Meesen and Newton

[LITTLE STINGA 1]

speaking to Josh Mahoney last night at the MFC event...both players will be paid out for the remaining years on their contracts. Good move by the club as they can now focus on rookie listing players who can actually add something to the side....

Good move? More like a GREAT move we don't need deadwood at this club.

[LITTLE STINGA 1]

The incentive was they had a chance through the ND and PSD with another Club. I think the Club would have told them they are finished

Doesn't sound like a great incentive to me considering they would almost have no chance of going to another club.

[Gooner 9]

If we could somehow manage to rookie Panos over Newton, we'd do it in a heartbeat...

I was a fan of Meesen but we probably don't need him from now on with Gawn, Fitzpatrick

Unfortunately, unless we pay them out or they get picked up in the PSD, we're stuck with them.

I'd be in favour of taking Panos with pick 1 in the PSD (I think we can) rather than McDonald.

I think we need a 18 y.o. key position forward, more than we need a 25 y.o. midfielder.

[Carn dees 108]

Do the hawks have a psd pick, if so i wouldnt rule them out picking meeson.

[torpedo 33]

If they can do that under AFL rules then can they rookie others or are they blocked from rookieing replacements?

According to comments on this thread you can just sack a player for being crap...

http://forums.demonland.com/index.php?show...mp;#entry287916

Although nobody was able to explain to me what changed or why it was all of a sudden an accepted view that you could even though the rules were the same as always.

Personally I do not see why 're-rookieing' players should be an accepted practice but simply sacking them is not... it is grown adults they are dealing with and it appears inevitable what 're-rookieing' means.

[Nasher 33,129]

Do the hawks have a psd pick, if so i wouldnt rule them out picking meeson.

No, they don't.

Even if they did, only those living in fantasy land would have thought they were ever going to pick him up.

Meesen is a spud of a footballer. Furthermore, he's a spud with a career threatening injury. I doubt hopeless footballers with completely busted feet are exactly what Hawthorn are looking for.

[rpfc 27,543]

speaking to Josh Mahoney last night at the MFC event...both players will be paid out for the remaining years on their contracts. Good move by the club as they can now focus on rookie listing players who can actually add something to the side....

But re-rookied?

I don't think some of you are right to assume this conversation means we can pick up Jack's brother in December.

I think it means we got Gawn and Fitzpatrick because Newton and Meesen agreed to go onto the RL.

I think they'll be down at Casey next year.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Doesn't sound like a great incentive to me considering they would almost have no chance of going to another club.

They have no chance of playing AFL with Melbourne so the almost no chance is better than none.

[Don24 103]

I was under the impression we were obligated to rookie them if not selected by others? Can anyone confirm this is not the case?

If not, is it too late to clear out a rookie or 2, per haps Rhys Healy or Danny Hughes? Id be happy to loose either or both of them to clear some room???

[Rogue 585]

We should say sayonara to Newton ASAP. Meeson showed a bit before injury. I would retain.

Newton's showed more than Meesen. He's generated enough shots at goal to have cemented a spot in our side, but his kicking woes meant he didn't convert enough of the many 'gettable' shots.

[kozi 0]

But re-rookied?

I don't think some of you are right to assume this conversation means we can pick up Jack's brother in December.

I think it means we got Gawn and Fitzpatrick because Newton and Meesen agreed to go onto the RL.

I think they'll be down at Casey next year.

not re-rookied! PAID OUT AND DELISTED!!

[kozi 0]

They have no chance of playing AFL with Melbourne so the almost no chance is better than none.

yes we are obligated to put them on the mature age rookie list, however, we also have the option of paying out their contracts and delisting them. Neither player will be at Melbourne next year...

[rpfc 27,543]

not re-rookied! PAID OUT AND DELISTED!!

I understand they have been delisted, but it would not look good if we didn't do what we promised we would do.

Therefore, I will wait for confirmation of this before believing your, possibly misintepreted, conversation.

Personally, I would prefer to add a couple of rookies but I don't like coaxing young blokes into agreeing to be delisted with a promise of a RL spot and then pulling the carpet from under them.

[dee-luded 2,958]

We signed him in 2007 on low bucks for 2 years at a time we had no forwards to speak of. It was a long shot punt that did not work. Agree that both should go. Meesen was as much an error as Newton, Hopefully GAWN and Fitz rectify that in years to come.

FWIW, I would have thought Meesen was as bad if not worse. We gave him 3 years and Adelaide pick 37. Newts renewal cost us nothing. Meesen....

YOUNG Adelaide ruckman John Meesen has been traded to Melbourne for a third-round draft pick.

Meesen, 21, went to the Demons in return for Melbourne's third round draft pick, No.37.

He is the second player to leave the Crows during the AFL's trade period, after Martin Mattner was traded to Sydney earlier in the week.

Meesen spent three seasons on Adelaide's list, but played only two games for the club, in rounds 20 and 21 this year.

http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0...7-12428,00.html

http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/ft_draf...amp;t=N&s=P Pick 37 taken @ 38.

Edited November 27, 2009 by dee-luded

[Adzman 2,085]

I was under the impression we were obligated to rookie them if not selected by others? Can anyone confirm this is not the case?

If not, is it too late to clear out a rookie or 2, per haps Rhys Healy or Danny Hughes? Id be happy to loose either or both of them to clear some room???

I wish we could dump these two guys. Healy is nothing special, and Hughes has had his chance. I know you can't just sack a senior listed player, but what are the rules on dumping contracted rookies? This is the final stage of the complete rebuilding process, clearing more spots, as harsh as it sounds, makes perfect sense.

Is it possible to part ways after the list lodgment before the ND? If so, Healy and Hughes have to go to make room for someone who can help us win in 2011 and beyond.

[LIFT 0]

By delisting these two players and pledging to rookie them does this mean we have to take them with our first two picks in the rookie draft if they are not taken in the PSD?

What if some club with mid to late picks wanted them in the Rookie Draft and we could use our higher picks on Mitch Thorpe, Dylan Grimes and Panos?

I really would not mind getting some more young untried talent onto our list than these guys who have been given every opportunity in the last 2 years.

Anyone have any ideas how this will work if say Hawthorn tells Meesen they plan to Rookie him?????

[Hulett Packard III 166]

Pardon me for doubling up but I posted this on another thread about the Scorpions and it's just as relevant here.

It's not clear what promises were made to John Meesen and Michael Newton about rookie drafting them if they weren't picked up by another club.

Obviously, whatever happens, the club has to compensate one or both of them if not rookied and would also need to consider the consequences of any flak it might receive by breaching a contract (this didn't seem to worry Hawthorn when it dumped Mitch Thorp). Still, if John Meesen's injury persists the question needs to be raised as to whether we should rookie him in circumstances where he is unlikely to play much footy in the final year of his contract.

In any event, assuming these blokes are fit, could the club join with Casey in offering either or both of them new contracts with the Scorpions and paying out the balance of their contracts either partly or in full in that way?

The result might well be a win-win for all concerned. Melbourne could free up a spot to rookie list a Dylan Grimes, Casey would still have the services of a quality footballer or two and added depth and the players would be looked after financially and remain in a high standard football environment.

[Footynut 302]

I wish we could dump these two guys. Healy is nothing special, and Hughes has had his chance. I know you can't just sack a senior listed player, but what are the rules on dumping contracted rookies? This is the final stage of the complete rebuilding process, clearing more spots, as harsh as it sounds, makes perfect sense.

Is it possible to part ways after the list lodgment before the ND? If so, Healy and Hughes have to go to make room for someone who can help us win in 2011 and beyond.

Im interested that people are panicing re this issue.

Fringe players seem to be imo copping it sweet without alot of justification apart from a throw away line such as 'they've had their chance.'

The club knows exactly whats its doing. They are all over the detail.

To now take aim at Healy I dont think is right - not all players can be a gun in their first years of footy. We need to be considered with our decisions.

Hughes has been around for a while and had numerous chances to push from the lower level. Im not sure why he is still there but the club obviously thought he was worth a spot when they put him on the rookie list....

Lets not assume that players such as Patrick, Grimes or Panos are any better than what we already have just because they are flavour of the month.

Reflect on the fact many on these boards wanted Patrick at 34 yet no club actually rated him good enough to get picked at all. Same goes for Temmel....

Given the hysteria on the boards it was interesting to hear BP say that Patrick is a rookie at best and really is no where near Jurrah.

So lets relax and see where the FD goes with Newt and Meese but to take aim at those who havent really had an op imo is not overly fair.

Rohan Bail is another who I have heard some bashing on. In fact while talking to BP at the function a Rohan basher came in and said, 'Rohan Bails gotta go doesnt he? To which BP said no he'll be ok let him develop we will see.

Time to settle and be strategic - take the emotion out and work within the rules to maximise what we have.

[rpfc 27,543]

Nothing has been said on this thread that makes me change my mind - the club will pick up Meesen and Newton as rookies.

We are done.

(After JMac of course)

[deanox 8,676]

interesting. if we pass to see what everyone else does we lose the chance of first pick.

i think we are probably really hoping that meesen gets picked up by hawthorn now, we picked up a ruckman and a forward/ruckman in the draft so we are probably happy to let him go.

[Nasher 33,129]

interesting. if we pass to see what everyone else does we lose the chance of first pick.

i think we are probably really hoping that meesen gets picked up by hawthorn now, we picked up a ruckman and a forward/ruckman in the draft so we are probably happy to let him go.

Surely it's like in the card game "500", once you pass you're out of the bidding (draft) for good. There's no option of watching what everyone else does.

Besides, that seems like a dumb strategy anyway, even if the rules did allow it. Sit and watch as the next 15 or so best players available are snapped up by other clubs.

[Dee Fan 3,247]

Im interested that people are panicing re this issue.

Fringe players seem to be imo copping it sweet without alot of justification apart from a throw away line such as 'they've had their chance.'

The club knows exactly whats its doing. They are all over the detail.

To now take aim at Healy I dont think is right - not all players can be a gun in their first years of footy. We need to be considered with our decisions.

Hughes has been around for a while and had numerous chances to push from the lower level. Im not sure why he is still there but the club obviously thought he was worth a spot when they put him on the rookie list....

Lets not assume that players such as Patrick, Grimes or Panos are any better than what we already have just because they are flavour of the month.

Reflect on the fact many on these boards wanted Patrick at 34 yet no club actually rated him good enough to get picked at all. Same goes for Temmel....

Given the hysteria on the boards it was interesting to hear BP say that Patrick is a rookie at best and really is no where near Jurrah.

So lets relax and see where the FD goes with Newt and Meese but to take aim at those who havent really had an op imo is not overly fair.

Rohan Bail is another who I have heard some bashing on. In fact while talking to BP at the function a Rohan basher came in and said, 'Rohan Bails gotta go doesnt he? To which BP said no he'll be ok let him develop we will see.

Time to settle and be strategic - take the emotion out and work within the rules to maximise what we have.

If we pay out players it sends the wrong message to others on the list and tells them that the MFC doesn't have any credibility when it comes to giving players its word. We cannot expect the players on the list to be upfront with us if we are devious in our dealings with them, I don't care if other clubs do it this is Melbourne not Hawthorn.

I have heard on here that we will be paying out either or both of these guys but I hope they don't unless they have told them that they will keep them in the system just to help them to get a gig elsewhere but delist them if they don't.

Personally I think that Meesen has a bit of talent and irrespective of what others have said he could turn out ok, if he is not too badly injured he could be worth a bit more time, remember The Russian has taken many years to show some good form.

[Akum 2,660]

Didn't somebody from the club say recently after this year's draft we're unlikely to pick up too many new players through drafting for 2 or 3 years, and instead we'll be looking to the rookie list? Or did I imagine it?

Even if I did imagine it, the situation remains that next year there's likely to be much less available through the draft and even thru trade (sure, we'll try to trade with GC17 for some draft picks, but every other club will be doing the same). And next year quite a few "fringe" players come out of contract - as well as Newton & Meesen, there's Bell & PJ & Miller & Bartram. Add Junior maybe retiring, that's seven.

This presents us with a golden opportunity to seriously improve the quality of our list. But where are we going to get the 5 or 6 or even 7 good new players to replace them?

OK, maybe this is looking too far ahead. But the immediate issue is that our current rookie list really needs major strengthening if it is to sustain us through the lean years ahead. Given that there is still some potential talent around (Grimes jr, Panos, Patrick, Daw), this could be a one-off chance to load up our rookie list.

[deanox 8,676]

Surely it's like in the card game "500", once you pass you're out of the bidding (draft) for good. There's no option of watching what everyone else does.

Besides, that seems like a dumb strategy anyway, even if the rules did allow it. Sit and watch as the next 15 or so best players available are snapped up by other clubs.

i just had a look at the clubs lists on afl.com and it looks like there are 64 available rookie spots on club lists! thats a lot of player still to be taken, it really looks like clubs have cleared out to get as much youth into their lists as possible pre GC17.

but how does it work RE meesen and newton? do we need them to sign a contract with someone saying that if they are available they will be picked? a verbal agreement isnt good enough, because if we select someone else and then newton or meesen is no selected that it leaves us in an awkward situation...

[rpfc 27,543]

i just had a look at the clubs lists on afl.com and it looks like there are 64 available rookie spots on club lists! thats a lot of player still to be taken, it really looks like clubs have cleared out to get as much youth into their lists as possible pre GC17.

but how does it work RE meesen and newton? do we need them to sign a contract with someone saying that if they are available they will be picked? a verbal agreement isnt good enough, because if we select someone else and then newton or meesen is no selected that it leaves us in an awkward situation...

We pick them up with a relevant picks or we reneg on our promise, pay them out (or at least one of them), and get the 6th best player left.