On 02/03/2011 at 01:48, DemonWA said:

I heard he's delaying contract talks until the end of the year so he can sign a 5 year deal with the club he loves, the Tigers. He's just letting them have enough time to do their version of debt demolition so that they can afford his salary

this post has been made to demonstrate how much speculation is contained in some of these posts!!

I don't even think that is that stupid

If I was him, the deserved number one kid in the land, drafted by the Tigers I would certainly have the possibility in the back of my mind 'how can I get to the mighty MFC where I belong?'. Obviously I would also be thinking about pay day.

To suggest he has some sort of debt, or a bond, or an allegiance, or an affinity or whatever you want to call it, with us is ridiculous. We are just the mob who finished last the year he was drafted

  On 02/03/2011 at 02:20, DemonDave said:

Players dont 'love their clubs' anymore, they're gainfully employed by them. If you worked at Westpac and got offered triple your salary to goto ANZ, would you stay for the love of the bank and your workmates, or chase the money? Shane Woewodin loved the footy club it helped him get a Brownlow. Cameron Bruce loved the footy club it helped him win a best and fairest. They were there for more than 2 years, but it didnt stop them looking after their own interests ahead of the club.

Club loyalty is a redundant and oft-misused word nowadays.

Wasn't Woewy pushed?

  On 02/03/2011 at 02:24, iv said:

Wasn't Woewy pushed?

I seem to remember him being traded. I don't think it was his choice, especially considering that he is still involved with the MFC today

Also re: Scully:

I think he'll stay. If anything, the press-conference on Friday will likely tell us little more than we already know, so everyone should be prepared for that.

Why would he come out and say "I am putting off contract negotiations with the MFC until the end of the season but I am 100% going to stay here."? If he commits to re-signing with the Dees at the end of the season, that significantly decreases his bargaining power and he won't be able to receive as much money.

He will say that he is committed to Melbourne for 2011 and will negotiate 2012 onwards at the end of the season. End of story.

  On 02/03/2011 at 02:20, DemonDave said:

Players dont 'love their clubs' anymore, they're gainfully employed by them. If you worked at Westpac and got offered triple your salary to goto ANZ, would you stay for the love of the bank and your workmates, or chase the money? Shane Woewodin loved the footy club it helped him get a Brownlow. Cameron Bruce loved the footy club it helped him win a best and fairest. They were there for more than 2 years, but it didnt stop them looking after their own interests ahead of the club.

Club loyalty is a redundant and oft-misused word nowadays.

I agree withe the sentiment of what you are saying but I think saying there is a correlation between a football club and a banking organisation is going a bit far.

Football is a game driven by passion and more often than not "playing for the jumper". Working for a bank doesn't derive the same such emotion, it's a desk job that has no supporters. The money side of things I do agree with you on though..

Maybe Tom needs a few months rest away from footy to get his head straight.

  On 02/03/2011 at 02:08, Beetle said:

Agreed. Regardless of the sums (possibly) being offered, if he's decided to leave the MFC this early into his career it will show that he never loved the club and never wanted to be a part of it.

I'm prepared to give him more credit than that at this stage though, (note at this stage), I want him to stay but if it all comes to fruition and it comes to the above, then he's not the sort of player you want at the club anyway.

If Tom Scully is not the type of player we want at our club then we are bound for more mediocrity.

  On 02/03/2011 at 02:50, Roost It said:

If Tom Scully is not the type of player we want at our club then we are bound for more mediocrity.

I was making the statement, putting his playing ability and obvious personal dedication aside, referring purely to the fact that I want players at the MFC who want to be at the MFC.

Clearly I want Scully at Melbourne and as stated would HATE to lose him, but I also dearly want to him to WANT to be at our club.

Yes, all players don't want to be at their clubs until they have signed new contracts 8 months in advance...

  On 02/03/2011 at 02:49, america de cali said:

Maybe Tom needs a few months rest away from footy to get his head straight.

Bagging Tom makes you look really stupid

  On 02/03/2011 at 02:20, DemonDave said:

Players dont 'love their clubs' anymore, they're gainfully employed by them. If you worked at Westpac and got offered triple your salary to goto ANZ, would you stay for the love of the bank and your workmates, or chase the money? Shane Woewodin loved the footy club it helped him get a Brownlow. Cameron Bruce loved the footy club it helped him win a best and fairest. They were there for more than 2 years, but it didnt stop them looking after their own interests ahead of the club.

Club loyalty is a redundant and oft-misused word nowadays.

I totally agree with you to a certain extent, but you can't win premierships at ANZ? I dont think you'll be able to at GWS either....

wow; this whole thing has gone a bit over the top.......

  On 02/03/2011 at 02:14, belzebub59 said:

Mikes be around a few blocks more than a few times. I'd lay money he knows more than most of us put together. If he's jittery then I'm inclined to start focussing on a post Scully Melbourne team.

I still quite frany see nothing to lose by round tabling and asking the elephant.

"Well mate , where are we heading with all this?"

You want to confront Tom.

  On 02/03/2011 at 02:14, belzebub59 said:

It's a two way street . The club has a responsibity to look after him and utilize and grow his talent BUT only really if he's of a mind to stay. I've said this before but if an emoyee of mine couldn't look me in the eyes and commit then I'm wondering why not. They'd be perfectly entitled to look around but if they were they'd be off my A team and informed they now have all the time they like to look; don't worry about closing the door etc.

We have finished the big rebuild and are now looking to refine and enhance. Much of that comes from match time and playing more with your team mates.

What on earth is to be gained by Melb to play Scully if he's not going to be with us next year ? Better that time, effort and club resource put into someone who is.

You want to confront Tom.

  On 02/03/2011 at 02:14, belzebub59 said:

All this waiting t seasons end is double speak. It means ONE thing. I'm outta here !!

You think he is gone.

  On 02/03/2011 at 02:14, belzebub59 said:

It's already been reported the AFL won't get it's magic Billion. All interested. parties could do there workings on about 800 million. Experienced operators can estimate what that may or may not translate to for players in their charge.

You don't like reason given by player manager.

  On 02/03/2011 at 02:14, belzebub59 said:

Those that WANT to be at the Dees have already spoken to that end. Many at other clubs have said similar.

You want to confront Tom.

  On 02/03/2011 at 02:14, belzebub59 said:

I'm certainly not one of those that would be happy to stick head in sand and think all will be well. You need to be proactive . This club is and always will be bigger than one player, no matter how good he is or might be.

You want to confront Tom.

  On 02/03/2011 at 02:14, belzebub59 said:

Tom , you're more than entitled to the best return on your efforts . So is the club.

We won't waste your time. Don't waste ours.

You want to confront Tom.

  On 02/03/2011 at 02:14, belzebub59 said:

Melbourne will enjoy far more success in the period of your playing career. You could well figure in that. Arguably you might earn more money at another club.

Life can be mercenary but also very rewarding.

If you don't see your future at Melb say so . We'll respect that.indicate that to the club now and we can all get on with things.

You want to confront Tom.

  On 02/03/2011 at 02:14, belzebub59 said:

I'm with Paul Roos ... Play hardball Melbourne. don't and this cancer will reappear over and over.

You want to confront Tom.

We get it.

Apparently, we have already done that through Jim Stynes talking to the kid.

He has not signed yet, he has no obligation to do so with a third of his current contract left.

Mike Sheahans nervous (Gubby Allan inspired and manipulated) ramblings aside - we have not lost him yet, but we could if we act like we will.

We are casting aspersions of Tom on here and I don't like it. I am seriously, for the first time since Byron Pickett lined up for us, wondering what reaction a Dees player will get from his own fans...

  On 02/03/2011 at 03:05, rpfc said:

Yes, all players don't want to be at their clubs until they have signed new contracts 8 months in advance...

What I said has nothing to do with when he signs, it doesnt bother me when it is he signs. For what it's worth, I believe his management are doing the right thing by Tom in holding off contract negotations until the end of the year to increase his market value.

I'm referring to the fact that I believe if he chooses to go the GWS (despite the huge amount of money that will be thrown at him), turning his back on potentially a much more fulfilling, successful career at a more successful club in the immediate future, then he did not want to be at the MFC.

  On 02/03/2011 at 03:23, rpfc said:

are casting aspersions of Tom on here and I don't like it.

You're right rpfc, i'm stepping away from this now, I don't want to get drawn any further into the speculation.

What will be will be. I'll just keep my fingers crossed.

Getting very concerned about the increasing number of gratuitous negative comments being made about Tom, just because he chooses not to seriously sabotage his bargaining position.

Nobody would want the club to say: "Tom, we're prepared to pay you whatever you want!" Yet that's the equivalent of what some are wanting Tom to do.

  On 28/02/2011 at 10:02, arossoukas said:

Without trying to upset the positive vibe around the news today

I was at golf day with Mike Sheehan last week and he says categorically that Scully has agreed to terms with GWS via his manager. A point to note that Graeme Allan of GWS is a very close friend of Mike's.

Although he has not officially signed with GWS an agreement via his management company Velocity and GWS has been done. Now before you all shoot me down please note that I am passing on what I heard with the other 100 people on that day

I obviously don't want to see him go but the details of this seem like its done

IF this proves to be true then he, through his management company, have blatantly lied to all & sundry, just using semantics as a cover. IF true he can take his millions and go! PS people should read Robert Shaws article in todays inside football

  On 02/03/2011 at 04:04, Akum said:

Getting very concerned about the increasing number of gratuitous negative comments being made about Tom, just because he chooses not to seriously sabotage his bargaining position.

Nobody would want the club to say: "Tom, we're prepared to pay you whatever you want!" Yet that's the equivalent of what some are wanting Tom to do.

I agree.

It's exactly the situation Gubby & Sheeds have tried to create.

A young kid being treated unreasonably by his "supporters" for acting in a reasonable manner.

Problem is, too many MFC "supporters" are too stupid to be able to put themselves in his shoes without being blinded by greed.

DemonWA hit it on the head,if he doesn't declare his intentions on Friday or even before round 1,he's GW$ bound.Therefore,he plays VFL and we get games into Gysberts and Blease.

For the record,Mike Sheahan said on at least 5 occasions that i can remember "Gary Ablett won't go to the Gold Coast".

If we are good enough to win a flag with Scully,we'll be good enough to win it without him.

  On 02/03/2011 at 04:07, loges said:

IF this proves to be true then he, through his management company, have blatantly lied to all & sundry, just using semantics as a cover. IF true he can take his millions and go! PS people should read Robert Shaws article in todays inside football

Has everyone forgotten that, along with his "impeccable" sources, Mike Sheahan has an agenda of his own in this?

It is in his interest to keep this issue alive for as long as he can, because it's an easy way to fill columns and sell newspapers.

He has no real allegiances to any particular AFL club; his allegiances are to his newspaper & his reputation for being a newsbreaker.

  On 02/03/2011 at 04:20, Keyser Söze said:

I agree.

It's exactly the situation Gubby & Sheeds have tried to create.

A young kid being treated unreasonably by his "supporters" for acting in a reasonable manner.

Problem is, too many MFC "supporters" are too stupid to be able to put themselves in his shoes without being blinded by greed.

Are you the Velocity Sports Stooge on this forum????

  On 02/03/2011 at 04:22, Jack7 said:

DemonWA hit it on the head,if he doesn't declare his intentions on Friday or even before round 1,he's GW$ bound.Therefore,he plays VFL and we get games into Gysberts and Blease.

For the record,Mike Sheahan said on at least 5 occasions that i can remember "Gary Ablett won't go to the Gold Coast".

If we are good enough to win a flag with Scully,we'll be good enough to win it without him.

I wonder what your reaction will be this Saturday to Scully?

Will you boo him?

Will you slag him off as he is coming off the ground?

When do we say "he is a MFC player wearing our jumper and we are not going to let rumours turn us on each other?"

We are being played by Gubby Allan...

  On 02/03/2011 at 04:22, Jack7 said:

DemonWA hit it on the head,if he doesn't declare his intentions on Friday or even before round 1,he's GW$ bound.Therefore,he plays VFL and we get games into Gysberts and Blease.

For the record,Mike Sheahan said on at least 5 occasions that i can remember "Gary Ablett won't go to the Gold Coast".

If we are good enough to win a flag with Scully,we'll be good enough to win it without him.

Careful, your intelligence is showing...

I have so far resisted posting anything on this topic because it's been such a speculative "dog chasing its tail" argument that will go nowhere until something concrete is delivered by way of a re-sign or resign outcome.

There has also been much said about Tom wanting to be the best player he can possibly be - measured by quality and quantity of kicks, handballs, marks and tackles, the ability to pressure, dominate games, influence results and so on. These are measurements that lead to Brownlows, best and fairests, premierships and countless accolades.

I wonder if he has ever given thought about how he would like to be remembered in football history (a big ask for a 19 year old I know). Are champion players who play out their careers as one club players remembered with greater reverence than those who changed clubs at any stage of their careers? Chris Judd, Nathan Buckley, Gary Ablett (both of them), Wayne Carey, Stan Alves, Greg Wells, Ron Barassi and countless others all left clubs for various reasons. New challenges at the back end of a career, the chance to play finals and win a flag, homesickness, club fallout, poor club culture and no doubt money, all played a part in them ultimately making the big move.

For Tom Scully, he has the opportunity to help take a once poorly, but now well run club, starved of a premiership for nearly 50 years, led by a peerlessly inspiring president and create a potential dynasty with his best mates, many with whom he played junior footy, and take a team from basketcase to glory. How perfect a scenario for a player striving to be the best he can be. He will be well remunerated for this and will also be well remembered for what he helped to achieve for the AFL's oldest club.

The alternative is to help pioneer a new team in an AFL backwater, largely devoid of Aussie Rules culture, live in a foreign city far from family (albeit two hours away by plane and car) and help achieve the AFL's dream of two competitive teams in a non AFL landscape - a dream that may take far longer than his own career. To help them achieve this he will be paid a king's ransom but the price to do this is to desert all his mates, the fans and club who believed in him, as well as the unfinished and barely begun job for which he was originally chosen (not his choice granted -but earmarked because of all he would bring). Will the new fans at the new club fan the same passion for the new entity and by extension its players whether in victory or defeat as those at existing clubs and how do you manufacture a soul and a culture to which one can readily identify, if no such culture or history exists and its shape and form moving forward is largely unknown? In short - the devil you know, or the devil you don't.

At this point there is no answer. Does Tom Scully take the money and run and set himself up financially for life, risking his very football credibilty and professionalism for which he seems so focused? Where does that start and end? Or does he stay and help complete the job which has been assigned to him from Day One in his AFL life, with all the goodwill and support, hope and faith - and yes as much money as this not overly financial club can currently afford to pay him under the guidelines in place and yet knowing that over the journey, financially he will be well looked after.

Romantic idealism or ruthless business?

Tom - your concience is yours - the decision is yours.

And for the years to come, history also awaits your decision

- and history will determine how you are remembered.

  On 02/03/2011 at 04:26, america de cali said:

Are you the Velocity Sports Stooge on this forum????

Good question.

I guess it'd be better than being Gubby Allen's Stooge, like you.

My only agenda is preservation of common sense, which seems to be so rare on this forum these days...