One year on and the senior players will either buy into what Neeld will be doing or they will move on. Happy players don't move. So be it.

You make a good point! Been a few changes since last year and we have this year to unfold. The pretext for Robbo's article seems to be that he may go because Essendon were into him last trade period and he is a FA next year, just seems to be drawing a bow on this one.

It would mean that he had a poor 2012...Nothing more or less...i hope he stays but i won;t lose sleep.

Are you sure Wyl ? You're normally a players man .

I reckon Brent will have another good year this season . And I can't see many of our midfielders going past him . Maybe Trengove . Honestly , we can ill afford to lose him . He's our best "goer" at the moment IMO .

If you check the stats on "Contested possessions" he's a fair way ahead of 2nd best . Moloney 271 , next best Sylvia 180 . Contested possessions is about the only stat I bother to look at with any real interest . And ........ it's connected to "Bruise free" . We've got a fair bit of work to do to shake that tag .

So the Bombers may of made an approach to Brent ? Hird and Thompson rate him ? Maybe they need some grunt and contested footy out of their midfield ? Some here would let him go .

Edit : I was a little surprised that Sylvia was 2nd best in our "contested possessions" count . Trengove had 164 and Jones 161 . Afl site provides the stats for those interested .

Edited February 25, 201213 yr by Macca

It would mean that he had a poor 2012...Nothing more or less...i hope he stays but i won;t lose sleep.

Have to disagree WYL. He is important to our midfield. Who will replace him, especially with the bullocking and clearance work? Trengove will get better, McKenzie is good in close but is a different type and I don't see anyone else proven at AFL level.

Have to disagree WYL. He is important to our midfield. Who will replace him, especially with the bullocking and clearance work? Trengove will get better, McKenzie is good in close but is a different type and I don't see anyone else proven at AFL level.

If in 12 months he is only the 4th or 5th best midfielder then his contributions will be easily covered by other options. If he is at that level then there will be something wrong with his clearance. Your own target of where he is to be in 12 months does not augur well. He is not a must keep at all costs.

Once again Rhino you mis read a post, miss the point, miss the boat. I won't go on as it's a rhino to a red flag

Good to see people think we're at the point where we can afford to start getting rid of experienced midfielders...

If we're going to secure something close to blue-chip with our two compo picks, I have a feeling we're going to have to give up something of value as a make-weight.

It would not surprise if Moloney was in that mix. There's more than a little smoke to Robbo's article IMO.

I for one enjoyed reading your post. Some on here will throw their own mum under a bus as thats who they are, negative.

Keep on keeping on, and ignore some ppl. You will learn who they are and realise they are all hot air. Loud but not deadly

Post says..

I was told this in strictest confidence by a mate who swore me to secrecy but stuff it I will betray that confidence and put in on Demonland for everyone to see.

I can't be trusted by a mate but all of you complete strangers out there can trust me.

The post says to me. I have a secret and kept until it reached the public domain in the largest paper in the country.

No harm done

Honestly, I am in no way worried by this. The article puts him at the head of it's "Can Get" list because he is the best of the players they put there. He doesn't actually meet the criteria they laid out, but obviously a way to lend your article credibility is to link it back to the trade week rumours from a few months ago. If they were to stick to the guidelines set in the article he wouldn't be there and this thread would not exist.

Nitpicking aside, by the end of this season both we and the players will have an idea of what the new shape of the club will be. There is a good chance that a couple of senior players will be moving on, as well as some of the less senior ones. Id beamer chooses to be one of them it will hurt, but it will be because it has been established that he is a square peg and the club has nothing but round holes, so the loss will not be crippling. I am absolutley confident that if he does well in the new style and plays plenty of football he will be perfectly happy to remain a Demon.

Blast from the past, this article.

That's right demonsterative waited till it came out !

Edited February 24, 201213 yr by demon minded

I wonder if there's anything in the rumour as to what Melbourne was going to get in the trade? Hurley, Ryder, young Heppell?

Mate of mine is a member of Essendon's FD. Laughed his head off at the notion of Beamer at the dons.

Funny thing about this is that I heard from a reliable source (close to family) that the Dons were seriously into Brock Mclean last trade period, go figure. Seems these family sources are either as reliable as tips from trainers and/or the backroom boys at Essendon were looking for any mids they could get their hands on. Maybe GWS weren't the only ones to approach KB.

I wonder if there's anything in the rumour as to what Melbourne was going to get in the trade? Hurley, Ryder, young Heppell?

Or whether we would agree to trade our reigning B+F winner who was contracted?

I'm not one to call into question the word of one of Brent family member's friend who happens to be a anonymous poster but I have my doubts.

If in 12 months he is only the 4th or 5th best midfielder then his contributions will be easily covered by other options. If he is at that level then there will be something wrong with his clearance. Your own target of where he is to be in 12 months does not augur well. He is not a must keep at all costs.

If our B&F player is not a must keep at all costs there is something wrong glad some on here are not in charge of our list.

Moloney has the opportunity to be the "Swan" of the Melb midfield over the next couple of years should he fully buy into Neeld's game plan. Also, by staying he is able to be on our veteran list when his time comes which should help get him an extra year or two...

Bring on the footy.

Go Dees

I have purposely not said anything about this previously but I am quite good friends with a close family member of Beamers. Essendon were heavily trying to get a deal done with him in last years trade week and he was very close to wanting the move, was not happy with what had been happening at the club. It was that close that his father had told family members it was nearly a done deal from his end that he wanted to go, he was not happy with the direction of the club. at the time my friend swore me to secrecy

I hope that with what has happened over the summer and even though he lost his leadership position I hope beamer sees the club is completey different from last year and heading in the right direction, I just hope we have some good on field results to support that!

Was Beamer said to be unhappy about the direction the club was taking under Bailey's regime, or unhappy at Bailey's sacking and with the direction being put in place under the new regime (ie, Neeld, Craig and others)?

I have to say, I still find it rather odd that Moloney hasn't been included in this year's leadership group.

Let's talk footy - I've really got butterflies about tonight....anyone else?

I really, really, want to see some sort of game plan and most of all, vigour and urgency!!

Moloney has the opportunity to be the "Swan" of the Melb midfield over the next couple of years should he fully buy into Neeld's game plan. Also, by staying he is able to be on our veteran list when his time comes which should help get him an extra year or two... Bring on the footy. Go Dees

Exactly my thoughts too PaulRB!

I believe 2012 will be Beamers best year yet. Only time will tell.

Was Beamer said to be unhappy about the direction the club was taking under Bailey's regime, or unhappy at Bailey's sacking and with the direction being put in place under the new regime (ie, Neeld, Craig and others)?

I have to say, I still find it rather odd that Moloney hasn't been included in this year's leadership group.

At first look so was I but i kept going back to the notion it was all based on what MN observed in his time so far. If Beamer is everything hes claimed, how bould he not impress ?? He clearly didnt impress Neeld. Thats all i take from it all.