Ruck Combo’s

Written by Motts on March 30 2011

You only have a limited amount of dollars to play with in this game. Funnily enough the combined value of Cox and Ryder ($845,000) is very similar to that of Sandilands and Warnock ($853,300). Do you think last week’s stats are representative of how all four of them are going to score for the season (Cox – 165, Ryder – 141, Sandilands – 134, Warnock – 117) or do you think things will change as time goes on? Its time to vote, which combo do you like more?

Sorry, there are no polls available at the moment.
0
0


Leave a comment / Scroll to bottom

34 thoughts on “Ruck Combo’s”

  1. sandi & Cox are the most consistent ruckman with big scores. Can’t see the bombers ruckmen pulling in big scores every week… we’ll see though.

    0

    0
  2. Ahhh, Mr. Motts, sir, you talk of Cox/Ryder versus Sandi/Warnock but give us voting options of Cox/Hille versus Sandi/Warnock? Hope I’m not being too pedantic here……I voted for Sandi anyway, whatever combo the big fella is in.

    0

    0
  3. Sandi/warnock combo for me. I’m hoping warnock will appreciate in value enough so I can upgrade to Sex on the Beach. Got Vickery on the bench. I know that’s a lot of bench $$$ but I figure I’ll need coverage, thanks to the byes, and I’m praying he’s a pretty little earner too.

    0

    0
  4. weeks ago i thought about to pick a cox and ryder combo ,but my head keeped saying 211 .so i played it safe ( about half of super coach teams ) and went with a cox and sandilands combo. touch wood they have a injury free year…

    0

    0
  5. Was originally contemplating gay sex but decided beach sex was far better

    …. Sandi and Cox are clearly the beez neez of SC rucking circa 2011. They will consistently poll 110+ scores with their lower scores around the mid 90’s. And with Hille you always have the everpresent likelihood of a few weeks on the sideline due to some act of thuggery.

    0

    0
  6. I just picked Sandi and Cox.
    expensive but with one of them captain should guarantee me 400 points every week.

    0

    0
  7. Picked Cox and Jolly.
    Not happy with Jolly, but well see how he goes
    Just feel like my rucks arent strong enough

    0

    0
  8. How many ruckmen scored over 100 this week?

    I had McCox combo – McOvoy and Cox and was very pleased for score vs outlay.

    0

    0
  9. Gidday Motts….and all his followers ( yours too Big & Sexy)……
    Personally i have COX and the Petrie / Hale combo thingy going on for the bye thingy that has been served up to us this year. – Thank GOD i get to rest Hale this week…… he might just sneak in to my fwd line.
    I am lucky enough to have a Math degree.( and a crystal ball) and the Cox / warnock combo is clearly the best option…..BECAUSE, as Motts says, we only have LIMITED funds………. IMHO Cox will actually score more points this year than the Giant, given he has no lower back pain ( touch wood), will rest fwd ( as oppossed to going off and giving Nic Nat a go ( and COX CAN kick goals) AND Nic Nat has had a very poor build up and is carrying a significant injury himself…… Cox WAY under the odds at 428k ….pretty confident in saying if you add Cox and Warnock’s scores together come rd22 and divide by total cost, they will come out on top of any other pair….. GIVEN no significant injuries to either – and none of us can allow for that……….
    Only other possible combo is Cox and Petrie………….fingers crossed……..

    0

    0
  10. Let me make that black and white for those that figures do not come easy to……..
    Sandi – 554700, Cox – 428,200.
    SOOOO going on last week Cox score, Sandi should have scored 213.74 to be value for money………. but then really, he still isn’t……… because you can spend the extra on a mid premium……..
    So he is nearly 80 points behind “value for money”…….. IMHO………..

    Anybody agree….?????

    Love the game……..love it……love the site…………ONLY one I look at after round one

    0

    0
  11. Just remember Cox wasnt up against a recognised ruckman on Sunday

    0

    0

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *