I am of the opinion that he is gone.

If he stays that is a huge bonus.

So the logic is that: being shopped = gone?

What a load of crap!

If your manager isn't trying to source at the asking price for your talents, you have a [censored] manager.

How does anyone know if Melbourne won't match the price if the club doesn't even know his asking price?

Anyone that follows US sports knows that looking around at offers is nothing more than a bidding process. Even if he WANTED to go, the club is still in the same position as all others to offer him a lucrative deal. They say it's about "money" but the club has it. If he left it would be about more than money.

"Hey Melbourne, I'm out of contract, but I want to stay, so offer me your best price!"

If there's no market for the player, the club can offer him whatever they want! If he is being shopped, then that would give the player leverage in getting the best deal.

Aussie sports journos are sometimes so clueless when it comes to free agency it hurts my brain. Suggesting he is gone simply because he is being shopped around is just a moronic stance to take. THAT'S WHAT FREE AGENCY IS! Generating a market price. It would be very bizarre if the club didn't match the offer. Whether he took it or not would be a different situation, but saying it wouldn't at least match it is silly.

Why wouldn't they?

Edited April 23, 201411 yr by Cudi_420

I honestly think Chip's manager will want him to leave an expects him to leave, so is sourcing the best quotes for his services.

I also think Chip is the type of bloke who loves his teammates, loves the club, and at the end of the day, having seen improvement and enjoyed his footy this year, will decide to stay, and potentially for a little less money than he could have received otherwise.

Based on nothing but my observations.

Just as valid as any other opinion.

In fact, I think Roos moving him forward may have been out of necessity, but will prove to be an accidental masterstroke.

The wins and improved performance it provided have been great.

But also the change of mindset, the freshening, the ability to learn and gain confidence in a new position.

When the alternative was the dreary "same old, same old" mindset of repelling onslaught after onslaught in our defence, which would have led to Frawley looking for an escape route.

We haven't kept a free agent yet, I can;t see us starting now.

We haven't kept a free agent yet, I can;t see us starting now.

Kept Dunn 2 years ago.

Kept Dunn 2 years ago.

Not sure it counts if no one wanted him.

Not sure it counts if no one wanted him.

You don't know that however...

He's a good player now. Haven't you heard?

We haven't kept a free agent yet, I can;t see us starting now.

Says a lot about the AFL trying to make all teams competitive. They have a draft and then after bottom teams have developed their picks, they are taken by the stronger clubs. Sensational idea by the AFL.

No coincidence, that we as the worst team of the last 8 years, have lost the most amount of players to free agency. How is that meant to help us be competitive?

I personally think this is another stuff up by the AFL. Same group that charges $18.00 for a 2 week old baby to go to the footy. Pathetic.

I played golf with a mate at The Freeway Golf Club in Ivanhoe today. My mate & I got teamed up with a guy named Mick and his mate was none other than Mark Robinson from the Herald Sun. I waited about six holes before I asked any questions regarding footy. I asked him if James Frawley was leaving and he said "He has been offered contracts from six other clubs and that in my experience that means he's being shopped and he's as good as GONE". He went onto tell me that Frawley manager told him "Melbourne can't & won't match his asking price".

I pressed him once more on Frawley and he said "He's going mate, He's going.......trust me". He added that all players were after the big payday and said that's the only thing Frawley's chasing is the best price. He did tell me a few juicy things about Dustin Martin as well but couldn't print them yet because he couldn't be 100% sure.

Since when has that stopped him? Maybe we should start a thread "Has Robbo turned the corner?"

Like a genuine 27 handicapper.

Fixed.

(No offence intended)

Salary cap means you can only afford so much, if players choose to leave for success and less money fair enough, but if it's more about money then were still in with a chance. The Hawks can't afford every one.

I don't think anyone we've lost so far has affected the club that much, plus through trade we've acquired good players. Securing current talent is a priority. The club should have plenty of cap space next year, are they already shopping themselves?

I am pretty sure that at the beginning of the year, Frawley would decide hell be a demon if he saw that the club is heading in the right direction.

If we can secure a few more wins for the year, does this mean he will most likely re-sign?

This was my interpretation, or do we have a Scully x2?

And Scully v2? Please, the circumstances are nothing alike.

Well, even the thread title would imply a decision having happened either way, not the potential for it.

Please, more care next time.

I see it this way. If Frawley goes back to defence he stays. If he continues to play forward he goes. Roos has made a clear statement he is going to rebuild us from defence first. Not going to waste his time building a defence around Frawley with all the doubt about his long term tenure unresolved.

Should move Frawley back & let Dunny go forward. I think the experiment has run it's race.

I would leave chip forward, why change a backline that's clearly working?.and his form apart from yesterday has been good

Should move Frawley back & let Dunny go forward. I think the experiment has run it's race.

Dunn been in good form - don't want to risk that. As America de cali said Frawley may not be here next year anyway so if we can get use to playing without him then good (Garland would help).

I see it this way. If Frawley goes back to defence he stays. If he continues to play forward he goes. Roos has made a clear statement he is going to rebuild us from defence first. Not going to waste his time building a defence around Frawley with all the doubt about his long term tenure unresolved.

It's an interesting perspective. Although I think putting him into the forward line has rejuvenated him and little, your point about taking him out of the equation into the future for the defence has merit.

Frawley was in the moon boot thks morning. Having scans on a toe injury that happend in the 2nd qtr.

I see it this way. If Frawley goes back to defence he stays. If he continues to play forward he goes. Roos has made a clear statement he is going to rebuild us from defence first. Not going to waste his time building a defence around Frawley with all the doubt about his long term tenure unresolved.

Don't agree. Frawley is, and is seen to be, a required player.

He understands why he is being played forward. And he's probably enjoying it.

I expect he also knows it's not permanent.

Just saw on game day on 7 that Chip is in a moon boot and having scans on his foot.

Could be out for a Month to 6 weeks if broken. Maybe fitzy gets another shot or Dunn plays as the lead up foward with Garlo coming back at some stage.

I hare moonboots

That out on the full he kicked when the game was in the balance says a lot about his footy smarts.

He's not all there in the head and yeastersay we won and he had an underwhelming game..

Gimme the compo pick, I'd rather it.

Don't agree. Frawley is, and is seen to be, a required player.

He understands why he is being played forward. And he's probably enjoying it.

I expect he also knows it's not permanent.

Well he is our No 1 defender with a huge price on his head but not playing in defence. Your maths dont add up. Still a required player yes, but now spare parts for the forward line. If his form drops I expect he would be dropped rather than shifted back to defence. But now that he may be injured it may be a moot point.