Why write an article about Melbourne? Why on their "bye" week? Why write about a player playing in the Sunday twilight spot?

Plenty of other things that could've been written about, hence why I had some interest in what was said, or perhaps what wasn't said. May very well be nothing.

All good questions.

But I don't think it points to Frawley leaving.

I think it maybe points to us having extra cap space and soon-to-be OOC players seriously exploring their options.

Whether that be Fyfe, Dangerfield, or otherwise.

But in keeping Frawley, we will still have a lot of room within the cap.

What i'd be telling Frawley, if he really is interested in playing in a successful team, is that the less he is willing to make in terms of $, the more $ we have in trying to recruit another good player and ultimately, being a more successful team.

What i'd be telling Frawley, if he really is interested in playing in a successful team, is that the less he is willing to make in terms of $, the more $ we have in trying to recruit another good player and ultimately, being a more successful team.

I wouldn't bother, under the assumption that even if he's stupid, his manager isn't, and knows that we've just taken Clark off the books when we already weren't paying the full cap, so Frawley signing for below market value won't affect our ability to sign other big names.

Why write an article about Melbourne? Why on their "bye" week? Why write about a player playing in the Sunday twilight spot?

Plenty of other things that could've been written about...

True, but this is a footy mad city and they need to fill papers. Plus, aren't these articles also in other Sun papers in other cities sometimes.

The idea of paying him 10 mill is [censored], however, i love the way he can break out of (through) the centre and run into the goals. He is a fantastic footballer who, most likely, will stay where he is.

The idea of paying him 10 mill is [censored], however, i love the way he can break out of (through) the centre and run into the goals. He is a fantastic footballer who, most likely, will stay where he is.

on the verge of signing..

an illusional solution

Tom Scully was an absolute steal at $1M plus per year. And for over a half a decade too.

Perhaps we could offer GwS a third round pick for Scully and Phatty

Perhaps we could offer GwS a third round pick for Scully and Phatty

GWS getting the better of that deal.

Perhaps we could offer GwS a third round pick for Scully and Phatty

perhaps we dont lest they take it

I'd rather give 10 million to Roos and extend his contract...

No, no, you're new around here, don't go voicing your opinion when the majority of the posters on this forum disagree, you'll get punished, I know, i too was once the new kid on the block.

I found initially that you would get a hatorade shower when you put a post up that some angry punter would disagree with. I found offense was the best form of defense. For more insight, see BarnDee and his rather crass responses to those who have gotten on his goat (just don't replicate his English language ability).

Edited May 26, 201411 yr by Colin B. Flaubert

Is it possible that wallace wanted a hall type?

before all the coaching stuff hit the fan up there. & Roos took the job?

No because he had decided to leave the year before if you remember how emotional they all were in Stuey Loewes last game against us when he handed the number 23 to Kosi.

It was Rodney Eades Sydney at the time and he wanted Hall

I would give either Danger or Fyfe anything required to get them to the club (this is why I'm not in charge). They will be in the top two players in the comp over the next decade.

I would give either Danger or Fyfe anything required to get them to the club (this is why I'm not in charge). They will be in the top two players in the comp over the next decade.

It's not that stupid.

Not too many are having a go at Sydney with the Buddy deal right now and Fyfe and Dangerfield are on the up and likely to deliver more than him.

President Bartlett talked about being ruthless. That means not being safe. Freo went hard for Ross Lyon and that went well. We went hard for Ross and that went well. No reason not to go after a star player.

The Dangerfield, Jones, Tyson, Viney midfield combination over the next 5 years would be scary. That's a fab 4

Imagine landing both, it's not going to happen but a midfield of

Fyfe, Jones, Viney, Dangerfield, Cross, Vince, Trengove, Tyson, Toumpas, Salem, M.Jones

I dunno. I'm not a Fyfe fan. He's good, but I wouldn't have him in the same bracket as Dangerfield. He's younger though, I guess. Just a bit overrated, IMO.

I dunno. I'm not a Fyfe fan. He's good, but I wouldn't have him in the same bracket as Dangerfield. He's younger though, I guess. Just a bit overrated, IMO.

I feel just the same way about Dangerfield. Flashy, but ultimately considerably less valuable than his highlights suggest. I'd pick Fyfe before Dangerfield, though Danger's a better leader so we'd likely need his type more than a younger player like Fyfe.

Herald sun reporting Jeremy Cameron is weighing up his future, now that's the player you throw a buddy deal together for

Herald sun reporting Jeremy Cameron is weighing up his future, now that's the player you throw a buddy deal together for

I am fully in agreement with you on this as he could be the missing link in our resurgence. I guess that Cameron did not appreciate their decision last weekend to play him as a key defender and with Boyd and Patton still on their list then they (GWS) can afford to do a deal. Would certainly help resurrect Roos' plans to develop a forward line around Dawes, Hogan and Clark. It would be a massive coup if we could pull it off in luring him to us [without having to sacrifice one of our own stars in a trade].

http://www.news.com....1-1226932258711