What Melbourne need is a match winner, someone that can turn a game, is Mitchell that player, I don't think so.

 

 

31 minutes ago, Dante said:

What Melbourne need is a match winner, someone that can turn a game, is Mitchell that player, I don't think so.

 

He's never needed to be one at Sydney.

3 minutes ago, johndemons said:

He's never needed to be one at Sydney.

Not sure what you mean by this? 

Sydney often play in tight games and have lost 4 games by less than 2 goals (and won 3).

19 minutes ago, Watts the matter said:

Not sure what you mean by this? 

Sydney often play in tight games and have lost 4 games by less than 2 goals (and won 3).

He's averaged 27 disposals per game in a midfield stacked with talent. I think he's contributed to their overall season that could have been 20-2 if not for losses that came as a result of poor disposals from Dean Towers under pressure. They have Buddy, Parker, Rampe, he's never really needed to stand up and make the winning difference, only to contribute. 

I just mean there will be more opportunity to take a stand and stem the flow of an oppositions momentum, like on the weekend against Cripps and Gibbs.But you're probably right, he's not a matchwinner. But I think we've already got matchwinners developing in the next few years in Petracca, Hunt, Oliver and Hogan

Mitchell would bring experience, not only in a top notch educational environment, where he learnt off some of the best leaders in the game, but also finals experience and big game experience. He's in the perfect age bracket and would add further A grade depth to our midfield. Outside of pace, just about the perfect target for us right now.

Viney, Mitchell, Tyson being the extractors in the middle collectively getting 60 to 100 disposals each game is salavating. Add In Oliver and Brayshaw we have the nucleus of a midfield that will be the best in the league. 

Kent, Hunt, Melksaham, Strech, Hibberd providing the run and disposal is the making of a finals team for many years to come. Maybe even the holy grail.

i see Mitchell as a Viney type of equal standing. 2 Vineys is better than one... 

3 hours ago, Dante said:

What Melbourne need is a match winner, someone that can turn a game, is Mitchell that player, I don't think so.

 

 

We already have Petracca, hogan and Viney. 

1 hour ago, DubDee said:

We already have Petracca, hogan and Viney. 

How did they go last week?

38 minutes ago, Redleg said:

How did they go last week?

How good have they been give their experience? How good will they be given 100 games experience.

28 possessions a game, 6 tcackles a game.. no injury concerns, just turned 23.  Much better option than Prestia would have been.

Still doubt we will get him, smells like the Luke Parker thread last year.

12 hours ago, Demonsterative said:

How good have they been give their experience? How good will they be given 100 games experience.

Wouldn't it be nice to have an elite mid until they get there though?

14 minutes ago, Petraccattack said:

28 possessions a game, 6 tcackles a game.. no injury concerns, just turned 23.  Much better option than Prestia would have been.

Still doubt we will get him, smells like the Luke Parker thread last year.

This is all well and good.

I'd argue that Viney or Tyson would be getting similar numbers if playing in a midfield of Kennedy, Parker and Hannebery.

Context is always lost when discussing individuals like Mitchell.

We don't need him and he doesn't add anything to our midfield mix that we don't already have. 

Attribute diversity. That's what we need.

12 hours ago, Demonsterative said:

How good have they been give their experience? How good will they be given 100 games experience.

Think you missed my point. We were discussing a match winner today, not in 100 games.

Its quarter time on the delayed telecast and we could use a player like Tom Mitchell sticking some of these tackles that our soft as butter (in the last 1.25 games) midfield are not sticking. He might want to hoard some of their studded boots from the Swans before coming. We slip over so often

I wonder what sort of impact a loss like today's has on attracting players.

We definitely need Mitchell, but no chance after today.

He is after cash, if we have made an attractive offer he would think long and hard about it - and our young talent on the rise.

Mitchell is the big fish once the prestia and omeara deals are finalised.

Michell is going to get paid big bucks, and given we seem to be throwing cash at Essendon players i can't see us affording Mitchells signature.

12 minutes ago, Adzman said:

Mitchell is the big fish once the prestia and omeara deals are finalised.

Michell is going to get paid big bucks, and given we seem to be throwing cash at Essendon players i can't see us affording Mitchells signature.

If we don't get Prestia, we'll be able to fit Mitchell in comfortably.

There's one match winning super star that is thinking of leaving, Nat Fyfe.

If you are going to spend a fortune he's the best.

Who would you have?

Tom Mitchell for 700 or Fyfe for 1 mill..............Fyfe

J. O'Meara for 800 or Fyfe for 1 mill..............Fyfe

Prestia for 550 or Fyfe for 1 mill...............Fyfe

And the big one Hogan for 900 or Fyfe for 1 mill..................not sure

If a team is going to throw all their eggs in one basket then get Fyfe!!!!!!!!!

 

On 26/08/2016 at 4:32 PM, Dante said:

What Melbourne need is a match winner, someone that can turn a game, is Mitchell that player, I don't think so.

 

 

We need a hell of a lot more than a matchwinner. Fyfe type.

All we have currently are names, hollow names, who've done stuff all.

On August 31, 2016 at 2:19 PM, DV8 said:

We need a hell of a lot more than a matchwinner. Fyfe type.

All we have currently are names, hollow names, who've done stuff all.

yes, it all smells a bit like 2010. everyone caught up in the hoopla of the youngest list , young talent, potential etc etc. It may bring finals but it may bring SFA. 

10 minutes ago, Third Man Up said:

yes, it all smells a bit like 2010. everyone caught up in the hoopla of the youngest list , young talent, potential etc etc. It may bring finals but it may bring SFA. 

And it may bring a final, & than drop out of the scene.  We need proven hard heads that want to win at all costs.  And keep the kids away from they're own bath water.

We do not wanna be another GGCsuns.

On August 31, 2016 at 2:46 PM, DV8 said:

And it may bring a final, & than drop out of the scene.  We need proven hard heads that want to win at all costs.  And keep the kids away from they're own bath water.

We do not wanna be another GGCsuns.

im concerned about the group think starting to appear yet again that all we need is games in the kids we have. People have very short memories. Every time a gun is up for trade and i read posters saying we dont need them beciase we have x and y, i cringe. Our list is not as elite as some posters believe and we are in dire need of a lot more talent

8 hours ago, Third Man Up said:

im concerned about the group think starting to appear yet again that all we need is games in the kids we have. People have very short memories. Every time a gun is up for trade and i read posters saying we dont need them beciase we have x and y, i cringe. Our list is not as elite as some posters believe and we are in dire need of a lot more talent

I know what you mean. Everyone is so picky. The Tyrone Vickery thread is full of disparaging NO's : All it says is people don't back their own system to get the best out of him and believe we're the same as Richmond. So they don't want Vickery, and Nathan Vardy is proposed. So WHERE IS THE NATHAN VARDY THREAD?

We need a match winner, but the only players on the market have threads full of NO's. 

Instead you've got Hawthorn head hunting him and Tom Mitchell because they believe in themselves to get the most out of those players.

The real story is that 'perfect' players rarely move out of clubs, and it's up to the club to back their own system and find a player that will get the most out of themselves within it.

20 hours ago, Third Man Up said:

im concerned about the group think starting to appear yet again that all we need is games in the kids we have. People have very short memories. Every time a gun is up for trade and i read posters saying we dont need them beciase we have x and y, i cringe. Our list is not as elite as some posters believe and we are in dire need of a lot more talent

I understand exactly what you're saying but fortunately the decisions at MFC these days aren't being made by group-think.

The cards-close-to-chest secret inner workings of modern day MFC is exactly the way it should be.

As for Mitchell I rate him highly- he's an absolute gun and the list would automatically be better having him on it.

But to pry him from Sydney and also outbid all the other interested clubs would certainly cost big. Very very big.

Unless he's in love with the club or Goodwin or something else MFC related, I struggle to see how an equitable deal can be done to get him here.