Rumour Tales from the Henley Beach Cafe: CROWS 2021 RUMOURS

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
On the back of the drug incident and Brad's wish to stay in Adelaide I think Port was hoping to get Brad at a lower market price

Maybe Port know now that other clubs are prepared to pay more and Port have since rolled out the "we are not interested" statement

On SM-G973F using BigFooty.com mobile app

I think there's also a big difference between inquiring about a players asking price/availability, actively chasing a player and then actually convincing that player to want to come, and subsequently actually getting a deal done with his current club.

I'd imagine, as you suggest, Port enquired with Crouch's manager as to his asking price/suggested to his manager what they might be willing to offer. The two didn't match up and so both parties moved on. The trouble is for fans, is word gets to elements of the media that there were "discussions" or "interest" and suddenly it gets made out like there's something serious going on, when in actual fact its much more a "nothing to see here" type scenario.

On the flip side, there's a case like Atkins whereby Gold Coast have clearly identified him a long way out and chased him with a large offer to entice him across.

I'd imagine our interest in Fantasia is similar to Port's interest in Crouch, if the price is right, sure we're interested. However, we're not going to waste too much time haggling or losing sleep over the deal if things don't match up, we'll walk away and move on.
 
I also think Port’s lower offer is a sign the think they can attract players with “success”. Ollie Wines said the other day that the list was set-up for the next 10 to 15 years.... they’re in a pretty good spot but fastest thing Port ever do is get ahead of themselves.

Please tell me that means a 10-15 year Hinkley contract extension is on the cards.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

It’s between the Saints and Essendon for Crouch’s services at this point, I trust this source so up to people if they want to believe it or not.
Any figures thrown out? And would that assume Essendon were going to match a daniher bid?
It’s between the Saints and Essendon for Crouch’s services at this point, I trust this source so up to people if they want to believe it or not.
 
Potentially, but FA is before trade period isn’t it? I would suggest the reverse, whoever doesn’t get Crouch will go very hard after Caldwell.

Depends on if Caldwell nominates a club or not.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I haven't seen the gut running in a while. The end can come fast for football players, let's not get caught with our pants down again.

I personally think he can still have an impact off the half back line playing a Hodge type role.
It's either that or the Ebert type roll from Port. I thought Ebert really did a good job reinventing himself down there. You'd think half back is a bit easier for Sloane but then again he's always been fairly solid in front of goal so maybe up there? Something needs to change though so either would be an improvement.
 
It’s between the Saints and Essendon for Crouch’s services at this point, I trust this source so up to people if they want to believe it or not.

Interesting, if you marry the Essendon part up with what Rendell has supposedly “heard”. I wonder if there might be a handshake agreement whereby Essendon obtain Crouch for enough to gain band one, which we agree to trade to them for 7 and 8?

Probably doesn’t pass the AFL “sniff test” though.
 
Depends on if Caldwell nominates a club or not.
Players just about always nominate a particular destination club... particularly a player in demand.
 
Interesting, if you marry the Essendon part up with what Rendell has supposedly “heard”. I wonder if there might be a handshake agreement whereby Essendon obtain Crouch for enough to gain band one, which we agree to trade to them for 7 and 8?

Probably doesn’t pass the AFL “sniff test” though.
And why would we give up pick 2 for two picks that won't result in McDonald or Thilthorpe (assuming we go Hollands at 1).

It would make sense if we intend to pass on Hollands and take McDonald or Thilthorpe with one and going mids for the next three picks inside the top ten.
 
And why would we give up pick 2 for two picks that won't result in McDonald or Thilthorpe (assuming we go Hollands at 1).

It would make sense if we intend to pass on Hollands and take McDonald or Thilthorpe with one and going mids for the next three picks inside the top ten.
Because that might be the only way we get Band 1 compensation for Crouch. Pick 7 & 8 might be the best result we can get for Crouch.
 
And why would we give up pick 2 for two picks that won't result in McDonald or Thilthorpe (assuming we go Hollands at 1).

It would make sense if we intend to pass on Hollands and take McDonald or Thilthorpe with one and going mids for the next three picks inside the top ten.

Id rather pick 2 as well, but the deal may be Essendon pay the extra to Crouch on the proviso we do the trade. 2 mid first rounders for Crouch is still a good deal.
 
Id rather pick 2 as well, but the deal may be Essendon pay the extra to Crouch on the proviso we do the trade. 2 mid first rounders for Crouch is still a good deal.
Would this work. We get Fanta for pick 8. Dons pony up enough for Brouch that we get pick 2.

crows in : pick 2, fanta
Crows out: Brouch , pick 8
 
Would this work. We get Fanta for pick 8. Dons pony up enough for Brouch that we get pick 2.

crows in : pick 2, fanta
Crows out: Brouch , pick 8
Considering the only way we get pick 2 is via free agency compensation, this implies we trade pick 8 for Fantasia :eek:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top