Search results for query: *

Don't think so. Our major age gap is between 23 and 27 (Taylor, Selwood, Hawkins, Varcoe and that's pretty much it) and we'd prefer to avoid a Melbourne-style bottoming out, thanks. Our next window of contention is probably, realistically, in four-five years and Boak would still be playing...

Have to admit that I'm not a huge fan of it when players do that without exceptional reason for doing so. Going to, say, StKilda, still beats the hell out of winding up at GWS...

Yes, deliberately so for the sakes of making a point. On another note, when players do decide to leave for another state, I don't understand why clubs (such as West Coast/Carlton/Judd, Burgoyne/Port/Hawthorn) don't put more pressure on players to nominate multiple clubs that they are happy to...

Yeh, you're right, it is the second point. We've had our eyes on players like Dangerfield and Bradshaw (back in the day, obviously) but had to give them up as pie-in-the-sky. The issue is not the lack of interest on our side, it's the availability. All the same, just because a player was...

It's a new situation, we haven't been interested in a big fish from another club since Ottens.

Having done the whole will-he-won't-he Ablett thing, I have to disagree. Having a player forced to pretend that he's not talking to anyone is bad for the player, bad for the club and bad for the supporters. The whole scene where he was busted chatting with GC in the airport (ironically enough...

If they're worth a first-rounder and have some say in their destination? Hey, I'd do it!

Good point, but he has stagnated somewhat. Who knows, maybe he'd look better in a better midfield. (No disrespect).

Or said when asked about Boak - as the media would have done many a time - 'Yes, we are interested - in fact, we're flying out Jimmy and Joel this week.' Beats the way that Ablett and Scully had to move clubs.

But for that, he has to sign a new contract. Mind you, if his alternative is Gold Coast...

It was stupid of the club to do that and think they wouldn't get 'caught'. Really it should have all been done in the open from the start. I didn't say he was average, by the way. I said he was a good player, but I can't see us cutting any real holes out of our list for him. What I was trying...

I think that Christensen will definitely turn out to be better than Boak, and Duncan maybe. But yes, he'd still be top-four at the club, no doubt. We're chasing him, but there's a difference between chasing someone and being willing to give anything for him. I think it's more so about not...

Ok. What's your PayPal?

Of course he would be. Simply put (in order): Selwood, Stevie J, Bartel, Kelly/Boak, Christensen. I wouldn't trade Duncan for him, that said. Boak is currently a better midfielder than Duncan, but Duncan is a few years younger than him. Look, it would be different if Geelong was in a...

That's far too generous. Would you like Hawkins as well? I'd just feel terrible about ripping you off so badly...

Not quite. We were desperate for Ottens and would have moved heaven and earth for him. We'd really like Boak, there's a difference. He's a good midfielder, not a top one. Thanks for your contribution, Powerade08... at least I'm not trying to tell you to take Gillies and Hogan and be grateful.

We'd do that for any draft prospect who we wanted to interview. That's basically my point, though, you do have the right to tell us to piss off if we won't meet your demands. In this case, what stance would both Port and Boak take?

The real question is - we (Geelong) would *like* Boak on our list, but we don't need him, and hence we may not meet your evaluation of him. If, say, North offered their first round pick - which will probably come before ours - would he be prepared to go there? Would you be prepared to let him...