Keep: Blease, Rivers,Gysberts, Jurrah (re-rookie if possible) and maybe Beamer

All others are well and truly on the chopping blocks.

By the way Bail was brought straight in to the side when he finally passed the concussion test, I'd say Neeld is a fan. I'm surprised he's rushing to sign Spencer, but as I've said before he's aggressive and has a dip; perhaps in the current environment that's enough - Bail probably falls under that banner too.

No mention of Fitzpatrick either.

Old55 is pretty certain he is contracted for another year, he says good source. I say probably true.

Let's go shopping...

Everyone seems to be posting on the assumption that the media article is correct

This is amusing because normally 'landers poo-hah media articles on the mfc as being speculative and mischievous

Until I see some confirmation from the club i'll be taking this article with a grain of salt

Confirmation will come in the silence surrounding the re-signing of a quarter of the list.

Alternatively, if any of those in that 11 are signed up before October you will have your answer.

This was a necessary step to ensure we have flexibility with the list should a few experienced players wish to come to the club. If we get 4/5 kids, 2 upgrades and 3/4 experienced FAs and a trade for an experienced player, that would be a good summer.

And with regard to Rivers - if I were him I would wait and see what is out there so both parties might be 'wating and seeing' but I would hope we are still keeping him in our plans - he and Jamar go onto the VL next year.

It's a dangerous strategy but at the same time, it's bold and it's brave. Franchise clubs aside, we're the worst performed club despite our early draft picks in recent years. Something has to be done and you have to admire the football club for taking what has to be regarded as a courageous step.

It is brave, but you are right about the dangerous part - if we cannot convince experienced players to come we will be loading up with state league players or kids in the draft to fill out the list.

Confirmation will come in the silence surrounding the re-signing of a quarter of the list.

Alternatively, if any of those in that 11 are signed up before October you will have your answer.

This was a necessary step to ensure we have flexibility with the list should a few experienced players wish to come to the club. If we get 4/5 kids, 2 upgrades and 3/4 experienced FAs and a trade for an experienced player, that would be a good summer.

I don't doubt we will go to the trade period with a lot of uncontracted players

What i am taking with a grain of salt (at this stage) is whether the list of players in the age article is the correct list

The same could be said about Jetta, injured all pre-season, gets injured first game back, long rehab a couple of games at Casey back in the team and again poor game against North gets 1 week then straight back. I love Jetta's attack on the footy and the man hope he gets another 2 years.

The rest we have to wait and see, the club would be be considering what they would get if Moloney went as a free agent, if we could get end of first round pick for Moloney you would almost take that. Anything less we would be better off with Moloney on our list.

This is actually an interesting point - the AFL hasn't come out and stated what compensation clubs will receive yet for FA's that leave, they have however stated what they won't get and they won't be getting the same compo teams got for players being taken by GWS/GC.

There was a discussion on BigFooty the other day re: Cloke and it was indicated (via link to an article quoting an AFL rep) that the compo would be something like a pick directly after the clubs first round pick. I don't tknow if this has any asteriks to it (eg how much the contract is worth, how many years they get etc) but considering all FA's will be in the same boat being long term servants of the club you would assume the formula may be similar for each of them. This being the case would anyone turn their nose up at pick 5 for Moloney (the pick after our first round pick?) This is highly speculative at the moment but considering the AFL hasn't indicated what the compo will be it is worth keeping in mind when thinking about whether we should keep guys like Moloney/Rivers on. Even if we got a mid or after first round pick it could actually be quite beneficial to us, not only getting an early pick but freeing up half a million or so in cap space (added to half a mil for Green as well and there is your million a year for Cloke.)

If we are following the moneyball plan I dont see how you would get rid of MacDonald cheap and reliable.

Who says we are following the "moneyball plan"?? God I am sick of this reference. Most people have no idea what it means and the club has never articulated that is what they are doing.

We don't have a shortage of money ATM which is why the Oakland A's couldn't compete with the Yankees. if you believe what you read we are chasing Cloke on big bucks, we are raising funds to have ago at some free agents and we got Clark on big bickies last year. We have plenty of room in our salary cap. That is the opposite of the Moneyball strategy.

Neeld simply wants to recruit players that can play to his game plan. Its that simple. He has demonstrated by his actions that he doesn't like Bate, Morton or Gys but likes players like Jetta, Magner and Bail.

That's the first part. the next part is getting players who can run and spread, deliver the footy and not turn it over.

BTW I havent seen the stats from last week but isn't it amazing how we can hit targets against teams like GC when there is no pressure?? Yet when we are pressured we are hopeless and have massive amounts of turnovers.....

I would've thought that we'd be keen to keep Rivers. Maybe it's him who has put negotiations on hold? I'd be very p*ssed off if Neeld didn't think he deserved another contract.

I'd give Sellar another year, and wait to see how Bartram's operation goes. I'm not surprised Davis isn't in discussions... two years on the list and he has barely made an impression. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see him go. It'll be interesting to see what Geelong offer up for the Gys. Definitely worth listening to them.

Jurrah's future obviously depends on his court case. Does anyone know when a verdict is expected to be reached? Or would we have to decide whether or not to re-sign him before the case is over?

I think we'll keep one of Macdonald and Dunn...toss a coin to see which one it is.

Bennell, Moloney, Petterd, and Bate can go.

I think with TMac going well ahead of schedule, & Watts going to the backline, is whats making it difficult for Rivers.

Our Youngs are playing well enough to warrant the positions in the backline for they're further development.

So I can see Riv maybe seeking other opportunities elsewhere.

I'd keep Sellar for another Yr to see what he can deliver. I think he's been handy.

Jurrah I'd look to package up with something as a potential offer to GWS or Port... Re the deals for GWS U-17 Mini draft or for the Boak dealings.

Moloney sounds as good as dusted. Looks like he needs to find a new cause to grab hold of.

Of the Others, I'd like to keep Petterd. IMO he'll start to fire when the club starts to find it's MOJO.

This List management Idea doesn't inspire all types to be at they're best. Hes a talented Competitor. IMO his motivators are different to most.

Edited August 10, 201213 yr by dee-luded

Worried a bit when I read the title.

Didn't care when I read who the players are.

Hmm, seems like any FA's we may sign would be offset by any FA's we lose (so if we sign Cloke and lose Moloney we would probably get nothing.)

Here is the article;

The AFL has not yet released the formula that determines what clubs receive for the loss of a free agent.

But sources yesterday said they had been told the maximum compensation for the loss of a free agent was one draft pick.

AFL spokesman Patrick Keane said yesterday clubs had been warned free agency compensation would be "nothing like" what clubs received for the loss of a player to the expansion clubs.

Importantly, Keane said if Collingwood received a free agent in the same period, the compensation for Cloke would be based on the "net" difference between the two players.

So if Cloke departed and St Kilda's Brendon Goddard arrived at the Pies, Collingwood conceivably would receive nothing.

The pick that clubs receive for the loss of a free agent would likely follow that team's pick in the national draft.

The formula for the round in which the compensation pick would be is based on a unreleased AFL formula.

The AFL explained in a statement in March what clubs would receive for the loss of a free agent.

"His original club will receive a compensation pick for the loss of the player, on an AFL-determined formula to apply where clubs lose more free agents than they gain in any single transfer period," the statement said

The rush to sign Spencer would seem to indicate we have no interest in drafting Grundy.

It 'aint Necessarily So.

We could still look at him. I think it depends on what happens thru the trade period.

The same could be said about Jetta, injured all pre-season, gets injured first game back, long rehab a couple of games at Casey back in the team and again poor game against North gets 1 week then straight back. I love Jetta's attack on the footy and the man hope he gets another 2 years.

The rest we have to wait and see, the club would be be considering what they would get if Moloney went as a free agent, if we could get end of first round pick for Moloney you would almost take that. Anything less we would be better off with Moloney on our list.

I find it a little concerning that this information is out in the public domain, every interview or article that has quotes from a Melbourne Official they clearly state "we will not comment on player contract negotiations" you hope that this is player agent driven and the information has come from there and not from the club.

They're Pre listing they're upcoming Sale.

Free agency will change things a Lot.

I think the problem for rivers is that I don't think we can play him, Frawley, Garland and T Mac all at the same time, it's too top heavy and all of those guys are too good to be in the VFL. Plus we have Sellar as a back up who is more flexible and can pinch hit in the ruck and much cheaper.

It's a pitty because he is one of my favs but I think there is some sound logic behind it. Our back line really needs a rebounder rather than another tall. What if we lost Rivers but gained Goddard?

I recall from when Needld was at the Pies they used to single Rivers out to try and get a one on one as they thought he could be beaten one on one. He clearly plays his best reading the play and zoning off. The concern might be in finals where it can be more a one on one style of game.

Having said all that I really think he was having an outstanding year down back and has been brave doing the team thing up forward. Interesting times.

Also perhaps his move forward has been as much about plugin a gap as it had been seeing how the back line functions without him?

But being a quality long serving footballer makes you worth signing.

Rivers is above the bar.

We'll have to agree to disagree there.

You are aware that we've only won 30 odd out of past 120 games? Not laying the finger of blame solely on Rivers but fact is we've got a slew of players who are average footballers at best.

We need faster, stronger, more athletic footballers than Jared Rivers.

Admittedly, the more I've watched us the more I've thought we have way too many defenders.

Chip, Judy, Riv, TMc, JMac, Sellar, Davis, Dunn now (he's only played forward once), Watts now...all can fit a particular mould, and many of them don't fit outside of it. This is why we've seen Judy and Riv forward in a way - remember Garland was forward before Clark went down.

We've got the ability to shed probably two of those and still be okay. I doubt we're going to shed twelve players this off-season, but to see seven or eight wouldnt surprise.

Poor Lynden

It was supposed to write- "Dunne" like the OP..

Topic of discussion- Mooney reckons we should trade Sylvia. It has some merit, although on initial thoughts I'm against it.

Discuss.

Topic of discussion- Mooney reckons we should trade Sylvia. It has some merit, although on initial thoughts I'm against it.

Discuss.

I'm Open to it... I don't like it, but I'll live with it.

He's talented but frustrating.

The Most Important thing i think is to FIX the Culture around our Ailing club.

Neeld is clearly wanting to get his own list together and it looks like there are no sacred cows. Rivers, Moloney, Gys. Wow. He is not going to get skewered with someone else's list.

I hope it doesn't backfire. We could find ourselves with no senior players!!

INteresting from a coaching perspective - do you coach the cattle you have (which clearly he hasn't done this year) or do you try to recruit players that will play the way you want them to play.

Dangerous gamble with our future from a coach that is unproven.

Too dangerous for my liking.

If it works, well done.

If it dosnt work, we are fcuked and no-player would want to join a disposable club culture.

I am afraid Neelds may be overestimating his abilities and we may be the worse for it.

Surely we can do a Sydney, use the players we have, get the most out of them and top up with good recruiting.

Rebuilding again after a 4 year rebuild is disturbing.

Couldn't we have just implement a methodogical defensive structure while embracing Baileys offensive flair and increasing our fitness base, so that we are at least winning games of footy.

But, I am sure their is a good 'reason'.

I am afraid Neelds may be overestimating his abilities and we may be the worse for it.

This is the problem with you in a nutshell. Fear.

Dangerous gamble with our future from a coach that is unproven.

Too dangerous for my liking.

If it works, well done.

If it dosnt work, we are fcuked and no-player would want to join a disposable club culture.

I am afraid Neelds may be overestimating his abilities and we may be the worse for it.

Surely we can do a Sydney, use the players we have, get the most out of them and top up with good recruiting.

Rebuilding again after a 4 year rebuild is disturbing.

Couldn't we have just implement a methodogical defensive structure while embracing Baileys offensive flair and increasing our fitness base, so that we are at least winning games of footy.

But, I am sure their is a good 'reason'.

Yes, 'doing' a Sydney is as simple as that.

And Neeld is attempting to get senior players from other clubs - just what the Swans do.

And welcome to FA - it is supposed to grease the wheels of player movement so that players don't rot at one club - that's what is happening.

I think this is a pretty clear indicator we're going to go quite hard in free agency.