Happy for us to look at deals as long as it makes us a better footy side. We need to create a winning culture. We cant keep saying we cant trade this bloke because he is liked around the club or he has shown loyalty or what ever. we as a club need results now, we have been mediocre for so long. Yes people will be [censored] but to get where we want to go we have to be ruthless.

Edited October 10, 201410 yr by S.R.J

I haven't the stamina nor the inclination to read this whole thread. How the hell did the prospect of getting Beams come about? He wants to move to Queensland to be close to his father.

I don't get it

Name me a slow outside player that is any good? because that's what he is.

Goddard?

Jack should be given a year to show what he can do in the centre square where he belongs. Only trade for a good offer ie with pick 3 for Danger

Jack should be given a year to show what he can do in the centre square where he belongs. Only trade for a good offer ie with pick 3 for Danger

So he can lose even more currency if he's no good following his surgery?

Brett Anderson ‏@BrettAndersonIF 18h18 hours ago

Trengove might not be only ex-high Dees draft pick we hear about in next few days. Melbourne brass have plenty of work ahead #AFLTrades

Whats going on down the club??

Something that isn't going on at atleast 3 other clubs (Dogs, Crows, Suns). The right people are calling the shots.

Hairy moles.

I'm sure BBO can help you out with this. He manages an avenue full of them.

In trading terms pick 23 doesn't get you anywhere near as much as what 12 might. Trenners is not worth 12 by himself. Christenson from Geelong is being traded out for #21. I know he has issues but he has far more to offer than Trenners.

Obviously. My comment above was for those stating we get pick 12 for him. Some even mention this trade and then go onto trade pick 23 to get Beams and Dangerfield. It's a bit like how pick 20 gets forgotten in the Tyson deal.

Jack Trengove WAS LOYAL TO MFC IN OUR DARKEST DAYS.

MFC MUST show him the same respect.

Get some ba@#lls and tell Richmond to "firetruck" off.

I'm amazed at people not thinking this is part of a bigger deal.

Out of curiousity, if this move leads us to our next premiership and a Beams or Dangerfield leads that charge, does that change people's view?

Or are we all ok with not winning a premiership in 50 years, as long as we stay a "loyal" club?

Jack Trengove WAS LOYAL TO MFC IN OUR DARKEST DAYS.

MFC MUST show him the same respect.

Get some ba@#lls and tell Richmond to "firetruck" off.

We're not forcing him to move. We outlined a proposal to him that Richmond put forward. The ball is in his court.

If I'm Jack I'd be thinking that with everything that he's been through at MFC a move might not be such a bad thing.

Edited October 10, 201410 yr by Tough Kent

We're not forcing him to move. We outlined a proposal to him that Richmond put forward. The ball is in his court.

Not having a go at you....

But what does that mean??? If the club didn't want to trade Trengove then it would have been shot down and not presented to Jack to make a call on. Clearly the club has some interest

I must admit I am a little shocked by this news, but sometimes the big moves that don't feel right can be the right moves. I trust Roos and co.

Am struggling to get my head around this move though

Edited October 10, 201410 yr by Unleash Hell

I'm shocked at this decision and also horrified that we may lose another first rounder from the club. I'd prefer to keep him and see how he performs this year.

I'm worried with the Beams scenario - if his father is as crook as reported what is stopping him from wanting to walk away at the end of next year?

Edited October 10, 201410 yr by Wormburner

Fair call UH. The player has to agree to any trade. I'm sure Roosy would be happy to keep JT if he decided Richmond wasn't right for him. You're right though. News like that would not be exactly what Jack would initially want to hear. Might be the best thing for all parties though.

Hopefully we can prize pick 12 out of the Tigers for Trengove without giving up 23.

Wouldn't mind trading Toumpas to Adelaide for 10 either.

Would give us 2, 3, 10, 12, 23.
But in all likelihood we lose 23.

This is a decent draft, I'd back Roosy in on this one.

This is like a great game of Chinese Whispers.

At no stage did I interpret any of the articles linked to indicate that he was told he is going to be traded.

I got back from an 8 hour trip from Universal Studios in Japan so maybe I was tired and could have chosen my words more artfully. Yet my point stands. The fact that his name has been mentioned and the club has taken the proposition seriously (they have put the news up on the website) is a disgrace when one considers the circumstances he has been through.

Anyone who played this year should be up for trade. Jack hasn't had the opportunity to show his wares for a year (and due to what may have been a chronic injury, perhaps 2). Let's not forget that the year Scully left for GWS, Trenners extended his contract shortly thereafter. I saw that as a symbolic moment as Jack had superior career output and could have shopped himself around for a better deal but chose to be loyal and declare that he wanted to be a part of the future.

Edited October 10, 201410 yr by Colin B. Flaubert

What do people think our players are actually worth, in terms of a draft pick?

If I was trading for Trenners I wouldn't give up anything more than pick 25 for him. About the same for Toump. Watts is too subjective. I'm not touching that one. We'll be lucky to get a tatts ticket for Blease, Strauss or Tappy.

I wish people would stop telling us what these blokes cost us at the draft. It's about what they're worth now.

Edited October 10, 201410 yr by Tough Kent

I'm amazed at people not thinking this is part of a bigger deal.

Out of curiousity, if this move leads us to our next premiership and a Beams or Dangerfield leads that charge, does that change people's view?

Or are we all ok with not winning a premiership in 50 years, as long as we stay a "loyal" club?

Because this club has always done so well trading out its heart-and-soul players, especially if they don't want to go.

Seriously, from Barassi thru Alves & Wells, Woey, Junior and all the others ... can anybody give an example where trading out one of our heart-&-soul players has actually benefited us on the field?

We've been a bottom team for years now and need to shake the place up and do some drastic things......were not playing happy campers here, it's about being a feared football side once again, and some people are probably going to get hurt along the way.

Because this club has always done so well trading out its heart-and-soul players, especially if they don't want to go.

Seriously, from Barassi thru Alves & Wells, Woey, Junior and all the others ... can anybody give an example where trading out one of our heart-&-soul players has actually benefited us on the field?

I can't give you too many examples of ANYTHING our club has done right in the last 50 years.

This would be a monumental error. In the same way axing Junior was.

Can't believe they would entertain it.

This would be a monumental error. In the same way axing Junior was.

Can't believe they would entertain it.

I think we are only entertaining this proposal IF we can do something extra with it. We will have the weekend to go over it, possibly contact clubs a dangle the two picks etc. and see what we can get. There is a part of me that believes we will not do it if we can't trade the pick for something else, but if we can then we will do it.

I know the bloke has been loyal to us, but what if a few years down the track he is still the same player who doesn't really bring much to the table anymore? We will rue the day we didn't trade him. I know it's a big risk and it still doesn't sit right with me, but we need to look at all avenues to improve the list.

If we trade Trenners it could lead to the heart being ripped out of the team which could lead to us struggling on the field next year and then to senior players wanting to leave to play in successful teams. Oh wait...

Edited October 10, 201410 yr by Tough Kent

I am staggered at the reaction to this by a lot of Demonlanders.

Imagine if we strategically traded out a 100 gamer who had actually put a few seasons together.

This would be a monumental error. In the same way axing Junior was.

Can't believe they would entertain it.

Ridiculous comparison, they are not even remotely similar scenarios.

I've read most of this thread but not all so apologies if this has been said.

If I was Trengove's manager I'd tell him to jump at the Richmond offer. Unlike others I'm in the boat that says Trengove is an average footballer never likely to be and A grader. He's a marking small IMO and will struggle to find a role in a team. I've always thought this but was convinced when I sat in the Southern Stand and watched Brock out pace him to a loose ball.

Trengove's initial reaction would always have been to stayed at MFC, he's that sort of bloke, but I think it's in his best interest to leave. If he has an uninterrupted season in 2015 and fails to improve much he's shot in terms of future value. His "blue sky" will have evaporated and his future will be mediocre at best. Those hanging on to the "now he's fit" theory should keep in mind his underwhelming 2012 and 2013.

If he goes to the Tigers he'll get at least a 3 year contract on good coin - they obviously rate him. He'll leave behind toxic memories of mismanagement he endured at MFC and he'll leave behind all the expectations placed on him by us. He'll go to a club that has played finals for two years, he'll be surrounded by much better players and he'll have a longer, better contract.

I have upmost respect for Jack but reality is he's been a bitter disappointment a far as output goes. I hope wherever he ends up he succeeds. But I think it's in his interest to go and in our interest to trade him regardless of whether the trade in part of a "bigger picture".