Post BF Upgrade Feedback - Click Here

Remove this Banner Ad

Rumour Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Matz
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

RuFiO said:
I don't get why people hate on Buckley so much and think Young's any better.
I guess once a majority of people go with one thing the rest follow.
Click to expand...
I tend to agree with this. Buckley has played some good games with a lot of posessions and only the odd bad decision to hold against him. His long kick is something we need out of defence. His turnovers every now and then we don't. I would suggest that he has done a lot more good things than bad in his games, and has occasionally been a matchwinner. Perhaps about as often as he has turned games against us with bad decisions.
Young will probably improve, and lose the rabbit in the headlights act that he has now with more experience, but he has shown a lot less than Buckley under match pressure so far.
In short, the selectors know more than we do.
 
mattys123 said:
Trading Young for a draft pick we probably won't use makes no sense unless Tom has asked to leave the club for a better opportunity at playing senior football elsewhere.

If he has asked to leave, it's strange that it's happened so late in the trade period.

Not a massive loss either way, interesting to see what draft pick the Dogs give us, anything after 48 will not be used by us.
Click to expand...

Well I have Heard we would of De-Listed Young anyway.

We Might Trade Pick 71 as we won't use it in the Draft
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

FIGJAM said:
Either that a lot of individual minds have come to the conclusion, on their own, that he is not up to AFL standard.
Click to expand...

Hes still on an AFL list so that conclusion cant be made yet. He was surplus to Collingwoods requirements and somebody had to make room. He will be better off at a club on a different part of the premiership clock while he continues to develop.
 
mattys123 said:
Trading Young for a draft pick we probably won't use makes no sense unless Tom has asked to leave the club for a better opportunity at playing senior football elsewhere.

If he has asked to leave, it's strange that it's happened so late in the trade period.

Not a massive loss either way, interesting to see what draft pick the Dogs give us, anything after 48 will not be used by us.
Click to expand...

It's pretty obvious that we were planning on delisting him. Thus it's a good will trade. I personally don't mind him and think that he will develop into a reasonable senior player.
 
I didn't think he was going to make it, but I don't dislike him and I'm pleased he's able to continue his career elsewhere.

I think it's pretty natural that Nathan Buckley wants to put his stamp on the list, and he's doing that after having worked with them for a season.

I expect Russell will now be picked up, but it might not be the case. The move could have been made with rookie elevations in mind, or simply preventing other delistings being necessary.
 
The Royal Sampler said:
I didn't think he was going to make it, but I don't dislike him and I'm pleased he's able to continue his career elsewhere.

I think it's pretty natural that Nathan Buckley wants to put his stamp on the list, and he's doing that after having worked with them for a season.

I expect Russell will now be picked up, but it might not be the case. The move could have been made with rookie elevations in mind, or simply preventing other delistings being necessary.
Click to expand...

Correct. The last spot on the list might end up being a choice between keeping Buckley, bringing in Russell, or promoting Williams.
 
Moving Young means we are making room for another player like Russell, using an additional pick in the draft or we are retaining someone we expected we would delist.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

TradeDraft said:
Well I have Heard we would of De-Listed Young anyway.

We Might Trade Pick 71 as we won't use it in the Draft
Click to expand...

Where did you hear that Dave? On Bigfooty? haha
Sometimes I think you forget that we're all here reading the same stuff as you.... :p
 
wicksy said:
Where did you hear that Dave? On Bigfooty? haha
Sometimes I think you forget that we're all hear reading the same stuff as you.... :p
Click to expand...

It was not on BigFooty
 
Timmy from Thomastown said:
Hes still on an AFL list so that conclusion cant be made yet. He was surplus to Collingwoods requirements and somebody had to make room. He will be better off at a club on a different part of the premiership clock while he continues to develop.
Click to expand...
You do realise we were talking about Suckley in that chain, hotpie?
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Timmy from Thomastown said:
Buckley and Russell are the same age so thats a bit irrelevant. Its just a question of who is likely to give us more. I'm still not sold on Russell but the club may think differnently.
Click to expand...
They provide completely different things though. Buckley can do more damage with limited touches than Russell can. They are both fairly crap though.

I'm honestly kind of annoyed we weren't in on McIntosh and Broughton. The need at the ruck position is obvious, but a less known need IMO is rebound out of defence. Someone to fill Leon's role was a big miss this season. We should have found a way to use pick 40 and 47 or whatever that pick is now, to at least have been in the reckoning for those two. Absolute bargains, and both would be integral parts of our team next season. Young and whatever straggler we've been linked with (Russell etc,) won't be.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Similar threads

JuniorB
    • Like
    • Haha
Certified Legendary Thread Covid, Life, UFOs, Food, & Wordle :( Part 2
160 161 162 163 164
Replies
4K
Views
126K
jathanas
jathanas

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom