View Full Version : Dean Cox is not up for trade
Yes, its been confirmed he is staying with the Eagles so any rumors involving him are not true.
The Clokes
12 Oct 2003, 18:43
He'll be at StKilda
Fall Out Boy
12 Oct 2003, 18:50
Originally posted by F-U
Yes, its been confirmed he is staying with the Eagles so any rumors involving him are not true.
Confirmed by whom?
Clokes - Thats twice you've said that with a degre of certainty. Is this conjecture or do you have some inside knowledge?
The Clokes
12 Oct 2003, 18:59
Heard on the radio St Kilda are very eager
West coast would be nuts(pun intended) to let cox go
Savatage
12 Oct 2003, 19:41
That's crap, he IS up for trade. WCE want a first round pick.
This came from a press conference with Trevor Nisbett regarding trade. He confirmed that Dean Cox is not up for trade just stating what John Worsfold said weeks before. He isnt going. They say they need Cox because he is a big part of there future or some ****. It seems like clubs will have to make a very generous offer to get Cos this year, although i doubt any clucb would offer anything substanial enough to change Worsfolds mind
Savatage
12 Oct 2003, 20:08
Originally posted by F-U
This came from a press conference with Trevor Nisbett regarding trade. He confirmed that Dean Cox is not up for trade just stating what John Worsfold said weeks before. He isnt going. They say they need Cox because he is a big part of there future or some ****. It seems like clubs will have to make a very generous offer to get Cos this year, although i doubt any clucb would offer anything substanial enough to change Worsfolds mind
That may be what they're saying publically, but believe me he has been offered around. Eagles wanted our pick #8.
evertonfc
12 Oct 2003, 23:39
Originally posted by Savatage
That's crap, he IS up for trade. WCE want a first round pick.
We won't give them that.
Not even close.
Much prefer to chase Croad, offer Black + 3rd Rounder, and solve our ruck problems by offering Carlton chicken feed for Matt Allen.
SainterSim83
12 Oct 2003, 23:41
Allan wouldnt solve our ruck deficiency, he would add to it. Croady could also be a lemon.. a very expensive one!
Monocle
13 Oct 2003, 00:05
Originally posted by Savatage
That may be what they're saying publically, but believe me he has been offered around. Eagles wanted our pick #8.
How do you know ? Give me reason to trust your informer!
Savatage
13 Oct 2003, 00:18
Originally posted by Monocle
How do you know ? Give me reason to trust your informer!
I know.
sainter
13 Oct 2003, 04:27
Originally posted by Savatage
That may be what they're saying publically, but believe me he has been offered around. Eagles wanted our pick #8.
As much as I appreciated the way he seemed to pick out Harvey, Hayes and Powell with his hitouts all day, giving up #8 would be as bad as selecting Jodi Arnol or Steven Sim. I wouldn't even want to part with #23 for him to be totally honest.
Originally posted by SainterSim83
Allan wouldnt solve our ruck deficiency, he would add to it.
Agreed 100%
Croady could also be a lemon.. a very expensive one! [/B]
Not too sure about Croad. If it could be arranged that Freo would pay a significant portion of his contract, I wouldn't mind giving him a chance to play at centre half back. A position is he far more suited too than as a key forward
evertonfc
13 Oct 2003, 14:47
Can people explain to me what the harm is in having ruckman in the calibre of Allan?
Get a grip.
Trent Knobel is honest at best, Brooks is still far too young. Koschitzke shouldn't even be an option and Magure + Oliver are too short.
Allan will cost $50,000 per year and we get to offload Lawrence.
Lunacy not to take him if he's available so cheaply.
evertonfc
13 Oct 2003, 14:49
Originally posted by SainterSim83
Croady could also be a lemon.. a very expensive one!
So could Nick Riewoldt.
The gamble on Trent Croad will pay for itself.
Originally posted by evertonfc
Can people explain to me what the harm is in having ruckman in the calibre of Allan?
.
He's a washed up hasbeen who takes up a spot on the list that could be used on a kid. I'd rather pay a teenager $30,000 and treat him as a "project player" rather than a selfish overrated dud who cannot get a game for Carlton.
Russian
13 Oct 2003, 15:54
I believe what the Eagles have said is that they are not trying to trade Cox, not that he's untradeable
90% of the players in the AFL would be up for trade if the price was right. cox is available be the question is at what price.
Originally posted by noodle
90% of the players in the AFL would be up for trade if the price was right. cox is available be the question is at what price.
i'd say 100% i don't believe there is any player out there that isn't untradeable
Originally posted by noodle
90% of the players in the AFL would be up for trade if the price was right. cox is available be the question is at what price.
Saying he is a required player could be a ploy to drive up his value? Also if Woosha is serious about Richo then we need to trade someone / thing of value.