Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board

Please don't even go near him in either the National or rookie draft. One trick pony and annoying one at that (re goal kicking run up)

Well I have Read we have Gurnateed him we pick him at Pick 48

Dave The Man wrote:Well I have Read we have Gurnateed him we pick him at Pick 48

Read where?

Provide link.

I know there are some rumours of us selecting him over at bigfooty but I can't imagine we'd need to use pick 48 to get him.

More a pick 85/rookie selection at best.

Personally I hope zero interest in him and do not want.

swoop42 wrote:

Dave The Man wrote:Well I have Read we have Gurnateed him we pick him at Pick 48

Read where?

Provide link.

I know there are some rumours of us selecting him over at bigfooty but I can't imagine we'd need to use pick 48 to get him.

More a pick 85/rookie selection at best.

Personally I hope zero interest in him and do not want.

In the Draft Rumor Thread. Someone said We have told him we pick at 48

I'd be disappointed with that. I think rookie at best, all depending on whether we've met that particular requirement with this draft. Not sure he's the answer when having a choice of a top 50 kid in the land or him.

I'm with you inxs - saw him play in Wellington and feel we could do much better with the upside that a newby will bring - but stranger things have happened!

Dave The Man wrote:

swoop42 wrote:

Dave The Man wrote:Well I have Read we have Gurnateed him we pick him at Pick 48

Read where?

Provide link.

I know there are some rumours of us selecting him over at bigfooty but I can't imagine we'd need to use pick 48 to get him.

More a pick 85/rookie selection at best.

Personally I hope zero interest in him and do not want.

In the Draft Rumor Thread. Someone said We have told him we pick at 48

you wouldn't want to offer anything other than a late round pick or a rookie spot. his goal kicking is around 63% (not including oob).

we would have been better off selecting jeff garlett (if we are pursuing this type of recruit) even though he is a jib

inxs88 wrote:we would have been better off selecting jeff garlett (if we are pursuing this type of recruit) even though he is a jib

Does jib mean squib?

Or is it a derivation from Gip, i.e. Gypsy or more accurately for him an Egyptian, both parents I thought were Olympic representatives from Egypt or some such thing

Strange rumour. I would have thought Hine and Rendall would look at a young kid who hasn't been through the AFL system lately instead of Saad but they must think he's worth looking at.

Admittedly we do we need a small forward though and looking at his stats from 2012 and 2013, Saad can find the goals but he doesn't get a lot of the ball and can go missing quite often.

Just read the article and it says we could take him in the rookie draft. That's not so bad and we wouldn't lose too much if it fails.

Got no issues with taking him in the Rookie Draft if the club deems he fills a need in our team (and like Jezza said, another small forward is on that needs list).

Would rather the club look at a McLean or Langdon type in the draft to fill the small forward void. They'd definitely have more upside

I'd be super disappointed if that rumour turned out to be true. Reckon it's total BS, though.

As a rookie selection, I say take him.