Getting Smashed on Trade Radio

[Soidee 1,496]

Let's face the truth - The MFC have been shyte and lost all credibility. Our image is shyte. Its now the clubs responsibility to change that. Personally I hate the negativity from the media about our club.

[ILLDieADemon 804]

Had we done nothing this month, they would have said we were crap because we did so bad last season that we needed to change something in our list.

We can't win with these guys.

Our list is [censored].

We need change.

Morton - too soft

Martin - 26 and still has done nothing

Gysberts - the only player I'm really not ok with losing but I don't know what he's like on the track

Cook - too thin, too many injuries

Only time will tell, this time next season these guys could be saying last year's trade month was a stroke of genius by Neeld.

If it doesn't pay off, boy are we going to hear about it.

[old dee 22,854]

Let's face the truth- The MFC have been shyte and lost all credibility. Our image is shyte. Its now the clubs responsibility to change that. Personally I hate the negativity from the media about our club.

Only one thing will change that Soidee

Winning games.

Starting winning in 2013 and beyond and watch how quick they change.

Until then ignore them as best you can.

[ILLDieADemon 804]

Let's face the truth- The MFC have been shyte and lost all credibility. Our image is shyte. Its now the clubs responsibility to change that. Personally I hate the negativity from the media about our club.

Me too mate, I don't understand why we are always smashed by the media?

The Bulldogs have done nothing no one smashes them.

[saka888 54]

todays trades!!!!!! HOW? WHY? WHAT are you thinking... im so dissapointed...

[Scipio 5,868]

Let's face the truth- The MFC have been shyte and lost all credibility. Our image is shyte. Its now the clubs responsibility to change that. Personally I hate the negativity from the media about our club.

Of course, we have no credibility and we are going to cop it until these guys get out there and show the media that we are going the right way. That's what you get for being the laughing stock of the league for so long.

Only one thing will change that Soidee

Winning games.

Starting winning in 2013 and beyond and watch how quick they change.

Until then ignore them as best you can.

Exactly it old dee!

[whatwhat say what 18,977]

to make this an acceptable trade period we need to get Jacobs in the PSD.

yep, would be very happy with that as an end-result. it'd make the trade period go from a 'c' to a 'b' in my view.

we gave away gys and morton for far, far too little in my view.

[Mono 454]

I agree with everything you have said. Undone much of our good work over the past 24 hours with nothing much left from a drafting perspective. We have paid overs for every trade, and why we let Rivers walk is mystifying - better than Pederson will ever be. Rapt with Viney and Hogan (and hopeffuly they don't stuff up pick 4 ) - the rest reak of short term decisions for mine

We offered Rivers a 2 yr contract, same as cats, and probably for more $s, given the compensation we received for him.

Rivers was a free agent; we could not stop him leaving if that was his choice.

Good grief.

[reynolds46 808]

Damo: "Well, then ok...but, but Dawes and Rodan.."

Jerk..

the fact that we were pushing hard for Dawes 12 months ago would indicate that he was on the radar.

[H_T 2,941]

Me too mate, I don't understand why we are always smashed by the media?

The Bulldogs have done nothing no one smashes them.

Because they sit on their hands with 5, 6, 22 ... they're not questioned. When you're inactive no one notices you. Much like Carlton this trade period.

[H_T 2,941]

the fact that we were pushing hard for Dawes 12 months ago would indicate that he was on the radar.

Indeed. That was unexpected I suppose. Until the Pies picked up Lynch. But Barrett wouldn't see that...For him to have the audacity to say about Melbourne..."I really think they panicked today" says volumes about Barrett. He re-visited the sacking of Bailey. He has shown his true colours today.

[AllenIsLord13 1]

Look, I'm all for positivity (am still rating Watts over NicNat!), but where is the consistency? (presuming Schwab has had the longest tenure over the last decade/ debacle!)

First we make Yze, White, Robertson, McDonald retire = no spots for over 30s!

So we stock up on youngsters…

Gysberts, Moloney, Martin, Morton…

They’ve all had some *great* games/ signs of promise during those years (but possibly just ingrained in a losing culture, fall off!) - especially liked Martin's breakout year as backup for Jamar

I appreciate the inevitable pump-up of the incomings, but let's also take an objective/ devil's advocate look:

Pederson (can’t get a game at North), Rodan (WE GAVE UP DRAFT PICK FOR A GUY ABOUT TO BE DELISTED!!), Dawes (hmm, jury’s out – could be damaged goods!), Byrnes (couldn’t even beat out a damaged Wozi for a spot!)

Um, much rather prefer Geelongs tactics: ie steal one of best CHB’s in the business (Rivers), and a ruckman who would’ve had the starting job at any other club (McIntosh)!!

anyways, just an opinion, based upon years of wild optimism tempered by shattered reality dreams!

[PJ_12345 1,098]

We started Trade period alright, but it's just gotten worse and worse. When you look at how clubs like Geelong and Collingwood went, then look at us, you realise we are still the small fish in their big pond and our enemies grow stronger and now we seem even further back than we were. Frustrating to say the least!

Hellllllllow Travis,

Look at Geelong, now back to Melbourne, now back to Collingwood, now back to Melbourne,

Sadly they aren't Melbourne, but if they start wearing blue and red maybe they can be like us.

Look around - where are you? Your on a boat, with a team those teams could be like

Whats in your hand, back at Melbourne, Melbourne has it, its a plan to win those games that you want

Look again, those wins are now premerships - anything is now possible when those teams are like Melbourne... I'm on a horse

(if you dont get what just happened watch the link)

[media=]

Edited October 26, 2012 by PJ_12345

[premiers13 48]

Barrett has just rated Melbourne's trading as an 'E". He rates Port Adelaide as a "C"!!!

Surely this alone, examples anything he says as rubbish.

He is allowed an opinion, but he certainly demonstrates a strong bias against Melbourne. His answer was that we should have kept our low Picks and drafted kids.....lowering our expectations!!!!!

I think time will prove him totally wrong.

Barrett you are a 'wombat'!

[Fat Tony 4,409]

The emotion of the Jack Viney situation saw us get bent over in the backroom deal for Hogan.

We paid full price in draft picks for Dawes and well over with regards to his contract.

I have a low value on Gysberts and Morton, but we gained little back from each trade.

The Martin trade was a shocker.

We lost Rivers and Moloney for below their full value.

I like Rodan as a player, but he is not the right demographic and his recruitment reflects Neeld’s desperation to keep his job. Ditto Byrnes.

Pederson might be a good pick up, but we now have a significant number of players of the same type and still have a bottom rung midfield.

Overall, it is hard to get too excited with our trading given our strong starting position of #3, #4, #14 and #26 and the advantage of Viney.

[monoccular 16,073]

Trade Radio are rating the team's performances througout the Trade period. Not sure what people think, or how would score us. Terry Wallace has given us a 'C', However Damian Barret has rated as an 'e'.

Is this fair you think?

Geez - what a disaster. That doyen of recruiting and building up a list, ex-Tigers coach whining Wallace says we didn't do well!!! That actually pleases me as it probably means the opposite. And as for Barrett - pfttt.

The proof of the pudding will be I the eating, and I hope the eating is those two tosses choking on their humble pie.

I do not give a toss about "Getting Smashed on TradeRadio", not one iota.

The club has put their faith in Neeld, Missen, Craig et al and I am certainly prepared to back him.

To those who whine about getting such low picks for a couple of ex round 1 draftees - why do you think we got such crappy offers? Because they were elite performers? We got more that we would have had we simply delisted them, like we will for quite a few of our OOC fringe dwellers.

[Dee Fan 3,247]

Look, I'm all for positivity (am still rating Watts over NicNat!), but where is the consistency? (presuming Schwab has had the longest tenure over the last decade/ debacle!)

First we make Yze, White, Robertson, McDonald retire = no spots for over 30s!

So we stock up on youngsters…

Gysberts, Moloney, Martin, Morton…

They’ve all had some *great* games/ signs of promise during those years (but possibly just ingrained in a losing culture, fall off!) - especially liked Martin's breakout year as backup for Jamar

I appreciate the inevitable pump-up of the incomings, but let's also take an objective/ devil's advocate look:

Pederson (can’t get a game at North), Rodan (WE GAVE UP DRAFT PICK FOR A GUY ABOUT TO BE DELISTED!!), Dawes (hmm, jury’s out – could be damaged goods!), Byrnes (couldn’t even beat out a damaged Wozi for a spot!)

Um, much rather prefer Geelongs tactics: ie steal one of best CHB’s in the business (Rivers), and a ruckman who would’ve had the starting job at any other club (McIntosh)!!

anyways, just an opinion, based upon years of wild optimism tempered by shattered reality dreams!

I feel flat, last year we recruited mature bodies in Magner and Couch which was part of the new strategy, Magner started off like a rocket but fell off as the year went on, Couch got one game but was shown to be too slow for AFL.

I don't have a problem with getting some experience in the side but I'm stuffed if I know what getting an ageing, injury prone, delisted player from Port will add to the side. I'm just not sure what sort of direction we are taking here.

Pederson is an unwanted player at North and they aren't exactly tearing the competition apart so why we went so hard after him mystifies me.

Byrnes is 28 and has maybe a couple of years left in him so he is really a stop gap and may add to the side but I'm not sure what that will be, I'm not unhappy, just not sure.

Our direction this year seems to be to get rid of players that the coach doesn't think will take us forward but they have been replaced by players that won't be there if we do.

I certainly hope we don't play these guys next year because we feel the need to justify selecting them.

[Disco Demons 92]

i rate this thread E

[Dee Fan 3,247]

i rate this thread E

How do you rate your contribution?

[binman 38,134]

Any rating is by definition based on a criteria. I didn't hear what criteria Wallace and Gromit used to assess our trading but i assume it would be on perceived value of the player worth we traded out against that of the picks and players we brought in,

However that's a nonsense as the club would have had a completely different criteria. For example i'm sure their base KPI was cutting out out the dead wood and players that have contributed to our [censored] poor training and general culture. Secondly they obviously focused on solid citizens and players who could add value to the culture. And thirdly they picked players for specific roles related to Neelds preferred game plan.

On that criteria i'd give us a B, but of course the proof will be in the pudding.

[H_T 2,941]

I certainly hope we don't play these guys next year because we feel the need to justify selecting them.

They wouldnt be selecting them this trade period if they didn't think they would contribute.

[Dee Fan 3,247]

Any rating is by definition based on a criteria. I didn't hear what criteria Wallace and Gromit used to assess our trading but i assume it would be on perceived value of the player worth we traded out against that of the picks and players we brought in,

However that's a nonsense as the club would have had a completely different criteria. For example i'm sure their base KPI was cutting out out the dead wood and players that have contributed to our [censored] poor training and general culture. Secondly they obviously focused on solid citizens and players who could add value to the culture. And thirdly they picked players for specific roles related to Neelds preferred game plan.

On that criteria i'd give us a B, but of course the proof will be in the pudding.

I would imagine they would have taken in to account the number of previously high picks we have given away free of charge, so in essence they would probably be marking us on our previous drafting as much as this trading period.

[Arrow 1,257]

It actually becomes a joke with these guys. Especially when like AFL Trade Radio and take 2 talkback calls. No-one can question their opinion one bit. Barrett even said "Don't worry I blocked them on my twitter, so I don't care what they say"... Buddy it's people having a difference of opinion to you- not threatening your life get a grip. He writes off people's careers yet doesn't have a thick enough skin to take it back; simply an incredible, incredible human being.

But more on the topic the funniest thing is all year Melbourne and their 'team' of coaches and upper level management were seen to be at fault for getting in so many leaders and leaving all these kids to do the work themselves.

We bring in: Premiership winning CHF in Dawes, Premiership winning HFF in Byrnes, Veteran and GF appearance in Rodan, and a mature body big guy in Pederson who has been through both AFL and VFL system which generally promotes a good understanding what is required to make it to the big time.

Furthermore, we delist the dead-wood. High draft picks who have given us jack: Morton (I'm sure got good skills but will never be a good AFL player), Gysberts (one game 2012), Moloney ("leader").

So now, it's berate Melbourne because we're not using DRAFT PICKS TO TOP UP OUR YOUNG TALENT. If you really base your decisions on what these clowns say you're just as bad as the pig Barrett.

I'm proud of Neeld, he made very tough calls and at the end of the day he is putting his job on the line trusting his judgement on these blokes. Good on you Mark, haters gonna hate.

[rpfc 27,476]

The emotion of the Jack Viney situation saw us get bent over in the backroom deal for Hogan.

We paid full price in draft picks for Dawes and well over with regards to his contract.

I have a low value on Gysberts and Morton, but we gained little back from each trade.

The Martin trade was a shocker.

We lost Rivers and Moloney for below their full value.

I like Rodan as a player, but he is not the right demographic and his recruitment reflects Neeld’s desperation to keep his job. Ditto Byrnes.

Pederson might be a good pick up, but we now have a significant number of players of the same type and still have a bottom rung midfield.

Overall, it is hard to get too excited with our trading given our strong starting position of #3, #4, #14 and #26 and the advantage of Viney.

We got three top 5 talents due to that 'awful' deal with one of them being 194cm/97kgs 17 year old forward.

How that is being spun so effectively that Melbourne supporters are turning on the kid's recruitment is disheartening.

Not surprising though, we are Melbourne supporters after all.

[rjay 23,922]

Wallace's view on SEN was more that he could see where we were heading and agreed with it in principle. His C rating was because he thought we paid overs on the Hogan Viney deal and as he said that was only his opinion that we could have done the deal with pick 3 alone. All in all he was a lot more positive than others about what we had done.

To me Dawes is critical to how we went and we won't know that for another 12 months or so. If our FD got it right like they did with Clark then it's a master stroke. Then if Hogan is what we think he is (Viney I think is a given) this trade period will have set the club up well for future success.