Does the Club saying "we have a surplus of inside midfielders" = Tuck gone?

[one-eyed]

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

[mightytiges]

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.

[mightytiges]

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.

[mightytiges]

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.

[WilliamPowell]

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?

[mightytiges]

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.

[Darth Tiger]

Would consider Hyde as far more expendable than Tuck.

The question is - Is he more tradeable ?

[Mr Magic]

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.

[mightytiges]

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.

[Jackstar]

You can bet that 1 of them will go with the Polak deal

[WilliamPowell]

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

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

[mightytiges]

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  .

[one-eyed]

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.

[letsgetiton!]

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

[tiga]

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.