What's Roosy on about here? Is pick 40 alive or not? I'm confused.

Pre-season to go to another level: Roos

“I think we’ve got some good youth and experience and then we’ve still got picks two and three and 40 [in the NAB AFL Draft],” he said.

What's wrong with Spencer and Vince??

What's Roosy on about here? Is pick 40 alive or not? I'm confused.

Pre-season to go to another level: Roos

“I think we’ve got some good youth and experience and then we’ve still got picks two and three and 40 [in the NAB AFL Draft],” he said.

more changes to our list to come then... given we now have some good mids and crumbing forwards, i think he must be considering another kfp with pick 3. One other thing to remember, if we dont go for one of the Key forwards available then these players will slide to Brisbane, Footscray, north melbourne etc... teams that will be the main ones we will be competing with next year to move up the ladder. Brisbane is already looking good with their midfield give them someone like McCartin up forward and they will be looking to challenge for the 8 next year.

During the period 2008 to 2011 we took 90% kids , kids and more kids.

The nett result of that was our poor list of the last three years when we had bugger all experience and the majority of the kids did not come on.

IMO we now see a more reasoned selection of experienced players and kids.

Sadly the imbalance is going to take a further number of years to correct.

This year we are seeing the selection of players with at least a couple of years in the system.

If we only have two draft selections this year then so be it.

Again IMO the MFC cannot afford to wait for a large number of kids to develop.

We need experience in 2015.

I am happy with the way we are selecting players this year.

Time will tell if we have chosen well but I believe in 2015 we have an improved chance of winning games.

Evans, Terlich, McKenzie and Matt Jones are the ones I'd be pushing out. 1 this year and 3 in October 15

I'd like to use pick 40 in the draft. We know what these 4 offer our team, all are limited footballers. ND 40 whilst a speculative pick could be a 10 year gun or a bust but you've got to inject the talent and not just persevere with list clogger's.

Trengove situation is a really bad one and difficult to handle to do the right thing for both parties.

Evans, Terlich and McKenzie I agree, but I reckon Matt Jones is good depth.

more changes to our list to come then... given we now have some good mids and crumbing forwards, i think he must be considering another kfp with pick 3. One other thing to remember, if we dont go for one of the Key forwards available then these players will slide to Brisbane, Footscray, north melbourne etc... teams that will be the main ones we will be competing with next year to move up the ladder. Brisbane is already looking good with their midfield give them someone like McCartin up forward and they will be looking to challenge for the 8 next year.

None of those teams you listed have any chance at getting McCartin considering 1. Out of them all Norf have the highest pick in 16, followed by WBs pick 26, and Brisbanes 44 (No chance in hell he'll slip that far) and 2. All the players Brisbane are picking up in the draft are academy zone picks.

Evans, Terlich and McKenzie I agree, but I reckon Matt Jones is good depth.

Evans has got to go for pick #40. At least the others featured in our recent B&F since coming on board, more a combination of their approach to the contest and our poor list overall rather than an indication of their skill set at AFL level.

actually its dead simple....and fair to both parties. It just seems abhorrent to some here; probably doesnt within the club.

Abhorrent to me. Abhorrent to 95% of DL posters. Abhorrent to the AFLPA, the AFL and any self respecting, contract abiding fan and member or any sporting organisation. And I would bet my bottom dollar, abhorrent to the MFC.

Still find it ridiculous that people are still discussing this as if its the 'right thing to do'...

I understand its a business, but this would be just like another non-AFL business paying out a contract of a pregnant woman and reinstating her on a reduced, short-term contract purely on the basis that shes pregnant.

Just. Wouldn't. Happen.

Evans, Terlich, McKenzie and Matt Jones are the ones I'd be pushing out. 1 this year and 3 in October 15

I'd like to use pick 40 in the draft. We know what these 4 offer our team, all are limited footballers. ND 40 whilst a speculative pick could be a 10 year gun or a bust but you've got to inject the talent and not just persevere with list clogger's.

Trengove situation is a really bad one and difficult to handle to do the right thing for both parties.

Matt Jones signed a new contract extension in January for 2 years, he is contracted to the end of 2016.

Dean Terlich signed a new contract in August for 2 years, he is contracted to the end of 2016.

I would suggest they are required players.

I agree on Evans and McKenzie.

During the period 2008 to 2011 we took 90% kids , kids and more kids.

The nett result of that was our poor list of the last three years when we had bugger all experience and the majority of the kids did not come on.

IMO we now see a more reasoned selection of experienced players and kids.

Sadly the imbalance is going to take a further number of years to correct.

This year we are seeing the selection of players with at least a couple of years in the system.

If we only have two draft selections this year then so be it.

Again IMO the MFC cannot afford to wait for a large number of kids to develop.

We need experience in 2015.

I am happy with the way we are selecting players this year.

Time will tell if we have chosen well but I believe in 2015 we have an improved chance of winning games.

In terms of guys who played significant games last year its:

Frawley out. Frost, Garlett, Lumumba, Newton, pick 2 and pick 3 (wait and see what they can do) and Hogan in.

Really it's Frost and Hogan to replace what Frawley did at either end, then adding some pieces to positions we are very weak in a crumbing forward and outside runner.

If those additions play a decent amount of games at a reasonable level and we don't have a lot of others drop off then we can't help but to be better. Whether that translates to wins is another question as despite some close losses with still had a fair few blow outs. I'm also not sure if those ins are as good as Tyson, Vince and Cross who combined for a real spike in performance. We might be able to get some mature help out of the ready to go guys, but we will need the draft picks or Hogan to burst on to the scene to get the same impact of Tyson.

I agree we couldn't go too hard for kids right now. We need to build something like a best 22 and solid 30 players so the club has a foundation. At the same time I don't think we added too many kids in 2010 and 2011 (plus they all failed anyway), nor really 2007. We had a definite plan in 2008-2009 and it worked for a while in 2010 but then it came crashing down.

In some ways I think we are almost back to where we were in 2010 in terms of just having two top picks in the draft. Having had some high picks in the years before. This time though we have a coaching plan to see it out and a more stable array of kids instead of just a bunch picked up in the two previous drafts and thrown in.

Matt Jones signed a new contract extension in January for 2 years, he is contracted to the end of 2016.

Dean Terlich signed a new contract in August for 2 years, he is contracted to the end of 2016.

I would suggest they are required players.

I agree on Evans and McKenzie.

I have no real problem with Matt Jones though it seems like he will probably play a fair bit at Casey if the likes of Salem, Toumpas, Riley, Newton, Michie and our new draftees come on this year.

I love Terlichs attack on the ball and the contest but his disposal is shocking and he makes poor decisions which compounds the disposal issue.

So does Trengove go straight on the LTI list? I wish Jack were injury free and dominating games for MFC. I was appalled we almost traded him given how he's been treated and the loyalty he's shown to the club.

In terms of guys who played significant games last year its:

Frawley out. Frost, Garlett, Lumumba, Newton, pick 2 and pick 3 (wait and see what they can do) and Hogan in.

Really it's Frost and Hogan to replace what Frawley did at either end, then adding some pieces to positions we are very weak in a crumbing forward and outside runner.

If those additions play a decent amount of games at a reasonable level and we don't have a lot of others drop off then we can't help but to be better. Whether that translates to wins is another question as despite some close losses with still had a fair few blow outs. I'm also not sure if those ins are as good as Tyson, Vince and Cross who combined for a real spike in performance. We might be able to get some mature help out of the ready to go guys, but we will need the draft picks or Hogan to burst on to the scene to get the same impact of Tyson.

I agree we couldn't go too hard for kids right now. We need to build something like a best 22 and solid 30 players so the club has a foundation. At the same time I don't think we added too many kids in 2010 and 2011 (plus they all failed anyway), nor really 2007. We had a definite plan in 2008-2009 and it worked for a while in 2010 but then it came crashing down.

In some ways I think we are almost back to where we were in 2010 in terms of just having two top picks in the draft. Having had some high picks in the years before. This time though we have a coaching plan to see it out and a more stable array of kids instead of just a bunch picked up in the two previous drafts and thrown in.

Agreed with most of that.

Having said that now there are better recruitment staff and talent ID staff within the new regime and after last years trade and draft period I'm keen to use 2, 3 and 40 plus stretch.

A few special kids can really make an immediate impact.

Abhorrent to me. Abhorrent to 95% of DL posters. Abhorrent to the AFLPA, the AFL and any self respecting, contract abiding fan and member or any sporting organisation. And I would bet my bottom dollar, abhorrent to the MFC.

Still find it ridiculous that people are still discussing this as if its the 'right thing to do'...

I understand its a business, but this would be just like another non-AFL business paying out a contract of a pregnant woman and reinstating her on a reduced, short-term contract purely on the basis that shes pregnant.

Just. Wouldn't. Happen.

Would happen and does.

In practical terms Trengove going to the rookie list is likely to make no difference to the player. He will be paid the same. He would just be providing an opportunity for another player to play football for MFC, which in his current state he is unable to do.

It makes sense for both parties and neither party loses anything.

Abhorrent to me. Abhorrent to 95% of DL posters. Abhorrent to the AFLPA, the AFL and any self respecting, contract abiding fan and member or any sporting organisation. And I would bet my bottom dollar, abhorrent to the MFC.

Still find it ridiculous that people are still discussing this as if its the 'right thing to do'...

I understand its a business, but this would be just like another non-AFL business paying out a contract of a pregnant woman and reinstating her on a reduced, short-term contract purely on the basis that shes pregnant.

Just. Wouldn't. Happen.

Then its abhorrent to you. its not to me. I know its not to quite a few here also.

Quite frankly I think it does a disservice to leave Trengove on the senior list with all its associated pressures and expectations. Even Jack doesnt expect to play in 15.

I consider your analogy abhorrent though as in no way does it parallel the professional sporting situation. Thats a straw argument at best and a nonsense otherwise.

You by inference suggest that delisting and rookying ( on full current wages) isnt the RIGHT thing to do. I think I need you to explain what your criteria and measurement of such is.

He's not being fired and cast upon the street to fend for himself , he's being repositioned in the playing group a point of which is he cant actually play !!

You understand this is business but then suggest its just like any other non AFL business. This is blatantly not the case. There ARE conditions etc which are somewhat unique to a sporting situation.

Playing sport is in actuality akin to mercenaries. Why ? Going in you as a participant are aware its entirely performance based. You are aware there are no promises in regards to longevity of career. You are aware a serious LTI means its all over red rover. None of this would be unexpected nor a surprise should it eventuate. This is not signing on at Coles !! Its a simple exchange of ability/performance for a paycheck. keep it up and youre more than likley to have a contract offered.Stop...and it stops.

Im afraid this angelic notion of loyalty is a furphy. The club would still be respectful of Jack even were it to rooky him. They would still be looking after him and indeed hoping he makes a recovery. But they dont owe him a lifes living, nor does he owe the club anything other than doing his best whilst a recipient of the club's help and encouragement ( and of course paychecks)

For some years now, clubs have delisted players (contracted and uncontracted) and then selected them as rookies. This has become more prevalent since the advent of mature age rookies and this year, by my count, at least three clubs have announced their intention of following suit. It's acceptable to the AFL and a number of clubs, the MFC has done it before and it was reported that Hawthorn are considering it with Sam Grimley to give themselves an extra choice in the draft or by way of a dfa if it so wishes. I think it's abhorrent to suggest that Melbourne might not consider every legally permitted means to improve its list. I don't understand some people who would like the club to remain in the stone age and not even try to compete to get the best list.

Putting JT on the Rookie list, might make some sense, but even if he stays on the main list next year we'll be able to put him on the LTI list and be able to promote a rookie to play senior footy all the same (probably for the entire year).

Putting JT on the Rookie list, might make some sense, but even if he stays on the main list next year we'll be able to put him on the LTI list and be able to promote a rookie to play senior footy all the same (probably for the entire year).

yes you can but it prohibits another dip into the draft or otherwise. He only goes on the LTI as such next season . His being on the senior list currently takes up a position. The argument of many here is ... what benefit to the club is there to remaiin on the senior list? Thats the point of conjecture.

Putting JT on the rookie list now, allows us to use #40 in the draft. Allows us a Oscar Mcdonald, Nathan Drummond or Tom Wilkinson selection.

JT is unlikely to play in 2015 & needs the time. But it should be advised we will promote JT back once he is medically fit to play post 2015.

They may want to limit the number of players that they want to develop year by year. Next year we may take more players in the draft than during the trade period. It really depends on how the coaches view our list needs year by year.

Why not just delist Trengove? MFC delisted some others with LTIs in the past.

Matt Jones signed a new contract extension in January for 2 years, he is contracted to the end of 2016.

Dean Terlich signed a new contract in August for 2 years, he is contracted to the end of 2016.

I would suggest they are required players.

I agree on Evans and McKenzie.

Terlich only signed a one year deal.

Terlich only signed a one year deal.

He signed for 2

Pretty sure I read somewhere he Riley and Bail all signed one year deals.

Putting JT on the rookie list now, allows us to use #40 in the draft. Allows us a Oscar Mcdonald, Nathan Drummond or Tom Wilkinson selection.

JT is unlikely to play in 2015 & needs the time. But it should be advised we will promote JT back once he is medically fit to play post 2015.

He is not contracted past 2015 season and I would not want to make any undertakings at this point beyond his current contract.

He is no certainty play again at a sustained capable AFL level.

Why not just delist Trengove? MFC delisted some others with LTIs in the past.

When they had a contract?

they could potentially put Terlich, Jones, Evans or McKenzie onto the rookie list to make room for extra picks.