Tom Mitchell

[bush demon 2,040]

Errr, so you're giveing evidence to support recruiting other players now?!!

I think you missed the point BD.... being that we won't know if he wants to come to us until we try. A mix of players we develop and those from other clubs that suit our needs is ideal. That's called building our own brand.

Giving numerous games to marginal young draftees who don't come good is what we have done for the last 7-10 yrs. Given our list is considered poor by most non-MFC people, we would certainly benefit from an injection of high quality mids. If the FD believe Mitchell fits our needs, they'd be crazy not to have a go.

There is not one team in the AFL that does not poach players from other teams.

I'm not saying 'recruitment' in the 70's was right or wrong, just saying it happened in that period and is not exclusive to the brand new world of football-as-a-commodity, which is the current fashion. I just get sick of the newby supporters who just seem to think that players can be got without other clubs having similar designs on our playing list, which is a shootout we would, and will lose in the future. i also get sick of posters banging on with their latest recruitment theory and concluding with 'thoughts'? as though there is any thought to be had... as though the poster had any sway whatsoever in the runnings of the club. i wonder what the players think about their being 'traded up' by eager onliners in these cyber garage sales. yes, they must think the people who support our club are a joke. at least the ones who conceal their identity in these swap meets. i admit that i maybe somewhat jaded in this regard, even out of fashion.

[Moonshadow 17,676]

I'm not saying 'recruitment' in the 70's was right or wrong, just saying it happened in that period and is not exclusive to the brand new world of football-as-a-commodity, which is the current fashion. I just get sick of the newby supporters who just seem to think that players can be got without other clubs having similar designs on our playing list, which is a shootout we would, and will lose in the future. i also get sick of posters banging on with their latest recruitment theory and concluding with 'thoughts'? as though there is any thought to be had... as though the poster had any sway whatsoever in the runnings of the club. i wonder what the players think about their being 'traded up' by eager onliners in these cyber garage sales. yes, they must think the people who support our club are a joke. at least the ones who conceal their identity in these swap meets. i admit that i maybe somewhat jaded in this regard, even out of fashion.

I think you'll find that a lot of posters here, including me, are not "newby supporters". On an supporter's internet forum for a club with little success, there will inevitably be discussion on players from other clubs exploring the chance of coming to MFC. It's the internet BD, it's not court of law. Plenty of speculation and unlikely propositions come up for discussion. This thread title clearly indicates the topic of discussion. If you are sick of the topic or just so jaded about trade topics, it's simple - don't read it.

[ignition. 1,466]

I'm not saying 'recruitment' in the 70's was right or wrong, just saying it happened in that period and is not exclusive to the brand new world of football-as-a-commodity, which is the current fashion. I just get sick of the newby supporters who just seem to think that players can be got without other clubs having similar designs on our playing list, which is a shootout we would, and will lose in the future. i also get sick of posters banging on with their latest recruitment theory and concluding with 'thoughts'? as though there is any thought to be had... as though the poster had any sway whatsoever in the runnings of the club. i wonder what the players think about their being 'traded up' by eager onliners in these cyber garage sales. yes, they must think the people who support our club are a joke. at least the ones who conceal their identity in these swap meets. i admit that i maybe somewhat jaded in this regard, even out of fashion.

Your on a forum old cobba consisting of passionate supporters, get use to it. I must apologies that my 145 odd posts limits the strength of my views, if only I had 915 people

might actually listen to me.

[ignition. 1,466]

So he's played a few games since this was first posted, I hope the hunt is on. The only question is what is he worth? and what would have to be paid? I think it would be extremely hard to tear him away from the swans but if there's a chance it's worth a shot.

[jayceebee31 761]

Mitchell is a star in the making...a dead set megastar...similar type I saw play in this year's Under 18's was Taylor...

I would make a go at him, Round 2....

[The Song Formerly Known As 6,479]

Hi all,

I know it's early in the season but I am curious what everyone thinks of Tom Mitchell as trade in target? Obviously he has suffered from some injuries however from what I have seen and read this young man is phenomenal. He grew up playing U16s with Viney, an absolute ball magnet and already well built.

His father Barry still works in Melbourne and a decent offer from the Dees just might tear him away from the Swans already tight salary cap.

So what are your thoughts? We are in need of some gun midfielders still with plenty of years left in them to match our list, yes there is D.Thomas

but every club will chase him and Melbourne's recent track record might not exactly enthuse him. So thinking outside the box I think Mitchell could be a real go-er (Owww yeah he should be out of contract at the end of this year unless if he initially signed a 3 year one).

Thoughts? Discuss, post the videos if people please.

Can you please take over the MFC's head recruiter role.

Thanks.

[Ted Lasso 19,518]

would be happy to offer pick 2

[Demon trucker 1,800]

would be happy to offer pick 2

If he is worth pick two and is already playing and showing it, why in hello whould the swans give him up, for a pick2, he is already getting games at a good club and he is a father son, so he would. Of stayed in melbourne.

[Clark_Kent 315]

Anyone who thinks first of all Sydney would give up Mitchell and secondly that he would want to come to the Demons is delusional. He is genuinely a future star and he is playing in one of the best sides in the comp. Come on guys lets get serious.

[Gippsland Dee 367]

this guy is tearing it up at the Swans. If he had started playing at the start of the year, imo he would be ahead of O'meara in the rising star. He spent a few seasons in reserves without any pressure on him and is now reaping the benefits.

If we were to make a play for him we would have to really offer a huge sum and give the swans a pretty big deal for them also. I can't see him leaving the swans at all. Would love to have him but it just won't happen imo.

[Over the fence 12]

I have it on good authority that the club has offered Mitchell a lucrative contract.

An offer currently tabled by Sydney is approximately $550k / year, although negotiations appear to have soured.

The MFC is willing to table an offer approximately $100 - 150k more/ year, for which Sydney cannot compete against with their already tight salary cap.

I'm still awaiting intel regarding the length of the offer.

More to come.

[stuie 7,374]

1 minute ago, Over the fence said:

I have it on good authority that the club has offered Mitchell a lucrative contract.

An offer currently tabled by Sydney is approximately $550k / year, although negotiations appear to have soured.

The MFC is willing to table an offer approximately $100 - 150k more/ year, for which Sydney cannot compete against with their already tight salary cap.

I'm still awaiting intel regarding the length of the offer.

More to come.

Tell me more person with 1st post who joined Demonland 12 minutes ago...

 

[DemonOX 8,791]

3 minutes ago, stuie said:

Tell me more person with 1st post who joined Demonland 12 minutes ago...

 

Don't be mean stuie!

[dazzledavey36 54,938]

6 minutes ago, Over the fence said:

I have it on good authority that the club has offered Mitchell a lucrative contract.

An offer currently tabled by Sydney is approximately $550k / year, although negotiations appear to have soured.

The MFC is willing to table an offer approximately $100 - 150k more/ year, for which Sydney cannot compete against with their already tight salary cap.

I'm still awaiting intel regarding the length of the offer.

More to come.

Wow very interesting if true.

[The Song Formerly Known As 6,479]

7 minutes ago, Over the fence said:

I have it on good authority that the club has offered Mitchell a lucrative contract.

An offer currently tabled by Sydney is approximately $550k / year, although negotiations appear to have soured.

The MFC is willing to table an offer approximately $100 - 150k more/ year, for which Sydney cannot compete against with their already tight salary cap.

I'm still awaiting intel regarding the length of the offer.

More to come.

 

5 minutes ago, stuie said:

Tell me more person with 1st post who joined Demonland 12 minutes ago...

 

better than nothing!

[DemonOX 8,791]

9 minutes ago, Over the fence said:

I have it on good authority that the club has offered Mitchell a lucrative contract.

An offer currently tabled by Sydney is approximately $550k / year, although negotiations appear to have soured.

The MFC is willing to table an offer approximately $100 - 150k more/ year, for which Sydney cannot compete against with their already tight salary cap.

I'm still awaiting intel regarding the length of the offer.

More to come.

Welcome to the nut house over the fence. Hope u r right. 

[deeflog 679]

20 minutes ago, Over the fence said:

I have it on good authority that the club has offered Mitchell a lucrative contract.

An offer currently tabled by Sydney is approximately $550k / year, although negotiations appear to have soured.

The MFC is willing to table an offer approximately $100 - 150k more/ year, for which Sydney cannot compete against with their already tight salary cap.

I'm still awaiting intel regarding the length of the offer.

More to come.

Brace yourself over the fence....

[Adam The God 30,259]

36 minutes ago, Over the fence said:

I have it on good authority that the club has offered Mitchell a lucrative contract.

An offer currently tabled by Sydney is approximately $550k / year, although negotiations appear to have soured.

The MFC is willing to table an offer approximately $100 - 150k more/ year, for which Sydney cannot compete against with their already tight salary cap.

I'm still awaiting intel regarding the length of the offer.

More to come.

In the words of a small little Hawthorn [censored]: "that's what I'm talkin' about!"

Edited August 25, 2016 by A F
If true...

[Bombay Airconditioning 6,395]

25 minutes ago, Over the fence said:

I have it on good authority that the club has offered Mitchell a lucrative contract.

An offer currently tabled by Sydney is approximately $550k / year, although negotiations appear to have soured.

The MFC is willing to table an offer approximately $100 - 150k more/ year, for which Sydney cannot compete against with their already tight salary cap.

I'm still awaiting intel regarding the length of the offer.

More to come.

I'm surprised the Swans can offer that much. Yes he'll most probably be worth 500k next season but how do they fit everybody inside the cap. 

[John Demonic 5,796]

Good. I want one big trade move to be excited about. I'm willing to settle for a fake rumour

Edited August 25, 2016 by johndemons

[stevethemanjordan 6,952]

Underwhelmed if true.

And also from a list 'balance' point of view, it doesn't make a lot of sense.

Any players that we want to add to our midfield mix should be adding something we lack. Speed and foot-skills namely. 

List balance and attribute diversity is what we need. Not another fairly one-dimensional, one-paced, high accumulating contested ball winner.

We have enough of those.

[Adam The God 30,259]

19 minutes ago, stevethemanjordan said:

Underwhelmed if true.

And also from a list 'balance' point of view, it doesn't make a lot of sense.

Any players that we want to add to our midfield mix should be adding something we lack. Speed and foot-skills namely. 

List balance and attribute diversity is what we need. Not another fairly one-dimensional, one-paced, high accumulating contested ball winner.

We have enough of those.

Despite this line of thought, we still need more elite ball winners that make good decisions. As I've been saying all year. So it does make sense, IMO.

[Coq au vin 755]

Jaeger O'Meara anyone?

[John Demonic 5,796]

What would we trade for Tom Mitchell? A 2017 first round pick? Salem?

Edited August 25, 2016 by johndemons

[stevethemanjordan 6,952]

12 minutes ago, A F said:

Despite this line of thought, we still need more elite ball winners that make good decisions. As I've been saying all year. So it does make sense, IMO.

I couldn't disagree more.

We have an absolute gold mine of ball winners, most of which were 'elite' in their 18's year. Brayshaw, Petracca, Oliver, Viney, Tyson, ANB.

Thats six who are pure ball winners and obviously the club will back themselves to develop them into 'elite AFL' ball winners.

Putting all your eggs in one basket is the last thing you'd want to do as a list manager/recruiter/coach.

We need players that will compliment our ball winning mids with different attributes.

That should be an obvious observation on the back of some of the games we've lost this year.