IS IS IT TIME FOR A CHANGE OF PLANS?

[Talisman]

Appreciate your comments Talisman and they are valid - Just one comment though and you can still feel free to disagree with me after byes which I am looking at would you need your Ruck 4 to be playing.  There are a number of Rucks that may or may not play later in the season that you could downgrade to just to sit on pine.  I would be looking at some Rookie ruck with a $94k price tag when the time comes and not be worried whether playing or not.

That's a very fair point Ringo. I guess personally I would just be a little bit concerned about the possibility of more than 1 of my starting ruckmen missing games through injury/suspension, which would leave me in a bit of strife/donut-town - fine if I was Homer Simpson, but I'm not as big a fan - especially in SC!  :P

I guess that fear comes a bit from last year when I ended up with a number of non-playing rookies on my bench, leaving me with donuts when more than one of my starters/prems missed games. So I guess I like to have as much cover/protection on the bench as possible who are playing regularly. Hard to achieve as downgrade targets can be tough though.

Thanks for the great chat - love it when people respect each others ideas/opinions & discuss them. Cheers! :)

[Ringo]

And why do you need a 94k ruck anyway?

All you do is upgrade Stephenson, on the proviso he plays and keep Giles as 3rd ruck just as those who started with 2 prem rucks are doing.

Personally I think Giles as 2nd ruck is the way to go this year, this is of course if Stephenson goes ok and keeps getting games. You just upgrade him as soon as you can afford a Mumford or similar.

To explain why a 94k Ruck is required.

My 1/3 Currently is Berger, Giles, Reddan and Stephenson/
Assuming I upgrade Reddan to Cox  I have both Giles and Stephenson on the bench.  I can not affford to have a say $250k+ sitting at R4 eg Stephenson by Round 11 so if I downgrade to a $94k ruck $160k to be used elsewhere.  That is the Rationale as I do not think you need 2 playing rucks on the Pine after Round 12.

[quinny88]

And why do you need a 94k ruck anyway?

All you do is upgrade Stephenson, on the proviso he plays and keep Giles as 3rd ruck just as those who started with 2 prem rucks are doing.

Personally I think Giles as 2nd ruck is the way to go this year, this is of course if Stephenson goes ok and keeps getting games. You just upgrade him as soon as you can afford a Mumford or similar.

To explain why a 94k Ruck is required.

My 1/3 Currently is Berger, Giles, Reddan and Stephenson/
Assuming I upgrade Reddan to Cox  I have both Giles and Stephenson on the bench.  I can not affford to have a say $250k+ sitting at R4 eg Stephenson by Round 11 so if I downgrade to a $94k ruck $160k to be used elsewhere.  That is the Rationale as I do not think you need 2 playing rucks on the Pine after Round 12.

You would need to trade two of either giles redden or orren to ever afford cox anyway?
So one of these guys will be sitting on the pine with little chance of them being used anyway.. So they may aswell be a 94k player

[ubeaut]

Ruckruck better.

Haven't you got only one prem ruck though mate?

[ubeaut]

I'm tossing up on the same question. Cox and Sandilands  or Cox and Redden for me. Would advise you to stick with the plan at this stage, but I hear you, there's not many decent rookie mids apart from GWS. For me my final team structure will come down to who is named. All depends on this.