Hey I am just curious to what every one thinks of letting J Viney go to GWS If in fact they nominate him at pick 1 or 2.

I am really sick of clubs trying to walk all over us example K Sheedy.

This scenario would stick it right up GWS and the AFL.

Just say Todd tells Jack to play at GWS for 2013 and only sign a 1 year contract then he can return to Melbourne in 2014 and in fact tell GWS all year long he is happy at the club maybe give them a bit of Dejavu (Scully) see how they like it.

It's a long shot I know but just posing the question.

PS My first post look foward to chatting to all you Demon fans.

Edited July 11, 201213 yr by ashdemons22

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

AND

NO!!!!!!!!!!!!

NO

pretty sure draftees have to sign a 2 year contract as standard.

Edited July 11, 201213 yr by demon-4-life

Some other HEADline suggestions...

"Melb to let Neeld coach Fremantle this week"

"Melb signs 10 year deal with Darrell Lea"

"Melb to bury Norm Smith curse under MCG drop-in wicket"

"Melb to bring back the drop-kick to break the lines"

Pretty ordinary Thread title...you scared the Shite out of me...!!

Not a good idea...We take Viney wherever that number is...draft numbers are not critical..We have already proved that.

Edited July 11, 201213 yr by why you little

Welcome! And haven't you entered with a bang!

Plain and simply no.

No. Apart from the minimum two year contract it would show the club as lacking integrity and honour. Enough looking for the eternal quick fix.

probs should change the title of this thread..

Bloody hell by the title of the thread I thought he was gone. I have said it here before Jack Viney and all other players are not just draft pick numbers they are Human. Viney doesn't love the club that much that he is willing to jeopardise his career for our interests. You let a kid go and to another club and generally they find they love the place even if it is interstate (Dangerfield). If this strategy was plausible we could tell Sylvia,Howe,T.Mcdonald,Blease and any other player with some currency at our club to take a trade, we get the picks ask them to play like crap and then we trade them back for bugger all.

theres only about 60 pages elsewhere on this subject. Doesnt need a new thread

Welcome but 'searching " and reading may become your friends.

Nay, non, nie, yox, he, ikke, ei, nicht, ni, nu and NO

But apart from that welcome to the Madhouse

haha you guys a brutal, in hindsight was not the smartest thread.

Just thinking of ways to get Sheedy and GWS back

And apart from all the above, how could we be sure of getting him to come back to Melbourne, even if he (and we) still wanted to, after 2 years?

haha you guys a brutal, in hindsight was not the smartest thread.

Just thinking of ways to get Sheedy and GWS back

Thats easy....[censored] the guts out of them until they fold!!! Simple.

haha you guys a brutal, in hindsight was not the smartest thread.

Just thinking of ways to get Sheedy and GWS back

I'd imagine viney running for the ball collecting the ball then stiff arming scully's ribs into the Southern stand, then kicking his 10th goal in the first quarter would [censored] sheedy off enough.

If he's not rated in the top five - yes.

A Nathan Jones and Jack Viney midfield next year seems like a pretty thought midfield to me.

Just need some class to go with it...

I have been told, directly, that we will take players in the order we rate them. If Jack is rated 1 or 2 (likelihood?), then we would match the bid. If not, we will not. Simple.

No chance. We will take the option to get a gun midfielder while we can.

Certainty is a good thing.

If someone is insane enough to risk their 1 or 2 pick on him then I say let them have him. He isn't going to be rated that highly given that he's lost half a season and missed a fair chunk of the carnival (and AA selection). There will be many higher rated players in the draft.

It will hurt us in the short term in that we have already indicated that we will take him and could be considered to be lacking in integrity, but it will hurt the club who bid on him more as they will be giving up a very highly rated pick. In the long run I can only see it helping us. If we burn a club badly the first time, will anyone be game to play silly buggers with us again? It would be sending a clear message to the rest of the competition that we will burn you if you try to screw with us.

The above being the case, I feel that I should say also that I love JV and really hope to see him in the red and blue next year. I just think it is more important to the club to stand their ground and not be caught bluffing or waste our early picks.

If someone is insane enough to risk their 1 or 2 pick on him then I say let them have him. He isn't going to be rated that highly given that he's lost half a season and missed a fair chunk of the carnival (and AA selection). There will be many higher rated players in the draft.

It will hurt us in the short term in that we have already indicated that we will take him and could be considered to be lacking in integrity, but it will hurt the club who bid on him more as they will be giving up a very highly rated pick. In the long run I can only see it helping us. If we burn a club badly the first time, will anyone be game to play silly buggers with us again? It would be sending a clear message to the rest of the competition that we will burn you if you try to screw with us.

The above being the case, I feel that I should say also that I love JV and really hope to see him in the red and blue next year. I just think it is more important to the club to stand their ground and not be caught bluffing or waste our early picks.

I agree with you RM, & we'll fight to trade him back in again next year, with a pick & a Morton or a Sylvia, or other enticement.

If they take him with 1 or 2,,, then we have picks in the range of, 3 & 4 + 13ish, & 26ish,, all free to use on players we need.

IF one of the teams were to take Jack, then either Grundy or Whitfield slips thru.

Port would love Grundy or Toumpas I'm sure...

We are in a Strong Position.

If someone is insane enough to risk their 1 or 2 pick on him then I say let them have him. He isn't going to be rated that highly given that he's lost half a season and missed a fair chunk of the carnival (and AA selection). There will be many higher rated players in the draft.

It will hurt us in the short term in that we have already indicated that we will take him and could be considered to be lacking in integrity, but it will hurt the club who bid on him more as they will be giving up a very highly rated pick. In the long run I can only see it helping us. If we burn a club badly the first time, will anyone be game to play silly buggers with us again? It would be sending a clear message to the rest of the competition that we will burn you if you try to screw with us.

The above being the case, I feel that I should say also that I love JV and really hope to see him in the red and blue next year. I just think it is more important to the club to stand their ground and not be caught bluffing or waste our early picks.

The above

Stick me in a freezer and thaw me out round 1 2013 ffs