Search results for query: *

First of all, I have not suggested trading Allan at all - you might want to go back and look at my posts before you pop off like this. What I was defending was people's rights to share a view on this forum of what Allan might be able to fetch on the trade market. Secondly, I definitely don't...

You can absolutely. But this forum is in large part about making predictions and guesses about what might happen in the future, and the above scenario classifies. You are welcome to not provide your opinion until 2025 has played out though.

Could have already had two brownlows. Already is 12th all time in votes for Collingwood players.

Yep exactly - in the final game of a 2 year stretch on the list, and where he had only played one game prior in the two years.

Gold Coast say no to this one for sure. For two reasons - 1) because Rowell is worth far more to them than a future (uncertain number) first round and a couple of latter picks, especially since they don't really need draft picks anymore, they need to keep their developing core together as much...

List blogger - hahah....! I feel like I'm a list blogger who's been on this blog site too long...

You'd relucantly accept a trade where we lose Harrison and a future first round pick in 2026, for Rowell...? Um, yep, so would everyone. Well, except for Gold Coast, obviously...

Of course there is a point - it is a prediction, that's we do on this site. There would be much less content on this site if we stripped out all predictions. So the point of the declaration is to register my prediction. If we successfully trade for him, then I'm wrong. If someone else trades...

Long was on Hawthorn's list for a few years prior also, and even though he had the same physical attributes as we've described was delisted.

No, last year we traded a best 22 player, a borderline best 22 player, a first round pick and a second round pick. This year, we won't be able to trade a first round pick or a second round pick, won't have a player we are able to let go, and Rowell would command a higher trade price than Houston.

How was he held back? He played a full season in the VFL didn't he?

Yeah, it's an easy thing to say, but who? Give me an example of someone who we would be okay to trade away (noting that we are also close to a flag) that GC would want as compensation for losing one of the best young mids and the former number one draft pick? The likes of a De Goey or Cameron...

If Rowell was on the trade table, someone is going to offer 2x top 12 first round picks as a starting point. We don't have enough good mid aged players to upstage that, without being net negative to our competitiveness.

Yeah, but we don't have any young talent we would want to let go (as we need more young talent than less), our older talent won't fetch back much in return given their age, and we wouldn't want to trade out a mid aged player who is best 22 right now to bring in a mid aged player, even if it is...

But wouldn't we need to trade for him? We don't have ANY trade capital next year, and even our future first rounders we need to hang on to now. We need to accept that we aren't getting a big name now unless they are FA - which should be a somewhat open avenue as we will have a lot coin coming...

Do we have any academy players that are candidates for us next year?

Can someone clarify for me - do we have access to Riley Onley or not? I may be confused.

I reckon Brown was better than serviceable - he played over 130 games as a lock down full back - he'd be the missing piece of our team right now if he was on the list. Reid also played 150+ games, despite his injuries. We'd have won the 2018 flag if he was fit. Tarrant wasn't drafted in the...

Fair enough, and thanks for your feedback Manic. Which ones do you think have the most better chance at making it than I have suggested?

Wow - I love this! you are even more of a pessimist than I am! :)

The Brown/Reid/Dawes draft delivered a three best 22 key position players in 2006 I think it was, but outside of that we haven't landed anything useful.

Given I'm bored, I thought I'd take a leaf from some of the US sports and offer a rating of our 'rookie/prospects' - i.e. young players who have yet to establish themselves. For the purposes of this thread, I've drawn the line at anyone who was born in or after 2002, and has played fewer than 30...

Does Wil break in and become a permanent small defender this year? I'd love it if we didn't need to use Josh Daicos (or even Houston) as a running small defender, but not sure if he is up to it yet. Imagine being able to have J Daicos and Houston on the wings...

Jen, no one is going to give you bad marks for not getting it right - this is a safe place. Just give it a shot - what do you think the GF team would look like (i.e. at the end of the year) if we were lucky enough to make it?

"By the end of the year" - okay, so what is your best 23 for the 'final game' of 2025? And isn't is okay for us to assume / hope that Collingwood's final game is the 2025 GF...?

The best 23 concept is about "if you had to pick your best side for one game", otherwise, the post from Timmy is right - you need more than 23 players to succeed. I disagree with your comment about that you 'need to' have more youth in the side at the end than at the start if we are to move...

Yep, I understand. But I believe the purpose of this thread is to project what might be the best 23 if we were lucky to make the Grand Final. Otherwise there is no point to the thread.

Haha yep. Correct answer is 'Definitely not - it's the not the pants at all."

It will take 35 players to get to the GF. It will take 23 to win it.