Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board

If Sam Weideman is looking for other oppurtunities, why dont we look at him as part of the trade for Grundy?

mattdally wrote:13 and 27 for Grundy with 16 heading to the Dees makes sense.

Why not just ask for Freos first round pick that Melbourne now has?

People need to move on from Weideman.

He's simply not a good footballer.

People said the same about 2 metre Peter

^ 2 metre Peter was always a better footballer than Weideman.

^

Yeah, likely, but doesn't matter now. We should have had a dash at Peter when we had the chance but didn't and now Weed is going to Essendon, so don't look in the rearview mirror just put the wipers on and move forward.

Jezza wrote:^ 2 metre Peter was always a better footballer than Weideman.

We should have traded for 2MP at the time. He wanted to come to Collingwood. We couldn't get it done. Too many other issues going on at the time.

According to Rendell on trade radio we are now screwed on the Grundy deal cos we’ve committed to other deals already. I think he’s right. All the more reason not to get screwed on Henry. We now have no bargaining power with Melbourne but we hold all the aces with Geelong. I don’t think they’re desperate for him anyway. They’ve already got a bonanza and they just see Henry as a bonus. We need to stick fat. Hardball.

Collingwood are threatening to hang on to Brodie Grundy after Melbourne refused a proposal to swap first round picks as part of the deal for the ruckman, which came on a busy day of trades which saw the Demons finally complete a three-club deal to get Luke Jackson to Fremantle. Melbourne have refused to offer more than pick 27 for the two-time All-Australian ruckman. Collingwood had said at the outset of trade talks they wanted a draft pick inside 25 for Grundy.

Collingwood are also in a standoff with Geelong over out-of-contract second-year forward Ollie Henry, who has requested a trade to the Cats. Geelong have offered pick 25, while Collingwood have said they won’t entertain anything less than a first-round selection.

Michael Gleeson, Jake Niall and Jon Pierik THE AGE 1840 hrs

We owe Melbourne zilch in terms of Grundy.

Their pick 27 (after Father-Sons have gone through) would be nearly 30..

Keep Grundy- trade for Fiorini and Frampton.

Looks like Mitchell won't happen.

In terms of Henry- these Cats should not get 'the cream' from us.

The lad needs to show heart and earn his place in the starting 22 for Round One next year.

The history of VFL/AFL is littered with folks who don't work hard enough to earn their stripes.

Having said that, Henry is very talented and should make a difference to our prospects in 2023.

2 minutes ago Reported in The Age
Collingwood threatens to hang on to Grundy;
Melbourne has denied Collingwood’s latest trade proposal that would see Brodie Grundy land at the Demons, according to a report in The Age.
It’s left Collingwood threatening to hang onto the contracted ruckman.
The Magpies have consistently demanded a top-25 pick for Grundy. The club is keen to offload him given the 28-year-old is reportedly on between $900,000-1,000,000 annually and are believed to be happy to pay a portion of his contract going forward.
Melbourne’s negotiations began by offering pick 27, which was denied.
Give them Darcy Cameron or stuff em Go Pies

robevpau1 wrote:Collingwood are threatening to hang on to Brodie Grundy after Melbourne refused a proposal to swap first round picks as part of the deal for the ruckman, which came on a busy day of trades which saw the Demons finally complete a three-club deal to get Luke Jackson to Fremantle. Melbourne have refused to offer more than pick 27 for the two-time All-Australian ruckman. Collingwood had said at the outset of trade talks they wanted a draft pick inside 25 for Grundy.

Collingwood are also in a standoff with Geelong over out-of-contract second-year forward Ollie Henry, who has requested a trade to the Cats. Geelong have offered pick 25, while Collingwood have said they won’t entertain anything less than a first-round selection.

Michael Gleeson, Jake Niall and Jon Pierik THE AGE 1840 hrs

I actually think todays outcome has put us in a better position to get more for Grundy than any day before it.
So far the Dees have lost Jackson, Bedford and Hunt and with both Tomlinson and Weideman bring linked elsewhere. If I’m the Dees and the premiership window remains wide open, you simply can’t afford to not bring some quality in to balance the outs.
They would be crazy not complete the Grundy deal and the beauty is, Collingwood know it.

Pies2016 wrote:

robevpau1 wrote:Collingwood are threatening to hang on to Brodie Grundy after Melbourne refused a proposal to swap first round picks as part of the deal for the ruckman, which came on a busy day of trades which saw the Demons finally complete a three-club deal to get Luke Jackson to Fremantle. Melbourne have refused to offer more than pick 27 for the two-time All-Australian ruckman. Collingwood had said at the outset of trade talks they wanted a draft pick inside 25 for Grundy.

Collingwood are also in a standoff with Geelong over out-of-contract second-year forward Ollie Henry, who has requested a trade to the Cats. Geelong have offered pick 25, while Collingwood have said they won’t entertain anything less than a first-round selection.

Michael Gleeson, Jake Niall and Jon Pierik THE AGE 1840 hrs

I actually think todays outcome has put us in a better position to get more for Grundy than any day before it.
So far the Dees have lost Jackson, Bedford and Hunt and with both Tomlinson and Weideman bring linked elsewhere. If I’m the Dees and the premiership window remains wide open, you simply can’t afford to not bring some quality in to balance the outs.
They would be crazy not complete the Grundy deal and the beauty is, Collingwood know it.

Absolutely. Their loss. Not ours. I'm happy to hang onto him. Just means Mitchell falls through.

warburton lad wrote:We owe Melbourne zilch in terms of Grundy.

If anything they owe us for the times when they were in financial trouble and we 'lent' them Queens Birthday.

The fixture is traditionally staged at the Melbourne Cricket Ground, which is the home ground for both teams. However, from 2001 until 2018, the match was always a designated Melbourne home game, resulting in Melbourne receiving a greater portion of the gate and its highest match profit of each season, in the order of $800,000 to $900,000. Collingwood, which had a substantially higher membership and more blockbuster fixtures than Melbourne, agreed to and encouraged the deal over that period.[4] Since 2019, when a period of success had seen Melbourne close the financial gap between the clubs, the clubs have agreed to alternate the home team designation between the two clubs each year, with Collingwood's first home game played in 2019.

Not sure why we do this only for team to throw it back in our face. Another example is St Kilda, over the last decade have got St Kilda - $156m in funding from the AFL. Collingwood the lowest Collingwood - $93.3m. They use that money to have a crack at JDG.

That is the way equalisation works but for all we do as a club to make the AFL what it is... want 3.30pm on a Sunday to rate... schedule Collingwood... we don't get very much back.

There is a cry in the press and elsewhere about what a season 2022 was... AFL has never been better!!!! Take Collingwood out of this year and it was just another year. It was us that made this year special.

Rant over (for now )

Lone Ranger wrote:If Sam Weideman is looking for other oppurtunities, why dont we look at him as part of the trade for Grundy?

Pick 13, plus the Weed, yeh, I can live with that. As for Ollie, Geebung can get stuffed right royally.