Theres always a lot at stake P-man..always

I understand what you're saying, beelzebub, and I guess you're right. Nevertheless, this one leaves me feeling a little hollowed out.

I share that feeling too ET, spoke to Jack at Princes Park before he went to the games to encourage Jess.

A more humble genuine young fella you will not meet, doesn't win games though.

Great to see some well thought out sense from BB, AOB, The Fork, GOTO and Redleg. Oh for the good old days when most posts read like this.

The club have built an expectation that something like this was coming. I would love to have seen the response if this had just come out of nowhere. I am unclear of what part of "everyone is tradeable", "some players are scarred by previous years and may never recover", "we will evaluate our overall position at the end of the trade period not each trade" do people not understand.

If it was a straight Trengove for 12 would people have an issue or is it the value that people have concern with? Do your best 18 including Garlett and Lamumba and assume Petracca and work out where Trengove fits. This could be best for us and best for him whether it is just for the pick or as part of a bigger deal.

Edited October 11, 201410 yr by big_red_fire_engine

He's not rated .... Simples as that.

Worst 1 & 2 selections of all time.

If the Crows are serious, it could be whats needed to lose that 2nd rounder as part of any deal.

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??

A lot of traffic's gone past this roundabout already and we're no more informed than yesterday....its all ...a 'something in the air'

But id like to revisit for a sec that tweet. Says to me theres a lot, a damn lot of almost-trades-not-over-line out there amongst the clubs and its needing more fuel and sweeteners. to facilitate them.

The idea of Trenners being accessible I think will put a fire rocket into the mix.Not because its Jack per se but because it might unlock some doors and release some brakes elsewhere.

If we trade him to gain a pick to use on another trade, I'm all for it.

But if we just trade him to gain pick 12, which could just as well turn out to be a dud player, then it's a real slap in the face to a kid who stuck by us and shows that we aren't confident in our ability to develop players.

Of course I do believe that our club is run by competent people now, and that trading him for pick 12 is for the purpose of then on trading pick 12 for immediate list improvement.

If we trade him to gain a pick to use on another trade, I'm all for it.

But if we just trade him to gain pick 12, which could just as well turn out to be a dud player, then it's a real slap in the face to a kid who stuck by us and shows that we aren't confident in our ability to develop players.

Of course I do believe that our club is run by competent people now, and that trading him for pick 12 is for the purpose of then on trading pick 12 for immediate list improvement.

If we are willing to trade for pick 12 doesn't it show the current group are confident in developing players but some current players might be beyond development due to previous damage done?

Edited October 11, 201410 yr by big_red_fire_engine

The fact that the club has publicised the "possible" trade is all part of a well thought out campaign to get members used to the situation, before it happens. Same tactic

as was used to "ensure" a pick 3 for Frawley. Let the rabble run out of steam and when decision time comes it is a foregone conclusion.

I seriously doubt if any of this is to 'get members used to the situation'. It is either to send a message to other clubs or to deal with information that has become public.

He's not rated .... Simples as that.

Worst 1 & 2 selections of all time.

Um, the proposed trade is to a team that just made the finals.

Logic fail.

need to get this thread to 100 pages to save trenners

If Adelaide want him, then we want Danger

Picks 3 + Trengove for Danger

Um, the proposed trade is to a team that just made the finals.

Logic fail.

Then again....it is Richmond

If it was a straight Trengove for 12 would people have an issue or is it the value that people have concern with?

It's definitely a question of value for me, Red. I like Trengove, but every single player in the AFL is tradeable. I just think the trade is terrible value. While we are always going to be clouded in our judgment about our own players and what they're worth, what on earth would Richmond supporters know about his value? Are their lives so sad that they have been watching Melbourne games every week for the last five years and have a firm grasp on him as a player? I'm hoping desperately that Melbourne is doing this with Beams/Dangerfield/other equivalent star in the bag and require this pick, as for me it's the difference between an A or an F this trading period.

Apart from one person stating that Trengove's 'best footy was ahead of him', the only arguments for keeping Trengove on the first page of the thread were deviations of 'when he was ~17, MFC's recruiters at the time ranked him as the second best bet in the draft'.

Would the reactions be the same if he was the same player, but his pathway into AFL was via the rookie list?

Forget about the guesstimates of his talent when he was under-age, and focus on what he's got to offer in the future.

NB: This isn't an argument for or against the purported deal with the Tigers.

A balanced, logical, unemotive post. BB there's no place for this here.

Minor quibble, but I hate comments like this. For every person flying off the handle, there are three reasonable posts stating their case, on both sides.

Notwithstanding the fact that it's okay to get emotional and upset if an idea strikes a nerve. It would be a pretty boring forum if everyone had the same reaction to news

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.

While I appreciate the sentiment we need to improve our list amd have too many players not performing. JT is one of these and could benefit from a fresh start. We need a list that puts us in the hunt for finals otherwise we will lose 'loyal' players to FA that want to play regular finals. This includes a genuine elite midfielder, e.g Dangerfield or Beams

Beams.

A [censored] leapard can't change its spots. MFC has been a royal [censored] leapard for some time and aggressive trading will help change our spots.

S h i t leopard.

Minor quibble, but I hate comments like this. For every person flying off the handle, there are three reasonable posts stating their case, on both sides.

Notwithstanding the fact that it's okay to get emotional and upset if an idea strikes a nerve. It would be a pretty boring forum if everyone had the same reaction to news

Those comments reek of "everyone is unreasonable unless they agree with me"...

We'd be open to trading Jones in your opinion then? Hahahahahaha Oh, but not Dunn, Salem or Tyson......... So they have no currency in your opinion or they are more untouchable then Jones? Lol

Wow, that was a late night post and slightly intoxicated. What I meant with Jones was that we'd be open to trading him if he won't re-sign. Roos has already flagged this.

A [censored] leapard can't change its spots. MFC has been a royal [censored] leapard for some time and aggressive trading will help change our spots.

This is one of the... least impressive... posts I've ever read on this forum.

A leopard can't change its spots, but we're trying to change our spots? WTF?!

Some are suggesting that, since Richmond came to us with the deal, we therefore can't be exploring a so-called 'mega-trade'.

IMO it's both. Assuming we want to take at least one of 2 and 3 to the draft, we will have realised at some point during negotiations that we need to get into the top 15/20 to get the type of player we want. At the same time, Richmond has come to us with a proposal. Doesn't mean we didn't ask them 'is there anyone on our list you'd look at for pick 12?'.

My biggest concern with this trade is the cultural impact. It's all well and good to acknowledge that our list has problems and we need to fix things, but I wonder what the impact on the other players would be if we traded a player who, from all reports, actually strongly wants to be here. Especially if the goal is to bring in someone who just wants more money and to get away from Nathan Buckley.

For mine, upgrading from 23 to 12 is not worth moving Trengove on, taking into account the fact that his best football is most likely ahead of him given his injuries, unless we are looking to on-trade 12 as part of a bigger deal. In other words, I don't believe upgrading from 23 to 12 just to go to the draft and take a kid is worth moving Trengove on.

I imagine the impact on the playing group would be for them to think "****. These guys are serious about doing whatever it takes to get better. I'd better lift my game, or look for a new home, or think about life outside footy."

And guy like Jones, Tyson would be thinking "YES."

I imagine the impact on the playing group would be for them to think "****. These guys are serious about doing whatever it takes to get better. I'd better lift my game, or look for a new home, or think about life outside footy."

And guy like Jones, Tyson would be thinking "YES."

Is that what happened when we pushed Junior into retirement?

(I don't know tbh, I'm just wondering).