On 09/09/2014 at 05:43, Striker475 said:

To be fair, we're the club that's giving reportedly $500k/year to Cam Pedersen and gave quality coin to Shannon Byrnes. Plus Colin Young would know exactly how much we were up for in 2015 for Clark. I'd suggest that Young at least, if not MC himself, are after more coin.

Of course they are, that's the manager's job. To get more money, and he's either had to convince MC of this or not. We're all in no doubt as to the moral standards of the manager, it's just MC's, the AFL, and other clubs we're not sure about.

  On 09/09/2014 at 04:51, pitchfork said:

Isn't compensation determined by the value of the new contract not an arbitrary measure of player worth?

I understand those who feel MC wouldn't be worth a first or second rnd pick as a result of only playing 15 games in 3 seasons, but if another club deem him worth a $500k contract, than that's what he is worth. Because of this I think the best case scenario for all involved is a one year contract that allows him to test-the-market in 2016 if he so wishes > he'll get a contract that reflects his true value, and we'll get to keep him or get proper compensation.

I think you are confusing FA compensation with whatever is going to happen in this instance.

If it is left up to the clubs to trade with us - we are not going to get a good pick - clubs are not going to fall over themselves getting a guy that has played 15 games in 3 seasons.

We will not get a trade commensurate with Mitch Clark's value to us before his fall from grace.

Unless the AFL step in with draft assistance...

  On 09/09/2014 at 05:43, Striker475 said:

To be fair, we're the club that's giving reportedly $500k/year to Cam Pedersen and gave quality coin to Shannon Byrnes. Plus Colin Young would know exactly how much we were up for in 2015 for Clark. I'd suggest that Young at least, if not MC himself, are after more coin.

I find that hard to believe, in fact there is no way known that is true.

  On 09/09/2014 at 05:43, Striker475 said:

To be fair, we're the club that's giving reportedly $500k/year to Cam Pedersen and gave quality coin to Shannon Byrnes. Plus Colin Young would know exactly how much we were up for in 2015 for Clark. I'd suggest that Young at least, if not MC himself, are after more coin.

To be fair - that is BS.

If the sticking point is a rookie spot or a senior list spot, I think we'll give him a senior list spot.

I assume money and length of contract is more the issue. The club is justified if they aren't willing to risk another long term well priced contract. I doubt most other clubs would either.

I dont see how listing him as a rookie is even possible. If Clark was in the rookie draft i can''t see StKilda passing on him

  On 09/09/2014 at 05:16, Grand New Flag said:

I agree that it is likely this is over a maximum rookie spot offering by MFC and MC and/or his manager wanting more.

"Mitch..... whats his name"

I wonder whether Roosy could get his mate Ross to come over to the demons in 2 years.

He is brutal and can be bought.

I can see two scenarios that could work out very well for us here.

1. Clark is going elsewhere:

The MFC float the idea to the commission that due to Clark's fragile health it would be better for him to get to the club he desires with a minimum of fuss and as such it would benefit all parties to have him declared a Free Agent and Melbourne be compensated under those rules. Factoring in the loss of Frawley and the ongoing request for unspecified special assistance we make a play for a package compo deal for all of these elements and call it either Ablett-level compo for the loss of our AA Fullback and star full forward, or at the least one pick after our first round and another mid-first round. Best case we wind up with picks 1, 3 and 10-12 or so. Otherwise it could be 2, 3 and 10-12. Maybe lower at 2, 3, and start of second round ~20. Either way we wind up getting some pretty decent picks as compensation for the losses and Clark moves on to a top side where he may or may not play.

2. Clark is staying:

The MFC and Clark come to an agreement on a new contract. In this case we may have to push the line with the AFL that he is a total unknown at this point and could wind up failing to get back, having another breakdown or just not being very god anymore. Important to run this line as his return could be used as an excuse to deny us special assistance once again as they did last year. Frawley compo is once again considered top-tier at pick 3 (let's face it, if they do nothing else for us over the special assistance request, they have to give us that much), leaving us with picks 2 and 3 in the draft and Mitch working his way to possibly coming back as our FF.

My reasoning in scenario 1 regarding floating Mitch as a FA rather than trading him is simple. I don't think we'll get anything of note in a trade for a player as damaged as him. We would be far better off having him walk and using that as ammo for compensation than actually trading him. I know there has been talk of a straight swap for Lumumba, and that may not be the worst thing ever although it is a short term solution, but I think I would prefer to get the high pick and trade for something we really need rather than yet another mid-sized/tall defender, especially one with that much baggage. Much better to throw those early picks into a play for Dangerfield I would have thought.

I think the second scenario is pretty self-explanatory. I'm not sure it would be the best outcome for either the MFC or Mitch, but it could well wind up being the best we can get under the circumstances.

  On 09/09/2014 at 05:46, AzzKikA said:

I think i do too now.

how can you not

  On 09/09/2014 at 05:41, Curry & Beer said:

Got a thing for Naomi Watts

We should do a month where we have Aussie starlets as our avatars. I've got dibs on Rose Byrne and will fight to the death anyone who tries to claim her.

So how about that Mitch Clark eh?

Shifty Mitch they called him.

What was interesting about Roos last night on 360 was his obvious anger about FA when he said "its no good for anyone".

Finally we might have someone making the case that its a disaster for the lower placed clubs especially after the extended period of compromised drafts.

  On 09/09/2014 at 06:54, P-man said:

We should do a month where we have Aussie starlets as our avatars. I've got dibs on Rose Byrne and will fight to the death anyone who tries to claim her.

So how about that Mitch Clark eh?

Shifty Mitch they called him.

mc is not the be all and end all forget him mfc does not need another drama child

  On 09/09/2014 at 05:28, pitchfork said:

That's what pre-season is for. Everybody has the same degree of match fitness in early February.

What?

Did you even read my post?

  On 09/09/2014 at 03:44, P-man said:

The worst part of your crime is that you plagiarised Robbo.

I should do time for that

  On 09/09/2014 at 07:30, ILLDieADemon said:

I should do time for that

yep

So where can Mitch go?? Freo, Lions are obviously out. The saints have said No , Can't see him going to the Swans, GC, GWS, WC.

Doggies - no key forwards or the Filth but options are running out.

How scathing was Ross Lyon! Won't help his case. Rookie list may well be his only option and that seems right for the time out of footy and health and fitness concerns.

Ross Lyon basically said he was a very ill young man a few times. Made a point of it. His value is plummeting...

He is off his tree if he thinks He will get more than a base salary in 2015

  On 09/09/2014 at 07:07, barneymfc said:

mc is not the be all and end all forget him mfc does not need another drama child

Wow... did you just like your own post...

I now know not to take you serious in any of your posts..

IMO a spot on our list would be reliant on a base salary plus incentive payments for games played. I believe MFC is reluctant to enter into another big dollar contract. After all, once bitten twice shy! I do like Ralphius Maximus suggestion though.

  On 09/09/2014 at 07:47, Maggot 1977 said:

So where can Mitch go?? Freo, Lions are obviously out. The saints have said No , Can't see him going to the Swans, GC, GWS, WC.

When did the Saints say no??

A smart arse comment by Ross Lyon on Nine News, saying "Mitch who, what is his name". Then the reporter said "Clark" and he said "oh, he had a chance to come to us and didn't want to".

Pretty ordinary and the guy is suffering from a mental illness, by the way.

Looking like he has zero value around the league and thats understandable

Rookie list spot at base salary for you Mitch, or you can go play in the WAFL or take black and white photos of trees

You owe the MFC, we dont owe you [censored]

  On 09/09/2014 at 08:24, Redleg said:

A smart arse comment by Ross Lyon on Nine News, saying "Mitch who, what is his name". Then the reporter said "Clark" and he said "oh, he had a chance to come to us and didn't want to".

Pretty ordinary and the guy is suffering from a mental illness, by the way.

He also seems to forget they were trying to lowball the Lions which caused the delay that allowed us to pounce. So they equally had their chance to get him.