is it even possible to trade a rookie?

I hope he does go to sydney and gets a chance.

He is not a required player at MFC, get what ever we can for him and wish him all the best

is it even possible to trade a rookie?

I hope he does go to sydney and gets a chance.

So do i.

I really like shane i recon he just doesnt fit in to the team with the midfeild we have, because his definetly eared the right to have a crack.

Do some people just think up ideas and post them... I think this is a rumour started by the person writing this thread. Valenti is probably a nice bloke who will have a good VFL career.

I heard Fremantle are interested in signing Robbo on a 6 year deal to boost their youth stocks. could be just a rumour

Valenti's on the rookie list. If this is real (which I doubt), all he'd have to do is nominate for the national draft this year and Sydney can get him for free.

Do some people just think up ideas and post them... I think this is a rumour started by the person writing this thread. Valenti is probably a nice bloke who will have a good VFL career.

I heard Fremantle are interested in signing Robbo on a 6 year deal to boost their youth stocks. could be just a rumour

Wow mate. From your use of sarcasm I can tell you're a pretty intelligent bloke. Why would someone bother to make this up? I don't care if you don't believe me, just annoys me that you're

Pretty much having a go at my integrity. I can promise you that this isn't a rumour.

Valenti is a good player unfortunately a little too slow for the AFL today.

is it even possible to trade a rookie?

The AFL have introduced a rule starting at the end of this season that allows clubs to trade rookie-listed players for ND draft picks. I remember seeing an article posted up here last week about it.

Valenti is a good player unfortunately a little too slow for the AFL today.

i Do not understand the selection strategy at present.I have been pushing for valentis inclusion all year.I rate him highly ,he has had 1 game for the year which was ok ,he is abetter option than mclean as he is a better decision maker than mclean and uses the ball far better.I would be trading mclean if possibel .he would make an excellent ameteur player

andhis turnoverswould not be as noticeable in the ameteurs as they are each week now.If sydney is interested it just goes to show how blind our selection process is.He has been caseys best allyear and his time in the 1's last year was excellent and I do not understand why he has had 1 run this year

Could this be the week that Jordie McKenzie gets promoted?

Though I haven't seen the Scorpions recently, it seems he's the sort of inside midfielder we need in the ones.

So much for Deegirl always being on the money.

Those senile old gits over at Demonology will believe anything.

...& would rather him than Dunn.

This is an interesting comment, because both have something that the other needs. Dunn has good footskills and speed, but winning the football doesn't come naturally to him. Whereas, Valenti is a ball winner but lacks speed and probably awareness. I'd prefer to persist with Dunn than Valenti, as he has more upside and we have enough of these slow type midfielders, that can win clearances.

Valenti certainly should be given some games.

We are in another losing season, let's see what the kids can do...

Wow mate. From your use of sarcasm I can tell you're a pretty intelligent bloke. Why would someone bother to make this up? I don't care if you don't believe me, just annoys me that you're

Pretty much having a go at my integrity. I can promise you that this isn't a rumour.

Don't you mean "I can promise you that this is a real rumour." ... ??

Because it definitely isn't fact until he's at Sydney, so...

And the AFL is looking at making rookie listed players tradeable but it is far from written into the rule books as we speak.

Stay tuned folks...

i Do not understand the selection strategy at present.I have been pushing for valentis inclusion all year.I rate him highly ,he has had 1 game for the year which was ok ,he is abetter option than mclean as he is a better decision maker than mclean and uses the ball far better.I would be trading mclean if possibel .he would make an excellent ameteur player

andhis turnoverswould not be as noticeable in the ameteurs as they are each week now.If sydney is interested it just goes to show how blind our selection process is.He has been caseys best allyear and his time in the 1's last year was excellent and I do not understand why he has had 1 run this year

How the hell do you come to that conclusion? if you base that on the game Valenti played, Mclean had 37 touches and was close to BOG. I for one will admit brock has been up and down but brock is miles ahead of Valenti.

Don't you mean "I can promise you that this is a real rumour." ... ??

Because it definitely isn't fact until he's at Sydney, so...

And the AFL is looking at making rookie listed players tradeable but it is far from written into the rule books as we speak.

Stay tuned folks...

I heard the AFL is toying with the idea of making Free Agency available to Rookies, but they have to be placed on the list of their new club.

Might come in at the end of the year. I think it is the AFL trialling FA to see for potential, and avoidable, problems when the league has FA in a few years time.

I really don't see why people are getting so huffy puffy about this. I'm not saying that Valenti is actually heading off, all I'm saying is that a club is considering him as an option. Guess it's better to just keep your mouth shut on this site sometimes.

I really don't see why people are getting so huffy puffy about this. I'm not saying that Valenti is actually heading off, all I'm saying is that a club is considering him as an option. Guess it's better to just keep your mouth shut on this site sometimes.

dw mate i appreciate the news and il just go with your word, i mean its like your saying that Sydney are gana trade a second round pic for him or player, all your saying is there interested wich doesn't suprise me at all.

:D Hooray!!! Really looking forward to seeing Jordie in action for the Demons on Sunday!!!

Also looks like our estimated wages budget this year will be blown out of the water again, due to rookies and match day payments

I think it happened 3 or so years ago. Oh well, thats footy

Would have thought their match payments are significantly lower than a listed player though (not 100% how it all works)

Who has gone onto the injury list for McKenzie to be elevated?

Who has gone onto the injury list for McKenzie to be elevated?

Garland..?

As far as I can tell no one was promoted for him.

Spencer was promoted for Jamar and still needs to be promoted again to play seniors again this year

Would have thought their match payments are significantly lower than a listed player though (not 100% how it all works)

Rookies are on a low salary(?$50,000), which rises significantly when they're promoted(I wonder if it's on a pro rata basis, ie Jordie's salary might rise to that of the lowest ranked listed player for 6/22 of the season)

That's the way to go, however financially strapped we are(remember when the green-grocer put in money for Flash to be elevated?)

It costs the club money to give deserving rookies a game....but it pays dividends! Financial constraints must never preclude the promotion of a deserving rookie.

I'm just a bit worried Jordie will play so well that we'll achieve the dreaded win!

Garland..?

As far as I can tell no one was promoted for him.

Spencer was promoted for Jamar and still needs to be promoted again to play seniors again this year

According to this article on the dee's website http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/newsart...81/default.aspx there are new guidelines that let a player be elevated without the need for a long terms injury listed player.

According to this article on the dee's website http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/newsart...81/default.aspx there are new guidelines that let a player be elevated without the need for a long terms injury listed player.

yeah, that's true, but you have two players elevated -- Valenti and McKenzie.

One for Garland, one for the new rule.