's name is still being mentioned in dispatches but he has a back-ended contract (Schwarz guessing said around 250k) so that comes in consideration in any trade.
why was tuck given a back ended contract :banghead :banghead :banghead
-
From SEN:
Tuck's name is still being mentioned in dispatches but he has a back-ended contract (Schwarz guessing said around 250k) so that comes in consideration in any trade.
Actually Schwarz said it would be around $250k a year normal but back ended it could be as high as $300k - well that's how I took what he said
why was tuck given a back ended contract :banghead :banghead :banghead
If it's true - that's a bloody good question X
-
From SEN:
Tuck's name is still being mentioned in dispatches but he has a back-ended contract (Schwarz guessing said around 250k) so that comes in consideration in any trade.
Actually Schwarz said it would be around $250k a year normal but back ended it could be as high as $300k - well that's how I took what he said
Thanks WP :).
why was tuck given a back ended contract :banghead :banghead :banghead
If it's true - that's a bloody good question X
Us hoping our financial situation would be much improved by his final year so we can spend more than the minimum 92.5% of the salary cap ???.