Does anyone one know if the AFL is persisting with the farce of having a draft WEEK where nothing basically happens until the last day and a half ?

Far better IMO to limit the time frame to 48hrs. Any other "posturing" and "bluffing" can be done in private by the clubs prior to the trade period.

Bit harsh to say nothing happens. Stuff does happen. Much needs time to gestate ,to have offers sounded out and interest garnered etc. The composition of momentum and deadlines always makes it look like its only the back end of ghte week with action where as the truth is much happens from the minute trade week starts ( if not before ) it just takes a few days often to permeate its way to us, the public.

Does anyone one know if the AFL is persisting with the farce of having a draft WEEK where nothing basically happens until the last day and a half ?

Far better IMO to limit the time frame to 48hrs. Any other "posturing" and "bluffing" can be done in private by the clubs prior to the trade period.

Just tune in on the Friday. Forget the other 4 days.

In fact, better to tune in the last hour on day 5.

I must confess to be a bit of a trade week junky. I dont expect much to start but it facinates me with all the conjecture etc how what is painted as an elephant often turns into a donkey :D Still, it intrigues me as to how the various teams often appreciate and value the various players quite differently to us spectators. With the Dees having been out of contention for so long now I take my jollies where they show..

With GC looming I feel there will be an unusual emphasis this year on trades. Some looking to jockey better for a pick, othrs using that leverage to acquire a player if looking at a window. Could be an intersting song and dance this year.

I must confess to be a bit of a trade week junky. I dont expect much to start but it facinates me with all the conjecture etc how what is painted as an elephant often turns into a donkey :D Still, it intrigues me as to how the various teams often appreciate and value the various players quite differently to us spectators. With the Dees having been out of contention for so long now I take my jollies where they show..

With GC looming I feel there will be an unusual emphasis this year on trades. Some looking to jockey better for a pick, othrs using that leverage to acquire a player if looking at a window. Could be an intersting song and dance this year.

I think it could be more interesting next year. With the GC's picks. Current teams will be lining up some of their possible options for GC in order to obtain one of their picks...

I think it could be more interesting next year. With the GC's picks. Current teams will be lining up some of their possible options for GC in order to obtain one of their picks...

I suppose canbe looked at a number of ways re GC. My thoughts are that despite picks being quite precious next year those teams with any show at finals in that time frame will not be looking to rely onanytalent brought in over thenext couple of years. Yes tehy , like any teams will want raw material for development but its not the same urgency or priororty.Conversely those teams aspiring to get somewhere , or break into the eight over the next 3-5 years will NEED more material to work with and have them rolling before the GC effect takes hold. Agin my thoughts alone, Id be circling the wagons and mustering now rather than next year. Either way it wil lbe interesting to see how it all unfolds. Will give some insight possibly as to where on teh clock various teams se themselves.

I must confess to be a bit of a trade week junky. I dont expect much to start but it facinates me with all the conjecture etc how what is painted as an elephant often turns into a donkey :D Still, it intrigues me as to how the various teams often appreciate and value the various players quite differently to us spectators. With the Dees having been out of contention for so long now I take my jollies where they show..

With GC looming I feel there will be an unusual emphasis this year on trades. Some looking to jockey better for a pick, othrs using that leverage to acquire a player if looking at a window. Could be an intersting song and dance this year.

Who can forget that blockbuster trade of Aaron Davey to Port for pick 4..??!?

There's a lot of ridiculous conjecture and barely any of the trades that actually happen have been predicted by any of the pundits, but goddamn it is fun.

And how did this thread turn into a trade week debate?

I find it fascinating how all threads seem to naturally evolve into one of the same old topics...

Who can forget that blockbuster trade of Aaron Davey to Port for pick 4..??!?

There's a lot of ridiculous conjecture and barely any of the trades that actually happen have been predicted by any of the pundits, but goddamn it is fun.

And how did this thread turn into a trade week debate?

I find it fascinating how all threads seem to naturally evolve into one of the same old topics...

Wasn't it something ridiculous like Daniel Bell for a 1st rounder to Port...?

Then there can be a rightful comparison with the trades for Jolly, Simmonds etc. Mind you we traded Simmonds because we had Jolly come through. Jolly cracked the sads because he could not get game time against White the then AA ruckman. Jolly was ready to walk on the Club. The Club took the sensible decision at the time. Its easy in hindsight to be critical without understanding the facts and issues at the time.

The Jolly / White issue was a clear failure on ND's part - the season was lost, White was struggling with injury, and Jamar and Jolly werevying for game time. ND opted for the easy decision, as White could actually walk, and didn't say to Jeff - take the year off and we will play the two Js and see which is the better. This turned out to be a lose / lose decision.

I admire what Yoda has done with the list, but I hope he doesn't make the same mistake with McLean - he has the opportunity to get Brock 100% for preseason 2010, and as well have a good look at Valenti and possibly McKenzie.

I admire what Yoda has done with the list, but I hope he doesn't make the same mistake with McLean - he has the opportunity to get Brock 100% for preseason 2010, and as well have a good look at Valenti and possibly McKenzie.

Agree. Would like to see McKenzie get a run. We've seen Valenti.

I think Bailey has done little wrong in his time at the club...

Outside of the coach's box on match day.

That's where the question mark lies IMO.

Agree. Would like to see McKenzie get a run. We've seen Valenti.

But valenti could be on his last legs.

But valenti could be on his last legs.

That's why I said "we've seen Valenti", hence let's see McKenzie instead.

That's why I said "we've seen Valenti", hence let's see McKenzie instead.

What im trying to say is valenti has to play for his career at melbourne wile mckenzie has more time.

Personally would like to see both, but doubt that would happen.

What im trying to say is valenti has to play for his career at melbourne wile mckenzie has more time.

Personally would like to see both, but doubt that would happen.

think again...

Why did I read the thread title and think this thread would be about Dean Bailey having 'man boobs'?

Got to get off the gear.

I've got no idea the amount he was after, however the Dees were not willing to pay it. At this stage Prismall looks good at Essendon, and maybe we should have paid the price. However, our list is nowhere near good enough to carry players coming back from knee injuries.

We could have pipped the bombers with our 35th pick though, as bombers gave them pick 39. We got Bennell as it turned out.

Exactly

The Jolly / White issue was a clear failure on ND's part - the season was lost, White was struggling with injury, and Jamar and Jolly werevying for game time. ND opted for the easy decision, as White could actually walk, and didn't say to Jeff - take the year off and we will play the two Js and see which is the better. This turned out to be a lose / lose decision.

I admire what Yoda has done with the list, but I hope he doesn't make the same mistake with McLean - he has the opportunity to get Brock 100% for preseason 2010, and as well have a good look at Valenti and possibly McKenzie.

Nothing like a history revisionist.

At the end of Rd 18 2004, MFC were on top of the ladder. One of the principal reasons was the domination of J White in the ruck and he did so single handedly. The others were Scott Thompson and David Neitz. Both got injured toward the end of the season. White did begin to feel the strain of the long year and after a significant layoff with injury Jolly returned and in limited game time showed little form to justify his spot. Jolly cracked the sads about not getting more game time with White having been in such good form. Yet he did little that year but sulk on and off the field. His form was so deplorable that he got dropped and a very green and inexperienced Jamar was elevated (too soon) as the needed second ruck option to support White. At the end of the year Jolly with one year left on the contract wanted to leave MFC. MFC traded Jolly to Sydney for pick #15. Its interesting to note that in first few years at Sydney Jolly saw more pine than woodcutter.

ND was out to try and win a flag and did not have the luxury of telling his AA and primary ruckman to take the year off. Jolly's little tantrum forced MFC to play Jamar well before time. Jolly had shown little then and in his early years at Sydney that he could be a reliable first ruck. Hardly a lose lose decision at all when you deal with the facts.

Nothing like a history revisionist.

At the end of Rd 18 2004, MFC were on top of the ladder. One of the principal reasons was the domination of J White in the ruck and he did so single handedly. The others were Scott Thompson and David Neitz. Both got injured toward the end of the season. White did begin to feel the strain of the long year and after a significant layoff with injury Jolly returned and in limited game time showed little form to justify his spot. Jolly cracked the sads about not getting more game time with White having been in such good form. Yet he did little that year but sulk on and off the field. His form was so deplorable that he got dropped and a very green and inexperienced Jamar was elevated (too soon) as the needed second ruck option to support White. At the end of the year Jolly with one year left on the contract wanted to leave MFC. MFC traded Jolly to Sydney for pick #15. Its interesting to note that in first few years at Sydney Jolly saw more pine than woodcutter.

ND was out to try and win a flag and did not have the luxury of telling his AA and primary ruckman to take the year off. Jolly's little tantrum forced MFC to play Jamar well before time. Jolly had shown little then and in his early years at Sydney that he could be a reliable first ruck. Hardly a lose lose decision at all when you deal with the facts.

agreed RR, spot on good post.