Looks like Old got the bullseye.

Wrong ... Again I'm not upset if thats what you are trying to imply. I fully understand what old is trying to do. Sorry to disappoint you.

Edited July 19, 201113 yr by hangon007

I think you'll find Cloke was quietly told to pull his head in. Daisy WILL sign. Thing is Pendles has signed. So it's for a year but the Filth got on with it they're setting the agenda.

Currently Tom is... There's a difference

Now that is spin...

More and more I'm leaning towards not paying Tom significantly over market value. He is going to be a great player, there is no doubt of that, but throwing huge wads of cash at him could potentially do far more harm than good. To begin with there is the ill-feeling it could create within the team to have a young guy who has in no way earned that sort of money being the highest payed player on the list. Then there's the very real possibility that GWS would simply make the same offer to Trengove next year, leaving us with the same debate all over again. On top of the GWS issue, we've already had several clubs sniffing around our young stars, and that will only continue. We need to keep our player payments under control and relatively even if we are to have any hope of fending off the poachers who will see opportunity in the situation.

All in all, I would really like it is Scully decided to stick around, but I can't see any possible justification for paying him seven or eight hundred thousand a year. Realistically, the only thing to do is to put it to him that he has in no way earned that sort of money and ask if he could look his teammates in the eye knowing that they are all on less so that he could have more.

Sorry to say Tom, you will be great, but you're not worth the potential loss of 3-4 other young guns.

Interesting reply ... yip go back 20-30 years all you want. The game was near broke ... ah yeah that word passion.

Mate some supporters are fickle ... couldn't see what good for them if they fell over it.

We live in 2011 deal with it. Move on grows some balls. Its a big bad world out there. Learn the laws of the streets and you will survive.

However, dont make the mistake that just because it a business we dont care ... further from the truth could never be uttered.

The show down we've all been waiting for, will be in the year 2123

the McDonald's Magpies Vs the Subway demons

I think you'll find Cloke was quietly told to pull his head in. Daisy WILL sign. Thing is Pendles has signed. So it's for a year but the Filth got on with it they're setting the agenda.

Currently Tom is... There's a difference

Cloke signed after the end of the season - and the Essendon threat was real - Cloke smelled more success and stayed but it was protracted.

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/afl/travis-cloke-knocked-back-2-million-to-stay-at-collingwood/story-e6freck3-1226007225880

Daisy will sign ? I think you have a lot of people on here saying the same thing about Scully

Pendles signed for one year only keeping him in the GWS dangere zone - you believe that this call was of Collingwoods making ??????

My call stands - other clubs deal with the same crap - its the landscape of AFL professionalism.

The show down we've all been waiting for, will be in the year 2123

the McDonald's Magpies Vs the Subway demons

Well you never know.

It takes $20 million investment in your football department per year to win a premiership in 2010 ... what will it take in 2123?

It takes like a $16-17 million spend in your football department per year just to make top 4 in 2011 ... what will it be in 2123?

Care to guess who are the highest spending clubs in the league in their football department in 2011?

Oh ... yes. Success before the cash. hahahahaha. I dont think so.

Edited July 19, 201113 yr by hangon007

No distinction required, someone is yet to point out the relevance of Barassi to the current situation. I fail to understand why it was even mentioned.

Barassi himself referred to the Scully situation earlier in the year, likening his own move in the '60's to the current day moves to make NSW a strong AFL state. He even gave a partial blessing to such a move.

Well you never know.

It takes $20 million investment in your football department per year to win a premiership in 2010 ... what will it take in 2123?

It takes like a $16-17 million spend in your football department per year just to make top 4 in 2011 ... what will it be in 2123?

Paying for parking would be a nightmare, If there is even cars then....

Forget about getting a pie at the game, they will only be selling happy meals....

50% of your footlong, with the purchase of a membership....

Edited July 19, 201113 yr by tatu

More and more I'm leaning towards not paying Tom significantly over market value. He is going to be a great player, there is no doubt of that, but throwing huge wads of cash at him could potentially do far more harm than good. To begin with there is the ill-feeling it could create within the team to have a young guy who has in no way earned that sort of money being the highest payed player on the list. Then there's the very real possibility that GWS would simply make the same offer to Trengove next year, leaving us with the same debate all over again. On top of the GWS issue, we've already had several clubs sniffing around our young stars, and that will only continue. We need to keep our player payments under control and relatively even if we are to have any hope of fending off the poachers who will see opportunity in the situation.

All in all, I would really like it is Scully decided to stick around, but I can't see any possible justification for paying him seven or eight hundred thousand a year. Realistically, the only thing to do is to put it to him that he has in no way earned that sort of money and ask if he could look his teammates in the eye knowing that they are all on less so that he could have more.

Sorry to say Tom, you will be great, but you're not worth the potential loss of 3-4 other young guns.

I agree. Disciplined list management is required, now more than ever.

This whole saga leaves a dirty taste - it's just a real pity. I was absolutely stoked when we secured picks 1 & 2 (and 11 & 18) - I hadn't contemplated at the time that the contract extensions of any of those players would be such a total and drawn out pain in the @ss.

I hope we know sooner rather than later what Scully intends to do, as I genuinely fear some of the other contract negotiations may hit the wall in October. For instance, I really don't want to see brinkmanship being applied in the context of Sylvia's contract talks just prior to trade week. And, rest assured, there will be other clubs circling our number 12.

Well you never know.

It takes $20 million investment in your football department per year to win a premiership in 2010 ... what will it take in 2123?

It takes like a $16-17 million spend in your football department per year just to make top 4 in 2011 ... what will it be in 2123?

Care to guess who are the highest spending clubs in the league in their football department in 2011?

Oh ... yes. Success before the cash. hahahahaha. I dont think so.

Collingwood paid similar overs in relation to other teams spending during the whole part of the past decade and didnt win one premiership, many teams succeeded without such a spend, Collingwood is an outlier atm and will continue to be, the average spend is much lower

Although higher football department spending will benefit clubs, you dont BUY premierships

Well you never know.

It takes $20 million investment in your football department per year to win a premiership in 2010 ... what will it take in 2123?

It takes like a $16-17 million spend in your football department per year just to make top 4 in 2011 ... what will it be in 2123?

Care to guess who are the highest spending clubs in the league in their football department in 2011?

Oh ... yes. Success before the cash. hahahahaha. I dont think so.

I could through some figures at you , but i doubt they would be correct. I also doubt that you'd be able to prove them wrong...

Success = Success....

Edited July 19, 201113 yr by tatu

Collingwood paid similar overs in relation to other teams spending during the whole part of the past decade and didnt win one premiership, many teams succeeded without such a spend, Collingwood is an outlier atm and will continue to be, the average spend is much lower

Although higher football department spending will benefit clubs, you dont BUY premierships

Dont live in the past. Its 2011. Welcome to the new world. Stick your heads in the sand all you want.

Note you didnt guess the footy department spends in 2011. The average spend is rising by the day assuming you want to stay at the top ...

I could through some figures at you , but i doubt they would be correct. I also doubt that you'd be able to prove them wrong...

Success = Success, i get it....

Fail ... Never let the facts get in the way ... What not correct about the figures?

Note you also didn't guess the footy spend inside your footy department.

Fail ... Never let the facts get in the way ... What not correct about the figures?

Note you also didn't guess the footy spend inside your footy department.

prices in 2123? hmmmmm.....

I was absolutely stoked when we secured picks 1 & 2 (and 11 & 18) - I hadn't contemplated at the time that the contract extensions of any of those players would be such a total and drawn out pain in the @ss.

Let me put on my fireproof clothing first...

Perhaps it's karma for our tanking in order to get the priority pick.

I think you'll find Cloke was quietly told to pull his head in. Daisy WILL sign. Thing is Pendles has signed. So it's for a year but the Filth got on with it they're setting the agenda.

Currently Tom is... There's a difference

Yes, and it's called MFCSS... there I've said it!!!

Let me put on my fireproof clothing first...

Perhaps it's karma for our tanking in order to get the priority pick.

Might explain why Vlad was never too worried about us getting the picks. Not if he thought we wouldnt get to keep them ( in a manner)

Many people laugh athe so called conspiracy nature of some reasonings but some might want to stop and take a step back and have a look at the how and why the AFL is going about its control of the game and the indfluence of teams , players, players organisations and managers.

Vlad has his little plan..!!

Vlad has his little plan..!!

hehehe ... B)

Might explain why Vlad was never too worried about us getting the picks. Not if he thought we wouldnt get to keep them ( in a manner)

Many people laugh athe so called conspiracy nature of some reasonings but some might want to stop and take a step back and have a look at the how and why the AFL is going about its control of the game and the indfluence of teams , players, players organisations and managers.

Vlad has his little plan..!!

What's "conspiracy theory" about imagining that Demetriou sat and watched Jordan McMahon take a mark after the siren and kick a goal from 50 to secure MFC's compensation pick, safe in his knowledge that in over 2 seasons Tom Scully would sign for the AFL's newest franchise and MFC would be compensated once again...?

What's "conspiracy theory" about imagining that Demetriou sat and watched Jordan McMahon take a mark after the siren and kick a goal from 50 to secure MFC's compensation pick, safe in his knowledge that in over 2 seasons Tom Scully would sign for the AFL's newest franchise and MFC would be compensated once again...?

well my point ( maybe not clear enough ) was I dont think its all Conspiracy Theory , i.e Unreal Paranoia meets Subversive overplan. I actually think there is an agenda. That is beyond the obvious of taking Footy to hostile regions come hell or high water.

Theres a pattern. Vlad doesnt like too much out of the reach of Fortress AFL.

Cant have consitency in fines and penalties so they have the MRP where everything is Anderson under-written and as consistent as mud.

Cant have Clubs being too autonomous...so dribble feed them on handouts and persistently change the goal posts . Eventually the AFL gets its way on most things.

Cant have those horrible pesky upstart bastards having their own voice and grabbing too big a slice of pie, even though they are the reason teh pie exists in the first place...so lets set about diluting the power of the AFLPA

Player managers...oooh scarey scarey....getting in the ear of those impressionable kiddies.. Lets create our own !!

We need a certain amount of prime fresh talent to make its way to the newby clubs.... even better , lets get them to put a few games under their belts with unknowing surrogate teams ...then create a situation where they can be knicked from right under their noses !! A gem that one.

Yes we will get some compensation ...that in some new talent...but what of the time and money and effort put into the existing pick ?? Same for other teams.. To say nothing of the brouhaha it causes.

Mary Shelley created a Monster.... and the VFL created another, neither could forsee the horror of their creations.

Edited July 19, 201113 yr by belzebub59

Let me put on my fireproof clothing first...

Perhaps it's karma for our tanking in order to get the priority pick.

You could be right hardtack.

BUT - remember how we got completely ripped off the year before. We could've/should've got picks 1 & 2, yet instead got pick 4, as a result of the infamous Carltank game.

It's win-win. Time to push the WIN button

How exactly do you push a 'win' button?

The spinning wheel will stop in October. We're just waiting to see if it lands on 'STAY' or 'GO'.

Exactly those words HT!!!!!

HT = High Tower or Hardtack? :-)

I will assume it is me as High Tower hasn't commented, so I will start by asking what is the point of emoticons if people aren't going to pay attention to them? It was a half joking post that was intended to trivialise comments coming before it.

Having said that however, I do not buy that McMahon thing for one minute... there is absolutely no denying that the club was tanking well before that game (just look at the line-ups and field positions that were being implemented) and it was only through extreme good fortune on our part or rank stupidity on the Tigers part, that we lost that last game.

Edited July 19, 201113 yr by hardtack

HT = High Tower or Hardtack? :-)

I will assume it is me as High Tower hasn't commented, so I will start by asking what is the point of emoticons if people aren't going to pay attention to them? It was a half joking post that was intended to trivialise comments coming before it.

Having said that however, I do not buy that McMahon thing for one minute... there is absolutely no denying that the club was tanking well before that game (just look at the line-ups and field positions that were being implemented) and it was only through extreme good fortune on our part or rank stupidity on the Tigers part, that we lost that last game.

It was for High Tower actually...just above my last comment!

It was for High Tower actually...just above my last comment!

That's weird... I went back three or four pages and cannot see any High Tower comments at all. Is this a side effect of my watching the Tour de France?