it has ( been posted ) but its one of the most curious things to find daylight during the trade period so far

Its intriguing and odd at the same time.

The phrase "hear about" could mean lots of things but I deduce ( or at least assume ) the context is trade.

Is this AFL hack a conduit privy to our cause and used to disseminate or is he mucking around?

don't know if you listen to him but he's a mad Demon supporter and wouldn't be talking [censored], but l hope he's wrong because l don't want Trengove or Watts to go!!!!!!!

Jordie Mckenzie was loyal to us in tough times. Even more so than Trengove when he rejected a spot on the senior list at Adelaide to stay a rookie at Mfc.

Would a trade involving Mckenzie evoke the same outrage from those demanding loyalty to Trengove?

Edited October 12, 201410 yr by jabberwocky

Just the whole idea of Trengove playing in the same team as Jack Reiwoldt and Tyrone Vickery irks me.

Don't stress, Vickery won't be on a list for long.

If the Pies won't accept pick 5 and 25 because they want an established player to replace Beams what makes everyone think they will take 3 and 12? They loaded up on kids last season and so far in negotiations with Brisbane have been adamant that they want a quality player not more kids. Just as Roos has stated we wont be bringing in too many kids why throw away JT for pick 12 and another kid, not to mention giving up pick 23. Personally I hope we consider the offer for about 10 seconds and politely refuse and hope that JT doesn't take it too badly

Trengove has had a debilitating foot injury for "probably" 3 full seasons. That's why he hasn't produced - some here are trying to make it sound like he's had opportunities and failed without taking into account his injury issues. He's mostly played under duress (in my opinion) His foot injury was almost certainly misdiagnosed so who's to blame?

He's had 2 full seasons to prove himself - his first 2 years. Most here were in agreement that he had a bright future after 2011. Having a crook foot in footy is a bit like having a crook AC joint or stress fractures for a fast bowler. Both types of injury can render a sportsperson close enough to useless.

Also, some here are glossing over his injury concerns and only want to talk about his "form". He actually had major surgery earlier this year on a foot issue that he probably had for at least 18 months prior (probably more like 2+ years) That surgery kept him out for the whole season so we can assume it wasn't a "minor concern"

Hogan has just missed a whole season with stress fractures - it's certainly not a form issue with him. By the way, Hogan still needs to find his feet ... if he plays a dozen games next season and has an impact in 3 or 4 of those games, we should be quite satisfied.

Agree with you 100% 'Macca'.

In my opinion you could not use the form line of the last 2 years as the basis for a decision to trade Trengove. There may be other reasons like the damage done by putting the leadership on him maybe deemed irreparable whilst he stays at the club or he may not be able to get back to full fitness. Another one maybe there is another deal in the wings with a player we need more.

His first 2 years at the club were very good, unfortunately his career was derailed by injury and poor management/coaching.

Being reported on Tigers BF board that he failed a medico.

Didn't he have his medico yesterday?

Being reported on Tigers BF board that he failed a medico.

Thought I read somewhere he passed??

Interesting.

Being reported on Tigers BF board that he failed a medico.

If true, would at least explain why we were thinking of shipping him off for nothing more than a small upgrade of picks. [censored] news if true.

Disregard. Was a "joke", apparently.

That's the first and last time I report from the Tigers BF board.

Agree with you 100% 'Macca'.

In my opinion you could not use the form line of the last 2 years as the basis for a decision to trade Trengove. There may be other reasons like the damage done by putting the leadership on him maybe deemed irreparable whilst he stays at the club or he may not be able to get back to full fitness. Another one maybe there is another deal in the wings with a player we need more.

His first 2 years at the club were very good, unfortunately his career was derailed by injury and poor management/coaching.

The coaching had an effect on a lot of our players, 'rjay'. but I do believe that as professional sportsmen, they had a duty to still go about things in a professional manner. Many of them didn't.

Trengove had major injury issues when not many of our players did ... except for Clark. Both had foot injuries which is quite telling. Like Clark, I put just about all of it on the foot injury with Trengove ... the rest of it pales into insignificance if you've got no "take off speed" or speed in general - all other aspects of one's footy can be affected with a debilitating injury.

Captaincy or no captaincy, if you're not fit enough, you can't produce. I've known plenty of people who have had their sporting lives affected because of injury - strangely enough, a lot of those injuries were lower leg issues (achilles, ankle, calf issues, stress fractures in their feet etc)

I believe that Trengove probably did the noble thing and thought he could play through the injury but ... history tells us he couldn't do it. Footy clubs can be fairly unforgiving places for those who are constantly injured (especially if a player misses a multitude of games with a "mystery injury")

Regardless of what happens with this "possible" trade, I hope he makes a full recovery and gets back to playing good footy.

But does it have to be with Richmond? Ugh!

I have heard that they want a pick in the 8-15 region in order to pick up Jake Lever, who they do not want to pull the trigger with 2 or 3 on. That said I personally don't like the idea of trading Trengove, but I am certain that Roos has the best interest of the club in his head. So I will back him.... Please just be doing it to get an offer for Toumpas or someone else please!

The coaching had an effect on a lot of our players, 'rjay'. but I do believe that as professional sportsmen, they had a duty to still go about things in a professional manner. Many of them didn't.

Trengove had major injury issues when not many of our players did ... except for Clark. Both had foot injuries which is quite telling. Like Clark, I put just about all of it on the foot injury with Trengove ... the rest of it pales into insignificance if you've got no "take off speed" or speed in general - all other aspects of one's footy can be affected with a debilitating injury.

Captaincy or no captaincy, if you're not fit enough, you can't produce. I've known plenty of people who have had their sporting lives affected because of injury - strangely enough, a lot of those injuries were lower leg issues (achilles, ankle, calf issues, stress fractures in their feet etc)

I believe that Trengove probably did the noble thing and thought he could play through the injury but ... history tells us he couldn't do it. Footy clubs can be fairly unforgiving places for those who are constantly injured (especially if a player misses a multitude of games with a "mystery injury")

Regardless of what happens with this "possible" trade, I hope he makes a full recovery and gets back to playing good footy.

But does it have to be with Richmond? Ugh!

Agree again 'Macca'.

With Trengove I think the management/coaching issue was that he felt the need to play through his injuries. This should have been sorted much earlier and he could have been back on track this year. Too much pressure was placed on this kid way to early.

There is no doubt Trengove's take off speed and power were badly effected in the last couple of years and he shouldn't of had to play when good old blind Freddie and some of us on here could see something wasn't right.

Lever missed the entire 2014 season recovering from an ACL repair must be a speculative pick at best for pick 10-12

I have heard that they want a pick in the 8-15 region in order to pick up Jake Lever, who they do not want to pull the trigger with 2 or 3 on. That said I personally don't like the idea of trading Trengove, but I am certain that Roos has the best interest of the club in his head. So I will back him.... Please just be doing it to get an offer for Toumpas or someone else please!

I actually don't believe this. You can't be guaranteed of picking up Lever, I would be more inclined to think maybe there are a few targets in that range we are interested in but even then it's a flawed strategy.

The one thing you can be sure of on draft night is that we got the player we targeted and we couldn't believe he fell to our pick. Only pick one struggles with this reasoning.

Lever missed the entire 2014 season recovering from an ACL repair must be a speculative pick at best for pick 10-12

Was shaping as a number 1 pick from last year. Could be a bit like Dyson Heppell in terms of injury ridden, but still a jet

what is all this yap about beams he want to go to qld for a reason let the dude go there , no way no how want him at MFC

Agree again 'Macca'.

With Trengove I think the management/coaching issue was that he felt the need to play through his injuries. This should have been sorted much earlier and he could have been back on track this year. Too much pressure was placed on this kid way to early.

There is no doubt Trengove's take off speed and power were badly effected in the last couple of years and he shouldn't of had to play when good old blind Freddie and some of us on here could see something wasn't right.

Good point ... again, if he had a "hot" spot that would flare up in an inconsistent manner, both the player, the FD and coaches can start second guessing themselves.

The advice might have been to try and play through it and they'd monitor it. Weeks turn into months and before you know it, they could have been repeating the same exercise for 2 years.

Going into the 3rd year with a more professional way of doing things at the club - he's evaluated properly and gets the surgery done.

Ugh...... wake me up in a week. All this speculation about Beams, Danger, some random GWS midfielder, going to the draft with all our picks because Roos and Taylor want to do a full re-build properly with Petracca/Brayshow/Lever/Cockatoo.... it's doing my head in.

Edited October 11, 201410 yr by Lamashtu

Jmac I think that's just a coincidence, I don't think they would do this without a target in mind

Maybe, because the deal as proposed doesn't stack up for mine...

Jordie Mckenzie was loyal to us in tough times. Even more so that Trengove when he rejected a spot on the senior list at Adelaide to stay a rookie at Mfc.

Would a trade involving Mckenzie evoke the same outrage from those demanding loyalty to Trengove?

Not a fair comparison. The upside on Jack we have seen . Its good. Jordie we have also seen his best and it ain't good.

Not a fair comparison. The upside on Jack we have seen . Its good. Jordie we have also seen his best and it ain't good.

Probably not a great comparison but I get the essence of the argument. Just because a player shows us loyalty doesn't mean we're obliged to keep them. Just as Roos would have pushed Frawley out the door if he'd tried to re-sign this year.

You have to make pragmatic, emotionless list decisions if you want to get head. I think we're all sick of being the basket case of the AFL. It's time for Roos to be a hardass and move this club up the ladder.

Don't disagree with that. But Trengove also has to have the ability to spread as well.

This is the area he has struggled since 2012.

The guy is not a tank. He has the physique for speed but it is not there.

If it was then this deal would not be up for discussion

Let me just clarify WYL If the deal is a straight swap for 12 as I have said many times whilst disappointed I can deal with it and will accept that it is a ruthless business, it is the Pick 23 that has me somewhat annoyed.

Let me just clarify WYL If the deal is a straight swap for 12 as I have said many times whilst disappointed I can deal with it and will accept that it is a ruthless business, it is the Pick 23 that has me somewhat annoyed.

We'll likely go back to them and ask for a second round downgrade. So pick 23 for pick 30.

Let me just clarify WYL If the deal is a straight swap for 12 as I have said many times whilst disappointed I can deal with it and will accept that it is a ruthless business, it is the Pick 23 that has me somewhat annoyed.

I am more interested in experienced playes PSD. The draft is a lottery we have fcuked it up too many times.

I am also interested in the medical that Richmond put him through.

If he passed it maybe he will survive at the MFC.

This trade week has been crazy so far!!

To Delanders on the east coast you can clarify for me but was Tyson initially our target last season, did we ask for someone else possibly Shiel or Treloar and it ended up being Tyson put up as the trade option.

Richmond have come to us requesting Trengove and the club has asked him if he is open to the trade which he has said (according to reports) he would rather stay but would not block a trade if the club wanted it and he has reviewed the Toiges facilities and had a medical. I would think the bargaining and discussions will be occurring as we speak and continue into Monday. The initial report by Jay Clark (who if you are reviewing this as part of your job are a complete moron who doesn't even know players names and has a strike rate up there with North Korean factory workers) put forward will probably not end up being the final deal.

Trengove may end up being replaced by another MFC player for 12 & 23

Trengove for 12 may be the deal

Trengove & 23 for Pick 12 & 2nd rounder

Trengove & 23 for Pick 12 and a RFC player

Trengove for 12 and a third party involved

I think we are only seeing the start of this and the last 4 days are going to see a lot of rumours and long nights for footy department staff