I know what you are saying, but offering a speculative/potential rough diamond ruckman, more money than Zerrett, more than Parish will get on his next contract, etc etc, its just silly. He would be on about the same money as Heppell, and just behind Jobe. He would be earning more than probably 80% of our list. And his next contract would be a killer. It just isn't a sensible thing to do. Not from a list management point of view, not from a financial point of view, and not from a cultural point of view. Agree ruck stocks are a potential weakness for us, but disagree entirely with this method of trying to address that problem.
Probably a pipe-dream, but I hope at some point we can move to the Storm (new) method of payments.
FF gets this.
First Ruck gets this.
First small forward gets this.
Jackets is good. I don't think he's that good yet.
My tip is that a club will do it, maybe not for Preuss but for another young ruckman. There's aren't that many good, or potentially good, young rucks around. Most clubs tend to poach them from other clubs anyway:
Adelaide - Jacobs, Jenkins (didn't play a game for us though...)
Brisbane - Martin
Carlton - Phillips, Gorringe
Essendon - Leuey, Smack
Fremantle - Griffin (not a good example as he is 2nd fiddle to Sandi...)
Geelong - Stanley, Clarke
Gold Coast - Witts
GWS - Mummy
Hawthown - McEvoy, Vickery (maybe a stretch too far LOL!)
Port - Ryder
Richmond - Nankervis, Maric, Hampson
St.Kilda - Hickey, Longer
Sydney - Sinclair
West Coast - Giles, Vardy
Unless you have a once-in-a-generation freak like Nic Nat, very few clubs take rucks at the pointy end of the draft. Even Grundy slip to like Pick 18 or something like that, and he is a jet. Seems like clubs watch them develop elsewhere then once they know they are legit they try and poach them. Might be less risky then blowing a top 5 pick on a kid...
I'd think Longer is the best bet if you want a long-term ruck. Not really sure why he's languishing at Sandy.
But it's possibly 3 years before there's a vacancy.
We do need an umpire on our side. Do we wine and dine them like Hawthorn does?
Yeah, but Sydney also needed the #1 ruck spot filled. Why would an unproven ruck come to us to sit behind the others? And why would we offer big bucks on the long shot they're better than what we've got?
Seems very unlikely.
Completely lost as to the connection to my post, but...yeah, the umpires are an issue.
We legit need to be five goals better than GWS to beat them.
You'll have to excuse me, I am drunk.
You are now starting a whole different conversation that the advocating of ludicrous dollars for speculative rucks. None of the guys on your list were offered huge money to move.
Well, not the unproven ones which you were talking about. Obviously guys like Ryder and Mumford (to GWS) did.
I'll give you Ryder, although the circumstances we're a one off. Mumford crossed over as first ruckman not developing 3rd stringer.
When he went to GWS?
Is the Jake Spencer listed in the OP the ruckman? If so he should be added to this list.
Think he is 24 - 26 and has looked fairly good when given the opportunity, Gawn is a similar age and fairly durable coupled with Melbourne not playing two rucks. Could look for opportunity.
If they were looking for a back up to replace him could let TBell go.
Dogs will have their cap stretching very soon - would love to reel in English. Unproven, I know, but the kid will be special, I reckon.
Yep. They had to replace Brogan, and all the hard was Giles and Sentanta.
He signed a two year extension earlier this week.
And didn't tell me???
I think we're talking past each other. You said none of those guys moved for big money. I pointed out that although that was mostly true, it didn't hold for a Ryder or Mumford. You initially disagreed. Are you still disagreeing with me or are you now agreeing with me now?
Far prefer we chase good youngsters than throw the kitchen sink at 1 superstar.
Only FA I'd want would be a ruck.