Bartram Cheney and Tommy Mac re sign

[Dee Fan 3,247]

It looks as if all our list management is now in place.

http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/newsart...73/default.aspx

[Darren Cuthbertson 0]

It looks as if all our list management is now in place.

http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/newsart...73/default.aspx

Hoopla will be upset.

Although he has blood on his hands with Meeson's delisting he'll be upset that his growing influence within the club didn't get Bartram as well. He must have had a lovers tiff with Juice though!

[Toot182 7]

'Extended their contracts'...? So, now they are due to expire end of 2011?

[hoopla 418]

'Extended their contracts'...? So, now they are due to expire end of 2011?

Logically Cheney and McNamara at 19 will get 2 year deals. I just hope Bartram has accepted one year

[DeeSpencer 26,493]

Logically Cheney and McNamara at 19 will get 2 year deals. I just hope Bartram has accepted one year

I hope all 3 of them only get one. Whilst I really like McNamara and think the others are okay they could end up a long way from best 22. Cheney has to improve his skills and speed to get a game in a decent team and McNamara needs to add strength and hardness. If they dont do part of this next year they will be list cloggers for their second year if they did get 2 year deals.

[Ryan Dee 140]

And the early call on Bartram was wrong, good going people Pff.

Very glad to hear.

[Toot182 7]

I think we'll find that once draft concessions for GC17 and GWS come in these are the sort of players we'll need for depth as we won't be getting the younger, better players onto the list through the draft. (or, i don't like to say it, but trade bait)

Also, hopefully in about 3 years, when they do hit, we'll be at the top of the ladder anyway!

[Nasher 33,617]

In light of the Meesen and Newton outcomes, this now makes perfect sense. Had that not happened, at least one of them would have gotten the bullet.

Well played MFC.

[deestroyers 0]

Excellent list management.

You would assume their contracts have only been extended 1 year each.

[Steamin Demon 401]

Great list management, On all fronts.

[Viney Vidi Vici 148]

i'm liking it. seems like everything we needed to happen has, and we haven't had any painful goodbyes.

[Carlos Danger 380]

McNamara and Cheney have shown a lot of potential, Bartram I'm not sold on.

[Bang Na Demon 168]

I'm rapt with all those resignings including Barts.

Does anyone remember James McDonald early in his career? Quick and brave but would hit the opposition lace more than his team mates. I had similar frustration with him

then that many now have with Barts. Tommy Mac is star in the making.

[titan_uranus 25,211]

Cheney and McNamara both deserved new contracts, so I'm very happy that they've got them. Personally if one (or both) got 2 years I wouldn't be upset, but 1 year would be the smarter thing to do at this point.

As for Bartram, I'm nowhere near as excited, but this is a better outcome than keeping Newton and losing Bartram.

Overall, this is a great outcome.

[Keyser Söze 0]

Cheney and McNamara both deserved new contracts, so I'm very happy that they've got them. Personally if one (or both) got 2 years I wouldn't be upset, but 1 year would be the smarter thing to do at this point.

As for Bartram, I'm nowhere near as excited, but this is a better outcome than keeping Newton and losing Bartram.

Overall, this is a great outcome.

We'll need a few to delist next year (not sure of the rules but I don't think deleting Newton and/or Meesen from the rookie list will count...)

[titan_uranus 25,211]

We'll need a few to delist next year (not sure of the rules but I don't think deleting Newton and/or Meesen from the rookie list will count...)

Each club must delist a minimum of 3 players. I'll give you 3 who were already on the list and who are already in contention to be delisted next year: PJ, Bell, Dunn.

If we're keeping players for the sole purpose of having options for the following year's list culling, then that's horrible list management. I'd say they like Bartram enough to give him another year to develop into a tagger or whatever they have in mind for him.

And you're right about Newton and Meesen. Rookie delistings don't count to that minimum of 3.

[Adzman 2,154]

A 3 deserved a new deal. Great work MFC. Really starting to act like a club that is pushing to win.

[Crystal Dees 372]

Each club must delist a minimum of 3 players. I'll give you 3 who were already on the list and who are already in contention to be delisted next year: PJ, Bell, Dunn.

If we're keeping players for the sole purpose of having options for the following year's list culling, then that's horrible list management. I'd say they like Bartram enough to give him another year to develop into a tagger or whatever they have in mind for him.

And you're right about Newton and Meesen. Rookie delistings don't count to that minimum of 3.

If we are keeping duds that precludes optimising our window, then thats horrible list management. Newton and Meeson and probably Bartram have a year to make an impact. They are lucky to have that opportunity but they have got it. If they can't improve or get on the paddock then they will go. MFC are switched on and professional nowadays and will use the system to improve our list. Sentiment will continue to kill us if we let it. We are no longer a not-for-profit (read unsuccesful) organisation because that threatens not only our success but the future of the club! If the club needs to promote Meeson and/or Newton from the rookie list in 2010 simply to be able to delist them and benefit our 2010 draft selections then do it! As it stands they are the 'weakest links' and I'd rather they did it to them instead of a Buckley type who had promise.

[rpfc 28,966]

If we are keeping duds that precludes optimising our window, then thats horrible list management. Newton and Meeson and probably Bartram have a year to make an impact. They are lucky to have that opportunity but they have got it. If they can't improve or get on the paddock then they will go. MFC are switched on and professional nowadays and will use the system to improve our list. Sentiment will continue to kill us if we let it. We are no longer a not-for-profit (read unsuccesful) organisation because that threatens not only our success but the future of the club! If the club needs to promote Meeson and/or Newton from the rookie list in 2010 simply to be able to delist them and benefit our 2010 draft selections then do it! As it stands they are the 'weakest links' and I'd rather they did it to them instead of a Buckley type who had promise.

Bartram being delisted would bring Pick 66 in a shallow draft to the club.

How is that optimising our window?

You need to clear out three players a season, and having a massive clean-out like Richmond is pointless.

Who will we delist next year? Easy, you say?

Who will we delist the year after next? Gets harder doesn't it.

[Grand New Flag 3,227]

Each club must delist a minimum of 3 players. I'll give you 3 who were already on the list and who are already in contention to be delisted next year: PJ, Bell, Dunn.

I agree that we have a number of players lining up for delisting next year, who would have been in trouble this year if it was not for being in contract, however, Dunn is not one of them.

Did you watch the second half of the season. His form was nothing short of outstanding. I too thought he was in trouble of being delisted at the mid season break but he was tough, consitent, and damaging to the opposition in the second half of the season. This did not go unnoticed by the FD and I am pretty sure he was rewarded with a new two year contract which ends after the 2011 season.

How about this for 2010 delistings/retirements:

Newton

Meeson

PJ

Bell

McDonald

With the compromised draft I can't see more than 5 going next year. Possibly less. All these guys have one foot out the door. In Newtons case one foot and 4 toes. You could also add to the list:

Jamar (looking to be traded)

Miller (one eye on GC)

Because of the new teams taking all the picks in the next two years, delistings will be significantly lower.

[titan_uranus 25,211]

Did you watch the second half of the season. His form was nothing short of outstanding. I too thought he was in trouble of being delisted at the mid season break but he was tough, consitent, and damaging to the opposition in the second half of the season. This did not go unnoticed by the FD and I am pretty sure he was rewarded with a new two year contract which ends after the 2011 season.

Dunn's second half of 2009 was definitely an improvement on his career. But to call it 'nothing short of outstanding' is a bit rich. It was good.

I'm yet to see any proof of Dunn being contracted till 2011. If he is then good for him, but that's poor list management. 2 years based on about 15 decent games, the majority of which came in the second half of this year, is not smart. He's not in our best 22, unlikely to be playing Round 1, and if he has a bad year next year, we have another Newton/Bell/Johnson situation on our hands.

How about this for 2010 delistings/retirements:

Newton

Meeson

PJ

Bell

McDonald

Newton and Meesen are on the rookie list (if they remain at Melbourne at all). So they don't count.

McDonald I didn't mention, but he, Bell and PJ give us 3 picks next year. If we want more we then would look to Miller and Dunn.

[H_T 3,049]

Newton and Meesen are on the rookie list (if they remain at Melbourne at all). So they don't count.

McDonald I didn't mention, but he, Bell and PJ give us 3 picks next year. If we want more we then would look to Miller and Dunn.

At this point in time, I'm of the same view. And I don't see it changing unless there is a significant change of circumstances and/or form.

[Crystal Dees 372]

Bartram being delisted would bring Pick 66 in a shallow draft to the club.

How is that optimising our window?

You need to clear out three players a season, and having a massive clean-out like Richmond is pointless.

Who will we delist next year? Easy, you say?

Who will we delist the year after next? Gets harder doesn't it.

You are either missing my point or more likely, I haven't explained it well. I'm not advocating delisting Bartram this year. The club by rookie listing (likely scenario) Newton and Meeson has freed us up to go to 50 in the draft and #1 in PSD. I agree 66 is of little or no use but 50 could be used for a good recycled player (Thorp?) along with the PSD (McDonald?), the other picks on kids. What I was trying to say is the club has given the strongest message in can to newton and meeson whilst allowing us to use all the picks that we want to use this year. I was saying to use the new 'mature rookie' rule to our advantage and don't be afraid to 'promote' one or both to cover a long term injury (which invariably occur) solely so they can be delisted next year. Unless Bartram, Newton, Meeson and Bell improve in 2010 they would be favourites for delisting. If they improve then great, I'm sure 1 or 2 others will slip into the danger zone. If not, then I think that would be a great problem to have.

Re the year after, I know you couldn't be serious so I'll let that go to the keeper.

[rpfc 28,966]

You are either missing my point or more likely, I haven't explained it well. I'm not advocating delisting Bartram this year. The club by rookie listing (likely scenario) Newton and Meeson has freed us up to go to 50 in the draft and #1 in PSD. I agree 66 is of little or no use but 50 could be used for a good recycled player (Thorp?) along with the PSD (McDonald?), the other picks on kids. What I was trying to say is the club has given the strongest message in can to newton and meeson whilst allowing us to use all the picks that we want to use this year. I was saying to use the new 'mature rookie' rule to our advantage and don't be afraid to 'promote' one or both to cover a long term injury (which invariably occur) solely so they can be delisted next year. Unless Bartram, Newton, Meeson and Bell improve in 2010 they would be favourites for delisting. If they improve then great, I'm sure 1 or 2 others will slip into the danger zone. If not, then I think that would be a great problem to have.

Re the year after, I know you couldn't be serious so I'll let that go to the keeper.

Ok, now I understand.

And 2010 off season delisting possibilities: Green (onto the VL for Junior), PJ, Batram (?), Bail (?), Miller (trade?), Bell, Dunn, Cheney (?), and McNamara (?). Are we going to elevate Spencer, McKenzie, or Meesen?

2011 - Those with question marks that didn't go a year earlier? Pick 50 from this coming draft? Who else?

[Crystal Dees 372]

Ok, now I understand.

And 2010 off season delisting possibilities: Green (onto the VL for Junior), PJ, Batram (?), Bail (?), Miller (trade?), Bell, Dunn, Cheney (?), and McNamara (?). Are we going to elevate Spencer, McKenzie, or Meesen?

2011 - Those with question marks that didn't go a year earlier? Pick 50 from this coming draft? Who else?