Jump to content

WELCOME TO THE MELBOURNE FOOTBALL CLUB - JACK VINEY

einstein251
einstein251
in Melbourne Demons

Featured Replies

  On 26/04/2012 at 03:25, old55 said:

I can't see how that works - the pick we have will be after their picks anyway so who we take with it doesn't impact them.

No we'd need to offer them a player they want at a decent pick discount or a later pick trade that favours them.

  On 26/04/2012 at 03:58, daisycutter said:

The point is we could get viney with a second round pick instead of a pick 3. That is an ENORMOUS advantage (to us) and anyone negotiating with us would know that and would demand a BIG favour.

Plus if we finish 3rd last we have to negotiate with TWO other clubs

Try and come up with some win-win examples and we can discuss them

  On 26/04/2012 at 04:45, rpfc said:

We're not saying it will be easy but it is the only way we take Viney in the second round.

Option 1 - GWS or GC bid for Viney, MFC take him at 3.

MFC Result: Pays abstract overs for a player we really need.

GWS and GC: They make a competitor pay more than full price for a player. No direct benefit.

Option 2 - Enable handshake agreements on trades prior to F/S bidding. Mid to late picks on table. Some fringe players on table.

MFC Result: Ensure Viney is in the second round. Give nothing trades a few weeks later that idiot fans decry and The Footy World © call 'gaming of the system.'

GWS and GC : Get an overbalanced trade for absolutely nothing. Direct benefit.

These are the only options.

Examples: Bennell/McDonald/Davis/Martin/Tapscott/Cook for Pick 75, or Pick 40 for Pick 75 as trading picks for picks is legal now.

  On 26/04/2012 at 05:09, old55 said:

You're not making any sense - we won't get a chance to take Whitfield.

If we finish 16th and they nominate Viney the picks will be 1: GWS, 2: GC, 3: MFC=Viney, 4: MFC, 5: 15th finishing team

If we finish 16th and they don't nominate Viney the picks will be 1: GWS, 2: GC, 3: MFC, 4: MFC, 5: 15th finishing team .... Round 2 MFC: Viney

Our picks are after their picks either way, they'll take Whitfield either way.

  On 26/04/2012 at 05:45, José Mourinho said:

Whitfield is not involved unless we're lucky enough for him to still be available at our pick.

Nothing to stop GC from taking him.

^That will all be thrown on it's head, if we end up with you know what people....

Wash your mouth out H_T !

  • Quote
    •  
      On 26/04/2012 at 05:59, billy2803 said:

    I honestly can't believe all the tripe I'm reading on this thread about us doing deals with GWS/GC, and anything else that has been mentioned.

    At the end of the day, if we finish 16th (as per the current ladder), we have pick 3. If GWS or GC wish to pick Viney with either Pick 1 or 2, then we have to use our Pick 3 on him. If the MFC believe he is worth that, they spend it, quite simple.

    The solution is simple. We could be in a fantastic position to go in to this draft with pick 3, 4, 11(ish) and get Viney with our 2nd round pick. We MUST do whatever we can to ensure GWS/GC don't want to use Pick 1 or 2, but one thing is for sure, this DOESN'T involve some secret deal - give these bastards nothing. If they still want to try and backdoor us by putting in a dummy bid, I'm all for calling their bluff and letting them have him. We will get either Whitfield or whoever else is rated a top 2 pick - I'm not going to lose any sleep over it.

    I honestly don't think GWS or GC would risk missing out on a true, potential pick 1 or 2, just to shaft us by trying to force our hand on a potential pick 5-15. Anyone thining otherwise really is jumping at shadows.

    You are probably correct. But there is one shadow i jump at - I have a feeling that Sheedy will be keen to shaft MFC (partly based on Sheedy not getting Bailey's job and him then paying over-the-odds for $cully).

    Will Sheedy have any say in GWS plans after this season?

  • Quote
      On 26/04/2012 at 06:17, H_T said:

    ^That will all be thrown on it's head, if we end up with you know what people....

    Wash your mouth out H_T !

    go on ht say it.......the w........ s......... - sh!t I can't say it either

  • Quote
    •  
      On 26/04/2012 at 06:27, disco_demon said:

    i love how everyone assumes we are going to beat gold coast and gws this year.

    I love how you rope "everyone" into the same basket.

    Can you support this ?

    I'll save you the work....

    "No"

  • Quote

      On 26/04/2012 at 06:20, daisycutter said:

    go on ht say it.......the w........ s......... - sh!t I can't say it either

    At the risk of grinding your gears on two separate threads today, this is why it wouldn't biother me at this stage if we happened to finish last this year considering what we theoretically have to gain. I'm not necessarily saying tank and I don't think we will finish last but if we did it wouldn't be the worst thing in the world. We would then have pick 1, 2, 12(ish) & Viney. Won't happen but I'm not gonna slit my wrists if it does.

  • Quote
      On 26/04/2012 at 06:32, H_T said:

    I love how you rope "everyone" into the same basket.

    Can you support this ?

    I'll save you the work....

    "No"

    this thread is up to 30 pages...it's easier to say everyone. ha

  • Quote
      On 26/04/2012 at 06:37, Dr. Gonzo said:

    At the risk of grinding your gears on two separate threads today, this is why it wouldn't biother me at this stage if we happened to finish last this year considering what we theoretically have to gain. I'm not necessarily saying tank and I don't think we will finish last but if we did it wouldn't be the worst thing in the world. We would then have pick 1, 2, 12(ish) & Viney. Won't happen but I'm not gonna slit my wrists if it does.

    The thing is, I don't think we'd finish much worse off having Viney, pick 4, pick 12 and pick 22, such is the depth.

    Buddy went at 5, Bartel went at 8, Rioli at 12, Fyfe at 20, Sam Reid at 39.

    I know it gives us the best chance, but the highest picks aren't always the answer.

  • Quote
    •  
      On 26/04/2012 at 06:10, José Mourinho said:

    2011

    Freo: picks 38 & 56 to Hawks

    Hawks: picks 29, 58 & 71 to Freo

    Geelong: pick 26 to GC

    GC: picks 32 & 34 to Geelong

    Adelaide: pick 24 to GC

    GC: picks 27, 31 & 68 to Adelaide

    2009

    Swans: pick 47 to Lions

    Lions: pick 39 to Swans

    Essendon: pick 58 to Hawthorn.

    Hawthorn: pick 89 to Essendon.

    The Mark Williams / Burgoyne deal:

    Geelong got involved and gave up picks 33 & 97

    to receive picks 40, 42 & 56

    I said 2 picks without any further trades ie a pick for a pick ala my example in post 709 which you initially replied to.

    Your 2011 examples involve more than 2 picks.

    Your 2009 examples are part of either a 3 way trade, a 4 way trade or involve more than 2 picks - non of which are applicable to my point. Swans Lions wasn't even a direct trade.

    My point was in the context of a simple pick for pick trade in isolation and then GWS not bidding on JV as a return favour (which is obviously a non trade period benefit).

      On 26/04/2012 at 06:10, José Mourinho said:

    Lawyered!

    lol

  • Quote
      On 26/04/2012 at 05:50, daisycutter said:

    That's silly. Did Carlton and West Coast and Collingwood not force him to deny tanking? Were they any more subtle? Or are you suggesting that Vlad didn't realise tanking was going on until we came along? The whole argument that we somehow 'embarrassed' vlad is just ludicrous

    btw i'm not trying to justify tanking but I can't see how vlad could hold a grudge over us and not the others

    and on a slightly different tack how could vlad defend the f/s bidding process if Tom is ranked outside the top 5 or even the top 10 and we are forced to use a pick 3 (under his rules)

    This is my point - the AFL will not be happy or supportive of a club that puts the whole FS bidding system under major scrutiny.

    The key thing is that Melbourne at seasons end (assuming they finish with pick 3) need to come out formally and say we rate Tom pick (say) 7 and we will not be bidding higher than this. That way the clubs know. If GWS or GC take him, then so be it. Otherwise we will be screwed (yet again!).

  • Quote

      On 26/04/2012 at 06:57, 1858 said:

    I said 2 picks without any further trades ie a pick for a pick ala my example in post 709 which you initially replied to.

    Your 2011 examples involve more than 2 picks.

    Your 2009 examples are part of either a 3 way trade a 4 way tradeor involve multiple picks.

    My point was in the context of a simple pick for pick trade in isolation and then GWS not bidding on JV as a return favour (which is obviously a non trade period benefit).

    lol

    Uhh... No.

    2009 examples were independent trades of 2 picks.

    The geelong one was just thrown in for good measure.

    Maybe you don't remember it, but I did, because at the time I couldn't figure out why teams would do it & even questioned Emma Quayle on it.

    She said it was done to generate good faith and relations between the clubs, or something along those lines.

    I don't buy it.

  • Quote
      On 26/04/2012 at 07:00, José Mourinho said:

    Uhh... No.

    2009 examples were independent trades of 2 picks.

    The geelong one was just thrown in for good measure.

    Maybe you don't remember it, but I did, because at the time I couldn't figure out why teams would do it & even questioned Emma Quayle on it.

    She said it was done to generate good faith and relations between the clubs, or something along those lines.

    I don't buy it.

    Swans Lions was not a direct trade.

    As for the Hawks Bombers it was part of a 4 way unless you are asserting they did it for no other reason. Ergo further trades were involved.

    As for Geelong that involves more than 2 picks as well.

  • Quote
      On 26/04/2012 at 06:57, daisycutter said:

    That's silly. Did Carlton and West Coast and Collingwood not force him to deny tanking? Were they any more subtle? Or are you suggesting that Vlad didn't realise tanking was going on until we came along? The whole argument that we somehow 'embarrassed' vlad is just ludicrous

    btw i'm not trying to justify tanking but I can't see how vlad could hold a grudge over us and not the others

    and on a slightly different tack how could vlad defend the f/s bidding process if Tom is ranked outside the top 5 or even the top 10 and we are forced to use a pick 3 (under his rules)

      On 26/04/2012 at 06:57, Born to Run said:

    This is my point - the AFL will not be happy or supportive of a club that puts the whole FS bidding system under major scrutiny.

    The key thing is that Melbourne at seasons end (assuming they finish with pick 3) need to come out formally and say we rate Tom pick (say) 7 and we will not be bidding higher than this. That way the clubs know. If GWS or GC take him, then so be it. Otherwise we will be screwed (yet again!).

    It's Jack, not Tom

  • Quote
      On 26/04/2012 at 05:59, billy2803 said:

    I honestly can't believe all the tripe I'm reading on this thread about us doing deals with GWS/GC, and anything else that has been mentioned.

    At the end of the day, if we finish 16th (as per the current ladder), we have pick 3. If GWS or GC wish to pick Viney with either Pick 1 or 2, then we have to use our Pick 3 on him. If the MFC believe he is worth that, they spend it, quite simple.

    The solution is simple. We could be in a fantastic position to go in to this draft with pick 3, 4, 11(ish) and get Viney with our 2nd round pick. We MUST do whatever we can to ensure GWS/GC don't want to use Pick 1 or 2, but one thing is for sure, this DOESN'T involve some secret deal - give these bastards nothing. If they still want to try and backdoor us by putting in a dummy bid, I'm all for calling their bluff and letting them have him. We will get either Whitfield or whoever else is rated a top 2 pick - I'm not going to lose any sleep over it.

    I honestly don't think GWS or GC would risk missing out on a true, potential pick 1 or 2, just to shaft us by trying to force our hand on a potential pick 5-15. Anyone thining otherwise really is jumping at shadows.

    desperate for "Dislike" button

  • Quote
      On 26/04/2012 at 07:07, 1858 said:

    Swans Lions was not a direct trade.

    As for the Hawks Bombers it was part of a 4 way unless you are asserting they did it for no other reason. Ergo further trades were involved.

    As for Geelong that involves more than 2 picks as well.

    Both were a subsequent trades done days after the initial trades had gone through.

    The geelong trade is clearly not being discussed as per the criteria you've now set.

  • Quote

      On 26/04/2012 at 07:31, old55 said:

    desperate for "Dislike" button

    Yep.

    I'm all for giving those teams a little something, if in the end we come out with a better net result.

  • Quote
      On 25/05/2011 at 01:29, Striker475 said:

    Third youngest in Vic Metro, pretty good - he'll get another shot next season (unless GWS do the 17-year-old-trade-to-Dees thing) I think?

    He's a Melbourne supporter who trains with the senior Melbourne list almost weekly. Why would he go to GWS? He's already spoken to Neeld about where he'll fit into the side and he's given the club the heads up on the personality and performance of every kid going into the draft next year. He's old man ain't shipping him off to NSW.

  • Quote

    Lol all this would be a non issue if we werent so [censored]. But such is MFC life. We need every step up we can get in drafts because we suck at them. I want Viney with a second round pick. And I want to make essendon use their first rounder on that daniher kid.

  • Quote
      On 26/04/2012 at 07:32, José Mourinho said:

    Both were a subsequent trades done days after the initial trades had gone through.

    They may have been "lodged" as individual trades fine, but they were obviously made in conjunction with further trades. They would not have simply been made in isolation without any other trade consideration which is what I was clearly getting at.

      On 26/04/2012 at 07:32, José Mourinho said:

    The geelong trade is clearly not being discussed as per the criteria you've now set.

    Your Geelong trade example is just a cluster****.

  • Quote

      On 26/04/2012 at 07:47, 1858 said:

    They may have been "lodged" as individual trades fine, but they were obviously made in conjunction with further trades. They would not have simply been made in isolation without any other trade consideration which is what I was clearly getting at.

    Your Geelong trade example is just a cluster****.

    How?

    Geelong getting involved and benefiting from facilitating a deal for other clubs.

    There's nothing wrong with it. It might not fit your criteria, but it's an example of a club just getting involved purely for extra later picks.

    It's purely as an example of how GC and/or GWS might be happy to let us take Viney 2nd round, so they can get another 3rd round pick, instead of having to wait til the 4th round. It's not of great benefit to them, but it's a cherry for nothing on their part.

  • Quote
      On 26/04/2012 at 07:31, old55 said:

    desperate for "Dislike" button

    Could we have a "I dont understand" button?

  • Quote
      On 26/04/2012 at 08:12, José Mourinho said:

    Geelong getting involved and benefiting from facilitating a deal for other clubs.

    It might not fit your criteria, but it's an example of a club just getting involved purely for extra later picks.

    It's purely as an example of how GC and/or GWS might be happy to let us take Viney 2nd round, so they can get another 3rd round pick, instead of having to wait til the 4th round. It's not of great benefit to them, but it's a cherry for nothing on their part.

    No worries, you've raised a genuine example of how the club can try and negotiate a better position. Lets hope something like that can eventuate if we try to go down that road.

  • Quote
    •  

    What if we nominate our first rounder to daniher. Then we dont have a first rounder left nd can use our second rounder on Viney.

    Or if we tell GWS we ll absorb the risk of nominating to take Daniher so they dont have to, as long as they dont bid for Viney. And hell if somehow we end up with Daniher for pick 3 then i dont see it as a loss.

  • Quote

    I can't buy that GWS or GC would use their first pick on Viney, just to 'force' us to use pick 3....it's way too risky, unless Viney is actually worthy of pick 1 or 2. They can't be 100% certain we wouldn't just let him go and then just find a way to trade/draft him back for f/all in two years time.

    There's several far more powerful clubs in the competition than us for GWS to worry about.

  • Quote

    • Archived

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

    Go to topic listing

    Featured Content

    • PREVIEW: Essendon

      As the focus of the AFL moves exclusively to South Australia for Gather Round, the question is raised as to what are we going to get from the  Melbourne Football Club this weekend? Will it be a repeat of the slop fest of the last three weeks that have seen the team score a measly 174 points and concede 310 or will a return to the City of Churches and the scene where they performed at their best in 2024 act as a wakeup call and bring them out of their early season reverie?  Or will the sleepy Dees treat their fans to a reenactment of their lazy effort from the first Gather Round of two years ago when they allowed the Bombers to trample all over them on a soggy and wet Adelaide Oval? The two examples from above tell us how fickle form can be in football. Last year, a committed group of players turned up in Adelaide with a businesslike mindset. They had a plan, went in confidently and hard for the football and kicked winning scores against both home teams in a difficult environment for visitors. And they repeated that sort of effort later in the season when they played Essendon at the MCG.

        • Thanks
        • Like
      • 0 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • PREGAME: Essendon

      Facing the very real and daunting prospect of starting the season with five straight losses, the Demons head to South Australia for the annual Gather Round, where they’ll take on the Bombers in search of their first win of the year. Who comes in, and who comes out?

        • Thanks
      • 478 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • NON-MFC: Round 05

      Gather Round is here, kicking off with a Thursday night blockbuster as Adelaide faces Geelong. The Crows will be out for redemption after a controversial loss last week. Saturday starts with the Magpies taking on the Swans. Collingwood will be eager to cement their spot in the top eight, while Sydney is hot on their heels. In the Barossa Valley, two rising sides go head-to-head in a fascinating battle to prove they're the real deal. Later, Carlton and West Coast face off at Adelaide Oval, both desperate to notch their first win of the season. The action then shifts to Norwood, where the undefeated Lions will aim to keep their streak alive against the Bulldogs. Sunday’s games begin in the Barossa with Richmond up against Fremantle. In Norwood, the Saints will be looking to take a scalp when they come up against the Giants. The round concludes with a fiery rematch of last year's semi-final, as the Hawks seek revenge for their narrow loss to Port Adelaide. Who are you tipping this week and what are the best results for the Demons besides us winning?

        • Thanks
      • 123 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • CASEY: Geelong

      There was a time in the second quarter of the game at the Cattery on Friday afternoon when the Casey Demons threatened to take the game apart against the Cats. The Demons had been well on top early but were struggling to convert their ascendancy over the ground until Tom Fullarton’s burst of three goals in the space of eight minutes on the way to a five goal haul and his best game for the club since arriving from Brisbane at the end of 2023. He was leading, marking and otherwise giving his opponents a merry dance as Casey grabbed a three goal lead in the blink of an eye. Fullarton has now kicked ten goals in Casey’s three matches and, with Melbourne’s forward conversion woes, he is definitely in with a chance to get his first game with the club in next week’s Gather Round in Adelaide. Despite the tall forward’s efforts - he finished with 19 disposals and eight marks and had four hit outs as back up to Will Verrall in the second half - it wasn’t enough as Geelong reigned in the lead through persistent attacks and eventually clawed their way to the lead early in the last and held it till they achieved the end aim of victory.

        • Like
      • 0 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • REPORT: Geelong

      I was disappointed to hear Goody say at his post match presser after the team’s 39 point defeat against Geelong that "we're getting high quality entry, just poor execution" because Melbourne’s problems extend far beyond that after its 0 - 4 start to the 2025 football season. There are clearly problems with poor execution, some of which were evident well before the current season and were in play when the Demons met the Cats in early May last year and beat them in a near top-of-the-table clash that saw both sides sitting comfortably in the top four after round eight. Since that game, the Demons’ performances have been positively Third World with only five wins in 19 games with a no longer majestic midfield and a dysfunctional forward line that has become too easy for opposing coaches to counter. This is an area of their game that is currently being played out as if they were all completely panic-stricken.

        • Thanks
        • Like
      • 0 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • NON-MFC: Round 04

      Round 4 kicks off with a blockbuster on Thursday night as traditional rivals Collingwood and Carlton clash at the MCG, with the Magpies looking to assert themselves as early-season contenders and the Blues seeking their first win of the season. Saturday opens with Gold Coast hosting Adelaide, a key test for the Suns as they aim to back up their big win last week, while the Crows will be looking to keep their perfect record intact. Reigning wooden spooners Richmond have the daunting task of facing reigning premiers Brisbane at the ‘G and the Lions will be eager to reaffirm their premiership credentials after a patchy start. Saturday night sees North Melbourne take on Sydney at Marvel Stadium, with the Swans looking to build on their first win of the season last week against a rebuilding Roos outfit. Sunday’s action begins with GWS hosting West Coast at ENGIE Stadium, a game that could get ugly very early for the visitors. Port Adelaide vs St Kilda at Adelaide Oval looms as a interesting clash, with both clubs form being very hard to read. The round wraps up with Fremantle taking on the Western Bulldogs at Optus Stadium in what could be a fierce contest between two sides with top-eight ambitions. Who are you tipping this week and what are the best results for the Demons besides us winning?

        • Thanks
      • 273 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland
    View All