Jump to content

Trapper on the outer at the Lions

Chelly
in Melbourne Demons

Featured Replies

Gee I love/loved Trav for the player he could be. Even for all his faults I loved the guy in red & blue. The 02 Season and finals were his best for us but unfortunately that season was a long time coming and it never really eventuated again.

The swap as suggested above was a KOTD moment for us and I would say his replacement in # 16 has already shown much better application and consistency to his football.

For all that, I will still remember him fondly but understanding how by letting himself down he also let the club down.

 

Lets recruit him, mature age rookie?

Is he eligible to go onto our Veterans list? or Does anybody know?
 

Is he eligible to go onto our Veterans list? or Does anybody know?

You would need to give him a contract and I do not see that happening!

At the very best you might make him a mature age rookie.

but I cannot see that happening either.

MFC seems firmly fixed on youth!

So where does a 30 year old fit? we do not seem to want to give Bruce two years

And he is still playing well.

why would we give a spot to Travis?

You would need to give him a contract and I do not see that happening!

At the very best you might make him a mature age rookie.

but I cannot see that happening either.

MFC seems firmly fixed on youth!

So where does a 30 year old fit? we do not seem to want to give Bruce two years

And he is still playing well.

why would we give a spot to Travis?

Yeah but if he sits outside your senior list ... he costs you next to nothing.

If you had the choice of Trapper or a 5th round rookie selection it would be a no brainer. Baring in mind

a/ ND = 90 spots (approx)

b/ Pre Season draft = 10spots (approx)

c/ GWS Rookie draft concessions = First 8 picks

d/ Rookie Drafts Round 1-4 = 70 spots

So in effect he would be pick 179ish in the drafting process. I'm sure you could also give him a year-year contract, again assuming he sits on your veteran list.

If he goes onto your Veterans list its just a "cheap" player that you dont have to upgrade via a rookie list up-grade.


Judds grandmother will be on our list before TJ

Yeah but if he sits outside your senior list ... he costs you next to nothing.

If you had the choice of Trapper or a 5th round rookie selection it would be a no brainer. Baring in mind

a/ ND = 90 spots (approx)

b/ Pre Season draft = 10spots (approx)

c/ GWS Rookie draft concessions = First 8 picks

d/ Rookie Drafts Round 1-4 = 70 spots

So in effect he would be pick 179ish in the drafting process. I'm sure you could also give him a year-year contract, again assuming he sits on your veteran list.

If he goes onto your Veterans list its just a "cheap" player that you dont have to upgrade via a rookie list up-grade.

All of the above is fine but what does he give the MFC?

to play him we have to leave out one of the many midfielders we have at present.

I would prefer to find out if Maric / Bennel can play at AFL level than use Travis next year.

Don't get me wrong I am an admirer but I just do not see a spot for him.

As someone said earlier a one year deal at St Kilda might be a good move for them.

But we are not in danger of winning a flag next year. 2013-14 is hopefully our time.

TJ will be long gone by then.

Fondness? Ambivalence. He was rated dangerous and at times he was but it was too few in delivery. At best he was white hot but he was a frustration with what he delivered below that.

Which is what makes the price we got for him a steal. I rate Matthews as a coach... perhaps not as highly as some, but certainly up there... and he said of Trav that he was the first player you looked at when it came to playing Melbourne, where you said "what are we going to do about stopping this guy?" Obviously you could argue that our lack of good midfielders in the last 10 years (or ever?) contributes to the fact that Trav was considered our most "dangerous."
 

Which is what makes the price we got for him a steal. I rate Matthews as a coach... perhaps not as highly as some, but certainly up there... and he said of Trav that he was the first player you looked at when it came to playing Melbourne, where you said "what are we going to do about stopping this guy?" Obviously you could argue that our lack of good midfielders in the last 10 years (or ever?) contributes to the fact that Trav was considered our most "dangerous."

The trade to Brisbane was a god send for MFC and I am glad Matthews felt that way. I think Lethal was trying to top up his list with Brown, Black and Power still around. I think he chose poorly.

I dont doubt the danger tag but he was a down hill skier that did not deliver on his talent. The answer to Matthews question about stopping is put a tag on him and make him accountable and run him around. Work a treat while TJ was at MFC.

The embodiment of the Daniher era. I loved him when on song but he went missing way to often. Probably could have done with some better guidance. Club failing as well. Great decision of Bailey's to cut him on arrival. I would have loved it had we had another captain leading from the middle back then. Say a 26 year old Scully to keep the troops in order. As much as I loved Neita I think his best footy would have been played at CHB without being captain.

I am in no way blaming Neitz for Johnstone's failings so relax.


Yeah but if he sits outside your senior list ... he costs you next to nothing.

If you had the choice of Trapper or a 5th round rookie selection it would be a no brainer.

No brainer is right. B)

If you dont select him he costs you nothing also.

Has Judd's grandmother nominated for...

No brainer is right. B)

If you dont select him he costs you nothing also.

Or you take a 4-5th round rookie selection that still costs you the same ... yet statistically has about a .00000001% of a return. B)

Now dont get me wrong I'm not saying we do it. But it must be an option worth considering. But again, only if its possible.

Interesting nobody has confirmed if its possible.

Or you take a 4-5th round rookie selection that still costs you the same ... yet statistically has about a .00000001% of a return. B)

Now dont get me wrong I'm not saying we do it. But it must be an option worth considering. But again, only if its possible.

Interesting nobody has confirmed if its possible.

Assuming that he'll pull his finger out and give it 100%, right?

Nobody has confirmed it because it's a crazy idea.

On the assumption that he'll pull his finger out and give it 100%, right?

Nobody has confirmed it because it's a crazy idea.

Nobody has confirmed, because they probably dont know.

But I wouldn't be surprised if Brisbane dont in fact want "the option" of him on their rookie list. He does qualify for that with the 3 year residency rule. So it would instantaneously relieve salary cap pressure without losing a player. Sounds like a "low risk" strategy for Lions ... the only "genuine" threat to the plan would be us assuming we where pre-pared to Veterans list him, if thats possible.

Nobody has confirmed, because they probably dont know.

But I wouldn't be surprised if Brisbane dont in fact want him on their rookie list. He does qualify for that with the 3 year residency rule. So it would instantaneously relieve salary cap pressure without losing a player.

Regardless of whether it's possible or not, it's still a dumb idea. Low cost or not, you're still using up one spot on your list for a guy who has spent the last 11 years demonstrating that he has no desire to do what it takes to be the best he can. With his form over the last few years, he would not fit in our best 22, and you can taken it as a given that he won't go the extra mile to fulfill his potential, because if he hasn't done it in 10 years, he never will.

Ability alone is not sufficient for making it in the AFL, yet you seem to want to pick up every talented but broken player on the market - first Peterson, now TJ. The generic rookie listed kid who doesn't show much talent early but gives it his best shot might not have a high probability of making it, but he has a higher probability of making it than the talented guy who clearly doesn't have the appetite for it. I know which way I'd go.


Nobody has confirmed, because they probably dont know.

If you want to know so bad why don't you look it up yourself and confirm it? Why expect us to do your leg work.

It's a terrible suggestion, and even if possible would be insane.

Regardless of whether it's possible or not, it's still a dumb idea. Low cost or not, you're still using up one spot on your list for a guy who has spent the last 11 years demonstrating that he has no desire to do what it takes to be the best he can. With his form over the last few years, he would not fit in our best 22, and you can taken it as a given that he won't go the extra mile to fulfill his potential, because if he hasn't done it in 10 years, he never will.

Ok. All I'm suggesting is that this "might" be a "low risk option by Brisbane." I'm not convinced his career is finished just yet. However, until its proven that the alternative is better we should at least consider the option.

Ability alone is not sufficient for making it in the AFL, yet you seem to want to pick up every talented but broken player on the market - first Peterson, now TJ. The generic rookie listed kid who doesn't show much talent early but gives it his best shot might not have a high probability of making it, but he has a higher probability of making it than the talented guy who clearly doesn't have the appetite for it. I know which way I'd go.

No I want us to "look" at players that have a chance to improve our squad. Simple logic. No good taking draft picks if they will never play for you - waste of time & money. However, I do accept thats not something commonly understood around here at least.

Both the players mentioned played 15+ AFL games last year & would be miles ahead of any 4/5th round rookie draft pick in this up-coming draft. I'm not saying we should take them all ... but you must consider them as an "option".

If you want to know so bad why don't you look it up yourself and confirm it? Why expect us to do your leg work.

It's a terrible suggestion, and even if possible would be insane.

Ok so you dont know either.

Ok so you dont know either.

Yeah you're right, I don't know. And I don't want to know, hence why I wouldn't waste my time looking for it.

Feel free to look it up, Google will lead you in the right direction.

Yeah you're right, I don't know. And I don't want to know, hence why I wouldn't waste my time looking for it.

Feel free to look it up, Google will lead you in the right direction.

"A" typical viewpoint held by many around here. :wub:


We should get him back at the club but not in playing capacity.

Maybe as a social assistant for past players and members. Had a few beers with him from time to time in his younger days and he was a great guy to have around. He always ensured everyone was having a great time up until the point where would get so blind he needed to be lifted into a cab. Sort of like Chris Connolly without the rapier sharp wit and perhaps the cab charges.

He is a top bloke but a frustrating player whom was loved by most, even though his short comings were regularly on display.

"A" typical viewpoint held by many around here. :wub:

Yeah I know, it's bloody terrible that there are so many realists on here. This is the internet for crying out loud, everybody should be in fantasy land.

 

"A" typical viewpoint held by many around here. :wub:

Well, you did bring up the option.

So you were the first to tacitly say "look it up yourself, wankas!!"

Paraphrasing.

We loved TJ but we moved on and we want him to be happy but we didn't like ouselves when we were with him. We're better off without him.

Sounds like the perfect role model.

Hey, you can't say you wouldn't have a good time. The sponsors and current players should be kept away though......


Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

Featured Content

  • GAMEDAY: Collingwood

    It's Game Day and the Demons face a monumental task as they take on the top-of-the-table Magpies in one of the biggest games on the Dees calendar: the King's Birthday Big Freeze MND match. Can the Demons defy the odds and claim a massive scalp to keep their finals hopes alive?

      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 38 replies
    Demonland

  • CASEY: Collingwood

    It was freezing cold at Mission Whitten Stadium where only the brave came out in the rain to watch a game that turned out to be as miserable as the weather.
    The Casey Demons secured their third consecutive victory, earning the four premiership points and credit for defeating a highly regarded Collingwood side, but achieved little else. Apart perhaps from setting the scene for Monday’s big game at the MCG and the Ice Challenge that precedes it.
    Neither team showcased significant skill in the bleak and greasy conditions, at a location that was far from either’s home territory. Even the field umpires forgot where they were and experienced a challenging evening, but no further comment is necessary.

      • Thanks
    • 4 replies
    Demonland

  • NON-MFC: Round 13

    Follow all the action from every Round 13 clash excluding the Dees as the 2025 AFL Premiership Season rolls on. With Melbourne playing in the final match of the round on King's Birthday, all eyes turn to the rest of the competition. Who are you tipping to win? And more importantly, which results best serve the Demons’ finals aspirations? Join the discussion and keep track of the matches that could shape the ladder and impact our run to September.

      • Thanks
    • 216 replies
    Demonland

  • PREVIEW: Collingwood

    Having convincingly defeated last year’s premier and decisively outplayed the runner-up with 8.2 in the final quarter, nothing epitomized the Melbourne Football Club’s performance more than its 1.12 final half, particularly the eight consecutive behinds in the last term, against a struggling St Kilda team in the midst of a dismal losing streak. Just when stability and consistency were anticipated within the Demon ranks, they delivered a quintessential performance marked by instability and ill-conceived decisions, with the most striking aspect being their inaccuracy in kicking for goal, which suggested a lack of preparation (instead of sleeping in their hotel in Alice, were they having a night on the turps) rather than a well-rested team. Let’s face it - this kicking disease that makes them look like raw amateurs is becoming a millstone around the team’s neck.

      • Thanks
    • 1 reply
    Demonland

  • CASEY: Sydney

    The Casey Demons were always expected to emerge victorious in their matchup against the lowly-ranked Sydney Swans at picturesque Tramway Oval, situated in the shadows of the SCG in Moore Park. They dominated the proceedings in the opening two and a half quarters of the game but had little to show for it. This was primarily due to their own sloppy errors in a low-standard game that produced a number of crowded mauls reminiscent of the rugby game popular in old Sydney Town. However, when the Swans tired, as teams often do when they turn games into ugly defensive contests, Casey lifted the standard of its own play and … it was off to the races. Not to nearby Randwick but to a different race with an objective of piling on goal after goal on the way to a mammoth victory. At the 25-minute mark of the third quarter, the Demons held a slender 14-point lead over the Swans, who are ahead on the ladder of only the previous week's opposition, the ailing Bullants. Forty minutes later, they had more than fully compensated for the sloppiness of their earlier play with a decisive 94-point victory, that culminated in a rousing finish which yielded thirteen unanswered goals. Kicks hit their targets, the ball found itself going through the middle and every player made a contribution.

      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 1 reply
    Demonland

  • REPORT: St. Kilda

    Hands up if you thought, like me, at half-time in yesterday’s game at TIO Traeger Park, Alice Springs that Melbourne’s disposal around the ground and, in particular, its kicking inaccuracy in front of the goals couldn’t get any worse. Well, it did. And what’s even more damning for the Melbourne Football Club is that the game against St Kilda and its resurgence from the bottomless pit of its miserable start to the season wasn’t just lost through poor conversion for goal but rather in the 15 minutes when the entire team went into a slumber and was mugged by the out-of-form Saints. Their six goals two behinds (one goal less than the Demons managed for the whole game) weaved a path of destruction from which they were unable to recover. Ross Lyon’s astute use of pressure to contain the situation once they had asserted their grip on the game, and Melbourne’s self-destructive wastefulness, assured that outcome. The old adage about the insanity of repeatedly doing something and expecting a different result, was out there. Two years ago, the score line in Melbourne’s loss to the Giants at this same ground was 5 goals 15 behinds - a ratio of one goal per four scoring shots - was perfectly replicated with yesterday’s 7 goals 21 behinds. 
    This has been going on for a while and opens up a number of questions. I’ll put forward a few that come to mind from this performance. The obvious first question is whether the club can find a suitable coach to instruct players on proper kicking techniques or is this a skill that can no longer be developed at this stage of the development of our playing group? Another concern is the team's ability to counter an opponent's dominance during a run on as exemplified by the Saints in the first quarter. Did the Demons underestimate their opponents, considering St Kilda's goals during this period were scored by relatively unknown forwards? Furthermore, given the modest attendance of 6,721 at TIO Traeger Park and the team's poor past performances at this venue, is it prudent to prioritize financial gain over potentially sacrificing valuable premiership points by relinquishing home ground advantage, notwithstanding the cultural significance of the team's connection to the Red Centre? 

      • Thanks
    • 4 replies
    Demonland
View All