We are only in a bottoming out stage because Bailey was unable to get anything out of the experienced players, all of whom had played regularly in the finals. That's what caused the train wreck, not the previous administration.

This would have to be the most ridiculous thing I've read on this site. Apologies to YM as I know he covets that honour.

You obviously didn't read the article. Roos stated that clubs aren't given enough credit for making the finals, and you for one have been critical of our sides from 2004-2006. As he states, there is no formula to winning a premiership, but you have to make the finals to have a chance.

You watch, clubs like Carlton and Richmond will receive higher praise during the off-season despite missing than finals, than the likes of Adelaide, Kangaroos, Sydney, and the WBD. Armchair experts like yourself will say that they need a cleanout of the players that won't attain them the ultimate prize. According to Roos, this is folly.

We are only in a bottoming out stage because Bailey was unable to get anything out of the experienced players, all of whom had played regularly in the finals. That's what caused the train wreck, not the previous administration.

There's a difference between playing in finals and playing well in finals. Melbourne hasn't done the latter since 2000, and let's face it, the current set up states that half the competition gets to play in finals, which means from time to time some very average teams get the chance. Our list and playing style just wasn't up to the level of finals pressure, and I'm amazed that this hasn't been accepted by our supporters.

Quality teams step up in finals, we weren't one of them.

Bailey inherited a list that lacked senior leadership, tall forwards, experienced key defenders, quality pacey midfielders and depth.

This would have to be the most ridiculous thing I've read on this site. Apologies to YM as I know he covets that honour.

/agreed

Back on topic.

I wouldn't do the original trade suggested.

Simply because we wouldn't be gaining an extra pick. Just upgrading 17 - 6.

I think people would look more at:

Bruce, Green to Carlton for pick 6.

Even that sounds like a loss to melbourne.

Personally I would look at

Green, Jamar for pick 6.

exactly right. if they are keen, we might do a pick 90 for pick 96 swap to allow him to get to carlton sure thing and make everyone happy. but we wont be getting anything for jeff white.

not when we have told the world he wont play for us anymore, and not when he is out of contract.

Actually Melbourne can still trade him, and White's value is driven by the market. If two or more clubs want White then MFC could get a good deal. If only Carlton wants White then he could end up there for their PSD #6.

You are either a historical revisionist or a goldfish mo. Bailey caused the train wreck that happened a year before he arrived. Your pathological hatred of our coach is getting very tiresome and has now degenerated into fantasy. You are a disgrace

In addition to the 6 wins, how many narrow defeats did we have last year? This year we were competitive on the scoreboard in 2 1/2 games, with one of those against a side that didn't try (WCE).

Jeez I'd love a coaching job where you accept no blame for what transpires under your tutelage. The facts are that we were uncompetitive with a list that was competitive in the years prior.

A Carlton supporter on bigfooty suggested pick 17+ Bruce+ Green for pick 6.

Would you take it??

I probably would.

Would leave us with pick 1,6,19. An 11 pick upgrade for two players who aren't important, future-wise.

It's early days, but that's going to be near impossible to beat for the '2008 Most Idiotic Trade Proposal Award'. Do Carlton supporters really believe that after they treated West Coast like a piece of Sorbent that the same will occur in any future trade they participate in? Don't waste your time on that forum.

A Carlton supporter on bigfooty suggested pick 17+ Bruce+ Green for pick 6.

Would you take it??

I probably would.

Would leave us with pick 1,6,19. An 11 pick upgrade for two players who aren't important, future-wise.

Oh dear lord,

What an absolute joke, seriously..

To gain 11 spots, with no guarantee of a positive outcome we give 2 players who are both worth top 20 potentially..

please..

Will Carlton want White now that they think they have Warnock?

Will Carlton want White now that they think they have Warnock?

What is the source?

Pick 1. Jack Watts

Pick 17. Sam Blease

Pick 19. Aaron Cornelius

Pick 35. David Zaharkis.

Leave it that, I think those selections are perfect.

It reads well Chop. But from what I gather and have seen on previous threads and forums, Zaharkis will go well before pick 35. Even before 17.

Your 1,17,19 picks however I would be most pleased with.

There's a difference between playing in finals and playing well in finals. Melbourne hasn't done the latter since 2000, and let's face it, the current set up states that half the competition gets to play in finals, which means from time to time some very average teams get the chance. Our list and playing style just wasn't up to the level of finals pressure, and I'm amazed that this hasn't been accepted by our supporters.

Quality teams step up in finals, we weren't one of them.

Bailey inherited a list that lacked senior leadership, tall forwards, experienced key defenders, quality pacey midfielders and depth.

Well said.

Jeez I'd love a coaching job where you accept no blame for what transpires under your tutelage. The facts are that we were uncompetitive with a list that was competitive in the years prior.

You would not get past the first interview with your ridiculous re writing of history. At least Y M knew he was sprouting garbage. You're the only dolt you have fooled

with your self serving tirade.

A sad example of pretence in dire need of substance and fact.

In addition to the 6 wins, how many narrow defeats did we have last year? This year we were competitive on the scoreboard in 2 1/2 games, with one of those against a side that didn't try (WCE).

We had 5 wins I think you will find. Remember? Had we lost to Carlton we would have had a priority pick.

Any so-called anguish engendered by potentially trading Green and/or Bruce has a parallel in the potential trading of Yze and/or White a few years ago.

Collingwood and Carlton offered big money for both, but we held onto them by paying over their worth. (Incidentally, we need to avoid the same trap in chasing Warnock.)

Had we made the hard call - or should that simply be the "right" call? - and traded Y & W we would not be groaning about paying them big money, and we could have possibly received a better player in return.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but if the club had their time again they would not have over-rated the list and almost certainly would have looked to offload any or all of White, Yze, Green and Bruce when their market value was at a premium.

Ask yourself: are you happy with the Travis trade? I know I am.

Most every player has their price. It's no different with Green and Bruce. If either wants to bail, we should let them. If we can scoop a handy pick for either, we should go for it. But it's probably too late.

We MUST be prepared to make the hard calls on any of the remaining medium ability players who failed to deliver us a flag.

We MUST be prepared to make the hard calls on any of the remaining medium ability players who failed to deliver us a flag.

Fingers crossed the club's new coaching staff and admin have a better sense of our players worth than the last lot. Yze and White on over $1 million. Oh dear God who's idea was that?

Actually Melbourne can still trade him,

of course we can trade him. but no one will want him. if someone is interested we will do our best to get him there. we are not out to get value from white, and dont expect anything otherwise.

of course we can trade him. but no one will want him. if someone is interested we will do our best to get him there. we are not out to get value from white, and dont expect anything otherwise.

MFC know they wont get a trade for him. He is a PSD candidate at best.

For a start - look at the sides that we had on the park in 07 & then look at the sides that we had on the park in 08. Big differenece buddy!!! Yes, we had a few narrow defeats last year - as we did this year!

You wouldnt get past the interview as the would know that you walk around this world with your eyes closed!!

B.t.w - I WOULD NOT trade either Bruce or Green!! Why dont we put an under 23 yrs side out on the park??? WE need senior players out on the park to help the young guys.

In addition to the 6 wins, how many narrow defeats did we have last year? This year we were competitive on the scoreboard in 2 1/2 games, with one of those against a side that didn't try (WCE).

Jeez I'd love a coaching job where you accept no blame for what transpires under your tutelage. The facts are that we were uncompetitive with a list that was competitive in the years prior.

of course we can trade him. but no one will want him. if someone is interested we will do our best to get him there. we are not out to get value from white, and dont expect anything otherwise.

Some ppl just cant seem to understand y no one will offer a trade 4 a player they can now get 4 free!!

WE WOOOONT TRADE HIM< HE IS OFF OUR LIST!!

Its hard enuf to trade any player let alone a 31yr old Ruckman who's been told he is no longer req'd..

umm no. tom williams was not one of the dogs' best backmen. Harris(Lake), Gilbee, Morris were all considered better. At the end of the day he is 22 years old and has played only 19 games. Open up your eyes, this is considered a failed pick.

Tom Williams is not considered a failed pick. Has shown more than enough in the games I have seen to suggest that if he can be injury free he will be a darn good player - will start next season as a 22 year old, measures in at 196cms and 101 kg, athletic, good hands and a good user of the ball. I sincerely hope that you have nowt to do with our list management though given the fact we have not had key defensive depth in my lifetime there is every chance that you have been a back room recruiting power broker at the Dees for the last 38 years.

Tom Williams is not considered a failed pick. Has shown more than enough in the games I have seen to suggest that if he can be injury free he will be a darn good player - will start next season as a 22 year old, measures in at 196cms and 101 kg, athletic, good hands and a good user of the ball. I sincerely hope that you have nowt to do with our list management though given the fact we have not had key defensive depth in my lifetime there is every chance that you have been a back room recruiting power broker at the Dees for the last 38 years.

Very true..

Williams looks like a great prospect!!

We are only in a bottoming out stage because Bailey was unable to get anything out of the experienced players, all of whom had played regularly in the finals. That's what caused the train wreck, not the previous administration.

Bailey sure had experienced key defenders to call on, lets see Warnock started the season with 4 games to his name, Garland with 2 games to his name, Frawley with 9 and Stefan Martin with zero. Up forward he could at least call on a 91 game Centre Half Forward but then once Neita's body finally gave up Bails could slot in a 10 game full forward in Newton.

Do you really expect a team with such inexperience down the spine to do better than we did?

As for these senior players there is not one champion amongst them cept for Neita whose body packed it in. Holland, White and Yze were past it, perhaps Robbo too, Do you really expect the likes of Bruce, Green, Mcdonald, Wheatley and Whelan - yep they are our senior talent you were referring too - to have lifted us up the ladder?

Look at North, they've played regularly in finals under Laidley but do you see them as a Premiership threat in the next 5 years? They are as far away as we are or maybe further.

As for the mooted trade ain't no chance the Blues would say yes.

Look at North, they've played regularly in finals under Laidley but do you see them as a Premiership threat in the next 5 years? They are as far away as we are or maybe further.

your kidding right....

the rooos are a country mile ahead of us winning the flag mate

they will top up this yr, they've already got rid of sinclair, grant, they'll be more retirees/delistings, and inject more youth, and they will as always fly under the radar

your kidding right....

the rooos are a country mile ahead of us winning the flag mate

they will top up this yr, they've already got rid of sinclair, grant, they'll be more retirees/delistings, and inject more youth, and they will as always fly under the radar

You miss Demoniacs point.

We may be a mile from a flag but North who should be in their challenging zone appear no better placed than we were in our apparent zone (or Mo's glory days) of 2004 to 2006. Their performance this year would suggest they are well off the pace of Geelong and Hawthorn.They are not helped by the fact that Geelong is a gorilla of the Competition and streets ahead of the rest.

They need to do more than top up. They lack the stars and are key person reliant on Harvey (31 next year) and Simpson (33 next year). They lack firepower options up forward. Will they fall in to the same trap that MFC did and overrate their list?

They need to do more than top up. They lack the stars and are key person reliant on Harvey (31 next year) and Simpson (33 next year). They lack firepower options up forward. Will they fall in to the same trap that MFC did and overrate their list?

I think they're coming to that conclusion right now, if they are fair dinkum with their own analysis. When there is talk of trading Daniel Wells & Daniel Harris you know the Roos are on the skids. I can't see them bottoming out like us though. They've already got games into kids who are competitive who impress.