Trapper on the outer at the Lions

[needafullback 82]

Travis Johnstone's best performances were in finals. This shouldn't be forgotten when the eulogies of his career are being written. We were out of finals games against Adelaide in 2002 and Essendon in 2004 until Trapper brought us back. On neither occasion would we have gotten close if it weren't for him. This fact doesn't sit easily with the perception that he lacked heart, though clearly this perception was also well-founded. As usual, the truth is complex. I'll miss watching him kick the ball.

[Guest hangon007]

Travis Johnstone's best performances were in finals. This shouldn't be forgotten when the eulogies of his career are being written. We were out of finals games against Adelaide in 2002 and Essendon in 2004 until Trapper brought us back. On neither occasion would we have gotten close if it weren't for him. This fact doesn't sit easily with the perception that he lacked heart, though clearly this perception was also well-founded. As usual, the truth is complex. I'll miss watching him kick the ball.

Good point. At some point we need to push for the finals. Question is would be better able to do that with Trapper on our list or a 4-5 round rookie? Baring in mind the likely hood of getting a "player" in the rookie draft in this up-coming draft.

However, again I'm not saying we should take him merely pointing out the "option" is there for the "open-minded" amongst us.

[Sir Why You Little 37,308]

Travis Johnstone's best performances were in finals. This shouldn't be forgotten when the eulogies of his career are being written. We were out of finals games against Adelaide in 2002 and Essendon in 2004 until Trapper brought us back. On neither occasion would we have gotten close if it weren't for him. This fact doesn't sit easily with the perception that he lacked heart, though clearly this perception was also well-founded. As usual, the truth is complex. I'll miss watching him kick the ball.

Trouble with Trapper & Both the Finals games you speak of, in the last Quarter when the games were up for grabs we didn't win.

Now i am not denigrating Trappers performance but in both those games it was his 3rd Quarter that Burnt-In a final we needed him to burn in the 4th Quarter as well.

If TJ wants to play AFL next year you would have him on a base 1 year contract, chock full of incentives. "You Fire TJ, you get paid"

We all know his Talents-but what of his Ticker??

[ox_5 163]

Good point. At some point we need to push for the finals. Question is would be better able to do that with Trapper on our list or a 4-5 round rookie? Baring in mind the likely hood of getting a "player" in the rookie draft in this up-coming draft.

However, again I'm not saying we should take him merely pointing out the "option" is there for the "open-minded" amongst us.

I don't want finals, I want flags. He won't give us flag, a rookie pick, although unlikely, might.

[Guest hangon007]

If TJ wants to play AFL next year you would have him on a base 1 year contract, chock full of incentives. "You Fire TJ, you get paid"

or in Brisbanes case opening up "the option" of neatly tucking him away on their Rookie list where only half of his salary counts in their salary cap, also opening up the opportunity to use another pick in the national draft to get ahead of teams in the pre-season & rookie drafts.

[Guest hangon007]

I don't want finals, I want flags. He won't give us flag, a rookie pick, although unlikely, might.

Dont know if you have noticed mate. To win a flag you must first play in the finals. Lets put things into perspective.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Regardless of whether it's possible or not, it's still a dumb idea.

We know he has HAD the ability to play but his output has been diminishing over the past five years. He's finished.

If Bailey was so keen to get rid of him when he joined why would he take him back??

We are not a charity FCS.

[ox_5 163]

Dont know if you have noticed mate. To win a flag you must first play in the finals. Lets put things into perspective.

Nah not at all, didn't notice that. How about you put what I said into perspective, or do you just pick and choose which parts of posts you read?

[Sir Why You Little 37,308]

or in Brisbanes case opening up "the option" of neatly tucking him away on their Rookie list where only half of his salary counts in their salary cap, also opening up the opportunity to use another pick in the national draft to get ahead of teams in the pre-season & rookie drafts.

sure that is an option. But if Trapper really wants to play-he would be worth considering as a late Pick or in the PSD.

He still showed some skills at the Bears Particularly Hand Balls in close.

If he is available he is worth a look for a 1 year deal, depending on how the FD percieve his attitude. Attitude being the Primo concern

Maybe just maybe TJ would love a second crack with the "new" Demons.

He must have a shave though..... B)

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

If TJ wants to play AFL next year you would have him on a base 1 year contract, chock full of incentives. "You Fire TJ, you get paid"

Doesn't work. Who comes off our list? What role would he play?

And you have to reserve in the salary cap the prospect of TJ meeting all incentives.

Bailey wont have him back for the all the reasons he got rid of him in the first place.

And a 1 year contract is contrary to where MFC is heading in list development.

I am not sure any other club wants a lazy underperforming 30 year old. He's finished at AFL level.

[Sir Why You Little 37,308]

Doesn't work. Who comes off our list? What role would he play?

And you have to reserve in the salary cap the prospect of TJ meeting all incentives.

Bailey wont have him back for the all the reasons he got rid of him in the first place.

And a 1 year contract is contrary to where MFC is heading in list development.

I am not sure any other club wants a lazy underperforming 30 year old. He's finished at AFL level.

You are probably right-But he would be a great player to have as a designated "sub"

Remember Trapper only ever played Half a game-he could be a good prospect playing the 2nd Half.

Just a Thought.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

But he would be a great player to have as a designated "sub"

Remember Trapper only ever played Half a game-he could be a good prospect playing the 2nd Half.

Just a Thought.

No he wouldn't. Problem is his best half would have been the one when he was sitting on the bench.

Given the I/C changes I dont think you could carry such a unreliable and past it luxury on the pine.

[Guest hangon007]

Doesn't work. Who comes off our list? What role would he play?

With all due respect ... You are missing the "whole point"

Who comes off our list? We are the one & only club who the answer would be - "Nobody"!!!! Assumming we can place him on our Veterans list. (HE can only qualify for 1 Veterans list in the whole competitions)

What role would he play? - Hell of a better role than any 4-5th round rookie could ever play in this draft.

[Sir Why You Little 37,308]

No he wouldn't. Problem is his best half would have been the one when he was sitting on the bench.

Given the I/C changes I dont think you could carry such a unreliable and past it luxury on the pine.

Depends on his present attitude, i wouldn't recruit him back at all if there is any fear that he would soften our Midfield mind set at all.

But if he Really wanted to play, to prove a few people wrong..as a sub Player he is worth a late pick consideration.

Depends on whether he wants to do it, & with the right questioning that wouldn't be too hard to find out.

Would we not get him on the Veterans List anyway if he was picked??

If his File is already stamped "NO WAY" by Melbourne fair enough, we move on.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

With all due respect ... You are missing the "whole point"

Who comes off our list? We are one of the only clubs who the answer would be - "Nobody"!!!! Assumming we can place him on our Veterans list. (HE can only qualify for 1 Veterans list in the whole competitions)

What role would he play? - Hell of a better role than any 4-5th round rookie could ever play in this draft.

No I see it.

Green and Bruce will be on the Vets list. I think you can only have two. And why would we waste it on that waste of talent.

And you still havent worked out what role he will play. And if he is in competition with the 4th-5th round rookie then give me the rookie every time. At least in two years you might get something out of the rookie for a particular role. I know what you get from TJ and its floss compared to what we are building in the middle.

I cant see what TJ offers when we have Scully, Trengove, Grimes, Davey, Sylvia, Gysberts, McKenzie, Blease, Tapscott, Bennell, Bail Jones Morton fighting it out in the middle.

Get the picture?

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Depends on his present attitude, i wouldn't recruit him back at all if there is any fear that he would soften our Midfield mind set at all.

But if he Really wanted to play, to prove a few people wrong..as a sub Player he is worth a late pick consideration.

Depends on whether he wants to do it, & with the right questioning that wouldn't be too hard to find out.

Would we not get him on the Veterans List anyway if he was picked??

If his File is already stamped "NO WAY" by Melbourne fair enough, we move on.

Its got nothing to do with his personal attitude or what he wants to do at all.

We dont want him. Bailey wanted him out immediately he joined.

Recruiting TJ flies in the face of every thing we seek to do with the list.

The veteran list gives us the opportunity to put 1/2 of Green's salary outside the salary cap. Why waste that on TJ?

Your position is even more mind boggling when you were carping on about there are no excuses next year. We must improve RA RA RA and you want to recruit TJ. << Smacks forehead>>

[Sir Why You Little 37,308]

Its got nothing to do with his personal attitude or what he wants to do at all.

We dont want him. Bailey wanted him out immediately he joined.

Recruiting TJ flies in the face of every thing we seek to do with the list.

The veteran list gives us the opportunity to put 1/2 of Green's salary outside the salary cap. Why waste that on TJ?

Your position is even more mind boggling when you were carping on about there are no excuses next year. We must improve RA RA RA and you want to recruit TJ. << Smacks forehead>>

The Interchange Bench has changed Dramatically since last year, so i can see a player like TJ being used as the designated Sub. There now is a role he could fill.

And yes i do expect improvement next year, i don't consider it RA RA RR, You may not like Trapper or want him but he does have Talent, and if his attitude is ok he is worth considering.

[Guest hangon007]

I think you can only have two. And why would we waste it on that waste of talent.

No! You can now have as many Veterans that "qualify" ... B)

His "role" is simple. Better than the alternatives available to help us push for a spot in the finals.

Ps I get the picture.

[furious d 472]

No! You can now have as many Veterans that "qualify" ... B)

When did this happen? Surely Geelong would've been able to afford Ablett if this is true.

Not saying it's wrong but I never heard it, got a link?

[Guest hangon007]

When did this happen? Surely Geelong would've been able to afford Ablett if this is true.

Not saying it's wrong but I never heard it, got a link?

According to the AFL own website ... B) http://www.afl.com.au/about/tabid/13532/default.aspx

Veteran Players

Under AFL player rules, each club may nominate or list any number of what are called Veteran Player’s.

In order to be eligible for classification as a Veteran a player must have been the age of 30 as at September 30 in the relevant AFL season and be on the primary list of the AFL club for at least 10 years or in the case of Port Adelaide since the inception of the club.

From 2006 there is now no limit on the number of veteran players a club can list, as long as the player meets the required classification.

Now looking at Trapper ... Born 17 Jul 1980, Drafted by us in 1997, left end 2007! I will let you draw your own conclusions on if he qualifies!!!!

[gOLLy 401]

The Interchange Bench has changed Dramatically since last year, so i can see a player like TJ being used as the designated Sub. There now is a role he could fill.

And yes i do expect improvement next year, i don't consider it RA RA RR, You may not like Trapper or want him but he does have Talent, and if his attitude is ok he is worth considering.

Here here

[Axis of Bob 11,903]

For payment purposes, he would qualify as a veteran. Basically it means that instead of paying half of Green and Bruce's contracts outside the salary cap, we would pay one third of Green, Bruce and Johnstone's wages outside the cap, with 2/3rds included within it. Since TJ would be on significantly less than the others, we would actually lose out and end up paying more total wage inside the cap.

However, we may only include two veterans on the veterans list (for list management purposes). This means that we could only include 2 of Green, Bruce and Johnstone on the veteran's list. So TJ would have to be on the primary list and take the spot on the list of a primary listed player.

Not that it makes any difference, because it's a crazy idea to recruit him.

[John Crow Batty 8,880]

If he did get a another season with us he will be BOG for sure in two or three games. The problem is he will go completely missing for double that easy. I can't see him changing his ways unless he gets divine inspiration.

[Guest 36DD]

Is this bizarro world or something????

How could the football department justify getting back Trav after having "pushed" junior out the door???

Maybe we should dust off woey as well and bring em back in true Rolling Stones style.

Trav is yesterdays footballer, look at the way collingwood tackled, can you envisage Trav doin this???

[Guest hangon007]

So TJ would have to be on the primary list and take the spot on the list of a primary listed player.

Thats not what the AFL's own website states. It claims you can have as many veterans as you want ... assuming they qualify as of 2006!!! By your own admission you state ... "he does qualify"

But I would be happily corrected.