#46 Mason Cox

[Crimson Mask]

Any other club would have utilised this bloke in such a way as to maximise his considerable attributes such that he became a point of difference and a weapon.

The numbskulls in our coaching box and on the selection committee, being devoid of imagination but full of intransigence, were unable to fashion such a strategy with Cox, often scapegoating him for our losses.

We deserve to lose him as we never appreciated exactly what we have/had until it was too late.

You're a tool and you'll realise that tomorrow maybe.

Lemming!

[Leggie]

Any other club would have utilised this bloke in such a way as to maximise his considerable attributes such that he became a point of difference and a weapon.

The numbskulls in our coaching box and on the selection committee, being devoid of imagination but full of intransigence, were unable to fashion such a strategy with Cox, often scapegoating him for our losses.

We deserve to lose him as we never appreciated exactly what we have/had until it was too late.

I was sitting down having a pretty dull night and thought I'd log on to Nick's for a giggle.
Thanks Crimson.
You're a good laugh.
Hehe. Hoho. Haha.

[Albert Parker]

Dustin Martin was gone to North in the week prior to signing with the Tigers again by his own admission. Let's see where things end up

[Cam]

I read the Foundation Trilogy.

So did I, in my formative years, intriguing stuff.

[5 from the wing on debut]

Some people love arguing the opposing point, never fails.

No argument in this case.

Help me out.

What is the opposing point?

Is it always the one that you don't agree with?

[masoncox]

Some people love arguing the opposing point, never fails.

No argument in this case.

Help me out.

What is the opposing point?

Is it always the one that you don't agree with?

Drover thinks his point is more pointless than other points.
That is the point of the exercise.

[droversdog65]

Some people love arguing the opposing point, never fails.

No argument in this case.

Help me out.

What is the opposing point?

Is it always the one that you don't agree with?

Help yourself
There is always an opposing point to everything.
Of course that may be too straightforward for some.

[droversdog65]

Some people love arguing the opposing point, never fails.

No argument in this case.

Help me out.

What is the opposing point?

Is it always the one that you don't agree with?

Drover thinks his point is more pointless than other points.
That is the point of the exercise.

Well certainly can't blame your post for being pointless can we?
It's full of points.
But then so is a starfish.

[Magpietothemax]

Whatever the cost, keep him. It's quite simple.
There is no knowing what he can be in the next 3 years.

[What'sinaname]

I hope brick-dick stays

[glasseyevfx]

Whatever the cost, keep him. It's quite simple.
There is no knowing what he can be in the next 3 years.

"Whatever the cost" doesn't work - we have a salary cap - who would you like to sacrifice. Mason is in the best 22 in my book, but he is not 'the' 22.

[Magpietothemax]

"Whatever the cost" doesn't work - we have a salary cap - who would you like to sacrifice. Mason is in the best 22 in my book, but he is not 'the' 22.

I think it does work in this case. No one else is going to offer him so much that we can't match it. He is unproven as yet, no one will be prepared to break the bank for him, any more than we can. So we simply match and slightly surpass any rival offers.
We must keep him for so many reasons.
a) we need talls
b) He has unknowable potential that we deserve to harness

[E]

Whatever the cost, keep him. It's quite simple.
There is no knowing what he can be in the next 3 years.

i believe his salary was exempt from the salary cap for the past 3 years as a foreign rookie. I think. does anyone know if that goes away?

So taking him on is going to be like getting a new free agent.

before you guys all crap yourself over how good he might become, remember this. he isnt our number 1 ruckman. he isnt a dominant forward. He is merely a useful alternative and a different look for teams to cope with.

He is not a difference maker in either position.

On balance you'd like to have a competent backup for Grundy in the event of injury or suspension). He is that.

In certain games it might make sense to play him at the same time as Grundy (it worked well in the final game - and partly because Gawn is a true beast of the competition so two rucks against the dees is useful to try to nullify his dominance), but probably not often as Grundy is an 85% of the time type ruckman.

this means that for cox to be best 22, he needs to be a competant forward. Now putting aside your current bias, where we get super excited when he takes ONE mark up forward and kicks a goal, he still has a long way to go to be a reliable target up there. He also has massive tank deficiencies (although they are getting less pronounced).

So you have a player who needs to build his tank and improve his involvements in the game.

Definitely someone to try to keep as he is a very complimentary piece to have on a list. Not sure he's someone I'd pay Mayne money to!

Maybe 2 years on Mayne money would be sensible.

PS: why doesn't the club get more credit for the way it has successfully developed the FIRST ever yank! we are so quick to knock our club and be critical of our club. I havent seen one post where folks congratulate the club for its forward thinking in successfully bringing and integrating a yank into the system!

[AN_Inkling]

Whatever the cost, keep him. It's quite simple.
There is no knowing what he can be in the next 3 years.

In three years he'll be 30 years old and near the end of his career.

He's worth keeping but more as a backup than a definite first team member. If he doesn't want that then he should leave. I don't think he's going to work as a second tall forward and at 27 he's not a long term answer anyway.

I've been enticed by his improved play late in the season, but the more I think about it the more I hope he leaves. We've stuffed around enough, and lost enough games, trying to fit two rucks in our 22. Our team looked best with Reid forward or with a small forward line. I don't want us to waste another year trying to play a ruckman at full forward. If he's happy to mostly be a backup, great. If we're going to try and turn him into Paul Salmon, no thanks, it's going to fail.

[RudeBoy]

Whatever the cost, keep him. It's quite simple.
There is no knowing what he can be in the next 3 years.

In three years he'll be 30 years old and near the end of his career.

He's worth keeping but more as a backup than a definite first team member. If he doesn't want that then he should leave. I don't think he's going to work as a second tall forward and at 27 he's not a long term answer anyway.

I've been enticed by his improved play late in the season, but the more I think about it the more I hope he leaves. We've stuffed around enough, and lost enough games, trying to fit two rucks in our 22. Our team looked best with Reid forward or with a small forward line. I don't want us to waste another year trying to play a ruckman at full forward. If he's happy to mostly be a backup, great. If we're going to try and turn him into Paul Salmon, no thanks, it's going to fail.

Reid is far closer to the end of his career than Cox. In fact, if he continues to develop as he has so far, barring injuries, he could play for another 5-6 years. Reid, on the other hand, looks like he may only have one good year left.