Ayce Cordy in the pocket if Western Bulldogs play cards right

Ayce Cordy in the pocket if Western Bulldogs play cards right
Mark Stevens | April 01, 2008 12:00am


http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/spo...-19742,00.html

HE has a name befitting a lead guitarist and Ayce Cordy is already receiving the rock star treatment to match from AFL recruiters. Cordy is considered a potential top-five draft pick in October and will provide the first major test of the league's new father/son bidding process.

The 202cm forward/ruckman is the son of former Bulldogs defender Brian Cordy, who played 124 games between 1981-88.

It means the Dogs have first rights to the 17-year-old, who was yesterday described by one recruiter as more athletic than Carlton's No. 1 pick Matthew Kreuzer.

But the Dogs will have to pay a hefty price under the new bidding rules.

Rival recruiters believe it is a formality there will be first-round bids for Cordy.

Geelong Falcons regional manager Michael Turner, who has overseen Cordy's rapid rise, yesterday declared: "From what I've seen of Ayce, if he's not a top-five draft pick, I'm a bad judge."

Under previous father/son rules, Geelong had the luxury of picking up Gary Ablett, Matthew Scarlett and Tom Hawkins with third round selections.

That will not happen with Cordy, given the excitement generated by his performance for the Australian under-17 team in a curtain-raiser to the Round 1 West Coast-Brisbane clash at Subiaco this year.

"It has already been spoken about in recruiting circles, and clubs have said to me that they will bid for him," Turner said.

If another club bids on Cordy, the Dogs must use their next available selection to take him.

For example, if the Dogs finish eighth they will have pick No. 9. If a club with an earlier pick nominates Cordy, they would have to use No. 9 on him.

If Cordy somehow slipped through to pick No. 10 before being nominated, the Dogs could use their next choice (No. 25) to nab him.

Richmond list and strategy manager Craig Cameron yesterday made it clear the second scenario was highly unlikely. "I think he'll probably be an early selection," Cameron said.

Cordy is currently touring South Africa with the Australian under-17s, learning from AFL greats Michael Voss, Mark Ricciuto, Luke Darcy and Nathan Buckley.

He will this season share his time between Geelong College, where he has a scholarship, and the under-18 Falcons. A place in the Vic Country under-18 team also beckons.

"The Dogs would probably prefer he didn't do any of that. The more he plays, the more they're going to have to give up," Turner said.

The Dogs are closely monitoring Cordy, offering him support with diet and strength and conditioning. He visited the club over the pre-season.

As a state level basketballer, Cordy also has ability to inflict damage at ground level.

"He's just so mobile, he's very football intelligent, he's got a bit of s--- in him," said Turner, who can even envisage Cordy playing on the wing for the Dogs early next year.

Turner expects Cordy to reach at least 205cm.

All the Dogs can do now is sit tight and wait, hoping he sneaks through to the second round. "This will be the litmus test of the new bidding system, no doubt," Clayton said. "He's an exciting player, for sure."

Cordy's uncle Neil, now a Channel 10 reporter, played 139 games for the Dogs and 96 for Sydney. Another Cordy brother, Graeme, managed six games for the Dogs and 21 for Sydney.

The Cordy brothers were nowhere near Ayce's height - with Brian 183cm, Neil 188cm and Graeme 189cm.

Great...our turn comes and we have to be the first team to not benefit from a father son pick

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hujsh

Great...our turn comes and we have to be the first team to not benefit from a father son pick

---

I reckon the new system is just right. We have first crack at him, we either pay the market rate & he's a Bulldog or we don't & he's not. No problems from my point of view with the new system. it's much fairer.

Agree it is much fairer. I was hoping he would play the majority of the season for his school and therefore he would not be as exposed to other recruiters. Unfortunately his good form at Subiaco has put him "out there".
Oh well, its great to have first crack at a potential first round ruckman/fwd than having to otherwise finish at the lower end of the ladder to get the best talent.
Good to see the dogs are monitoring his diet from now, without getting too excited he sounds very promising.

The changes to the Father-Son rule are fair, it is very exciting to think that Ayce could be at The Kennel next year.

I heard that Steve Wallis has a son running around in St.Kevins 1st as a year 9, hopefully some more talent for us in the very near future.

Incentive to finish at the top and not loose as much, or fail miserably...

Much fairer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Coon Dog

I reckon the new system is just right. We have first crack at him, we either pay the market rate & he's a Bulldog or we don't & he's not. No problems from my point of view with the new system. it's much fairer.

---

Agreed - although it is disappointing we can't use the old system like Geelong has benefited from extensively and take 2 first round quality players with 1 pick.

Quick - News Flash. Mick Turner refers to Geelong Falcons kid as next superstar of the AFL. Stop the presses...stop the presses.

What a beat up.

Maybe he will go early, maybe he wont. He is tall and athletic I guess, but exactly how high he goes will depend on his performance at the carnival and how well he interviews at draft camp.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crizza

The changes to the Father-Son rule are fair, it is very exciting to think that Ayce could be at The Kennel next year.

I heard that Steve Wallis has a son running around in St.Kevins 1st as a year 9, hopefully some more talent for us in the very near future.

---

yr 10.
him and libba's son r on the same team.

Also hardly surprising given the Father/Son rule changes that teams & recruiters will be more inclined to talk these kids up with a view to generating interest, however justified, to nudge up the eventual price paid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mjp

Quick - News Flash. Mick Turner refers to Geelong Falcons kid as next superstar of the AFL. Stop the presses...stop the presses.

What a beat up.

Maybe he will go early, maybe he wont. He is tall and athletic I guess, but exactly how high he goes will depend on his performance at the carnival and how well he interviews at draft camp.

---

The only real quote I was interested in was

Quote:

---

Richmond list and strategy manager Craig Cameron yesterday made it clear the second scenario was highly unlikely. "I think he'll probably be an early selection," Cameron said.

---

Sounds like at the moment he is probably hovering around 10.

Still a season to go though and people have gone from 10 to 1, much like people have gone from 10- undrafted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Coon Dog

I reckon the new system is just right. We have first crack at him, we either pay the market rate & he's a Bulldog or we don't & he's not. No problems from my point of view with the new system. it's much fairer.

---

No doubt it's fairer but i don't think we've had a father son opportunity like Geelong has. Just bad timing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crizza

The changes to the Father-Son rule are fair, it is very exciting to think that Ayce could be at The Kennel next year.

I heard that Steve Wallis has a son running around in St.Kevins 1st as a year 9, hopefully some more talent for us in the very near future.

---

My wife worked with a relative of Steve Wallis who said that he was a promising player. Early days yet but maybe another.

Yes the system is fairer, it is just a shame we will be one of the first to use it.

Whilst unfair in comparison to Geelong, I'm still wrapped that we have first crack at the kid. If is good enough we'll take him, if not we wont!

I dont know much about Ayce but I do know that the new system is flawed, open to manipulation and will be overturned once one of the bigger clubs decide it's in their interests to have it overurned.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Coon Dog

I reckon the new system is just right. We have first crack at him, we either pay the market rate & he's a Bulldog or we don't & he's not. No problems from my point of view with the new system. it's much fairer.

---

I agree, the club still gets priority if they choose, could also work the other way around, and if a kid isn't rated as high, and having to still grab him with a 3rd rounder, even though he may be rated a 5th round selection, you can now pick one up if clubs don't rate them nominate them.

We got a good run with the priority system before it changed, grabbing both Farren Ray & Tommy Williams with picks 4 & 6 rather than having to wait till the end of the first round, so we can't complain too much!

I think the new system is rubbish and it sucks that we will have to give up a high pick for him - but I am still bitter that we got pick 10 after finishing second bottom to Fitzroy in 1996, and want priority picks for losing McGuiness and Kym Koster

Ayce is big and athletic, but has really not done much at an under 18 TAC cup level

I really hope he is a great player but to talk him up as a top ten at this stage is IMO ridiculous

Let's say in theory we had the number 1 pick and Geelong had pick 16.......
If they offered pick 16 for him would we have to use the number 1 pick to match their offer?
They are both 1st round draft picks. That would be an awful scenario

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bulldog Revolution

I think the new system is rubbish and it sucks that we will have to give up a high pick for him - but I am still bitter that we got pick 10 after finishing second bottom to Fitzroy in 1996, and want priority picks for losing McGuiness and Kym Koster

Ayce is big and athletic, but has really not done much at an under 18 TAC cup level

I really hope he is a great player but to talk him up as a top ten at this stage is IMO ridiculous

---

I was having a talk to a couple guys on Saturday and they think Cordy has a very bright future.

By the way, I don't rate the new system at all. A 2nd round pick is fair in my opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dancin' Douggy

Let's say in theory we had the number 1 pick and Geelong had pick 16.......
If they offered pick 16 for him would we have to use the number 1 pick to match their offer?
They are both 1st round draft picks. That would be an awful scenario

---

DD

My understanding was that if we had pick 1 and geelong had pick 16. if geelong used pick 16, we have to use our NEXT available pick, which i guess would be 17.

One of us is wrong, im not sure who

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dancin' Douggy

Let's say in theory we had the number 1 pick and Geelong had pick 16.......
If they offered pick 16 for him would we have to use the number 1 pick to match their offer?
They are both 1st round draft picks. That would be an awful scenario

---

No, second round in that instance.

For example, lets say we finished 8th. We would then have pick 9. If a side with picks 1-8 bids for Ayce Cordy, we would have to use pick 9. If a side with picks 10-24 bids for Ayce Cordy, we would have to use pick 25. It's the next selection you have, after a bid has been tabled that you have to use.

I think it's much fairer. It's easy to look at Cordy in isolation & say it's wrong, but if Steve Wallis' son comes up & he's say worth a 6th rounder, then that's all we use, not a 3rd rounder as was previously the case.

Clearly Geelong have been very fortunate, but if the new system was in last season, then a side with a pick before Geelong would surely have bid for Tom Hawkins, which would have seen Geelong use their first round selection on him, therefore missing the chance to select Joel Selwood.

I think some (not all, just some) who don't like the new system, do so out of ignorance.

You could argue it's been chopped & changed a number of times in the past which has somewhat bastardised it, but I do think this changes adds a degree of fairness the old system lacked.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Coon Dog

No, second round in that instance.

For example, lets say we finished 8th. We would then have pick 9. If a side with picks 1-8 bids for Ayce Cordy, we would have to use pick 9. If a side with picks 10-24 bids for Ayce Cordy, we would have to use pick 25. It's the next selection you have, after a bid has been tabled that you have to use.

I think it's much fairer. It's easy to look at Cordy in isolation & say it's wrong, but if Steve Wallis' son comes up & he's say worth a 6th rounder, then that's all we use, not a 3rd rounder as was previously the case.

Clearly Geelong have been very fortunate, but if the new system was in last season, then a side with a pick before Geelong would surely have bid for Tom Hawkins, which would have seen Geelong use their first round selection on him, therefore missing the chance to select Joel Selwood.

I think some (not all, just some) who don't like the new system, do so out of ignorance.

You could argue it's been chopped & changed a number of times in the past which has somewhat bastardised it, but I do think this changes adds a degree of fairness the old system lacked.

---

Thanks for clearing that up. Just wasn't sure

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Coon Dog

No, second round in that instance.

For example, lets say we finished 8th. We would then have pick 9. If a side with picks 1-8 bids for Ayce Cordy, we would have to use pick 9. If a side with picks 10-24 bids for Ayce Cordy, we would have to use pick 25. It's the next selection you have, after a bid has been tabled that you have to use.

I think it's much fairer.

---

And I think it's more open to manipulation than the old system. Say for example during trade week that club A agrees to put in a dummy or ambit claim so that club B can force our hand and take Cordy with a draft choice we didnt want to use therefore leaving the player we were going to pick to fall into club B's lap. I thought about it for about thirty seconds before I came up with that sceanrio. I'm sure a list development manager with more time on his hands is going to punch holes through this stupid bloody idea.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Twodogs

And I think it's more open to manipulation than the old system. Say for example during trade week that club A agrees to put in a dummy or ambit claim so that club B can force our hand and take Cordy with a draft choice we didnt want to use therefore leaving the player we were going to pick to fall into club B's lap. I thought about it for about thirty seconds before I came up with that sceanrio. I'm sure a list development manager with more time on his hands is going to punch holes through this stupid bloody idea.

---

But the bidding system is before trade week isn't it? Which throws that scenario out a bit. Plus if they put in that Dummy and we don't rate Cordy that highly they are then forced to take Cordy and perhaps miss out on 1 or 2 players that they wanted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Topdog

But the bidding system is before trade week isn't it? Which throws that scenario out a bit. Plus if they put in that Dummy and we don't rate Cordy that highly they are then forced to take Cordy and perhaps miss out on 1 or 2 players that they wanted.

---

Trade 'week' starts about June. Judd was always going to Carlton from halfway through last year unless another Victorian put an amazing offer on the table. Club B could trade a star player to club A in order to get their dummy bid. Club B is then taking the gamble that we wont pick Cordy and club A's worse outcome is they get the star player and Cordy.

Yeah thats true about starting in June.

Lets put this in more real terms. West Coast trades Judd to Carlton for pick 3. Carlton than says they will take Cordy with pick 1. We say 'nope too high an asking price'.

Carlton get Cordy but miss out on the best young player in the draft.

Is that what you mean by it? All the club B and Club A stuff confuses me today. Not a monday person!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Topdog

Yeah thats true about starting in June.

Lets put this in more real terms. West Coast trades Judd to Carlton for pick 3. Carlton than says they will take Cordy with pick 1. We say 'nope too high an asking price'.

Carlton get Cordy but miss out on the best young player in the draft.

Is that what you mean by it? All the club B and Club A stuff confuses me today. Not a monday person!

---

No what I have in mind is more of a Veale deal but a little bit different. West Coast wouldnt get Carlton's pick but Carlton's promise they will nominate Cordy, forcing us to use an earlier pick than we were planning. Then the player we were planning on taking earlier is sacrificed to pick Cordy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Twodogs

No what I have in mind is more of a Veale deal but a little bit different. West Coast wouldnt get Carlton's pick but Carlton's promise they will nominate Cordy, forcing us to use an earlier pick than we were planning. Then the player we were planning on taking earlier is sacrificed to pick Cordy.

---

I think it's too risky for a team to do it.

If they nominate Cordy earlier than they think he's worth they still run the risk of us saying "nope. He's not worth it" and they're stuck with a pick 12 player that they have to use pick 5 on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Twodogs

No what I have in mind is more of a Veale deal but a little bit different. West Coast wouldnt get Carlton's pick but Carlton's promise they will nominate Cordy, forcing us to use an earlier pick than we were planning. Then the player we were planning on taking earlier is sacrificed to pick Cordy.

---

No, because once a team has nomionated & been allocated a pick, they can't on-trade it.
In this case, Carlton would have to take pick 3 off the table because they have nominated for a father/son player so cannot use it for anything else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GVGjr

I was having a talk to a couple guys on Saturday and they think Cordy has a very bright future.

By the way, I don't rate the new system at all. A 2nd round pick is fair in my opinion.

---

I certainly hope Cordy does have a very bright future, I know he is a good athlete and coordinated, but I just hope he can enjoy his football and develop with the Falcons. He's still a pretty raw and very much developmental prospect isn't he?

A 2nd round pick would be far fairer, but I personally had no problem with a 3rd or 4th round selection.

I hate the new system

Ayce has been named at full fwd for this weekends game against Murray Bushrangers

Can anyone confirm that young Ayce has dislocated his shoulder and will miss the National champs?


Pros - might drop him down the draft list with clubs less likely to want to commit to someone who's only played a few games of school footy.

Cons - with his light build it might be the first of many shoulder issues a la Sean Rusling.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sockeye Salmon

Can anyone confirm that young Ayce has dislocated his shoulder and will miss the National champs?


Pros - might drop him down the draft list with clubs less likely to want to commit to someone who's only played a few games of school footy.

Cons - with his light build it might be the first of many shoulder issues a la Sean Rusling.

---

If true about him dislocating it, I wonder how true it is;)

As part of being an AFL member I received a magazine with an article of Ayce. He goes on to say Darcy has helped him a great deal with his ruckwork and he wants to model his game on Dean Cox who also plays as an onballer.
Also mentioned at 15yo he was 180cm tall and playing as an onballer which has helped him mobility wise now that he is 204cm. For those that failed maths, he has grown 24cm inside 2 years, quiet remarkable really!