Patrick Dangerfield ... Let's get him!

[Range Rover 1,935]

Hardnut, on 06 May 2012 - 10:04 PM, said:

Dangerfield is at a club which is achieving new found success under a new coach (one of several who MFC did not even interview if you believe the stories) - I repeat, why would he leave and why would that club let him go, unless there were some very unusual circumstances?

RR Posted 07 May 2012 - 02:36 AM

1. Money

2. 5-year deal

3. Neil Craig/Mark Neeld's vision

4. He's Victorian

5. Money

6. Did I mention money?

PD stayed as expected - money isn't everything!

Congrats Hardnut, an amazing prediction. Give yourself a pat on the back.

Unfortunately the point of the OP is still lost on you. And it is ... that it is incumbent upon us to try and have a crack wherever possible when someone of Dangerfield's ilk bobs up on the radar, not to take your defeatist attitude of "they'll never leave so why bother".

Get it?

[Guest José Mourinho]

The problem is we can't grow our own. We haven't for decades. None of those above players will be more than b graders at our club. It kills me to say it, but that's the reality of the situation. We need to trade in proven stars.

No, we haven't been able to develop our own in the past, through lack of putting money and resources into development.

That has changed, and our ability to develop talent will in turn change.

It's quite simple: cause and effect.

[rjay 24,929]

The problem is we can't grow our own. We haven't for decades. None of those above players will be more than b graders at our club. It kills me to say it, but that's the reality of the situation. We need to trade in proven stars.

I think you are wrong, just my opinion. Lets see in another couple of years how our midfield looks.

[Hardnut 327]

Congrats Hardnut, an amazing prediction. Give yourself a pat on the back.

Unfortunately the point of the OP is still lost on you. And it is ... that it is incumbent upon us to try and have a crack wherever possible when someone of Dangerfield's ilk bobs up on the radar, not to take your defeatist attitude of "they'll never leave so why bother".

Get it?

No RR, unfortunately it is you who is missing the point (as illustrated by Dangerfield, and most likely Sloane and Tippett) - it is always better to get good young players and provide them with a sound developmental environment which makes them want to stay at our club. That's often summarised by the phrase 'playing for the jumper'. I believe in a positive approach to players, which means we need positive coaching and support staff. That breeds an instinctive winning mentality where defeat is not an option. Imported, expensive, players will often disappoint when viewed from a total club perspective over a period of time. In short, good recruitment of young players will more likely lead to longer term success - remember Jim Cardwell's enticement: come and play for MFC just to be on the MCG.

[dees64 104]

Well run clubs do not lose star players most of the times, when you how look at the players at Coll,Ess even Rich who they have resigned with all this money from GWS & Suns it paints a bad picture of how bad our club has performed in the past. I think of Scott Thompson, Jolly, Scully etc all these players saw our issues within the club in terms of resources compared with other clubs plus more $$ & it was an easy decision. Why didnt Coll lose anyone to GWS?.In order to attract & retain players you need to provide stable & well resourced environments that will help in recovery & development.

Maybe this is changing with the new footy dept & added resources.......lets hope so!

Edited May 28, 2012 by dees64

[Adam The God 30,261]

Well run clubs do not lose star players most of the times, when you how look at the players at Coll,Ess even Rich who they have resigned with all this money from GWS & Suns it paints a bad picture of how bad our club has performed in the past.

Judd and Wanganeen say hello.

[Range Rover 1,935]

No RR, unfortunately it is you who is missing the point (as illustrated by Dangerfield, and most likely Sloane and Tippett) - it is always better to get good young players and provide them with a sound developmental environment which makes them want to stay at our club. That's often summarised by the phrase 'playing for the jumper'. I believe in a positive approach to players, which means we need positive coaching and support staff. That breeds an instinctive winning mentality where defeat is not an option. Imported, expensive, players will often disappoint when viewed from a total club perspective over a period of time. In short, good recruitment of young players will more likely lead to longer term success - remember Jim Cardwell's enticement: come and play for MFC just to be on the MCG.

Mitch Clark says hi.

[H_T 3,047]

Mitch Clark says hi.

Point well made.

For the record Dangerfield mentioned that his family ties that are strong were 'waiting with open arms', so there was a decision to be made. Fortunately for Adelaide, they're form and new direction under Sanderson and new found belief and happiness pulled stronger.

He made the decision in his own best interests and it was not one made lightly.

[Hardnut 327]

The full sentence was 'Imported, expensive, players will often disappoint when viewed from a total club perspective OVER A PERIOD OF TIME'.

Diamond Jim Tilbrook, Peter Moore and Kelvin Templeton also say 'Hi' (and thanks for the money).

From a more successful period for the club, the players from the '50s and '60s say 'Hi', as do Robbie Flower, Garry Lyon, Todd Viney ....

[praha 11,240]

Saying more and more about Melbourne as these stars continue to re-sign with their clubs without much back and forth media conjecture. Scully was gone from the start. Says a lot, really.