Player Watch #30: Reece Conca

Remove this Banner Ad

Madtiger2006 said:
I'd say no one wants him and we've offered him one year to see how he pulls up. Maybe a coaching role if he gets injured again
Click to expand...
What are the odds of Conca not being available on Saturday 29 July 2017 - National Lasagna Day.

Conca in a coaching role
upload_2016-10-9_8-8-45.png
 
Last edited:

Log in to remove this ad.

I don't think anyone here supporting him is saying they wouldn't trade him if the right offer came along. Considering it's hard to imagine anyone offering a pick in the top 50 for him I'd absolutely prefer to keep him, no point trading out a player with no currency who could come good. It's not as simple as saying he has under performed and therefore must be traded.
 
bananatigz said:
I don't think anyone here supporting him is saying they wouldn't trade him if the right offer came along. Considering it's hard to imagine anyone offering a pick in the top 50 for him I'd absolutely prefer to keep him, no point trading out a player with no currency who could come good. It's not as simple as saying he has under performed and therefore must be traded.
Click to expand...
Atm the only uncontracted players on the senior list are Batchelor, A Moore, Butler, Vickery who may or may not be traded and Conca.
It is unlikely that they will cut contracted players or even trade them out it is not what they do.

That is just 5 players.
What i am asking is how many should we be turning over. Yes we have lesser players than Conca but they are firstly contracted and are mostly much younger and been around far less time.
imo we should be utilising a minimum of 4 nd picks, do 3 trades/fa we probably have already done one in Prestia, and utilise at 3 rookie picks with Short and Castagna being promoted and Marcon delisted. That will make just 8 new faces spread across the ND, TRADE/FA and ROOKIES.
The thing is if we promote rookies we will need to move on players from the list proper to accomodate them.

If we keep Conca and say Vickery ends up staying and we promote Short and Castagna because of contracts it looks like we wont be making too many changes to the list at all.
This regime has constantly said it thinks it has the list and it thinks it has the right people in charge, change has been minimal apart from turning over assistent coaches, the turnover of players like the board and the f/d looks like it will be minimal. They are imo sticking to their belief that they have the list and personell in the f/d to go all the way.

Next year will be interesting because if they fail the board and the entire footy dept will have no option but get out of the place.
 
Plonka is a dud. Can't believe there're considering signing him for another two years. He selfish, can't kick and plays backwards. This is part of the big problem at Tigerland. If we keep re-signing dud players/list cloggers how do you expect to get any success. If he was in any other team he would have been gone years ago but at Tigerland he's in our best 22 according to some. Unbelievable. So he's been around for about 5 years and done almost nothing so what makes you think in the next 2 years he's going to turn it around. Getting rid of him for **** sakes.
 
THE THIN MAN said:
Basically he is paid to play football on the field, if he can't do that through fitness/desire he should be gone.
Click to expand...
Or you pay him minimum coin and keep him instead of losing him for nothing. We're hardly crying out for list space relief.
 
Selfishly, I love going to visit Lou at Conca's in Victoria Park and having his charcuterie platter.

May Reece stay.

Haere Ra
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

DrMike said:
Or you pay him minimum coin and keep him instead of losing him for nothing. We're hardly crying out for list space relief.
Click to expand...

He is a perpetual sicknote who has constantly failed to deliver; the only thing associated with Conca is potential.

It would seem the only thing keeping him on a playing list at Richmond is his high draft position.

Conca is a known quantity, better to bring someone new who can add something to the side.
 
THE THIN MAN said:
He is a perpetual sicknote who has constantly failed to deliver; the only thing associated with Conca is potential.

It would seem the only thing keeping him on a playing list at Richmond is his high draft position.

Conca is a known quantity, better to bring someone new who can add something to the side.
Click to expand...

Maybe there is another Ben Nason or Webberley out there....:drunk:

If we delisted him it just means we add a pick 18 picks after our current last one. So something probably in the 70's or 60's. The odds are terrible...and that's not even taking into account our awful track record
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Player Watch #30: Reece Conca

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top