Recruiting Trade & Free Agency VII

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.

Log in to remove this ad.

You guys would be better making a play for Josh Bruce than Cox.
At least he's good at ground level.
I think Cox is being courted as a ruckman as well as a forward. I would have zero objection to making a play at Bruce though.
 
Thinking about it a little more, I've always thought I'd love to see mason cox disappointed after a big ANZAC day loss, so this could work.

I shouldn't have laughed at this, but I did. :oops:
 
We'd be looking at Cox as a back up ruck that can push forward. I wish we'd been onto Bruce earlier purely as a forward but looks like the dogs have done all the work needed to get him.

Seems like they they convinced him, but he's contracted. He was likely to go to Collingwood last year.
Match the contract under offer and make a fair off to the Saints, and it could work.
 
Seems like they they convinced him, but he's contracted. He was likely to go to Collingwood last year.
Match the contract under offer and make a fair off to the Saints, and it could work.
What's the rumoured contract?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I question how keen we are.
We will just be shaking trees because this Daniher thing has caught us out and we would be canvassing all options, key forwards, ruckman, rucks that can play forward.

Remember this time of year a question is reported as a team chasing a player.
 
**** me dead, Mason Cox now, really? Wtf is Essendon even doing anymore.. have we really given up so badly...
 
Disagree. We need more cult figures. They help fill the void that the lack of success at anything has created.

Yeh but for every cult figure there needs to be a whipping boy, it's the order of things.. one gains power from the misfortune of the other like a parasitic svengali.

We only have one Zaharakis... Unless , does this mean Langford remains?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top