TimeFor17
Debutant
- Aug 7, 2023
- 110
- 279
- AFL Club
- Carlton
Before 2028 yes.Good luck ripping out of Cowans hands.
Sent from my SM-G998B using Tapatalk
After that who knows
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
AFLW 2024 - Round 4 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Before 2028 yes.Good luck ripping out of Cowans hands.
Sent from my SM-G998B using Tapatalk
Are you extrapolating from research like me? Or, do you have something more tangible?Cody is a freak
He certainly looks like he will be bigger and taller than his dad (still has at least 6cm of growth left in him looking at his frame). His dad was a freak athlete and if it wasn’t for the shoulder problems he had early in his career he would have reached even greater heights. I remember when played on Tomahawk back in the day and made him look like an amateur with his athleticism and speed. Hope his son didn’t inherit dad’s shoulders.Are you extrapolating from research like me? Or, do you have something more tangible?
I am super optimistic as he smashes his old man’s records. Walks was verging on a great after having his body compromised early in his career.
I just envisage a slightly bigger,, slightly more athletic hybrid who could play anywhere like his old man. Certainly one I am happy ta fantasise about, and I don’t do that too often these days.
Good problem to have, then we'll need to trade up in the draft to nab the cousin.Sounds like by the time he’s due to be drafted we’ll need to trade for Pick 1.
I think there's a little bit of perspective going on here, he's standing in front of AW1 slightly, his hair is a bit fluffy and AW is wearing a hat (OMG!!)From above mentioned Facebook page. Proud family photo.
Looks like Cody at 15 is about same height as dad who listed at 190cm.
(Hope this is OK by site rules)
View attachment 2011454
The football gods should let him grow to about 193cm, IMO.I think there's a little bit of perspective going on here, he's standing in front of AW1 slightly, his hair is a bit fluffy and AW is wearing a hat (OMG!!)
I'd say he's very close but not quite at 190cm (if that listing is accurate), maybe 188? Part of me hopes he doesn't keep growing at that rate otherwise he'll wind up being a KPP! Though not the worst thing, I've just always imagined an explosive mid size fwd/mid ala Petracca/Warner type.
It's a non issue. We'll still have first dibs for him but will have to pay more. If he is living up to the hype then it will be worth whatever we have to pay, especially coming into several years of compromised drafts. Having access to an elite talent like this when we'll be nowhere near the elite end of the draft is like striking gold - just like Colliwobbles and Daicos.Sounds like by the time he’s due to be drafted we’ll need to trade for Pick 1.
It's a non issue. We'll still have first dibs for him but will have to pay more. If he is living up to the hype then it will be worth whatever we have to pay, especially coming into several years of compromised drafts. Having access to an elite talent like this when we'll be nowhere near the elite end of the draft is like striking gold - just like Colliwobbles and Daicos.
Yes, they paid less but drafting a generational talent when you shouldn't be drafting there is immense - and will be worth even more then Tasmania come into play.
If he's worth pick 1 then bloody hell that's a good thing, not a bad one.
(may be getting ahead of myself calling him generational/elite etc. but you get the point)
Haha no not at all. Just don't like the whining about the rules changing. We'll still get him, and if we do have to pay up for a pick#1 then it's actually a very good thing, not something to complain about.Your talking to someone who’s still pissed of when Collo changed the number of games a father needed to play for a club and we missed out on Matthew Lloyd.
Me too; I didn't know about the rule change but I was pissed when * managed to nab him with a compo pick. Wasn't there some player we could have given up to get in before the scum/filth (I don't know which one is which)?Your talking to someone who’s still pissed of when Collo changed the number of games a father needed to play for a club and we missed out on Matthew Lloyd.
Explosive CrippsI think there's a little bit of perspective going on here, he's standing in front of AW1 slightly, his hair is a bit fluffy and AW is wearing a hat (OMG!!)
I'd say he's very close but not quite at 190cm (if that listing is accurate), maybe 188? Part of me hopes he doesn't keep growing at that rate otherwise he'll wind up being a KPP! Though not the worst thing, I've just always imagined an explosive mid size fwd/mid ala Petracca/Warner type.
It's the same rules for Academies, which ultimately are actually why it's being changed.Yep. Father son needs fixing. Meanwhile gc have 50 list spots and the Sydney clubs are likely getting COLA back. Yep. Father son is too much of an advantage.
I'm not sure of WA rules, but SANFL rules are rather stringent and not really much of anything. Adelaide missed out on Gibbs despite Ross playing 253 games for Glenelg.Lets not forget the WA and SA teams have father son access to WAFL and Sanfl players still...
Imagine he was off the table and we took Selwood instead...Haha no not at all. Just don't like the whining about the rules changing. We'll still get him, and if we do have to pay up for a pick#1 then it's actually a very good thing, not something to complain about.
We did get Gibbs because of rough rules for the SA clubs r.e. F/S too you know. He really should've been a Crow but, no.
Would you want a a@@$hole like that at our club. Still believe in quality of the person as well as talentYour talking to someone who’s still pissed of when Collo changed the number of games a father needed to play for a club and we missed out on Matthew Lloyd.
Realistically though, we probably would've taken Gumbleton or Luenberger. Ruck was a need at the time iirc, and Gumbleton was the no.1 key forward. Gibbs was the consensus and overwhelming no.1 pick, hence the selection and Selwood was pick 7. Without Gibbs we likely draft a huge bust instead.Imagine he was off the table and we took Selwood instead...
On SM-F946B using BigFooty.com mobile app
Realistically though, we probably would've taken Gumbleton or Luenberger. Ruck was a need at the time iirc, and Gumbleton was the no.1 key forward. Gibbs was the consensus and overwhelming no.1 pick, hence the selection and Selwood was pick 7. Without Gibbs we likely draft a huge bust instead.
Realistically though, we probably would've taken Gumbleton or Luenberger. Ruck was a need at the time iirc, and Gumbleton was the no.1 key forward. Gibbs was the consensus and overwhelming no.1 pick, hence the selection and Selwood was pick 7. Without Gibbs we likely draft a huge bust instead.