No. Absolutely not.

I like it when we look at players who are squeezed out. Tenace is just not up to it.

Hey..just curious what Old thinks here. He proposes a think ... not particularly my cup of tea Tenace, but am wondering how Old would procure him , if thats his thinking

I can't believe people are actually interested in Kane Tenace.

I knew this is what Belzebub wanted. A dumping ground for NQR's, this is what happens when you take the bullying from players who don't want to come here that can actually play good footy, you then get left with the rubbish.

I knew this is what Belzebub wanted. A dumping ground for NQR's, this is what happens when you take the bullying from players who don't want to come here that can actually play good footy, you then get left with the rubbish.

. Can you not deduce I was simply asking another a question... out of sheer curiosity ? Apparently not.

to borrow anothers....UGH!!!! <_<

That your mail has proven to be very reliable - perhaps Demonland deegirl?

A fringe player in a champion team is not necessarily a dud and it's facile to assert that. He's potentially a pretty good player, but it's very hard to break into that midfield. He's excctly the right age and he has pace, which when I look at our 2010 best 22 even with Brock gone and Ball not arriving, is a problem.

Look at Farren Ray, he made a significant contribution at St.Kilda. I think Tenace could add value.

In the long run the problem is that we're aiming to be the next Geelong so that would see him at the fringes and Ray failed in the GF. But there's the possibility that he becomes a more effective player in his late 20s.

I'm definitely interested.

I was just thinking of the Farren Ray situation.

It's quite similar, a high draft pick leaving a top club.

Saying that, we shouldn't simply take Tenace because Ray worked for St Kilda. We should have a look though.

. Can you not deduce I was simply asking another a question... out of sheer curiosity ? Apparently not.

to borrow anothers....UGH!!!! <_<

I'm sure you would love a Miller\Tenace combination.

I was just thinking of the Farren Ray situation.

Well there's Brent Prismall and Brent Moloney - the Geelong fringe player is a good player at other clubs.

We can get him virtually for free at a late pick or a PSD pick.

As you say he's worth a look at least.

Well there's Brent Prismall and Brent Moloney - the Geelong fringe player is a good player at other clubs.

We can get him virtually for free at a late pick or a PSD pick.

As you say he's worth a look at least.

That is an absolutely ridiculous comparison to make. To even suggest that Kane Tenace is similar to Prismall or Moloney is a joke.

Moloney was traded because Geelong needed picks to get Ottens.

Prismall was traded because he wanted to leave.

Neither player was delisted because Geelong thought they were crap.

Tenace is nothing compared to those two.

The common thread is that all three at the time of the departure from GFC were not rated best 22 and were expendable.

As others have said lets have a look at him with no promises. No problem.

The common thread is that all three at the time of the departure from GFC were not rated best 22 and were expendable.

As others have said lets have a look at him with no promises. No problem.

Considering that you are never right I can see why you are sitting on the fence with this one.

Considering some of your posts I'm surprised you ever take a side at all.

No Harm in giving him a look Training. See what he can do

his enthusiasm may have waned at the cattery with so much competition for spots.

I wouldn't hold my breath, but a second chance may fire him up.

The common thread is that all three at the time of the departure from GFC were not rated best 22 and were expendable.

As others have said lets have a look at him with no promises. No problem.

That's incorrect - Moloney was definitely in the best 22 at Geelong when he was traded.

Unfortunately for him it was a necessary evil to trade a player of his calibre to get a decent ruckman in return.

Fortunately for him (and us) he was being sent to the team he supported growing up.

Prismall was only just scraping out of the team.

Moreso for team balance than anything. He would've made the top 22 of a list of Geelong's best 22 players.

The common thread is that all three at the time of the departure from GFC were not rated best 22 and were expendable.

As others have said lets have a look at him with no promises. No problem.

That's wrong RR. Moloney was best 22 for them. Geelong, though, realised that they weren't going to get Ottens without another high pick, and Ottens was more important to their team than Moloney. So they let him go.

There is a marked difference between Prismall/Moloney and Tenace. The difference being that the first two are decent players. Tenace isn't.

That's wrong RR. Moloney was best 22 for them. Geelong, though, realised that they weren't going to get Ottens without another high pick, and Ottens was more important to their team than Moloney. So they let him go.

There is a marked difference between Prismall/Moloney and Tenace. The difference being that the first two are decent players. Tenace isn't.

All were expendable and neither Beamer and Prismall were deemed critical to Geelongs flag aspirations. Proven correct. So in a way they werent best 22.

The other teams gave up significant draft picks for each player (Beamer and Prismall). We wont if we decide to chance on Tenace. We probably wont. We're just letting Tenace train with us. Nothing to get too worried about.

All were expendable and neither Beamer and Prismall were deemed critical to Geelongs flag aspirations. Proven correct. So in a way they werent best 22.

That doesn't mean they weren't best 22 at the time. Moloney was best 22 until they decided Ottens was more important.

The other teams gave up significant draft picks for each player (Beamer and Prismall).

There's a reason for that.

That doesn't mean they weren't best 22 at the time. Moloney was best 22 until they decided Ottens was more important.

There's a reason for that.

You're getting bogged down in irrelevancy and semantics. Without gilding the lily GFC ranked Moloney 6 or 7 in the midfield and were prepared to let him go. Tenace is only training with us. If and only if they see some upside with him as opposed to other options (eg Thorp) whats the loss? PSD 1 that we would not have used anyway on that basis. I dont think it will go far but we should still explore it.

You're getting bogged down in irrelevancy and semantics. Without gilding the lily GFC ranked Moloney 6 or 7 in the midfield and were prepared to let him go. Tenace is only training with us. If and only if they see some upside with him as opposed to other options (eg Thorp) whats the loss? PSD 1 that we would not have used anyway on that basis. I dont think it will go far but we should still explore it.

I'm going to stop arguing with you about whether or not Moloney was best 22. You said he wasn't. I say he was. Let's leave that one there.

As for Tenace, I've never seen him play a good game of AFL level football. I just cannot see any possibly upside.

Tenace is only training with us.

Any confirmation of this? I can't seem to find any.

I'm going to stop arguing with you about whether or not Moloney was best 22. You said he wasn't. I say he was. Let's leave that one there.

As for Tenace, I've never seen him play a good game of AFL level football. I just cannot see any possibly upside.

I agree with you. Rhino is a clown and Tenace is a horrible footballer.

I suppose Enright isn't in their best 22 that is the player Geelong wanted to get rid of cause he was struggling at the time. Geelong were forced to give Moloney away cause we wanted Moloney and they wanted Ottens.

Rhino I suppose you think that the more posts you write the sooner you will get one right but it's just not happening.

I suppose you think that the more posts you write the sooner you will get one right but it's just not happening.

You will miss the irony of your post. If ever there were posts that routinely exhibits LCD understanding and thought its you Stinga.

FWIW, Enright in his early years was a struggling player and battled. But they got rid of Moloney not Enright. Hmmm. Dont get a headache.

You will miss the irony of your post. If ever there were posts that routinely exhibits LCD understanding and thought its you Stinga.

FWIW, Enright in his early years was a struggling player and battled. But they got rid of Moloney not Enright. Hmmm. Dont get a headache.

You can never admit that your wrong can you? Melbourne didn't want Enright and explain to why Bailey's comment on SEN weren't a stuff up when Connelly and Harrington have contridicted his comments. How you are a moderator is a joke.

You can never admit that your wrong can you? Melbourne didn't want Enright and explain to why Bailey's comment on SEN weren't a stuff up when Connelly and Harrington have contridicted his comments. How you are a moderator is a joke.

Even if his arguments are wrong, how on earth does that affect rhino's ability as a moderator?

You continue to make less and less sense...

The personal tuff is tiresome - take a step back for a while.

Back on topic...

I have always rated Enright.

I fail to remember a time when he was a lesser footballer than Moloney.

Granted Tenace has not shown to date that he is a capable AFL player, but 12 months ago Dawson and Farren Ray were in the same boat, in my view.

I doubt he can do it, but I'm willing to concede I could be wrong.

There may be teams who have a burning need for a player who's got pace and a good ballgetter but whose disposal is wayward. We don't have a burning need for such a player, though he could be handy.

No harm in getting him to train. The only problem is that for us to consider him, his disposal - especially disposal under pressure - would have to improve a lot. How much can training tell us about his disposal under pressure?

Farren Ray, by the way, isn't a good comparison, because he always had very good disposal, he just had to get it more and not try for so much.

Is it possible that we're looking at Tenace as a depth player primarily in a tagging role, with a little side hope that he will eventually improve the disposal?

If Tenace were happy to put him self in some kind of hibernation chamber for three years, we'd probably think he was a handy pick up then, providing a reserve option behind the truckload of gun mids. But we probably wont look at him as a prospect for being a midfield regular, which may mean he misses out.