Deserves better for having stuck it out

It's that type of thinking that has kept us where we have been for nearly a decade.

i want him gone.

he won't help us get better.

I had voted for him to stay.

Don't care now

As I said. Low ball him and if he takes the contract offer, look to trade him out.

I originally voted that I wanted Garland to stay. Great clubman and a good player but personally I think he is mentally exhausted and needs a fresh start.

He's a C-grader. There are literally hundreds of them running around in the AFL. Don't care either way.

Garland's last 3 weeks have been 7 disposals, 13 disposals and 9 disposals. After being smashed in the first quarter for the last 3 weeks running you all need to face the fact he is a dud who can't win his own ball. He can't lead the defence as he should with his age and experience.

He's not the only one down back but we are better off without him.

Voted to keep, want him to go. Offers nothing we don't have and his up and under kicks are utter dross.

He'd be mad to leave MFC (if we offer him a contract) if he wants to stay in the AFL. At a real club he'll be gone at the end of the first contract he signs, whilst we will probably accept his performances for another 5 years.

I would advocate delisting as I don't buy that he's giving it everything for the MFC.

i certainly can't possibly believe that he'd get $500k from us or on the open market.

he's a below average footballer playing in a below average side.

If someone wants to pay him 500k we should take the top 25 pick and run before they realise.

Another, who plays like an introvert.

Just waiting for him to be bold and dare...and to hell with the consequences.

Another, who plays like an introvert.

Just waiting for him to be bold and dare...and to hell with the consequences.

Never going to happen.

Playing like he is already out the door.

I'd be very surprised if he could get a regular game at any other AFL club.

Love him and when he plays well he's enormous. Problem is it's only 3 times a year.

Get currency for him and move him on.

bye colin thanks for your service

Colin hasn't performed well for what seems a long time, which seems to be par for course for a lot of MFC players in recent years. He is coming out of contract, Manager shopping him around, obviously wants more $. My question would be, Is it worth paying an underperformer in a side that is obvious the worst team in the history of the club more money?

Love him and when he plays well he's enormous. Problem is it's only 3 times a year.

Get currency for him and move him on.

He's not worth a cold pie.

Interesting to see that the poll has now completely swung the other way after yesterday's performance.. I know thats partly to do with supporters jumping on and off players anytime we win or lose as a club.

But to me, Garland's performance on the weekend didn't convince me anymore than any other week. He performed as he has for too long. And it's problematic. And if supporters can't see it, you are living in fairy land. A land in which you hold some false hope that these problematic players will all of a sudden come good and play an important role in helping remove these virus-like performances.

Would enjoy hearing from Wiseblood again about his thoughts. I honestly can't understand what at all you see. Not only did he not do the most basic and fundemental job he had assigned which was beating his man. He also contributed to turn-overs, provided no run, no intensity, no leadership.

Here's a good word. He floats. He's a floater, and that's what he's been doing for most of the year. There is no meaningful contribution.

I understand he's not on his own, but the fact that he's coming out of contract and is still being played in our starting 22 is of interest to me and is the reason why this thread has been opened. It's not about me bashing him as a player. If Jamar was still being played I'd have started a thread about him also and my views about Frawley being problematic were made well aware this time last year.

I'll be absolutely gob-smacked if Roos and Goodwin offer him another contract.

For anybody watching yesterday, did you not cringe to yourself that we've had to bring in a player from the Doggies by the name of Daniel Cross who is literally only getting games because he is one of few senior players on our list who plays with any sort of heart, desire and willingness. If you're looking at him as a player without that context, he wouldn't be getting games at any other club right now. He butchered the ball, fumbled and was as slow as always. But he still gets a game for us. Because these players I keep mentioning will not and do not provide what he does.

It's both a bittersweet feeling. I admire him so much for his willingness to compete and then I cringe when he turns the ball straight over or fumbles.

He is symbolic of these problems I'm talking about.

I think the only way we're going to be able to mend this 27+ old age bracket of players who are simply 'lost' is by moving them on methodically and continuing to top up with players like Vince and Cross. We need to get those selections right.

There are a number of Geelong players coming OOC who I'd be willing to make a play for. Players who are still mentally and physically fit and able. I've mentioned Adcock although I don't know how his body is holding up.

This age bracket player replacement needs to be prioritised if we're going to have any hope of keeping our young and talented players on the list.

It's the only way forward.

I think the only way we're going to be able to mend this 27+ old age bracket of players who are simply 'lost' is by moving them on methodically and continuing to top up with players like Vince and Cross. We need to get those selections right.

There are a number of Geelong players coming OOC who I'd be willing to make a play for. Players who are still mentally and physically fit and able. I've mentioned Adcock although I don't know how his body is holding up.

This age bracket player replacement needs to be prioritised if we're going to have any hope of keeping our young and talented players on the list.

It's the only way forward.

The trouble with this is that it costs us in young talent and pushes our rebuild back. Many complain that we are not matching it and falling behind the Saints and Dogs, they don't see the value of the senior players these clubs have that lead the way.

It's much better if you have senior players who have grown with the club and are part of it's fabric who can show the way. We don't have these players and have to buy in.

It's a long road ahead and it angers me when I think of the mess our club has been left in.

What an absolute f...up created by the previous admin.

Think he has to go. Optimizes the last few years and he needs a fresh start and we need to move on from that time.

We need to look at bringing in a mature replacement for him though. Any thoughts?

The trouble with this is that it costs us in young talent and pushes our rebuild back. Many complain that we are not matching it and falling behind the Saints and Dogs, they don't see the value of the senior players these clubs have that lead the way.

The year we got Vince and Cross, we also got Tyson and Salem.

Why do people think I'm talking about drafting every 28+ year old out there and forget drafting kids?!

It's about list management.

Do you really think if we started strategically culling some of these problematic senior players, we wouldn't bring in replacements with similar games experience and actual leadership traits?

Of course those holes would need filling. It's about bringing in the right ones. Ones who will provide what these guys lack.

Let's say we lost Garland, Howe and Jamar at the end of the year. You'd like to say at the very least we'd sign one 27-28 year old + player, perhaps two depending on what's available. I reckon I could name about 10 out there who would be more influential and have more of a positive and proactive effect on our list and how we'd perform next year.

Then of course you draft the right amount of kids from the draft, perhaps another mature age rookie. Etc etc.

In theory it's a piece of [censored]..

The year we got Vince and Cross, we also got Tyson and Salem.

Why do people think I'm talking about drafting every 28+ year old out there and forget drafting kids?!

It's about list management.

Do you really think if we started strategically culling some of these problematic senior players, we wouldn't bring in replacements with similar games experience and actual leadership traits?

Of course those holes would need filling. It's about bringing in the right ones. Ones who will provide what these guys lack.

Let's say we lost Garland, Howe and Jamar at the end of the year. You'd like to say at the very least we'd sign one 27-28 year old + player, perhaps two depending on what's available. I reckon I could name about 10 out there who would be more influential and have more of a positive and proactive effect on our list and how we'd perform next year.

Then of course you draft the right amount of kids from the draft, perhaps another mature age rookie. Etc etc.

In theory it's a piece of [censored]..

I'm agreeing with you 'steve', but it does cost and we do have to ensure we get the right players, not another Dawes or like the EFC a Cooney...

Garland is pretty good one on one albeit he has got pinged a few times for wrapping arms around qpponents.

On any one day he is generally never the worst of our back six and has had very good games when he only has to play his role. He suffers as many do, not just Melbourne defenders, when we are under the pump and losing because he generally just goes back to old habits of just stopping his player when perhaps the team needs someone to step up and attack off half back.

I reckon Garland is a smart bloke and he has lived through such club horrors that the self preservation instinct kicks in and he sort of thinks that if he just takes care of his man he can't get overly criticized. I think Grimes sometimes plays that way when we are getting pumped. I would like to see him play with a bit more freedom if he gets the chance and we actually start winning more games than we lose, (a couple of big ifs). He deserves that. I hope he wants it for us and himself rather than the answer to the question in the change rooms when someone asks how do you go about playing better footy and it seems like they all say "go to another club".

I think Suckling would be rubbish at Melbourne, under searing pressure his passing would go to crap.

I would like to keep Garland and hope he would like to stay and the club and he can agree to terms. But I think that of most players. I hate free agency.

agree about suckling