On 01/02/2011 at 08:51, Thomo said:

Can they take two or is it the same deal GC had?

They can tale 1 per club with no questions asked and no penalty to GWS

They can then take extras if they do a deal with the club (via draft) as GC did with Brisbane. They have a lot of extra options to do deals, so effectively they can get multiples (of out of contract players) from any one club.

  On 01/02/2011 at 08:43, realist said:

There is no doubt the "new professionalism" that has seen the Melbourne Football Club embark on a total youth policy at the expense of older servants

will have huge repercussions in the future.

Loyalty is a two way street and the current players will be well aware they need to look after their best interests as the club does.

Would you change jobs for 6 Million Dollars?

yes in a heart beat if the existing salary was $3 million for 6 years.

Food for thought

Jack Watts signed a new contract halfway through the season last year

A lot of Melbourne players will be under consideration no doubt.

Scully is the ultimate professional footballer, not a show pony.

He will stay for the success.

Besides he will be well paid in coming years along with endorsements and sponserships as he

becomes the AFL leading role model.

  On 01/02/2011 at 09:39, Neita3000 said:

Food for thought

Jack Watts signed a new contract halfway through the season last year

The reason why Jack Watts did this was to increase his potential salary value if he had a standout season and was approached by other clubs, which then Melbourne would seek to match - therefore increasing his contract offering

by Melbourne.

Because he knows he wasn't going to get offered the big bucks this early in his career as he has not had a break out season he signed mid way during the year, leaving it any later would be pointless.

Scully may or may not be doing this - just delaying contract signings at Melbourne to increase his salary when offered by GWS as everyone knows he will be a massive player.

I'm not worried though, watch Brent Moloney sacrifice his pay and give it to Scully. Just watch

  On 31/01/2011 at 21:28, daisycutter said:

No, only about 90+% I'd expect!

Personally I don't think GWS should be able to approach uncontracted players under a certain age (say 24)

There should be some protection for clubs with young developing players

Agree-agree- agree

I will put my hand up and say it scares me, cause it does.

Tom Scully will become one of the best footballers for the next 12 years.

We have him, we want him and if he left we know how much it would hurt us all.

This will be a massive test of the list management group, we have improved everywhere else in the football club and this will be a sign to see if the list management group is up to scratch.

However, to compare him to gary ablett is completely incorrect:

- Gary Ablett has won 2 premierships at Geelonge

- Gary Ablett has won a brownlow at Geelong

- Gary Ablett has a brother playing at his new club

- Gary Ablett was told he would not get the captaincy at the Geelong Football Club

Gary Ablett reflected on what he has done at Geelong and what he can do in the future at Geelong. He realised the only box he hasn't ticked is the captaincy one. I personally think he sees GC as a new challeng for him, he has been gifted a wonderful team to play within and I think he would like to test himself in a new environment. This new enviroment he can lead and teach new upncoming stars. YES THE MONEY WAS ALOT, but I like to think that wasnt the major reason for leaving.

Tom Scully has not ticked any of these boxes:

- He has not won a premiership

- He has not won a brownlow

- His family is in Victoria

- Captaincy may come along for him at MFC

He would be deserting a project that I am sure that all of the Melbourne Football Club players put there hand up to be apart of.

Lets hope he isn't after fast cash

  On 01/02/2011 at 08:37, roydevers said:

Hi all,

Read Demonland for years but never felt compelled to reply to anything until now.

A family friend's father (50s & 60s premiership player) was invited, along with the family friend to peruse the new facilities at AAMI Park.

After a tour and chat with club staff our friend sat and had a coffee with Chris Connolly. Among the many things they spoke of was GWS poaching a few players.

CC stated to our friend (sounds a little dumb, but I'm not into naming names) that both North Melbourne and the demons will lose 2 of our young players each.

CC was not concerned about Scully so much, but mentioned the names of Gysberts, Strauss and Blease among others.

I guess we'll have to resign ourselves to losing some young talent at the end of the season and beyond.

The good thing is there is so much of it.

Cheers

Is this post serious?

I'd like to think CC understands the rules for poaching players a bit better than this.

And he'd have no idea of the state of NM players this far out.

I'm inclined to believe this is all pure fantasy.

  On 01/02/2011 at 08:17, old dee said:

I could not agree more WM, we are seeing the 21st football world develop before our eyes.

First Tom Scully did not pick Melbourne he had no choice, he was drafted to the bottom team.

So IMO he owes Melbourne only one thing and that is to play at his best while he is a contracted player.

When the contract ends he is sort of a free agent!

He can make the decision to stay or go and tough for us if he should decide that the next paddock is greener.

That is the reality and it will be the same for a number of our players in the next few years,I find it hard to believe we will keep them all.

I would hate to see him go but that is the reality of the football world we live in.

The challenge for the MFC is to make him an good offer of which the financial element is one part of the offer.

What I would hate more than loosing Tom is for us to try and compete with the money that may be offered by GWS and others.

Make him a good overall offer and then move on if we loose the fight.

Great post. We are coming off the bottom, and are not a one player team. If he goes, he goes.

  On 01/02/2011 at 08:37, roydevers said:

Hi all,

Read Demonland for years but never felt compelled to reply to anything until now.

A family friend's father (50s & 60s premiership player) was invited, along with the family friend to peruse the new facilities at AAMI Park.

After a tour and chat with club staff our friend sat and had a coffee with Chris Connolly. Among the many things they spoke of was GWS poaching a few players.

CC stated to our friend (sounds a little dumb, but I'm not into naming names) that both North Melbourne and the demons will lose 2 of our young players each.

CC was not concerned about Scully so much, but mentioned the names of Gysberts, Strauss and Blease among others.

I guess we'll have to resign ourselves to losing some young talent at the end of the season and beyond.

The good thing is there is so much of it.

Cheers

Really interesting post.

I presume we may lose 2 players because GWS has concessions for 2 years, not 1 like GC. So we may well lose a player each year eg Scully & Trengove (Trengove is contracted til 2012).

FWIW, if Scully has not signed by mid-year, I'd put him in the VFL for the rest of the year. The Cats kept playing Ablett because they were flag contenders; we won't be, so should start planning and preparing for post-Scully.

Lets not be victims.

  On 01/02/2011 at 11:57, Mono said:

I presume we may lose 2 players because GWS has concessions for 2 years, not 1 like GC. So we may well lose a player each year eg Scully & Trengove (Trengove is contracted til 2012).

As far as I understand the 1 player per club rule is still in place. They just have 2 years to try and get them.

That's exactly how it works.

CC would know this, hence, it sounds like tripe.

Maybe... what CC was trying to say, is that we will have that many talented players we will not be able to accommodate all of them with a spot in the 22, & due to the numbers we are likely to lose at least 2 very talented youngsters over time.

This I would think is a possibility.

I agree with you Daveytrain. Very sensible line of thought.

I also think that we wont have to wait till the end of the season to know if he has signed a deal with GWS because unlike Geelong who were in Premiership mode and were obliged to play their best player or sacrifice their whole season, ie cut off their nose to spite their face, MFC aren't in the same situation and if it became known within that he'd signed to GWS theres no way we'd play him! Why? Develop a traitor? Develop game plans around a bloke whos leaving? I think we'd find he would develop a mystery injury and have a very poor season for us. So tactically he and his management and everyone else involved with the deal and of course those "know-all" Nth Melbourne officials will have to be very good at keeping a secret, or more likely he hasn't signed anything coz he needs to play footy this year.

I'll be pretty upset if we spend the year developing him as a player and a lot of our game plans around a bloke who's leaving. I think thats our leverage. ARE YOU IN OR OUT TOM?

  On 01/02/2011 at 11:57, Mono said:

Great post. We are coming off the bottom, and are not a one player team. If he goes, he goes.

Really interesting post.

I presume we may lose 2 players because GWS has concessions for 2 years, not 1 like GC. So we may well lose a player each year eg Scully & Trengove (Trengove is contracted til 2012).

FWIW, if Scully has not signed by mid-year, I'd put him in the VFL for the rest of the year. The Cats kept playing Ablett because they were flag contenders; we won't be, so should start planning and preparing for post-Scully.

Lets not be victims.

I don't mean this to be offensive, but that is one of the stupidest suggestions I've ever read on this forum.

Ridiculous.

What do you think that would achieve?

How paranoid are you?

  On 01/02/2011 at 11:58, ox_5 said:

As far as I understand the 1 player per club rule is still in place. They just have 2 years to try and get them.

That is what I understand. Losing a player (youngish) over a period of 2 years is not unreasonable and quite possible.

  On 01/02/2011 at 12:11, Keyser Söze said:

That's exactly how it works.

CC would know this, hence, it sounds like tripe.

Maybe... what CC was trying to say, is that we will have that many talented players we will not be able to accommodate all of them with a spot in the 22, & due to the numbers we are likely to lose at least 2 very talented youngsters over time.

This I would think is a possibility.

It's what I was thinking. We may well trade away a (say) Strauss for a good pick just because he isn't a regular. I wouldn't be upset if that is what he meant if indeed he did say it.

Yep.

I think this is where it might become advantageous for us when the AFL introduces the facility to trade future draft picks.

We can have a talented team now, trade those surplus to needs and warehouse the future picks we receive in return, so that we may top up as needed.

  On 01/02/2011 at 12:13, Keyser Söze said:

I don't mean this to be offensive, but that is one of the stupidest suggestions I've ever read on this forum.

Ridiculous.

What do you think that would achieve?

How paranoid are you?

Get a grip, and don't be offensive. And where does paranoia come into it? If Scully is going somewhere else, why play him in our 1's?

  On 01/02/2011 at 12:17, Rojik of the Arctic said:

It's what I was thinking. We may well trade away a (say) Strauss for a good pick just because he isn't a regular. I wouldn't be upset if that is what he meant if indeed he did say it.

As Rhino might well say, why would a club give us a good pick for a player who has played 2 games in 2 years, and been ordinary for the most part of 2010 in the VFL?

  On 01/02/2011 at 13:22, Mono said:

Get a grip, and don't be offensive. And where does paranoia come into it? If Scully is going somewhere else, why play him in our 1's?

The paranoia that makes you think just because Scully hasn't signed by mid-season, that means he is sure to leave..?

That is absurd. The smart thing for him to do, for his own welfare, is to wait until the end of the season before making any decision.

You will not know definitively that Scully is leaving, if he so decides, until the season is complete.

  On 01/02/2011 at 13:22, Mono said:

As Rhino might well say, why would a club give us a good pick for a player who has played 2 games in 2 years, and been ordinary for the most part of 2010 in the VFL?

Obviously if Strauss does not progress beyond his current standard, he will have no trade value.

For this scenario, the assumption has been made that he will develop further, play more games and prove his value.

The soonest we can trade him is after the 2011 season.

Its not that complex.

  On 01/02/2011 at 05:20, loges said:

What a farce Dumitriou has created. Whats the point of getting a priority pick if you only have the player for 2 years?

Agreed.....

  On 01/02/2011 at 10:37, Fork said:

Couldnt have said it better myself

Can we change the ridiculously flaming thread title on this????

146 posts for a dumb rumour on Big Footy that's touted as fact by the current headline.

I'm a firm believer in where there's smoke, there's fire. I will be content only when Scully re-signs.

  On 01/02/2011 at 12:11, Keyser Söze said:

That's exactly how it works.

CC would know this, hence, it sounds like tripe.

Maybe... what CC was trying to say, is that we will have that many talented players we will not be able to accommodate all of them with a spot in the 22, & due to the numbers we are likely to lose at least 2 very talented youngsters over time.

This I would think is a possibility.

That's how I read it.

  On 01/02/2011 at 03:44, Keyser Söze said:

It's harder to convince kids to leave for money when they are so young that they don't have a family to provide for and it seems like they have a whole career ahead of them where they will earn bucketloads of cash compared to what they are used to.

Money is less important as playing with mates, playing close to family, playing infront of large crowds at the MCG instead of 14K at a suburban stadium in West Sydney.

Good Grief! 14,000 at GWS home matches? Is that that per month or per year?

They will be lucky to get 5,000 paying customers per game at their home matches. I know some mad keen sports fans in Sydney and they are adamant that AFL will not work in the western suburbs. Sydney is the most anti-AFL city in Australia, and Western Sydney is the most anti-AFL region in Sydney. They don't like AFL. It's not tough enough for Rugby fans, and it has no international connection for soccer fans.

Scully is a footy fanatic who has dreamed at playing games at the'G' in front of big crowds. Is he really going to give up his dream; move away from family and friends, and play in a suburban park for a team that might fold in 10 years?

I don't think money is the main issue here. Tom is like every kid that plays AFL - he wants premierships and he wants to win. He knows he will get paid very well wherever he plays, but he does not know if he will play in a premiership team.

Let's say he plays for another 12 years after 2011. Assume 9 clubs win flags in those 12 years (same result as 1999 to 2010). That means the remaining 9 clubs will miss out. Tom has to be a part of one of those nine successful teams. If he thinks the Dees will win a flag, and he can stay in Melbourne and play in big games at the 'G', then I reckon he'll stay.