An extra year to 5 represents effectively a 25% increase

So a 4 year offer at 5-25% more than Collingwood offer would be offering more than Collingwood

So two choices [1] same money per year but over 5 years or [2] 5-25% more per year over 4 years. Either offer front-ended suiting both parties.

Option [2] is cheaper if < 25% increase, gets him for 4 years, reduces our risk, increases his offer and we could massively front-end it

Do we know the money/year that the filth are offering?

Really? Because in my time watching the Demons I can count the number of good forwards we have had on one hand (Lyon, Jakovich, Schwarz, Neitz, Clark).

You have forgotten Darren Bennet. Didn't he kick around 90 in 1990? If you have forgotton him it is likely because he played like Cloke.

I know it's history, but some of our best teams didn't have dominating big key forwards (Barry Bourke!), but others did (Bob Johnson). Doesn't that tell us something? Shouldn't we be moulding a team, rather than just following the latest moves of other clubs? Currently, the Hawkins/Cloke style of forward is in vogue. Maybe we should be the innovators and go for multiple goalkickers regardless of size or position - time to think outside the square? Just a lateral thought for a moment.

You have forgotten Darren Bennet. Didn't he kick around 90 in 1990? If you have forgotton him it is likely because he played like Cloke.

The best kick I have ever seen at the MFC.

Was not bad at the SD Chargers either.

Made the all star team a couple of times.

Nothing wrong with Darren Bennett. Ripping bloke to.

The best kick I have ever seen at the MFC.

Was not bad at the SD Chargers either.

Made the all star team a couple of times.

True and a great contested mark. Not as moblie as Cloke but very similar. So why is he forgotten?

I know it's history, but some of our best teams didn't have dominating big key forwards (Barry Bourke!), but others did (Bob Johnson). Doesn't that tell us something? Shouldn't we be moulding a team, rather than just following the latest moves of other clubs? Currently, the Hawkins/Cloke style of forward is in vogue. Maybe we should be the innovators and go for multiple goalkickers regardless of size or position - time to think outside the square? Just a lateral thought for a moment.

Through history very few clubs have won a flag by buying in an established big forward. Swans did it with Lockett but they built their entire forward line around him. I cant think of any that did it by buying two. We tried and it was a disaster with Moore and Templeton.

Through history very few clubs have won a flag by buying in an established big forward. Swans did it with Lockett but they built their entire forward line around him. I cant think of any that did it by buying two. We tried and it was a disaster with Moore and Templeton.

Cloke is a lot fitter than Templeton ever was. The Swans did not win the flag in '96.

Can I throw in a few more forwards - Green, Robbo, Farmer, Flower, Jackson R and M....

What was missing to make them even better than just our leading goalkickers for a year - the team around them.

Cloke is a lot fitter than Templeton ever was. The Swans did not win the flag in '96.

Thanks, Crossed lines with Barry Hall. My Error. But we know what happened to the dogs with Barry. Best we work a team around Clark.

Thanks, Crossed lines with Barry Hall. My Error. But we know what happened to the dogs with Barry. Best we work a team around Clark.

I agree. And that includes another tall forward. Jack Watts is not the CHF we hoped for. He may become that. But it is a few years away. We play moat games at the 'G. We can play 2 big forwards.

Given Neeld knows Cloke intimately, he'll know what he needs to thrive, be it midfielders, structure etc...

The reason why we should throw the kitchen sink at Cloke, are not just the fact that he is a consistently high performing, premiership winning, All Australian CHF.

Getting Cloke sends a clear message to experienced midfielders contemplating Melbourne as their next destination.

US getting Cloke shouts, "The MFC is serious about winning our next flag, and soon!".

Then there is the membership effect, how many extra members would "Cloke joins Melbourne" generate? I recall that Hird and Bomber to the Dons paid for itself in memberships in the first year.

So would an extra 3000 Melbourne fans join (or renew) on a $250 membership if we got Cloke leading into 2013?

If so, we have just added $750,000 to our income.

I know it's history, but some of our best teams didn't have dominating big key forwards (Barry Bourke!), but others did (Bob Johnson). Doesn't that tell us something? Shouldn't we be moulding a team, rather than just following the latest moves of other clubs? Currently, the Hawkins/Cloke style of forward is in vogue. Maybe we should be the innovators and go for multiple goalkickers regardless of size or position - time to think outside the square? Just a lateral thought for a moment.

It tells me that our "best teams" played nearly 50 years ago and it's probably time we moved on to 2012 2013 style football.

True and a great contested mark. Not as moblie as Cloke but very similar. So why is he forgotten?

Tended to miss from 30 m. Out directly in front.

It tells me that our "best teams" played nearly 50 years ago and it's probably time we moved on to 2012 2013 style football.

How many current teams have one big key forward, better still, how many have two big key forwards Nasher?

Should we always follow an apparent trend, or should we be innovative - what goes around comes around!

I agree. And that includes another tall forward. Jack Watts is not the CHF we hoped for. He may become that. But it is a few years away. We play moat games at the 'G. We can play 2 big forwards.

Every good forward lives and dies by the supply they receive. Clark has had to virtually mug the oposition to get decent ball.

All depends on team structure. The Swans are doing well without a marque forward. Adelaide have two fickle forwards. The hawks seem do do well wilth fill in's for Buddy. Pies have Cloke with their version of Seller. North have plucked a few out of no where. To many different solutions.

Sorry, hold on a tick. Did you just compare him to Sellar? Seriously? And have you not noticed that Buddy's fill in is Roughead? And I'd hardly say Drew Petrie has been plucked out of nowhere, even if you were to suggest that one of our non-Clark spuds is equal to him.

I don't say this very often, but if that's what you mean, you have absolutely zero credibility from here on in.

Tended to miss from 30 m. Out directly in front.

That is sooo Cloke.

I know it's history, but some of our best teams didn't have dominating big key forwards (Barry Bourke!), but others did (Bob Johnson). Doesn't that tell us something? Shouldn't we be moulding a team, rather than just following the latest moves of other clubs? Currently, the Hawkins/Cloke style of forward is in vogue. Maybe we should be the innovators and go for multiple goalkickers regardless of size or position - time to think outside the square? Just a lateral thought for a moment.

Yep, that worked when we drafted Bate, Dunn, Jurrah, Green, Petterd, Maric and probably 3 or 4 others I can't be bothered thinking about. Lots of pee wee goal kicking options, and look where that got us.

The reason that big marking, key position forwards are in 'vogue' is because they have been for years and years and years and (albeit with some exceptions) are essential to win premierships.

Through history very few clubs have won a flag by buying in an established big forward. Swans did it with Lockett but they built their entire forward line around him. I cant think of any that did it by buying two. We tried and it was a disaster with Moore and Templeton.

That's because most of them were smart enough to draft them when they were 18, or professional enough to develop them between 18-25, and didn't need to buy them in.

Sorry, hold on a tick. Did you just compare him to Sellar? Seriously? And have you not noticed that Buddy's fill in is Roughead? And I'd hardly say Drew Petrie has been plucked out of nowhere, even if you were to suggest that one of our non-Clark spuds is equal to him.

I don't say this very often, but if that's what you mean, you have absolutely zero credibility from here on in.

Petrie took a long time to develop. Close to being dumped a while ago.. Having a golden patch but no superstar yet. May get there. Roughhead would be a spud if playing for us. Block me if you like.

How many current teams have one big key forward, better still, how many have two big key forwards Nasher?

Should we always follow an apparent trend, or should we be innovative - what goes around comes around!

It's not an apparent trend

Salmon/Van De Haar

Dunstall/BreretonBuckenarra

Sumich/White

Kernaghan/Spalding

Ablett/Brownless/Stoneham

Carey/Mckernan/Longmire

Lloyd/Lucas

Brown/Lynch/Bradshaw

Tredrea/Thurstans

Hall/O'Loughlin/Davis

Riewoldt/Koschitzke

Mooney/Hawkins/Johnson

Franklin/Roughead/Williams

Cloke/Dawes/Brown

I've been following this club and the game in this country for over 30 years and every Premiership side or close contender has had at least 1 power forward and 1 or 2 others who played a rolein the forward line. Meth Coast of 05/06 had such a good midfield they were the only ones without a genuine power forward, Ash Hansen was the best of a bad bunch.

Floods, zones, presses will come and go but having two real power forwards will be a very good head start. Having said that We still need to be certain taking Cloke will not hamper our list going forward, but a front end loaded contract should sort that

Yep, that worked when we drafted Bate, Dunn, Jurrah, Green, Petterd, Maric and probably 3 or 4 others I can't be bothered thinking about. Lots of pee wee goal kicking options, and look where that got us.

The reason that big marking, key position forwards are in 'vogue' is because they have been for years and years and years and (albeit with some exceptions) are essential to win premierships.

That (the MFC example) is a very specific response (which includes only one successful forward) to a general discussion point I raised - lift your eyes and try to think beyond the present. To give two examples, several years ago recruiters went for athletes and tried to make them footballers - it didn't work. Recruiters also ignored short players for several years, now that has changed. All I am saying is that football is constantly changing - we would not have had Ron Barassi if Norm Smith wasn't open to innovation (or the 1964 flag).

Nothing in football is set in concrete.

He will Go To Sydney West, and the commentary will run thus: Scully sprays the ball and Cloke doesn't mark it.

It's not an apparent trend

Salmon/Van De Haar

Dunstall/BreretonBuckenarra

Sumich/White

Kernaghan/Spalding

Ablett/Brownless/Stoneham

Carey/Mckernan/Longmire

Lloyd/Lucas

Brown/Lynch/Bradshaw

Tredrea/Thurstans

Hall/O'Loughlin/Davis

Riewoldt/Koschitzke

Mooney/Hawkins/Johnson

Franklin/Roughead/Williams

Cloke/Dawes/Brown

I've been following this club and the game in this country for over 30 years and every Premiership side or close contender has had at least 1 power forward and 1 or 2 others who played a rolein the forward line. Meth Coast of 05/06 had such a good midfield they were the only ones without a genuine power forward, Ash Hansen was the best of a bad bunch.

Floods, zones, presses will come and go but having two real power forwards will be a very good head start. Having said that We still need to be certain taking Cloke will not hamper our list going forward, but a front end loaded contract should sort that

Yeah, you make a good point PSD, but my focus was on the modern day twin towers, whereas your examples are more the traditional CHF/FF of older times (and a midfielder who feeds them, eg Jarman). Nevertheless, I understand where you are coming from - perhaps mobility comes in here somewhere - it's a very good discussion point and thanks for joining in the spirit of it.