Or perhaps Judd and Ablett are "A grade above A grade"

that could be true

or like hotel ratings you could have 1 star thru 5 star (* ** *** **** *****)

that way everyone is a star (of some sort)

No, the point is you said I under estimated him.

I didn't. They don't have "star" mids, which was my premise..

...and the only 2 teams that do according to your criterea are both struggling.

Anyway, this is a round about way of saying that in my opinion Cloke would not be a good get for us. I think we are better to build from within through development and recruiting and maybe pickup a player along the way who is not demanding the $'s that Cloke is believed to be after. I know a lot think he is worth it but I don't, it's just an opinion neither right or wrong. We probably won't get a chance to test it anyway as I think he will stay a pie, now that one we can test.

I just wanted to thank Daisycutter and Tim again for inspiring today's post.

Cloke suitors insist on "reverse Phil Scully clause" to minimise exposure to father David - http://thedailymaggot.com/?p=2152

...and the only 2 teams that do according to your criterea are both struggling.

What's your point ? Is there some ridicoulously long bow that you're drawing ? Whatever it is it escapes me.

If you're suggesting that one star won't win a flag then derr. I grew up watching Robbie Flower, so I hardly need lessons in that regard.

What's your point ? Is there some ridicoulously long bow that you're drawing ? Whatever it is it escapes me.

If you're suggesting that one star won't win a flag then derr. I grew up watching Robbie Flower, so I hardly need lessons in that regard.

No mate no long bow the point is simple, I don't think Cloke is the right fit for us. To me we would be putting to much into one player.

It obviously didn't escape you at all.

...then derr

a new low

Whilst im happer to concede there will be others and possibly better choices become avail than Goddard..he is a valid option. Have so many forgot a fairly recent grand final. Hes only 27 with a good 4 years ahead. that makes for an ideal contract period. But......hes only an example.

im still guffawing..... Goddard not a fantastic mark ??? oh well

But there will be others

He takes the occasional one. have you noticed how he isn't played forward more No breakaway pace nor regular power marking. Just a good ordinary footballer like Montagna.

Is good in a well oiled machine, but not star material. Not a standout so to speak.

Fischer is they're best footballer with Hayes & Milne unfortunately. Gilbert is handy but not a key tall back.

He takes the occasional one. have you noticed how he isn't played forward more No breakaway pace nor regular power marking. Just a good ordinary footballer like Montagna.

Is good in a well oiled machine, but not star material. Not a standout so to speak.

Fischer is they're best footballer with Hayes & Milne unfortunately. Gilbert is handy but not a key tall back.

Am happy to look and take another. Was just pointing out there is a better direction to look when considering chucking truckloads ant game breakers than Cloke ( who will stay a Pie anyway imho )

The actual game of 'free agency" hasnt really started just yet, its warming up. Wait til about round 15-16 , when things are more sorted as to whom may or maynot participate in finals etc then we'll see the rumour mill go into overdrive, then meltdown. A lot of trade week will get played out in the media before the real one starts.

The clever managers ( and players by default ) will be keeping their powder dry for the mooment. Those vocificating currently are really about garnering a better deal internally than going elsewhere. This is not the main game just yet...its the support act.

a new low

Lower than only raising your head to post on here about club politics ?

Lower than only raising your head to post on here about club politics ?

yes

No mate no long bow the point is simple, I don't think Cloke is the right fit for us. To me we would be putting to much into one player.

It obviously didn't escape you at all.

I think we've established that you're against the move, but in reality I think we're discussing a moot point, because he won't leave anyway, but I asked you a couple of questions earlier that I don't think you've addressed.

Do you think we're a stronger possibility to win a flag with Clark and Cloke in our forward-lines over the next 5 years as we develop our midfield through the maturation of Trengove/Grimes/Gysberts and the additions of Viney/early draft picks ?

And what other players were you talking about when you said "we have other players that are far more valuable". You made this point when you were asserting that we'd be hamstrung in retaining players through the addition of Cloke.

I don't think any supporter would want to grab Cloke at the expense of retaining our other good young players. As I said, one studies opportunity versus cost.

a new low

Ben channeling Kylie Mole - what's not to like?

I think we've established that you're against the move, but in reality I think we're discussing a moot point, because he won't leave anyway, but I asked you a couple of questions earlier that I don't think you've addressed.

Do you think we're a stronger possibility to win a flag with Clark and Cloke in our forward-lines over the next 5 years as we develop our midfield through the maturation of Trengove/Grimes/Gysberts and the additions of Viney/early draft picks ?

And what other players were you talking about when you said "we have other players that are far more valuable". You made this point when you were asserting that we'd be hamstrung in retaining players through the addition of Cloke.

I don't think any supporter would want to grab Cloke at the expense of retaining our other good young players. As I said, one studies opportunity versus cost.

Yep, as I've said earlier I think he will stay so I guess we are talking about the principle here.

The developing midfield group you've mentioned plus players like Frawley, Watts, Garland, Blease, McDonald as a group are where the value is in my opinion and I wouldn't like us to tip the balance by bringing in a Cloke and risk loosing one or a couple of these guys or to cause some dissent in the group as a whole. I also think there may be opportunties to pick up a good young GC or GWS player that would be a better fit that we may miss or a Freo player if Cloke does move there.

You asked whether I thought we would be a stronger chance for a flag with a Cloke, Clark forward line and midfield maturation and I guess this is the argument. My concern is that it would bring disharmony to the group and be conterproductive. So I only think we would be a stronger chance if we could guarantee everything would be happy and all the players were on the same track, I just don't think it would be the case.

Yep, as I've said earlier I think he will stay so I guess we are talking about the principle here.

The developing midfield group you've mentioned plus players like Frawley, Watts, Garland, Blease, McDonald as a group are where the value is in my opinion and I wouldn't like us to tip the balance by bringing in a Cloke and risk loosing one or a couple of these guys or to cause some dissent in the group as a whole. I also think there may be opportunties to pick up a good young GC or GWS player that would be a better fit that we may miss or a Freo player if Cloke does move there.

You asked whether I thought we would be a stronger chance for a flag with a Cloke, Clark forward line and midfield maturation and I guess this is the argument. My concern is that it would bring disharmony to the group and be conterproductive. So I only think we would be a stronger chance if we could guarantee everything would be happy and all the players were on the same track, I just don't think it would be the case.

Fair enough.

Collingwood for Monday $1.08

Melbourne $8.00

I reckon they're about the same odds as Cloke staying as opposed to Cloke going.

Collingwood for Monday $1.08

Melbourne $8.00

I reckon they're about the same odds as Cloke staying as opposed to Cloke going.

Don't know about that. Cloke Snr may annoy the bejeezeuz out of everyone but you've got to have some admiration for him in sticking to his guns and trying to get the best deal he can for his son.

He's a proud man with a big ego and I don't think he'll back down from the 5-year demand in which case those odds (of him staying) will drift considerably.

He might be a proud man RR but the club hes banging heads with is a 100 times prouder !

Im going with Maurie's odds i think

Would Richmond have room for a 5yr contract for Cloke ?

(I'm not hangon007)

He might be a proud man RR but the club hes banging heads with is a 100 times prouder !

Im going with Maurie's odds i think

I just think their (the Cloke's) thinking is ... "Travis has won a flag, won a Coleman, won a Copeland .... all wonderful stuff but reality is he's got 5 years left in the Big Time. Sorry guys, it's payday."

Can't see the big man changing his stance myself.

Edited June 8, 201213 yr by Range Rover

I imagine we'd be getting Cloke as much for his attitude and work ethic as for his ability to take a contested mark. I reckon Neeld's taken a lot from Mick Malthouse's school of thought of players with ambition over players with talent.

This is Malthouse talking about Cloke in an interview with 3AW:

"He wanted that football, he would demand that football, he would run in front of packs and try to mark the football. He was a big guy, he dominated junior football … but we needed to teach him to jump for the football, because he didn’t need to. But the work ethic of Clokey … is unbelievable. He would get on the track and he would be last off. You would have to rope him and drag him off and he wanted to be the best. Give me a player with ambition – he has got a fierceness for the football. Ambition is the greatest thing of all time – if you lack ambition, you take shortcuts."

Great discussion and I have liked both sides during the argument

Still not sure, like to develop our own, like to buy instant impact, like to shove it up Clwood

BUT

Remember the Templeton Moore Tillbrook attempts which didnt win the Flag

This post/ Quote got to me as it speaks of the desire (ambition) to win. This has been a criticism of Watts.(unfounded IMO) but will Cloke bring it to the fore at the club or will having achieved the flag at Cwood see this as an oportunity to wind down.

So hard from a distance and just hope Neeld and coaches know the player, team, what we need and the administrators know how to load the contract to attract and retain and overall we as supporters see the performance results and get to enjoy the flag

Still not sure and would not want my opinion to be taken as inspiring any action but really do appreciate the thought and comments all demonlanders make. I think it helps us all make an informed decision

I am happy to support the club as I always have whatever they decide with their knowledge

Go Dees

I just think their (the Cloke's) thinking is ... "Travis has won a flag, won a Coleman, won a Copeland .... all wonderful stuff but reality is he's got 5 years left in the Big Time. Sorry guys, it's payday."

Can't see the big man changing his stance myself.

I still think around 3.3 over 4 will be the deal. 5 years for mine is posturing to up the ante a bit. The reality is if he wants to back himself why not sign for 4 with both parties prepared to look at renogotiation say at around 3 , if warranted.

Even better , if Travis is as good as dear old dad wants all tohave us believe then do a 2 year deal only... and look for a 3 year deal on the open market after.

I still reckon 4 years is sufficient. Good for Dave to try...and by all accounts hes VERY trying !!

Travis comes with baggage named D. Cloke.

I still think around 3.3 over 4 will be the deal. 5 years for mine is posturing to up the ante a bit. The reality is if he wants to back himself why not sign for 4 with both parties prepared to look at renogotiation say at around 3 , if warranted.

Even better , if Travis is as good as dear old dad wants all tohave us believe then do a 2 year deal only... and look for a 3 year deal on the open market after.

I still reckon 4 years is sufficient. Good for Dave to try...and by all accounts hes VERY trying !!

Lol good one. I think 4 years is sufficient, too. But it "appears" and I say that only taking my best guess, that the current market would pay him five.

Travis comes with baggage named D. Cloke.

Thankfully, a 5 year deal would see out the days of Cloke Inc. so Daddles would be little more than nuisance value.

Edited June 8, 201213 yr by Range Rover

Would Richmond have room for a 5yr contract for Cloke ?

(I'm not hangon007)

I was wondering the same thing about the beautiful Irony of a Cloke returned to his roots....

It has a nice sound of a 'Just' laughter, echoing around the chasms of the MCG,,, the Tigerland Way.

A good/great key forward or in fact 2 of them can improve a midfield .

Suddenly a midfield group have 2 terrific targets . The midfield can be more decisive in their actions , for various reasons . The good forward knows where to lead , can play in front all the time etc etc and in general provides a better target . Good key forwards have the effect of straightening a team up . It's hard to measure but it's a reality .

And it can extend , and often does , to the half back line . As an example , Collingwoods half back line of Davis , O'Brien and Shaw grabbing the ball , running through the lines and launching it towards their twin towers (either down the middle or when they went wide)

Good key forwards add confidence to a team . Cloke would be of enormous benefit to our team .