It was obvious from the get go becuase we blew our load over a 16 year kid! How about waiting until he has completed his underage football and make an assessment once we know our standing in the draft and know all the facts? It's not genius it's bloody common sense FCS.

You're happy to essentially lose 20 spots in the draft are you?

The breif should've been - GET VINEY WITH THE HIGHEST DRAFT PICK POSSIBLE. END OF STORY. We've done the complete opposite and there is absolutely no way in the world you will convince me otherwise.

Get it?

You should understand that:

- we had to make our intentions clear, since Adelaide were trying to engineer a situation to claim him themselves?

- the draft pick we take him with is tied to our finishing position, so it's only down to our on-field incompetence that we must now use a high pick

- there would be no way to invest resources in him before drafting, accelerating his development, without making our intentions clear

- it still remains to be seen which pick we need to use on Viney - situations can still be engineered that would work out very well for us

- if he's worth it, we take him. So what you're really worried about is paying the right price for something great. The rules have been changed so the F/S landscape simply doesn't allow for cheap deals like the Cats have benefitted from.

- if he's definitely not, we don't. And cash in on another team's bluff.

Considering the strength of this draft, and crystal ball gazing required in drafting, we may very well have lost nothing if we do in the end have to take Viney with pick 3.

It happens every year that kids taken around pick 20, on reflection should've gone top 5.

And finally - he is EXACTLY what we need and what our supporters yearn for in a player.

Not skills, not running capacity, not marking, but unparalleled hardness and competitiveness.

Viney will set the tone like no other.

For MFC, he is worth whatever we pay for him (and a lot of other clubs, at that).

To rpfc:

1.) Can you please tell me how Adelaide would've secured Jack behind our backs? I've heard this mentioned as a reason but can you please explain it.

2.) "I don't like paying slightly overs for him but when we made this deal we had no idea we would be forced to use Pick 3 or 4" - Exactly, which is why we should have waited until all the facts were known.

3.) "We were never a chance to take him in the 20s until we had such an awful start to the season" - Exactly, that's why we shouls have waited until all the facts were known.

4.) "Since when did we lose that?" - if we played it cool right from the start AND we finish 17th or 16th all we would have to do is convince GWS or GCS that we would take the best available player and call their bluff, and pick up Viney with pick 20 or whatever AND WE get another great player with pick 3. At this stage we've dropped 20 places in the draft in my eyes for absolutely nothing.

Adelaide wanted to trade for a mini-draft pick and would've selected Viney instead of Brad Crouch last year.

It was obvious from the get go becuase we blew our load over a 16 year kid! How about waiting until he has completed his underage football and make an assessment once we know our standing in the draft and know all the facts? It's not genius it's bloody common sense FCS.

You're happy to essentially lose 20 spots in the draft are you?

The breif should've been - GET VINEY WITH THE HIGHEST DRAFT PICK POSSIBLE. END OF STORY. We've done the complete opposite and there is absolutely no way in the world you will convince me otherwise.

Get it?

The development that we are putting into him should never be underestimated. Unlike other draftees who come to the club and have to find their footing, Jack will already have made friends and found a place in the group. He will also be ready made, and clearly will have no backward step about him when he steps into the AFL system.

The bottom line is if we were finishing 10th this year you would've herald this as a genius move, also bear in mind that when this was all sorted out most commentators (and the club as well) were expecting us to be top 8 contenders by now. We made a decision to keep him out of the hands of the Crows, from what little i've seen of him we will be getting a very good player (I won't jinx him with the S word) wherever we pick him up. What we have to hope for is that this so called super draft has players go ahead of him, and GWS and GC become concerned about trying to bluff us out.

A good response from Neeled. No doubt if he becomes one of the top players and we do call call the potential bluff of GWS, you will be the first to say, "God we are stupid, it's quite staggering".

To rpfc: 1.) Can you please tell me how Adelaide would've secured Jack behind our backs? I've heard this mentioned as a reason but can you please explain it. 2.) "I don't like paying slightly overs for him but when we made this deal we had no idea we would be forced to use Pick 3 or 4" - Exactly, which is why we should have waited until all the facts were known. 3.) "We were never a chance to take him in the 20s until we had such an awful start to the season" - Exactly, that's why we shouls have waited until all the facts were known. 4.) "Since when did we lose that?" - if we played it cool right from the start AND we finish 17th or 16th all we would have to do is convince GWS or GCS that we would take the best available player and call their bluff, and pick up Viney with pick 20 or whatever AND WE get another great player with pick 3. At this stage we've dropped 20 places in the draft in my eyes for absolutely nothing.

Well, your first question has ramifications for the other three but, essentially, when the Crows had Todd as Assistant Coach the club went to him and said - if he nominates for the 17 year old draft (the one in which they ended up getting Brad Crouch) they will be able to pick him up and he can stay in Adelaide with the family. Around that point Todd was leaving the Crows and having conversations with us. We said that we have been tracking him and would take him. Todd wanted to see him play where he played.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/dees-may-lose-viney-to-crows-20100902-14rmc.html

This agreement means that clubs knew that we were keen on him and would have known anyway when his father started working for us and when he started ripping up junior carnivals as an underager in SA.

2) By 'facts' do you mean 'where we would finish?' That is a little unfair to the recruiting guys who got this done and don't have any say in the performance of the team.

3) This question is incredibly unfair for similar reasons, as the only way we would have ever used the 2nd round pick is if we were so bad we would finish with GWS and GC and we could bring in a handshake trade to keep them happy - remembering the trade period is AFTER the bidding process.

These two questions completely remove the notion that Viney would have raised the attention of other clubs through his talent and amazing displays for SA and Vic Metro - he isn't exactly only kicking a footy in Todd's backyard.

You cannot keep a talent like this under wraps - that article above shows that clubs do their homework.

4) You can forget about calling people's bluffs - you cannot run recruitment like that. We would have lost a talent, Todd, and probably future F/S prospects. And we still can organise an arrangement with GWS and GC, nothing is set in stone.

You are right that 'the facts of the season' are different to what they perceived when Jack was contracted and committed to the cause but this change of facts that will make us pay slightly overs is also the change of facts that might see us pay with a second round pick.

And I am not going to blame aggressive recruitment.

Herald Sun reckons GWS has already decided to nominate for him.

So, does anyone else think that bidding a top-two drat pick in strong draft for a kid who is definitely good, considered possible top-ten, but will also have missed about half his final under-age season with an injury, as a little bit like draft tampering?

Herald Sun reckons GWS has already decided to nominate for him. So, does anyone else think that bidding a top-two drat pick in strong draft for a kid who is definitely good, considered possible top-ten, but will also have missed about half his final under-age season with an injury, as a little bit like draft tampering?

No it's not draft tampering, not at all. It's called taking advantage of another club showing their hand early.

simple, call the bluff if needed.

could end up with lauchie whitfield, which is a win. theyd be screwing themselves over and not taking an onus on there responsibility. id hate to be a member for GWS if they bid on Viney

He is rated top 5. He can't miss. He is driven, talented and harder than a cats head. We already know how hard he will work to become the best he can be.

Not sure about the heart burn from some here.

simple, call the bluff if needed.

could end up with lauchie whitfield, which is a win. theyd be screwing themselves over and not taking an onus on there responsibility. id hate to be a member for GWS if they bid on Viney

Is Whitfield better than Viney??? Viney is playing against men as a 17 year old and will have 1 years of club experience.

Just asking Don't have to bite my head off.

Err, how is this any different to the position Essendon are in with Joe Daniher?

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/more-news/essendon-draft-delight-looms-in-joe-daniher/story-e6frf9jf-1226341576023

We are lower down the ladder, so pay with a higher draft choice than them. Simple as that.

The same people bitching on here that we committed early and may pay slight overs are the same people that would have been bitching if we had not committed and he had gone to Adelaide in the mini-draft.

Would I love to get him dirt cheap for a second pick?. Absolutely, and we should do whatever in power to make that happen. However if we have to use a pick as low as 3 then so be it. He is exactly what we need. There may be better players drafted but we can be sure as any that our pick will be worth it.

Herald Sun reckons GWS has already decided to nominate for him.

I think that's good - it's on the table. We can now start discussing a deal with them to do otherwise.

I think people have to start looking at it in a different way.

One way of looking at it, is to say that if we come top 8 (like Essendon), then we get a steal on getting Viney at pick 15ish, like Essendon will do in getting Daniher.

However, the better way to look at it, is that is we came top 8, we might be getting Viney with pick 15ish, but our compensation pick would be pick 16!

We are going to have to use our first round pick on Viney. FULL STOP. The real issue is that if we come bottom 3, our compensation pick is pick 4 (instead of pick 16). Pick 4 (usually) gets you a very good player- no Cale Morton Jokes please

I think that's good - it's on the table. We can now start discussing a deal with them to do otherwise.

Exactly!

Been mentioned on another thread that Blease wants to go to GWS to play with he who shall not be named. Maybe we tell them they can get him at a good price if they don't nominate Viney. Could be as easy as that!

Whatever no. in the draft we use, he will be worth it!!!!!

I'd use no 1. if we had it. He is just what we need.

The highlights from saturday's game should make us all salivate. When Jack pushed that trainer away, I am thinking wow, this kid is tough!

There will be no two to three year development stage, Jack will be ready to mix it. I cannot remember seeing a kid as tough as Jack and physically well prepared to take up a position in our 1st 22.

As Wojo becomes a name from the distant past, Viney will become a household name at Melbourne (again) !

Premiers 13

Why does no-one seem to mention the positive impact of having Jack around our club, using our facilities, training, getting to know the gameplan and his teammates, for a good 18 months BEFORE he gets drafted? IMO thats worth declaring early that we were going to take him.

If anyone seriously thinks we would 'call their bluff' and NOT take Viney they are delusional

every1 here seems to think jack will be a #1 draft pick even though he is missing half this season due to injury.

dnt get me wrong, i think he ll be good to the team, i just dont think we should pay overs though and fold to GWS coz the kids 'been around the club'

we should take the best kid available, regardless. If its viney then sure, if its not then we should take whoever is the best.

Why does no-one seem to mention the positive impact of having Jack around our club, using our facilities, training, getting to know the gameplan and his teammates, for a good 18 months BEFORE he gets drafted? IMO thats worth declaring early that we were going to take him.

If anyone seriously thinks we would 'call their bluff' and NOT take Viney they are delusional

it has been mentioned, but your 100% correct

Guys we should have tried to convince the other clubs that jack viney was actually not going to play football, and wanted to be a ballerina, then diverting attention from a player who got the tac cup medal for best on in the grand final when his team lost! This also could have tricked all other clubs that he was not the toughest player entering this years draft, and that he would not slot readily into many midfields in the competition!

Of course we should have signed him up early, people saying anything else are just idiots! We could do nothing else about it!

MFC should take the best players possible with there picks in the draft. End of story.

Recruiters have the onus of responsibility to do so for there members, regardless if it be Melbourne, GWS or Collingwood.

MFC have been at the bottom of the ladder for years and i wouldn't accept them selecting anything less then the best, regardless of who it is.

every1 here seems to think jack will be a #1 draft pick even though he is missing half this season due to injury. dnt get me wrong, i think he ll be good to the team, i just dont think we should pay overs though and fold to GWS coz the kids 'been around the club' we should take the best kid available, regardless. If its viney then sure, if its not then we should take whoever is the best.

MFC should take the best players possible with there picks in the draft. End of story. Recruiters have the onus of responsibility to do so for there members, regardless if it be Melbourne, GWS or Collingwood. MFC have been at the bottom of the ladder for years and i wouldn't accept them selecting anything less then the best, regardless of who it is.

Well, at this point, the kid who has been able to get into the AFL system two years before his peers will have quite the head start.

Exactly!

Been mentioned on another thread that Blease wants to go to GWS to play with he who shall not be named.

Getting mentioned on Demonland as speculation makes it a fact?

every1 here seems to think jack will be a #1 draft pick even though he is missing half this season due to injury.

And here we go again. Speculation, exaggeration and hyperbole. Who here has said Jack will go at one? Everyone? Really?

And since when did 4-6 weeks become half a season? Though just to add, it's a jaw injury that won't stop his general training, and Casey have 2 of those weeks off in any case.

I tell you what. I'd rather use any pick we have available to us on Jack Viney, and see him lead from the front and deliver his already proven aggression and toughness for the Melbourne Football Club, and continue the legacy his dad left, over drafting it on a guy who apparently has 'natural talent' and then in turn doesn't have a break out game for a number of years, whilst sucking the [censored] of the club and then the media scrutinizing us on picking them whilst letting Viney slip through our fingers.

Even if Jack isn't rated top 3 in this years draft, with his body, skills, and passion for the club I can see him being a better player when playing for the demons and circumstances will show he should have been rated number 1 pick as the season continues. I guarantee it.