I wonder if hindsight will show us that Tom Scully was the best thing to happen to the club...or maybe 186...or both.

  On 28/10/2012 at 02:22, John Dee said:

It's actually Scully for Hogan, Barry and Dawes plus Viney at 27. Whomsoever doesn't consider that at win is not capable of coherent thought.

To nit-pick 48 for 63 was involved in there so I left Barry out. But yes, Viney at 27 is integral to the whole deal IMO. I reckon TIm Harrington has had a sensational period.

The title of this thread sounds a lot more fun than the thread itself turns out to be.

The quality of reporting on MFC has always been horrendous, so it's not surprising that the commentators on Trade Radio can't understand what the FD is trying to achieve.

  On 26/10/2012 at 11:06, rolly said:

If hickey was worth a first rounder we should have gotten better value for martin

gys + pick downgrade for pederson is overs

first round pick should have been enough for dawes, shouldnt have had to downgrade picks

Mini draft deal should only have cost us pick 3 or pick 4+13 at most

Should have taken rodan as a delisted FA even though we got the pick back

Other than that byrnes will be good for us and was only ever a victim of geelong success

Glad we got rid of morton though i think we got lowballed something fierce

seems like the experts may know what theyre talking about

It will be very interesting to see how many of the newbies will get new contracts in 2years time

Was the club supposed to come out and say "We're keeping Morton, Gysberts and Martin because no other club is prepared to offer anything but rubbish picks. They are not part of the plan, none are combatants in the true sense of the word. Some may think these and the delistings were hard decisions for the club. They weren't, Neeld and Craig are operating on a simple formula. Hard. tough, big and strong and preferably from a culture of excellence. Personally I think WC got shafted on pick 88. I just hope we use pick 4 well and keep clearing out the chaff in years to come.

  On 28/10/2012 at 01:34, PaulRB said:

The Melbourne are not a "credible destination" is total crud.

Last year we poached Clark from under Freo's noses, are they therefore more or less attractive than us?

This year we beat the Doggies and potentially others for the services of Dawes, are they therefore more or less attractive then us?

Who did we seriously target to have them choose to go to another club? Cloke and Ray chose to stay at their current club, all the other players we targeted we got.

Only one club landed a "big fish" in the Bummers landing Goddard, and we were not interested in Goddard for the same reason the Saints were not interested in keeping him, he's too old for our window.

Who did North add?

Who did Tigers add?

Who did Adelaide add?

Etc...

Sick to death of media regurgitating the belief that we are the perennial runt of the litter. It's total rubbish.

If Goddard is too old, what does that make rodan and byrnes?

  On 28/10/2012 at 04:12, Josh said:

If Goddard is too old, what does that make rodan and byrnes?

Goddard was way too expensive. The Bummers gave him a 4 year contract on big bucks. Desperation from Hird.

Rodan and Byrnes cost us bugger all and are their to help grow the young. 2 very different scenarios

  On 28/10/2012 at 04:33, Roost It said:

Goddard was way too expensive. The Bummers gave him a 4 year contract on big bucks. Desperation from Hird.

Rodan and Byrnes cost us bugger all and are their to help grow the young. 2 very different scenarios

In a couple of years time if we are in a position to challenge for the flag, I would expect that we will go after a big fish and land one. If it will help us win a flag I don't care what it costs and how long the contract is. Essendon have recruited Goddard to show the supporters they are leaving no stone unturned, but they are in reality miles off a flag.

  On 26/10/2012 at 08:03, dee-luded said:

Big CARL, Peter Moore, Danny Hughes & Marcus Seecamp, must have a grin from ear to ear. 10 is free again.

It must be rejuvenated with a vigorous player.

Are you suggesting that its last owner lacked vigour? Was that the problem?

  On 28/10/2012 at 03:24, dandeeman said:

I wonder if hindsight will show us that Tom Scully was the best thing to happen to the club...or maybe 186...or both.

GWS were the best thing to happen to us because they took him and saved us from another early draft pick disaster; plus they have to pay his $1m a year contract and we've got Hogan and Dawes or Wines in his place. 186 really just showed how far our club had fallen and how close to oblivion we were.

  On 28/10/2012 at 04:33, Roost It said:

Goddard was way too expensive. The Bummers gave him a 4 year contract on big bucks. Desperation from Hird.

Rodan and Byrnes cost us bugger all and are their to help grow the young. 2 very different scenarios

I would agree - Hird must be desperate; the golden haired boy who hasn't lived anywhere near up to expectations. It will be interesting to see how long they will keep him should they choke again.

  On 28/10/2012 at 05:30, RobbieF said:

In a couple of years time if we are in a position to challenge for the flag, I would expect that we will go after a big fish and land one. If it will help us win a flag I don't care what it costs and how long the contract is. Essendon have recruited Goddard to show the supporters they are leaving no stone unturned, but they are in reality miles off a flag.

we'll land one. Got a feeling its already in motion, in that the club will know the type of player it still needs.

Nothing better than watching Essendon fall over......well, there is Collingwood and Carlton

  On 28/10/2012 at 05:35, monoccular said:

I would agree - Hird must be desperate; the golden haired boy who hasn't lived anywhere near up to expectations. It will be interesting to see how long they will keep him should they choke again.

A joy to watch

  On 28/10/2012 at 05:42, Roost It said:

we'll land one. Got a feeling its already in motion, in that the club will know the type of player it still needs.

Nothing better than watching Essendon fall over......well, there is Collingwood and Carlton

A joy to watch

Yeah I think they will know what they need in a few years time and it will help us when some of the dominant sides of the moment start to decline and some of their stars want to move on and the clubs want to rebuild. Perhaps Gaff or Franklin or some Victorian that wants to get out of $cullyville or Plastic Pradise or a disenchanted Victorian player in South Australia.

Hopefully all the talk about us not being a creditable destination will be a thing of the past.

  On 28/10/2012 at 04:12, Josh said:

If Goddard is too old, what does that make rodan and byrnes?

Rodan and Byrnes will probably be at the club for, 2 years tops Rodan and 3 years for Byrnes.

  On 28/10/2012 at 04:12, Josh said:

If Goddard is too old, what does that make rodan and byrnes?

Inexpensive role models.

  On 28/10/2012 at 04:06, Roost It said:

Was the club supposed to come out and say "We're keeping Morton, Gysberts and Martin because no other club is prepared to offer anything but rubbish picks. They are not part of the plan, none are combatants in the true sense of the word. Some may think these and the delistings were hard decisions for the club. They weren't, Neeld and Craig are operating on a simple formula. Hard. tough, big and strong and preferably from a culture of excellence. Personally I think WC got shafted on pick 88. I just hope we use pick 4 well and keep clearing out the chaff in years to come.

As i said i was happy to see the back of morton despite the compo.

Gys personifies talent not working hard enough, the new recruits are designed to get our talent to work harder.

Not sure 4th rnd draftees will have more impact next year than a rejuvinated gys could have

  On 28/10/2012 at 09:09, rolly said:

..........

Gys personifies talent not working hard enough, the new recruits are designed to get our talent to work harder.

Not sure 4th rnd draftees will have more impact next year than a rejuvinated gys could have

Probably not, but without Gysberts going to north, Pederson was not coming to us. Simple as that.

Obviously Pederson was a real target. If we had got a 2nd rounder for Rivers (or the lions had given us a 2nd rounder for Martin), Gysberts would probably still be with us.

  On 28/10/2012 at 05:55, RobbieF said:

Hopefully all the talk about us not being a creditable destination will be a thing of the past.

Perhaps even yours?

There once was an owl that lived in the woods.

The more he saw,the less he spoke.

The less he spoke, the more he heard.

Why can't you be like that wise old bird?

Fox

Looks like I've got my own personal stalker, you fancy me do you son?

Perhaps you can take your own advice, I think the board would be better if you didn't speak at all; it certainly wouldn't decrease in intelligence if you left.

a C is still a pass.

Under promise over deliver I say.

We can only wait and see how the season unfolds.

Nobody has all the answers, although some pretend they do.

I don't like bagging out journos just because they bag out the MFC. To be frank, we have deserved a lot of the pastings that we have gotten over the last 4 years as the results on the field have been deplorable. I will say however that Barrett is just trying to go with the conventional wisdom that says whatever Melbourne touches turns to crap.I guess we should sober up and admit that it's a bit much to expect too much intellectual integrity from someone who works on the Footy Show or Channel Nine.

That crap about 'setting more realistic expectations' seems to me that he is suggesting that we are topping up with experience because we think that we are closer to finals success than we think. Damo, you [censored], you would have been one of the same crowd of predictable nimrods who would waltz onto commercial media footy coverage and rant about how Melbourne has no leaders if we were to continue on the path we were on. I don't expect Shannon Byrnes to play in the next Melbourne premiership side. I expect him to show our younger blokes what it takes to make it. Have an actual look at what the club is trying to achieve before you shoot your gob off and make patently ridiculous statements like the 'E' one you made on trade radio.

That being said, I thought Wallace was a little harsh giving us a C. I would say a C+ to a B would be where we are at.

  On 28/10/2012 at 05:56, RobbieF said:

Rodan and Byrnes will probably be at the club for, 2 years tops Rodan and 3 years for Byrnes.

If Byrnes is still on our list in 3 years we will be nowhere.

  On 28/10/2012 at 10:55, Redleg said:

If Byrnes is still on our list in 3 years we will be nowhere.

I agree, I was being generous; with Rodan as well.

I think the only reasonable way to look at it is that the club gets an F for its performance this year on field.

Now we got rid of 15 players, only 1 of which was a regular player in a terrible team by the end of the season (Rivers).

We replaced them with a couple of premiership players, 2 of the most exciting young players in the land (about to be 3 come draft day), and added a few bigger bodies to support a list that is still very young and developing.

But somehow we are expected to stick to the same plan that got us the F?

I'd say we deserve a B+ for being proactive and making changes.

  On 28/10/2012 at 10:55, Redleg said:

If Byrnes is still on our list in 3 years we will be nowhere.

That's a very absolute statement.

I will say that if Byrnes is still here in 3 years, these things must happen:

1. He has played well enough to earn another contract.

2. He has been a positive influence on the group.

3. And we still haven't found a suitable replacement to play as a small forward.

On the last day of trade week, the baby was thrown out with the bathwater.

Smacked of desperation.