He wasn't switched to play on Crameri last night when it was needed and he was giving Dunn a bath - if he doesn't play on his bunny Riewoldt next week I think it's clear what Roos thinks.

If his future is as a KPD then we'd be mad not to do everything in our power to keep him. If his future at MFC is as a 3rd tall forward behind Dawes and Hogan then we'd find better value with a compo pick and the cash in the cap.

Maybe Frawley and Roos see a need and a future for him as a forward. Particularly since Clark retired.

Maybe Frawley actually likes the idea of playing there and sees a future in it. We were going to play Clark, Hogan and Dawes together.

Maybe, just maybe, he won't be quite as attracted by another club (e.g. Hawthorn) whose need would be for a defender and who would want him to go back there.

I'd rather nab a proper key forward like Tex or Patton than keep Frawley up there, personally.

If (and when IMO) he does leave what will work in our advantage is how overrated he is out of our club. People talk about him like he's the best defender in the league. He's not even the best defender at the dees!

I do hope he stays though.

I'd rather nab a proper key forward like Tex or Patton than keep Frawley up there, personally.

I'd much rather spend money on building the midfield with a player like Fyfe or Dangerfield, or another Tyson.

I don't think keeping Frawley will cost anything like the figures that are being bandied about. Even Frawley says they're rubbish.

You thought this was bad next year garland, trengove, Nathan Jones, Howe, jamar, viney , Hogan , Salem are all out of contract

With a list of 40 players, average contract length of 2.5 years, every year 16 come out of contract. Those blokes coming out of contract at the end of next year isn't some grand disaster waiting to happen. It's business as usual.

With a list of 40 players, average contract length of 2.5 years, every year 16 come out of contract. Those blokes coming out of contract at the end of next year isn't some grand disaster waiting to happen. It's business as usual.

Quality versus quantity is the issue you've missed.

I'd much rather spend money on building the midfield with a player like Fyfe or Dangerfield, or another Tyson.

I don't think keeping Frawley will cost anything like the figures that are being bandied about. Even Frawley says they're rubbish.

Yeah, he doesn't come across as a bloke trying to push his price up and auction himself off to the highest bidder, does he?

Yeah, he doesn't come across as a bloke trying to push his price up and auction himself off to the highest bidder, does he?

Remember he does have an agent

His agent isn't doing his job if he isn't trying to get him the best possible deal, if mfc think they will lose him they are going to offer as high ad they are willing to go

His agent isn't doing his job if he isn't trying to get him the best possible deal, if mfc think they will lose him they are going to offer as high ad they are willing to go

I was suggesting Sassy that Frawley does not have to appear to be a [censored] he has agent to do it for him.

I am confident the MFC will offer what they think he is worth.

If someone offers more and he takes it well that is the way of Free agency.

It can work the other way of course, a bit harder for the MFC to pull it off at present but if we keep improving our day will come.

Remember he does have an agent

And?

Publicly stating that he isn't being offered the numbers being quoted is counterproductive if the aim is to push his price up.

It alerts all and sundry that bidding $800k is completely unnecessary because no one else is offering that.

I know you like to wear the defeatist / devil's advocate / realist / sourpuss / sarcastic / pessimist hats often, but FFS give it a rest.

And?

Publicly stating that he isn't being offered the numbers being quoted is counterproductive if the aim is to push his price up.

It alerts all and sundry that bidding $800k is completely unnecessary because no one else is offering that.

I know you like to wear the defeatist / devil's advocate / realist / sourpuss / sarcastic / pessimist hats often, but FFS give it a rest.

I will say it again Maschy I was suggesting He does not have to appear a [censored] he has an agent to do that.

Simple statement but construe it how you wish.

After last night, I'd still prefer Dangerfield (or Sloane or Fyfe) over an expensive forward instead of Frawley.

Would love Chip to have a read of this article...

http://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/adelaide-crows-superstar-says-loyalty-and-success-drives-his-football-unlikely-to-accept-lucrative-free-agency-offers/story-fndv862c-1226920625678

Now that it's clear that we're greatly improving and on the right track, if Frawley does go it will make himself look pretty bad.

I'll be happy if he stays but I'm no longer greatly worried if he goes.

one thing that we can't afford is to lose mcdonald or dunn if frawley does go.

that whately article posted by billy has this fantastic quote:

Lynden Dunn is becoming the disciplined, versatile footballer his first round selection a decade ago forecast.

Jack Watts is finding an intensity long missing. Nathan Jones is more than the heart and soul. He’s accountable and defensively determined.

Grimes looks more settled and sure with the ball. Neville Jetta is reinvented as a dependable defender. And Cam Pedersen looks to have found his place

the only way the editor could have made it better (in my mind) was if that line about pedo ended as

And Cam Pedersen looks to have found his place (all over the place)

coupled with these quotes and we can see where we're heading:

As Adelaide learnt the hard way, you can’t just rock up against Melbourne anymore. They’re an awkward opponent with the capacity to frustrate and a willingness to persist that bridges the talent differential.

Now that it's clear that we're greatly improving and on the right track, if Frawley does go it will make himself look pretty bad.

I'll be happy if he stays but I'm no longer greatly worried if he goes.

His whole rationale for not signing is to see our direction. Words from his mouth - so............

All this hard work isn't worth to much if we roll up to play port after the bye and get rolled by 100 points, that game will be a huge test, If we can push them I will be stoked

All this hard work isn't worth to much if we roll up to play port after the bye and get rolled by 100 points, that game will be a huge test, If we can push them I will be stoked

No Sassy keep your eyes on the prize.

A win is the thing.

Nothing more nothing less!

I am calmer about whether Frawley stays or goes, many things to be excited about, and the way our backs are playing (with or without him) is one of them. Once upon a time, (not very long ago) the thought of him going felt like another portent of doom for the club, not anymore thankfully.

I am calmer about whether Frawley stays or goes, many things to be excited about, and the way our backs are playing (with or without him) is one of them. Once upon a time, (not very long ago) the thought of him going felt like another portent of doom for the club, not anymore thankfully.

My feeling is that this has been Roos intent all along. Roos does not hide his mantra that everyone plays there role and defence first mantra. If you therefore had a query on one of your key personnel playing long term in the back half it makes no sense to develop a back six including him. I would imagine if he signed a contract tomorrow that we would see Frawley immediately returned to his most comfortable position. If he does go Roos has already started the transition to life without him. Really win! Win!

I think it's in our best interests to keep Frawley, and that he is a topline individual defender...

But I wonder how he fits into our current defense?

We've actually improved and performed better without him down there.

I'm not sure it's because of his absence, but it makes him look a lot less necessary to our success.

Also, on reflection, the money he's actually likely to get may not bring us a 1st round compo pick...

I think it's in our best interests to keep Frawley, and that he is a topline individual defender...

But I wonder how he fits into our current defense?

We've actually improved and performed better without him down there.

I'm not sure it's because of his absence, but it makes him look a lot less necessary to our success.

Also, on reflection, the money he's actually likely to get may not bring us a 1st round compo pick...

I really like CHip at centre half back and using his run up around the ground, we have shown that Tommy Mac can play at full back, Garland and Dunn getting the third and fourth forwards is a win and Jetta has been good against the dangerous smalls, if Chip stays we could have one of the better defences going around

I reckon chips agreed to a club after the Carlton game as he's been dog ordinary ever since.

actually, he may have had it in mind to leave, prior to the carlton game, & may be in two minds now, causing confusion & a lack of focus?

he may be just enjoying the club, & footy, once again?

Frawley will regain full fitness, have a few really good games where he dominates his opponents and all of a sudden this thread will turn into one where he's a keep at all costs player.

I don't believe for one minute he's gone.

I think we'd all love to see Chip stay, & get back to his best Footy.

but if he wants out, we must get great compensation. we cannot afford to keep losing long term mature players like Chip & Clark, for our long term viability. we need 250 gamers & 300 gamers at our club.

we need strong bloodlines in our club. & a strong heritage once again.