#17,#11 Dayne Beams

[Yarra Falls End]

Howdy all I'll give you all the tip the reason he nominated Brisbane is his dads treatment is in Brisbane on a ongoing basis (he is still undertaking treatment) which gives Dayne the chance of being close to his father and allowing his dad to stay over if required and it's only a 45 minute drive either way from Brisbane to Gold Coast now with the motorway.
All this talk of it being about money isn't actually factual as he would be handsomely rewarded with his next contract at the pies considering since he signed his last deal was done prior to him being a AA, Copeland winner and his output has increased markedly since the beginning of 2012.
I don't blame the club for rejecting the lions offer we all agree it is not fair and reasonable.
Many have pointed out that he is under contract and the club didn't put him up for trade Dayne requested it.
I said before I am like many others and am very upset by the way this has been played out and I'm squarely laying the blame at the feet of his management group as anyone with a ounce of scruples would have told there client to attend his current clubs awards night not advise him differently which has been reported.
I said before if Dayne stayed for 2015 I wouldn't expect anything less than the effort he has given weekly sin he arrived at the club.
He wouldn't play dead nor would he sit out a year as that would send a very bad message to any perspective club.
I hope he stays and the club then has 12 months to change his mind and find a way if giving him the chance to see his father more without impacting on his club commitments.
Correct me if I'm wrong but at the end of 2015 if he decides to leave he has to go into the national draft and could be picked up by any club ?
If he stayed for 2016 then he becomes a RFA and we have the right to match any offer ?
I hope this can be sorted out so the club doesn't loss out and Dayne can have some of his personal issues appeased.

Thanks for your continued input.

Are you able to shed any light onto why Dayne switched from Alaistair Lynch to Connors in 2012?

[bwphantom]

I dare say Brisbane are hoping Geelong are interested in Crisp and that our pick 30 and Crisp is enough for Christensen with pick 21 then going to us.

In that scenario I would hope we could keep pick 48 but wouldn't scuttle a deal over it.

Better yet pick 48 and Crisp for Christensen and we keep 30.

Screw em the best we can.

LOL.

If Crisp's name is being thrown up as a trade, what's wrong with Collingwood securing him, as well as pick's 5 and 25 from Brisbane? I think I would prefer Crisp to Varcoe if it came to that. We need another big bodied mid who has scope to improve. Crisp fits that description. We still try to secure Greenwood from North with a second round pick. That's another hard nut type similar to Adams. Goes some way to replacing Beams, doesn't it?

I agree if Hine rates Crisp enough on the back of 18 games in 3 years but I'm not sure his name was thrown up as coming to us or being traded for a pick around the mark of 21.

For me if we get Crisp we say no to Varcoe and look to Trade Lumumba and pick 30/48 to Melbourne for 23 or something along those lines.

While I prefer we don't trade with Brisbane at all now unless Aish becomes included in the deal I think I'd prefer 5, 23, 25 and Crisp
ahead of 5, 21, 25 and Varcoe which I believe would have included us losing pick 30 anyway.

Like you say Crisp has scope for development and improvement while Varcoe looks to be on the wane to me.

Get Crisp and so no to Varcoe. I don't want both and would prefer an extra pick to take to the draft.

Still hoping it'll be Beams to GWS, GC or the dees.

I agree somewhat concerning Varcoe, but to even allude to preferring Crisp to Varcoe?
Thinking you need to change your avatar to a blonde.

[swoop42]

^I'm have no genuine interest in him but at least he has some potential to improve.

He averaged 18.83 disposals (albeit over just 6 games), a goal a game, 2 clearances (nothing special), 3 tackles, 4 inside 50's per game.

Compare that to Adams with 19.17 disposals (12 games), 3 goals in total, 3 clearances, 3.5 tackles, 2 inside 50's per game.

He stacks up better than expected.

Varcoe on the other hand appears to be going backwards as each season passes.

He ain't the player he was back in 2011 that people seem to believe we are getting.

[RudeBoy]

I might be wrong but I think my fellow Nicksters have missed the point. There is no plan, that I'm aware of, for Crisp to come to collingwood. My reading of the press suggests the Lions will try to trade him to another Victorian club and add this draft pick to the 5 and 25 already available to give to us for Beams.

[ronrat]

Hasn't stopped Beams going overseas on holidays. If he was fair dinkum he would be having his picture splashed all over the Courier mail beside his Dad. Just maybe the Lions think they will make a play that won't work and say "well we tried".

[AN_Inkling]

If Crisp's name is being thrown up as a trade, what's wrong with Collingwood securing him, as well as pick's 5 and 25 from Brisbane? I think I would prefer Crisp to Varcoe if it came to that. We need another big bodied mid who has scope to improve. Crisp fits that description. We still try to secure Greenwood from North with a second round pick. That's another hard nut type similar to Adams. Goes some way to replacing Beams, doesn't it?

I agree if Hine rates Crisp enough on the back of 18 games in 3 years but I'm not sure his name was thrown up as coming to us or being traded for a pick around the mark of 21.

For me if we get Crisp we say no to Varcoe and look to Trade Lumumba and pick 30/48 to Melbourne for 23 or something along those lines.

While I prefer we don't trade with Brisbane at all now unless Aish becomes included in the deal I think I'd prefer 5, 23, 25 and Crisp
ahead of 5, 21, 25 and Varcoe which I believe would have included us losing pick 30 anyway.

Like you say Crisp has scope for development and improvement while Varcoe looks to be on the wane to me.

Get Crisp and so no to Varcoe. I don't want both and would prefer an extra pick to take to the draft.

Still hoping it'll be Beams to GWS, GC or the dees.

I agree somewhat concerning Varcoe, but to even allude to preferring Crisp to Varcoe?
Thinking you need to change your avatar to a blonde.

The reason we're interested in Varcoe is he's a line-breaking runner who's ready to go now. He'll replace Lumumba in our best 22 you'd expect, and because we seriously lack for these types, replacing Lumumba is important. Crisp on the other hand is no guarantee to even get a game in 2015. He may have scope for improvement, but we're looking for an established player not someone who may be a player sometime later.

[The Boy Who Cried Wolf]

I agree if Hine rates Crisp enough on the back of 18 games in 3 years but I'm not sure his name was thrown up as coming to us or being traded for a pick around the mark of 21.

For me if we get Crisp we say no to Varcoe and look to Trade Lumumba and pick 30/48 to Melbourne for 23 or something along those lines.

While I prefer we don't trade with Brisbane at all now unless Aish becomes included in the deal I think I'd prefer 5, 23, 25 and Crisp
ahead of 5, 21, 25 and Varcoe which I believe would have included us losing pick 30 anyway.

Like you say Crisp has scope for development and improvement while Varcoe looks to be on the wane to me.

Get Crisp and so no to Varcoe. I don't want both and would prefer an extra pick to take to the draft.

Still hoping it'll be Beams to GWS, GC or the dees.

I agree somewhat concerning Varcoe, but to even allude to preferring Crisp to Varcoe?
Thinking you need to change your avatar to a blonde.

The reason we're interested in Varcoe is he's a line-breaking runner who's ready to go now. He'll replace Lumumba in our best 22 you'd expect, and because we seriously lack for these types, replacing Lumumba is important. Crisp on the other hand is no guarantee to even get a game in 2015. He may have scope for improvement, but we're looking for an established player not someone who may be a player sometime later.

I'd respect Bucks more, by not recruiting him for any short term gain (ha!), and sticking with the overall long-term goal (a flag) and putting more games into our youth.

[AN_Inkling]

^^The thinking is that, even for the short term, we have a lack of experience. A balance is required even when you are rebuilding. There is no way we can be accused of not going young enough. Varcoe himself is only 26, there's every chance he's still around when we are competing again.

[35forever]

[Piesnchess]

YAWN, Has he gone, yet ????

[bwphantom]

Lions and Beams have been planning this for months.
They tried to play the sympathy card and has now backfired on both parties.
Seems reasonable given Collingwood's hard stance right from the outset.

Lions have missed, we stated publicly that discussions are over.
Beams will be at a club willing to pay, or a Pie in 2015.

[The Boy Who Cried Wolf]

^^The thinking is that, even for the short term, we have a lack of experience. A balance is required even when you are rebuilding. There is no way we can be accused of not going young enough. Varcoe himself is only 26, there's every chance he's still around when we are competing again.

That's a worry (26.. still here, etc). I understand we have a lack of experience, but honestly, I'd rather go for Cooney if that's the only reason we really want him (Varcoe).

[Rexy17]

If we get that soft sock Varcoe think I will have to join the ""perceptive fellow" crew"

[neil]

Why get Varcoe?
If we want a soft outside receiver who goes missing in big games we could just play Young

[John Wren]

really gotta laugh at the disparaging of footballers who have won more premiership medallions than most, if not all, here.