RP, are you saying that if Hogan was 100% fit, then Frawley would be playing at Casey, given you are of the view that Frawley is not required in the backline due to it currently "working without him", and that you have Dawes and Hogan as key forwards with Pedersen interchanging forward/back/ruck depending on match ups?

Wow.

Frawley was and still is our best backman. However, Roosy has been able to have our defence run pretty well (understatement) without Frawley within kooee of it. If this was last year, I'd have said that Chippa was vital to the structure of our back-line.

It would be interesting to see how our current back-line would go if one or 2 were to get injured (and not putting Frawley back down there).

It's doing quite well without him...

So if Dunn, McDonald, and Garland are doing fine without him - what does that say about his importance?

There is a statistic used in the US called Wins Above Replacement Player and it essentially the worth of a player weighted against an average player for that position - how replaceable someone is.

Frawley would not have a high WARP...

He has moved out of the defence and our defence has improved by 7 goals. The causal relationship is not as simple as that but it is telling us that Frawley absence has been mitigated by the players that have moved down there (Howe, Jetta) or the improvement of those already there (Dunn, McDonald, Grimes).

They've tried to raise it in the HS a couple of times.

Calling it just WAR (wins against replacement).

Sound concept.

And I agree Frawley wouldn't give us that much more.

I think what Roos has shown us in his time at Sydney and now MFC, is that good defenders are relatively easy to come by, with good coaching.

And solid team defensive structures trump a good individual defender every time.

If he stays I will be very happy, he has proven that he can be a star. He would be clearly an important part of our back 6 into the future.

If he goes and we can use the compo pick to gain an A grader through the draft or through another Tyson type trade, I will also be very happy.

I fail to see any down side for us.

They've tried to raise it in the HS a couple of times.

Calling it just WAR (wins against replacement).

Sound concept.

And I agree Frawley wouldn't give us that much more.

I think what Roos has shown us in his time at Sydney and now MFC, is that good defenders are relatively easy to come by, with good coaching.

And solid team defensive structures trump a good individual defender every time.

On that thinking, I wonder whether Roos and the FD would actually prefer a first round pick instead of Chip re-signing. Afterall, this would go towards getting another mid or two, something Roos has already flagged. More bargaining power and higher likelihood of a Tysonesque trade again.

RP, are you saying that if Hogan was 100% fit, then Frawley would be playing at Casey, given you are of the view that Frawley is not required in the backline due to it currently "working without him", and that you have Dawes and Hogan as key forwards with Pedersen interchanging forward/back/ruck depending on match ups?

Wow.

Once again - over your head - he has been easily replaced in that backline. That is not a headline.

He is easily replaceable forward next year - Hogan will actually attempt to get the dukes out and take it in his hands so there is an immediate improvement...

If he stays for next season he of course can find a spot in the backline, he will improve the backline but not immeasurably. Dunn played Cloke better than any back I have seen at the Dees. Usually Cloke ragdolls his Demon opponent.

I want to keep good players but there are very few players that leave a great hole, Frawley isn't one of them. He has left the backline with no dramas, and he will leave that forward line with requisite drama.

To be honest I don't care anymore, if that dog wants to bail out for more money than cya later pal, we don't need or want players that aren't committed to the cause. 12 months ago I was worried about him leaving but seeing the emergence of Dunn and too an extent Mcdonald (if we can fix his decision making/disposal) plus Col down there we'll be right. Frawley has average skills at best and his decision making isnt great either. Roos leaving him forward has been a master stroke in that our back 6 can gel without him, so when he does go it isn't such a huge loss. As previous posters have said Hogan will slot straight into Chips spot in the forward line. I'd love for Roos to give Frawley the ass in the latter part of the year when Hogans right to go...

To be honest I don't care anymore, if that dog wants to bail out for more money than cya later pal, we don't need or want players that aren't committed to the cause. 12 months ago I was worried about him leaving but seeing the emergence of Dunn and too an extent Mcdonald (if we can fix his decision making/disposal) plus Col down there we'll be right. Frawley has average skills at best and his decision making isnt great either. Roos leaving him forward has been a master stroke in that our back 6 can gel without him, so when he does go it isn't such a huge loss. As previous posters have said Hogan will slot straight into Chips spot in the forward line. I'd love for Roos to give Frawley the ass in the latter part of the year when Hogans right to go...

apparently you do care as you just called Frawley a dog ?

Your last line is closer to what my point is - a leader is a leader because of the group below - he is not seen as a 'mercenary' to his teammates, as they are the other potential mercenaries in this new AFL landscape that does not reward early decision making on contracts.

If they see his delay of talks (and as a purveyor of US sports - this is not a delay at all - simply proper process in the new landscape) as a sign of a lack of leadership I would be surprised. His teammates should, and would be, more disappointed in his inability to play consistent football in 2014 and for lazy involvements like the one that threw Terlich under a bus a few weeks ago against Collingwood when he didn't help the bloke out with a sheppard, when he could have.

If you think he is a poor leader at the MFC for his non-committal utterances about tenure then what do we make of Roos or Jackson for that matter? How long are they here for, in what role?

So my answer is that his approach to FA is irrelevant to his leadership of that group and an aspect of the new landscape that 'the club' should get used to. Clubs have been signing fringe players later and later these days - and sometimes delisting them before picking them up again (Jetta), the players have been given more freedom and it needs to be understood and dealt with, not met with handwringing and bitterness.

You've asked me a couple of times to explain my position in relation to Frawley, which, reluctantly, I took the time to do.

So please don't invent a position that is clearly at odds with what I have stated.

In this regard, I made it absolutely clear that, first round compensation in return, I'm completely ambivalent about Frawley leaving the club and, further, I explicitly stated that he's well within his rights to approach FA exactly as he has.

So, there's absolutely no handwringing or bitterness from me. Quite the opposite in fact. I am now quite unemotional about Frawley and his future commitment to the club. My affection is reserved for those players who commit to this club for more than money - and there are more than a few players on our list that I put in this category.

MFC have clearly turned it around this year, we are far more competitive and appear to be going in the right direction.

IMO Frawley should've put pen to paper by now. I'd be leaning towards moving him on.

Not only that, I wouldn't offer him upwards of 550k, to my eye Frawley is a limited player.

If we can get a top 10 pick for him, we've won the lotto.

MFC have clearly turned it around this year, we are far more competitive and appear to be going in the right direction.

IMO Frawley should've put pen to paper by now. I'd be leaning towards moving him on.

Not only that, I wouldn't offer him upwards of 550k, to my eye Frawley is a limited player.

If we can get a top 10 pick for him, we've won the lotto.

won the lotto? Not if the pick turns out to be a dud. A lot of people seem to be forgetting we would be losing a quality KPD for a pick with 'potential'.

You've asked me a couple of times to explain my position in relation to Frawley, which, reluctantly, I took the time to do.

So please don't invent a position that is clearly at odds with what I have stated.

In this regard, I made it absolutely clear that, first round compensation in return, I'm completely ambivalent about Frawley leaving the club and, further, I explicitly stated that he's well within his rights to approach FA exactly as he has.

So, there's absolutely no handwringing or bitterness from me. Quite the opposite in fact. I am now quite unemotional about Frawley and his future commitment to the club. My affection is reserved for those players who commit to this club for more than money - and there are more than a few players on our list that I put in this category.

Unemotional and ambivalent yet you question his leadership with regard to the actions that you are unemotional and ambivalent about?

And the bitterness is more to the posters who think akin to the JV7 who two posts ago referred to Frawley as a dog. I would call that bitter.

Yes - from a completely clinical and unemotional perspective, I question his leadership qualities.

The underlying reasoning for this is expressed to death above.

won the lotto? Not if the pick turns out to be a dud. A lot of people seem to be forgetting we would be losing a quality KPD for a pick with 'potential'.

Unless, of course, we on-trade that pick for a read-to-go mid.

No he won't look like a fool unless he goes to club that is not a constant finals contender.

I don't want him to go but if he goes to Hawthorn, Geelong or Freo I believe he is almost guaranteed of playing finals next year. More of a guarantee than if he stays with us.

It does make a mockery of his assertion that he wanted to see the direction of the club before signing - there is no certainty that we will play finals next year - or even the year after - but it is plain that we are heading in the right direction.

The window for Geelong and Hawks is closing and they have a chance this year but very little next year. He would be better going to Suns or staying with us to play finals

I felt as confident Wattsy was leaving last year as I am about Chip so who bloody knows.

The window for Geelong and Hawks is closing and they have a chance this year but very little next year. He would be better going to Suns or staying with us to play finals

Hawks will be open for a little longer than Geelong's. I think the Cat's window has closed (it had to close some time. The dominance they displayed from 07- now is a pretty bloody good window! I'd definitely take it, if it were Melbourne!!!)

The window for Geelong and Hawks is closing and they have a chance this year but very little next year. He would be better going to Suns or staying with us to play finals

So neither Hawthorn of Geelong are going to make the finals next year ? I'll remind me you of this post next year.

I get the Suns are on the rise but to suggest on the information available that Frawley is better off with us than going to Geelong or Hawks if he wants to play finals next year is fanciful at best.

And whilst I agree that the premiership windows may be closing on Hawks and Cats - you are suggesting that neither of these teams has any youth coming through to keep them in the top half of the ladder. They both may not be powerhouses but i don't see either of them becoming cellar dwellars.

Roos is on record as saying , as a commentator, that he would not play anyone he knew to be leaving. I think it was in reference to $cully. So I doubt that the administration know for sure. Still think he made the decision to go ages ago as history would suggest.

Roos is on record as saying , as a commentator, that he would not play anyone he knew to be leaving. I think it was in reference to $cully. So I doubt that the administration know for sure. Still think he made the decision to go ages ago as history would suggest.

I have no problem with the notion that he may go or has definitely decided to go. I have no problem with the notion that his management may have already made and in principle agreement with another club.

The idea that Frawley would tell our club he is off is ludicrous. I have no idea what purpose it would serve him doing that other than to have him dropped from the side and if admits to actually have made an arrangement to go to another club, open himself to fines and suspensions due to breaches of AFL rules.

So neither Hawthorn of Geelong are going to make the finals next year ? I'll remind me you of this post next year.

I get the Suns are on the rise but to suggest on the information available that Frawley is better off with us than going to Geelong or Hawks if he wants to play finals next year is fanciful at best.

And whilst I agree that the premiership windows may be closing on Hawks and Cats - you are suggesting that neither of these teams has any youth coming through to keep them in the top half of the ladder. They both may not be powerhouses but i don't see either of them becoming cellar dwellars.

Frawley would be a good fit in either of those two

what Im somewhat curious about is should he stay, where will he be played ?

To be honest I don't care anymore, if that dog wants to bail out for more money than cya later pal, we don't need or want players that aren't committed to the cause. 12 months ago I was worried about him leaving but seeing the emergence of Dunn and too an extent Mcdonald (if we can fix his decision making/disposal) plus Col down there we'll be right. Frawley has average skills at best and his decision making isnt great either. Roos leaving him forward has been a master stroke in that our back 6 can gel without him, so when he does go it isn't such a huge loss. As previous posters have said Hogan will slot straight into Chips spot in the forward line. I'd love for Roos to give Frawley the ass in the latter part of the year when Hogans right to go...

It's ironic how so many here talk about commitment and loyalty yet are happy to slag off all our players both professionally and personally at the drop of a hat.

He has every right to hold off until the end of the year and we know barely any of the facts. It's his livelihood and so he should be able to assess where the club is at. Would you trust this club? It's funny all that all negative comments posted here over the last 7 years are forgotten because we've played ok for 10 weeks which all of a sudden means we're going to win 6 flags.

Frawley would be a good fit in either of those two

what Im somewhat curious about is should he stay, where will he be played ?

Depends on his form. II won't walk away from the fact that he had AA years. (Toumpas for example some say will be a "gun" - they could be right but we haven't seen it in the past so we are guessing. We have seen Frawley's best and its pretty good). At the moment the only talls who are in the team and are in similar form is Garland and Howe. So if his form improves and these two form deteriorates then of course there is a role for him down back. I see Pederson as a more fortunate tall as he has second duties added to his string of uses. Frawley has shown he can play at both ends but so has Howe and Pederson and to a lesser extent Garland..

Only take a couple of injuries to our forward line and he becomes a required forward - exactly what has transpired this year.

RPFC - he had to be replaced in the backline because he was needed forward. Tom Macs development was always going to be better in the long run by leaving him in the backline, Garland was unavailable due to injury, and Dunn, well, he was moved forward as well.

As it has turned out, the backline has worked bloody well without Frawley, mainly because they had to.

Frawley is our best defender, and our backline is a far better place with him in it.

I can't believe your argument is that "it's functioning well without him". Is that your ceiling? I get excited about thinking about the level it could go to with him back down there. It could be the difference between a finals backline compared to a premiership backline.

Surely even you can see the point now?

Yes - from a completely clinical and unemotional perspective, I question his leadership qualities.

The underlying reasoning for this is expressed to death above.

Is this the death below?

I have not ever made one career decision based on money. The people with whom I work, the culture of the organisation, the prospect of self improvement etc have always been bigger factors for me. That said, other people with whom I have worked, in exactly the same position, have made different decisions based on similar opportunities that have been offered to them.

That's why I say, it's ultimately a question of priorities. Some players are more dedicated clubmen than others - and that's not to patronise those who approach the game as a business. But, don't be surprised that the players who approach their contract negotiations, let's say, more commercially, don't engender the same affection amongst supporters as those players who make big personal sacrifices for the club, its success and the players with whom they play (ie, trying to keep the list together).

Frawley may very well stay. I'm happy either way (as long as we secure good compensation, that is, if he leaves). Much, I expect, will depend on what other clubs are ultimately prepared to pay him relative to what we are.

And, for this reason, Frawley is unlikely to ever be a Cameron Ling or a Boomer Harvey or a Nathan Jones in my mind. He'll be just another player journeying through the AFL. It's also why that 'loyal, country lad' rhetoric has become so annoying to me, because his conduct to date hasn't matched the words coming out of his mouth.

I am just curious to know what about his 'conduct' is so appalling?

I think you are comparing him to higher standard that he shouldn't be compared to.

Those players that sign up regardless during the middle of the year like Trengove did in 2011 at the peak of our nonsense, they are not the standard to hold all others to account - they are the rare exception to applaud and amaze.

Boak is the new standard for loyal leaders at a club - explore your options and make a hard decision when the time comes. He made the harder choice and it is paying off for him. But he made it late, and he made it after meeting with the coach and LG of a different club. He has stayed and is applauded by all.

Or perhaps not applauded by all?