I think labelling players A B and C graders is too simplistic when looking to bring in footballers. The clubs who recycle players well tend to concentrate on getting players who are surplus at other clubs, not necessarily because they are rubbish, but because they are obstructed by who is ahead of them in thier position.

You need to ask yourself, how good the player is, how good do you think he will get and what role will he fill at your club.

A speedy mid with skills is definitely a need for the club, it's up to the club to figure out the rest.

Considering most of our players would be classed D grade, i think a B or C grade player would be an upgrade...

So, Sharrod coming over now that Cloke is signed?

We know one thing, he is midfielder that can spread, hit a target and get his own footy.

That is more then we can say for most of our midfield.

We need to go out and get him.

I also believe we are in the box seat:

- We can double his salary

- Offer him the top dog position in our midfield

- Keep him living in Melbourne with Buddy

- Neeld has already coached him

- He only has to walk in a different door next year.

We need some WINNERS around the club. First it was Clark, Wellingham can be next.

Wellingham is a capable player but my gripe all along has been what we are prepared to offer him.

If he moves on I want it to be based largely (but not entirely) on opportunity.

Big dollar deals should be restricted to a marquee figure. Clark was the AA 200cm power forward - tick. Dom Tyson is a top three draftee with the potential to become a bona fide A-grade midfielder - tick. Put Wellingham alongside these two and it smacks of desperation - wallpaper over the cracks stuff.

So, Sharrod coming over now that Cloke is signed?

Not necessarily. If he's talking to WA clubs and Pies are looking elsewhere ie Lynch/Rosa we'll have to bring out the ol' PowerPoint presentation and entourage. And make the Pies drool over our offer. Easier said than done.

Wellingham is a capable player but my gripe all along has been what we are prepared to offer him.

If he moves on I want it to be based largely (but not entirely) on opportunity.

Big dollar deals should be restricted to a marquee figure. Clark was the AA 200cm power forward - tick. Dom Tyson is a top three draftee with the potential to become a bona fide A-grade midfielder - tick. Put Wellingham alongside these two and it smacks of desperation - wallpaper over the cracks stuff.

Have you seen our club? It's a disgrace, a mess, and a failure at the moment. The ONLY way we can get players better than what we have is to offer money, we have NOTHING else to bargain with.

We know one thing, he is midfielder that can spread, hit a target and get his own footy.

That is more then we can say for most of our midfield.

We need to go out and get him.

I also believe we are in the box seat:

- We can double his salary

- Offer him the top dog position in our midfield

- Keep him living in Melbourne with Buddy

- Neeld has already coached him

- He only has to walk in a different door next year.

We need some WINNERS around the club. First it was Clark, Wellingham can be next.

Let's not over pay though.

Really can't see Wellingham having the same impact as Clark.

Would be happy with excess player swap. Let's just keep the "war chest" (haha) for bigger and better things.

I want the "war chest" (lol) opened when GWS players come out of contract. Hello Cameron!

I'm really torn about it all, we just desperately need to get better, we can't keep aiming for the future at the expense of the now, but we just need better players. Hogan is a perfect example of this, he'll be a gun, and I think there's a high chance of us taking him, but I hate the idea that we have to wait a year before he can even play.

Like waiting a year for a kid to come on is anything new.

Care more about what he is doing in his 3rd to his 10th year than his first.

The numbers were meaningless to Nasher's point.

We have the capacity, and until we are a better prospect to come to, the need - to overpay for decent talent.

Doesn't mean we have to - we can go through the draft and Delisted FA and Rookies and the PSD and low end FAs but if you want decent talent we will have to overpay and our TPP situation is weighted to do that. We have frontended contracts to pay someone this season and if we cannot lure some talent this year we will front end to meet the 95% threshold and do it again next year. Good teams offer the right fringe players more money then they are worth in the educated knowledge they will be worthy of that contract.

Sydney did that with Mumford.

We did it with Clark.

Maybe there is your answer BH - to 'when do we start making the decisions good teams make?'

Maybe that was Clark.

No, they're far from meaningless.

I wish people had a better grasp of the English language. Clearly we're going to have to overpay players to be an attractive option. But "paying ridiculous coin to B graders isn't a club making good decisions." Can you guess the crucial word in the last sentence ?

It's about making smart decisions regularly. There's another crucial word in the last sentence. And yes, Clark was a good get and I was in favour at the time and argued accordingly. I saw real A grade talent with Clark. Sydney saw A grade talent with Mumford, who was an example I had already used.

BH Mumford probably had less exposed form at the time he was pried away than Wellingham has, but of course overpaying is dumb.

I would expect that in order to get the deal done we might pay 25-30% more that his current club. A club that is more successful, has better prospects and has greater exposure increasing the ability to earn outside of footy.

Like waiting a year for a kid to come on is anything new.

Care more about what he is doing in his 3rd to his 10th year than his first.

I care more about what MFC will be doing.

I care more about what MFC will be doing.

I don't think you are following what I am saying.

Have you seen our club? It's a disgrace, a mess, and a failure at the moment. The ONLY way we can get players better than what we have is to offer money, we have NOTHING else to bargain with.

I know that and I have never argued against it. I just don't think throwing big dollars around for a player masquerading as an A-grader is smart practice.

No, they're far from meaningless.

I wish people had a better grasp of the English language. Clearly we're going to have to overpay players to be an attractive option. But "paying ridiculous coin to B graders isn't a club making good decisions." Can you guess the crucial word in the last sentence ?

It's about making smart decisions regularly. There's another crucial word in the last sentence. And yes, Clark was a good get and I was in favour at the time and argued accordingly. I saw real A grade talent with Clark. Sydney saw A grade talent with Mumford, who was an example I had already used.

Yes, I realise you said Mumford. That is why I mentioned him.

And yes, we all know that ridiculous money shouldn't be given to B-graders.

By definition, if it is ridiculous we won't want to give it.

Nasher's point is you will have to overpay and we have the capacity in the short term. You are the one that made it into a recklessness du jour by reading too much into the numbers and not what was written.

I wish people took better notice of the English language.

I know that and I have never argued against it. I just don't think throwing big dollars around for a player masquerading as an A-grader is smart practice.

It's not. But it's the only way we can improve right now because we are such an unattractive club. Once we improve by gaining these kind of "B grade" players we will become a more attractive proposition to outside players and we'll have more power at the bargaining table, but at the moment we have none.

I don't think you are following what I am saying.

What are you saying then?

I know that and I have never argued against it. I just don't think throwing big dollars around for a player masquerading as an A-grader is smart practice.

100% agree you are much better to target B & C and turn them into A's (but that takes dollars elsewhere but we have set the wheels in motion there) - much better way to go.

What are you saying then?

You don't draft kids for what they will give you in their first year.

You don't draft kids for what they will give you in their first year.

Der mate.... Sheesh.... And you think I missed the point...

I'm talking about MFC's need to improve not the first year of a kid.

Wellingham is a capable player but my gripe all along has been what we are prepared to offer him.

If he moves on I want it to be based largely (but not entirely) on opportunity.

Big dollar deals should be restricted to a marquee figure. Clark was the AA 200cm power forward - tick. Dom Tyson is a top three draftee with the potential to become a bona fide A-grade midfielder - tick. Put Wellingham alongside these two and it smacks of desperation - wallpaper over the cracks stuff.

perfectly said.

you might also want to add that he is a panzie.

We know one thing, he is midfielder that can spread, hit a target and get his own footy.

That is more then we can say for most of our midfield.

We need to go out and get him.

I also believe we are in the box seat:

- We can double his salary

- Offer him the top dog position in our midfield

- Keep him living in Melbourne with Buddy

- Neeld has already coached him

- He only has to walk in a different door next year.

We need some WINNERS around the club. First it was Clark, Wellingham can be next.

Not so sure about the hitting a target bit, he aint any better at this than a lot of our players, just doesn't stand out as much in a good side.

He runs hard, spreads, provides options and does the team thing.

But please lets not cloud our judgement on him because he is surrounded by class midfielders

Der mate.... Sheesh.... And you think I missed the point...

I'm talking about MFC's need to improve not the first year of a kid.

Oh.

Your point is a really bad point.

If Hogan at 23+ years old is better than Pick 4 at 23+ years old then what doe the MFC care about that first year?

That's a rhetorical question.

I think everything is up for grabs for the RIGHT reimbursement. There doesn't seem to be anyone looking for a trade that would be with any of our first round picks, but you never know what will come up. Just think we need to go hard for some 24-28 year olds, particularly mids, should the deal be right.

I'm really torn about it all, we just desperately need to get better, we can't keep aiming for the future at the expense of the now, but we just need better players. Hogan is a perfect example of this, he'll be a gun, and I think there's a high chance of us taking him, but I hate the idea that we have to wait a year before he can even play.

Alright I'll qualify what I mean. I'd trade pick 3 or 4 for a Gaff.

Theres No way I'd giveup pick 3 or 4 for Wellingham or Caddy types.

The whole idea is trying to pick a Gaff or a Cotchin/Martin with these.

Anything outside top P15 would be OK by me. If we trade in a pick or 2, maybe we could ontrade for some of these 'Mature B/C graders'.

perfectly said.

you might also want to add that he is a panzie.

And then there's this:

And the U.S. made Assange an enemy of state over this hobo-chic douchebaggery ...