Chris Johnson

[Roost It 1,434]

My source inside the club tells me Chris Johnson will be nominating for the Pre-Season Draft and leaving our club.

Apparently Carlton have thrown him a bucket of dollars and a longer contract than us and he has accepted.

I am absolutely furious if this is true.

I really rate CJ highly and we can't afford to lose him.

I also doubt he would slip that far to Carlton in the draft, so I am crossing my fingers that this is incorrect information from my normally reliable source.

If this is true, there better be some bl00dy good answers as tho why this is allowed to happen.

Because he's ordinary at best and not worth a 2 year contract or more money. Good call by Bailey

[e25 5]

Because he's ordinary at best and not worth a 2 year contract or more money. Good call by Bailey

By this stage he is a known quantity, even if he hasn't developed into that player just yet. But after 4 years they should have a fair idea.

And that is of a C grade player right now.

Grimes, Petterd, a new draftee - could be ANYTHING at this stage.

I think Bailey knew exactly what he was doing, putting CJ in a position to rack up a lot of possies in the second half of the season.

He wanted to raise CJ's trade value.

Unfortunately we had no takers.

But CJ's had his time.

We need to demand better of our players rather than settle for mediocrity.

(already contracted players notwithstanding)

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

So are you saying, RR, that we shouldn't be upset about losing a player in whom we invested 4 years of effort into developing, who is the son of a former club great, and who, by the sounds of it you admit could play a role in the team for next year, just because there are others like him around (in whom we never invested anything, may never be good enough anyway and don't have his excellent foot-skills)??? What are we to do instead, delist him to be picked up by the scum for free, take an extra low draft pick and hope he turns out to be at least a decent depth half back with good foot skills? Or a recycled player that someone else didn't want in the PSD? The point here is that you can't just gamble and hope to find adequate replacements when you already have someone who has shown he is capable of playing a specific role. You CAN trade these players for better draft picks or other players to fill other roles during trade period, but now that boat has sailed, we would be giving him away for nothing at this point in time after investing much. Delisting a young player who has shown promise and doesn't deserve to be delisted is bad business.

I could not care about how many years we have invested in a player as a criteria for keep him. On that critieria we could still have Chris Lamb on our list for ever waiting for him to come good. If he is not cutting the mustard and no matter how you floss it CJ is a fringe player. Furthermore the only relevance of being the son of a former great is where you get him under the F/S rule. After that he is in the same position as any other player.

And if you missed the trade week and by your comments you did, only six trades were down amongst 16 clubs. That tells you that you cant trade these players as there was no interest in him during trade week. And he was hocked around. No takers

And who said about delisting him? He apparently has been offered a 1 year contract. Retaining players who have known limitations (a well worn practice at this club) is proven bad business.

Heaven knows what posters will rave on about when we actually get a star at the Club!

And I don't quite get your second point. I did put in my post that most players are not born to be immediate stars in their career, but I never said that Johnno needed to develop into a star to continue to be of value to the team. Are you saying that to win a premiership we need 22 stars on the field come GF day, therefore let's get rid of him?

Were you inferring that they would be "stars" later in theri if not immediate? Otherwise the reference raised by you about "stars"was irrelevant because no one has said CJ has to be a star. However many posters do recognise where he is at. As for a premiership, CJ is not a critical keep towards a flag. At this point, he still has to prove he is criticial to the future. I dont think he has but has been thrown a lifeline.

His value in the team is as a fringe player whose role could be covered by a number of other players. He has been offered a year to consolidate his career at MFC or he can chase the bucks at Carlton.

[Rogue 585]

CJ's handy and will probably forge a decent AFL career.

I think many people had already crossed a line through CJ earlier in the season, only to reach for the white-out later in the year.

I'd prefer we kept him, but it won't be the end of the world if he goes.

If this is true, there better be some bl00dy good answers as tho why this is allowed to happen.

I imagine the answer is that the Club doesn't rate CJ as highly as you.

[torpedo 33]

Apparently Carlton have thrown him a bucket of dollars

I find that hard to believe. Have you got a ballpark figure? More than us is one thing, 'bucket of dollars' just sounds like a load of bulldust.

I really rate CJ highly and we can't afford to lose him.

I think he has potential also and if he can back this season's form up with further improvement and on a more consistent basis he'd be a handy player. But what we definitely cannot afford to have is a situation where we have players with unfulfilled potential, ie Carroll, Messen, Jamar, Newton, Bell (... and the list goes on), clogging up our list due to poor list management and unnecessarily long contracts.

There is nothing to suggest CJ will be a solid player for many years to come, there is glimmers of hope but nothing definitive. Why guarantee him another 2 years when he has performed below expectations for the majority of his AFL career?

If this is true, there better be some bl00dy good answers as tho why this is allowed to happen.

It is being allowed to happen because finally MFC is learning from its mistakes and no longer singing up 'maybes' on 2 or 3 year contracts... particularly not ones who have already had 4 years to prove their worth.

[pringle 42]

"I could not care about how many years we have invested in a player as a criteria for keep him. On that critieria we could still have Chris Lamb on our list for ever waiting for him to come good."

Except the difference is that, unlike Lamb, Johnson has already become a good player (but it seems you disagree).

"And if you missed the trade week and by your comments you did, only six trades were down amongst 16 clubs. That tells you that you cant trade these players as there was no interest in him during trade week. And he was hocked around. No takers"

If he wasn't traded and was not already delisted, then why lose him? Clearly another club wanted him (Carlton), and we couldn't find a way to even get a bad trade deal done for him. So instead of getting a small reward for moving him on we opt to release him for nothing???

"And who said about delisting him? He apparently has been offered a 1 year contract. Retaining players who have known limitations (a well worn practice at this club) is proven bad business."

If we don't agree to his contract terms and let him go, we are, in effect, delisting him.

"Were you inferring that they would be "stars" later in theri if not immediate? Otherwise the reference raised by you about "stars"was irrelevant because no one has said CJ has to be a star. However many posters do recognise where he is at. As for a premiership, CJ is not a critical keep towards a flag. At this point, he still has to prove he is criticial to the future. I dont think he has but has been thrown a lifeline."

Valid point. Not phrased well by me. I should have said that most players don't burst onto the scene and show their full capabilities immediately. Some take time to develop. And, no, he is not critical to the future, but he is at the very least more than just a useful player at the moment and according to many here perhaps proved himself as a starting 18 player before he got injured. I don't see the point in losing him at this juncture in time unless we thought we could get something for him (which we can't atm).

"His value in the team is as a fringe player whose role could be covered by a number of other players. He has been offered a year to consolidate his career at MFC or he can chase the bucks at Carlton."

Don't agree with the fringe player part, but if he really is chasing bucks (I think it's more chasing a 2-year gurantee, but if you are right), then yes, he can go get stuffed and cop the consequences when Carlton's next audit and salary cap scrutiny leave them with more penalties.

That may be hard to follow. If anyone could show me how to quote people section by section and then reply, would be appreciated.

[Rogue 585]

If we don't agree to his contract terms and let him go, we are, in effect, delisting him.

Sure, but - it seems - our intention is to re-contract him for one year, rather than to delist him (a la Holland, Yze, White).

If we don't agree to terms we will need to delist him, but - it seems - this isn't our preferred option.

That may be hard to follow. If anyone could show me how to quote people section by section and then reply, would be appreciated.

When you are typing a reply you'll see a variety of buttons and dropdown boxes above the text entry box (above where you're typing).

There's a 'quote' button, which puts the

[quote]

tags around text you have highlighted. These quote tags make the forum software display text within the quote tags in a quote box.

# Reply to post

# Highlight text you want to quote and then click the 'quote' button (located just above the text box, below the fonts dropdown).

Text that is going to be shown as a quote will look like this:

[quote]quoted text[/quote]

Voila!

NB: There are a few other ways to achieve the same aim, but this is probably the easiest.

[pringle 42]

Thanks Rogue. I'll put those new skills to use as soon as I can.

And I agree with you that it doesn't seem to be our preferred option to delist him. It does look like the club still wants him. I would just prefer more effort on our behalf to keep him. I don't think 2 years is too much to ask on his behalf. 3 years is too much. Two years seems reasonable as a player as you do want a bit of stability in your life. To negotiate a new deal every year seems a bit much to me (both for player and club). If he then has a brillliant year next year, the vultures will be out and we won't be able to match the rich clubs out there, so we'll lose him anyway. I understand that he could also have a stinker, and then we might want to get rid of him. But I also think he has already shown enought to suggest that he's worth taking a chance.

[e25 5]

Thanks Rogue. I'll put those new skills to use as soon as I can.

And I agree with you that it doesn't seem to be our preferred option to delist him. It does look like the club still wants him. I would just prefer more effort on our behalf to keep him. I don't think 2 years is too much to ask on his behalf. 3 years is too much. Two years seems reasonable as a player as you do want a bit of stability in your life. To negotiate a new deal every year seems a bit much to me (both for player and club). If he then has a brillliant year next year, the vultures will be out and we won't be able to match the rich clubs out there, so we'll lose him anyway. I understand that he could also have a stinker, and then we might want to get rid of him. But I also think he has already shown enought to suggest that he's worth taking a chance.

Don't you think once a player is entering his 5th season it is a bit late to be 'taking a chance' on him?

Honestly, remove all the emotion and the sentiment from it and look at the facts.

-shown promise over 4 seasons but nothing consistent.

-finally had a patch over about 6 games (yes SIX) where he was a solid contributor.

-then gets injured.

-has good footskills, not much else that makes him a standout. (i didn't say NOT GOOD, but nothing OUTSTANDING)

It doesn't inspire me to give him too much more time.

If he can't show in the next year why we would NEED him on our list, then we don't want him.

Football is a cutthroat business if you want to succeed.

[darkhorse72 1,759]

and he's gone...

http://afl.com.au/News/NEWSARTICLE/tabid/2...px?newsId=69475

[Guest Nicko06]

Unbelievable - let him go for nothing.. well thought through boys..

http://www.afl.com.au/News/NEWSARTICLE/tab...px?newsId=69475

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Unbelievable - let him go for nothing.. well thought through boys..

http://www.afl.com.au/News/NEWSARTICLE/tab...px?newsId=69475

There was no interest offered in trade week.

The club said in a statement: "Chris Johnson was offered a playing contract with the Melbourne Football Club for 2009. He and his management have since requested for Chris to be delisted, so that he could pursue other playing opportunities for the future."

[Whispering_Jack 28,092]

There was no interest offered in trade week.

The club said in a statement: "Chris Johnson was offered a playing contract with the Melbourne Football Club for 2009. He and his management have since requested for Chris to be delisted, so that he could pursue other playing opportunities for the future."

Johnson eyes Blues after Demon delisting

[Neita3000 37]

What a [censored]! At least give us the chance to trade you for something.

[sylvinator 96]

we are seriously such a crappy club atm.

As if we just throw away a guy who we put 4 years of development into him, he finnally starts playing good footy and is one of the only players on our list who can actually kick the footy.

Anyways...

Final list changes for the year------

Out:

1) Neitz

2) Yze

3) Holland

4) White

5) Weetra

6) Bode

7) Carrol

8) Chris Johnson

In:

1) Wonaeamirri (Elevated Rookie)

2) Pick 1- Jack Watts

3) Pick 17

4) Pick 19

5) Pick 35

6) Pick 51

7) pick 67

8) PSD pick 1

Retained Rookies- Valenti, Spenser, Zomer

Veterans- Robertson, McDonald

[e25 5]

Unbelievable - let him go for nothing.. well thought through boys..

http://www.afl.com.au/News/NEWSARTICLE/tab...px?newsId=69475

Seriously, poorly thought out sentiment like that will kill this club.

He's no great loss.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

What a [censored]! At least give us the chance to trade you for something.

We did. No takers.

Is Carroll still actually on the 2009 list?

[LeBron James 41]

No big loss.

Pleased we are getting rid of all the average players

[Neita3000 37]

We did. No takers.

Is Carroll still actually on the 2009 list?

Do remember Nudge reporting he was on the market.

Anyway still a poor effort on his behalf.

Yes, Carroll is still on the list. Don't worry though, there's a few list lodgements to go.

[Guest Golgothan]

Seriously, poorly thought out sentiment like that will kill this club.

He's no great loss.

Very true. We didn't let him go for nothing, he wanted to leave because he wasn't happy with our terms

Half-back/midfielder Chris Johnson, the son of former Demon Alan, has been delisted.

The club said in a statement: "Chris Johnson was offered a playing contract with the Melbourne Football Club for 2009. He and his management have since requested for Chris to be delisted, so that he could pursue other playing opportunities for the future."

Article

[Yencks 8]

he wanted to leave because he wasn't happy with our terms

ie) because he could get better terms elsewhere

i am happy, this just means we can another draft pick/rookie/psd pick

[ChannellingHopgoodAgro 4]

we are seriously such a crappy club atm.

As if we just throw away a guy who we put 4 years of development into him, he finnally starts playing good footy and is one of the only players on our list who can actually kick the footy.

Anyways...

Final list changes for the year------

Out:

1) Neitz

2) Yze

3) Holland

4) White

5) Weetra

6) Bode

7) Carrol

8) Chris Johnson

In:

1) Wonaeamirri (Elevated Rookie)

2) Pick 1- Jack Watts

3) Pick 17

4) Pick 19

5) Pick 35

6) Pick 51

7) pick 67

8) PSD pick 1

Retained Rookies- Valenti, Spenser, Zomer

Veterans- Robertson, McDonald

I didn't think that Carroll has been delisted or ousted yet - we're not allowed to just get rid of him are we?

[Yencks 8]

can someone explain what the veterans thing means? is it good or bad?

and, does anyone else think that carlton have lost all credibility when it comes to salary caps now?

[e25 5]

I didn't think that Carroll has been delisted or ousted yet - we're not allowed to just get rid of him are we?

There are another 2 list lodgements before the season starts... the next on 14th Nov so still in time for the draft. Gives us time to sort out what we are doing.

[e25 5]

can someone explain what the veterans thing means? is it good or bad?

and, does anyone else think that carlton have lost all credibility when it comes to salary caps now?

It means half their salary counts against the cap. Good if you have a player eligible that is on Chris Judd $$$