Adam Treloar

John Wren · Post by **John Wren** » Thu Apr 30, 2015 10:02 pm

treloar or danger?

watt price tully · Post by **watt price tully** » Thu Apr 30, 2015 10:06 pm

So rumour now, seems we are offering big bikkies for Treloar. If true how does this sort of thing get leaked?

1. Player Manager upping the ante?
2. Inadvertent slip - loose lips?
3. The club - not sure why

What would we need to offer the club in return?

White & Young?

Johnno75 · Post by **Johnno75** » Thu Apr 30, 2015 10:09 pm

Barrett on the footy show just said we are seriously into Treloar despite what Collingwood will say publically and are going to offer him 5 years at 3.5m.

I would go Treloar, Danger might be past his best when we next challenge for a flag.

inxs88 · Post by **inxs88** » Thu Apr 30, 2015 10:18 pm

Treloar much better option than Dangerfield. 22 years old vs 25. More prolific and has more upside in the long term.

MagpieBat · Post by **MagpieBat** » Thu Apr 30, 2015 10:22 pm

watt price tully wrote:So rumour now, seems we are offering big bikkies for Treloar. If true how does this sort of thing get leaked?

1. Player Manager upping the ante?
2. Inadvertent slip - loose lips?
3. The club - not sure why

What would we need to offer the club in return?

White & Young?

Try the first rounder and a very good player, for a start.

inxs88 · Post by **inxs88** » Thu Apr 30, 2015 10:26 pm

Hate to say it but Jarrod Witts is the obvious currency here given the age of Mumford, the NSW connection with Witts and the modern day difficulty of playing two bona fide Ruckmen in the same team.

scoobydoo · Post by **scoobydoo** » Thu Apr 30, 2015 10:40 pm

inxs88 wrote:Hate to say it but Jarrod Witts is the obvious currency here given the age of Mumford, the NSW connection with Witts and the modern day difficulty of playing two bona fide Ruckmen in the same team.

Why would Collingwood give up one off only two ruckmen on the list?
What happens if Grundy gets injured?

Bob Sugar · Post by **Bob Sugar** » Thu Apr 30, 2015 10:46 pm

watt price tully wrote:So rumour now, seems we are offering big bikkies for Treloar. If true how does this sort of thing get leaked?

1. Player Manager upping the ante?
2. Inadvertent slip - loose lips?
3. The club - not sure why

What would we need to offer the club in return?

White & Young?

Keefe and thomas.

Darkstranger · Post by **Darkstranger** » Thu Apr 30, 2015 11:01 pm

MagpieBat wrote:
watt price tully wrote:So rumour now, seems we are offering big bikkies for Treloar. If true how does this sort of thing get leaked?

1. Player Manager upping the ante?
2. Inadvertent slip - loose lips?
3. The club - not sure why

What would we need to offer the club in return?

White & Young?
Try the first rounder and a very good player, for a start.

You have no idea, first round and maybe a second rounder. He ain't that good!

swoop42 · Post by **swoop42** » Thu Apr 30, 2015 11:19 pm

Danger.

Get him for free in terms of trades and doesn't turn 26 to the start of next season so has plenty of good years left.

Treloar would cost us plenty in terms of trade and the price tag isn't high enough to scare others away in the PSD.

Az · Post by Az » Fri May 01, 2015 2:37 am

Treloar would be gold, going to have to give up something good. GWS better remember the favor we did them in paying some of Heater's contact too.

Not at all confident in his signature seeing as though he's the only one out of all the high end out of contract/free agent players to have publicly stated he wants to stay a GWS man.

If not, make a hard play for Danger, Shiel or Aish.

Bucks5 · Post by **Bucks5** » Fri May 01, 2015 5:52 am

I heard that Dangerfield has recently brought a property on the Surf Coast. If true, I'd say he is committed to Geelong and isn't worth wasting our time pursuing.

MJ23 · Post by **MJ23** » Fri May 01, 2015 7:22 am

Treloar or Shiel Id have either.
Been watching them both since they were playing in blacktown.

Shiel was my early favorite however Treloar last year wow.

They are both jets, Treloar half way through the year had stats up there with Fyfe and Pendles.

There is no way we'd give up Witts and they dont really need a ruck, They have more blokes in their side able to ruck or developing in the ruck than we do.

neil · Post by **neil** » Fri May 01, 2015 7:24 am

scoobydoo wrote:
inxs88 wrote:Hate to say it but Jarrod Witts is the obvious currency here given the age of Mumford, the NSW connection with Witts and the modern day difficulty of playing two bona fide Ruckmen in the same team.
Why would Collingwood give up one off only two ruckmen on the list?
What happens if Grundy gets injured?

Look this is about trading facts, money, TPP contracts, list management and reality have nothing to with it. Witts may be happy here and not want to leave, he may have a contract but since when should these be considered when getting rid of a player.

Dont forget if a player wants to leave he is a traitor, a mercenary and what about loyalty?

Culprit · Post by **Culprit** » Fri May 01, 2015 7:52 am

Could this be the first deal where future draft picks are given up? Say Our first pick this year and our first pick next year?

What is the clubs priority come recruiting time? a KPP? a Midfielder? Midfielders grow on trees, KPP's don't.

This is an unofficial Bulletin Board - owned and run by its users. We welcome all fans of the Mighty Collingwood Football Club.

Adam Treloar

Adam Treloar