Jump to content

WELCOME TO THE MELBOURNE FOOTBALL CLUB – JAKE MELKSHAM

Theo
Theo
in Melbourne Demons

Featured Replies

 

Or..... it just makes sense? Considering he'll be on our list for more than... this year?

It's logic big dawg. I agree his year wasn't great. Underwhelming. Does it mean I think he was a bad pickup? Far too early to make that call.

The argument for Melksham is there. Which is why the club are interested bro.

Along these lines, there should be no more criticism of BP as a recruiter until everyone he recruited departs the club.

We have all been unfair on our bro

  • Quote

    stevethemanjordan, you talk like you know it all, but that's a lot of text with very little actual substance.

    Comparing Melksham with the likes of Matt Jones, Bail and Terlich is a [censored] poor argument, in fact it just highlights the type of player Melksham is. Better than those 3, wow, what a game changer.

    Melksham is no good, hasn't been any good in his first 6 years and that won't change.

    Try aiming a bit higher.

    Matt Jones did crack it for 9 games this year, nearly half the season! if getting Melksham helps decrease that figure to 0 in 2016 then I can see the rationale. It's a fairly weak argument though.

  • Quote
    •  

    This time of year everyone seems to panic about every recruit/trade not being a Dangerfield or Fyfe. Let's not forget we have other spots to fill too, like those of Bail, M.Jones, Terlich, McKenzie etc. Just because we're seemingly into someone as a trade doesn't mean we're offering 10 years at 1mil a year. IF we are interested in Melksham it's clearly to bolster the talent of our depth, not to take the spot of Bernie.

    We can talk to more than one player at a time, and I'm pretty sure we wouldn't be going after Milkshake at the expense of going after Danger.

    Let's get some perspective on our list. Melksham is clearly better than our current depth options in Riley, M.Jones, McKenzie and on and on... So he would improve that part of our list.

  • Quote
    • Like 5

    Right. Well I'll give Lamumba more than 'one' average year before I judge whether or not he's a good pickup. In fact I might wait until his time is up at the MFC and then reflect on his contribution and whether or not he was a good pickup for us or not.

    But good on you for saying that.

    exactly.

    he is a running back/winger that we needed, to instill into our list & gameplan. he's a good start, to change from the likes of Bail & MJones, Mckenzie etc.

    These are all just stepping stones along our new journey, with a footy dept who know the right way about things, but we still have to take little steps across this pond, as the bigger fish haven't wanted to leap onto our Lilly, in recent times.

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    It's spelt 'Lumumba', have some respect.

    Nice and easy approach to wait wait for the career to be over before making a call.

    Why bother arguing in favour of Melksham before we've even got him then?

    i shaw am glad that someone saw & reported on the important details, in this sorry saga of all our woes. goodonya DA

  • Quote

    Yes, regretfully so.

    I honestly thought he'd have trouble putting on weight from early photos and clearly I'm wrong.

    Is this the same BenHur trying to create a cool and new online identity?

    You'll also look silly if Melksham ends up at our club.

    The one and the same, although I prefer Hannabal, but alas,that's a lifetime ago and my poor old dog is dead anyway (she was Hanna for short). Btw, I've never tried to hide this, although some seem to think it's a win if they "out me".

    Anyway, I'm all about love and peace these days :)

    I don't want Melksham, because he's just another C-grader. I accept he has some AFL traits and that Goodwin sees something, but after 6 years I'd rather back the draft.

    Besides, with Trengove (who I've always rated and believe will make it), plus Petracca, Stretch, ANB, vanDenberg, Kent, Harmes, etc., I think he'll struggle for a game.

    I didn't want Lumumba and nothing has changed my mind.

    I'm not averse to genuine class, but I see no point in bringing in more very average players. I'd rather back the draft.

    Edited by ProDee

  • Quote
    • Like 4

    The one and the same, although I prefer Hannabal, but alas,that's a lifetime ago and my poor old dog is dead anyway (she was Hanna for short). Btw, I've never tried to hide this, although some seem to think it's a win if they "out me".

    Anyway, I'm all about love and peace these days :)

    I don't want Melksham, because he's just another C-grader. I accept he has some AFL traits and that Goodwin sees something, but after 6 years I'd rather back the draft.

    Besides, with Trengove (who I've always rated and believe will make it), plus Petracca, Stretch, ANB, vanDenberg, Kent, Harmes, etc., I think he'll struggle for a game.

    I didn't want Lamumba and nothing has changed my mind.

    I'm not averse to genuine class, but I see no point in bringing in more very average players. I'd rather back the draft.

    Yeah just think, we could have had two absolute guns with picks 61 an 79, instead of that useless Garlett...

    Edited by stuie

  • Quote
    •  

    The one and the same, although I prefer Hannabal, but alas,that's a lifetime ago and my poor old dog is dead anyway (she was Hanna for short). Btw, I've never tried to hide this, although some seem to think it's a win if they "out me".

    Anyway, I'm all about love and peace these days :)

    I don't want Melksham, because he's just another C-grader. I accept he has some AFL traits and that Goodwin sees something, but after 6 years I'd rather back the draft.

    Besides, with Trengove (who I've always rated and believe will make it), plus Petracca, Stretch, ANB, vanDenberg, Kent, Harmes, etc., I think he'll struggle for a game.

    I didn't want Lamumba and nothing has changed my mind.

    I'm not averse to genuine class, but I see no point in bringing in more very average players. I'd rather back the draft.

    we can't have too many kids all at once... as the ratio is important in maintaining a solid comradeship without losing a healthy direction... see GCSuns.

    Steady as she goes is the way forward, with players we can bring in easily, if the young talent messes up, getting too smart by half.

    Melksham fits the bill as bringing up the level of our list... just hes not one of the A graders that we are still chasing.

    Edited by dee-luded

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    They're just repeating earlier article
  • Quote

    Matt Jones did crack it for 9 games this year, nearly half the season! if getting Melksham helps decrease that figure to 0 in 2016 then I can see the rationale. It's a fairly weak argument though.

    Matt Jones got 9 games in 2015. How many would he get next year?

    Harmes, Stretch, ANB, Vandenberg, White, Brayshaw all went past him this year.

    Add in Petracca, Trengove and Kent who are all returning from injuries.

    That places Matt Jones at the back of the group of Newton, Michie, Toumpas and JKH.

    Thats pretty much everyone on the list who will be ahead of him in the pecking order. So bringing in Melksham will have very little impact on how many games M.Jones plays next year.

  • Quote

    I used to actually like your posts and agreed with most of them, but for you not see how Melksham would be in our best 22, that's a bit of a worry.....they have in a way served their time already, any punishment they will be given will consider how the past 2 years or so has affected them all...

    So what's you're opinion of Goodwin now??

    1. The only way he would be in our best 22 would be if he was the only player we traded in and we let go of all of Howe, Watts & Grimed.

    2. As for suspensions the 34 will get. The time served ship has sailed. Good chance they'll get a season at least.

  • Quote

    Pass we should forget about essendrug until they have served their sentence .

  • Quote
    • Like 2

    Ironic that we apparently would've picked Melksham with pick 11 in 2009 (which we used on Gysberts) given that Essendon picked Melksham with pick 10.

    I'll back Simon Goodwin's judgement on this one.

  • Quote
    • Like 3

    God... make it go away...

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    Please name your best 22 for next year including Melksham.

    How many clubs go through a season only using the same 22 that line up in Round 1? Reality is its about whether he would be in our top 30-odd players who will rotate through the season.

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    We should be looking for the next Vandenberg instead of perusing turnips like this!

    And 4 years, is that a joke? He's a WADA boy. God I hope this is untrue.

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    interesting reading bigfooty thread on Melksham and seeing the change in attitude from a day or so ago when they wanted to trade him for anything they could get even a 4th round pick. Then once the Melbourne interest story broke he is suddenly worth a whole lot more, maybe 2nd round or better. you have to laugh at the stupidity of it all.

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    interesting reading bigfooty thread on Melksham and seeing the change in attitude from a day or so ago when they wanted to trade him for anything they could get even a 4th round pick. Then once the Melbourne interest story broke he is suddenly worth a whole lot more, maybe 2nd round or better. you have to laugh at the stupidity of it all.

    To be fair that happens with all clubs supporters.

    Everyone here would trade Matt Jones in a heartbeat. All of a sudden there is interest in him from a club and some posters are trying to package him in to some sort of deal to land one of their star players, as if he is suddenly worth a whole lot. Happens every year.

  • Quote

    Ironic that we apparently would've picked Melksham with pick 11 in 2009 (which we used on Gysberts) given that Essendon picked Melksham with pick 10.

    I'll back Simon Goodwin's judgement on this one.

    Good god. So many terrible repressed draft memories flooding back!

  • Quote
    • Like 2
     

    Yeah just think, we could have had two absolute guns with picks 61 an 79, instead of that useless Garlett...

    You're a dill Stu and never fail to salute.

    All positions on the list are important. Do you need reminding that Harmes, White and vanDenberg are rookies ? I also like the look of Max King.

    Silly campaigner.

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    As an example, never in my wildest dreams did I think Stefan Martin would become a really consistent and valuable AFL ruckman let alone last this long on an AFL list. It's clear he needed a change.

    But looking at the Melksham case, we're talking about a former number 10 draft pick. Clearly, he was rated. He actually possesses attributes that our list lacks. I can't understand why the same posters who vehemently defend the development of Jack Watts are happy to completely write off a player who has been similarly frustrating for supporters..

    Firstly, just because you didn't see what Stef was capable of doesn't mean that others couldn't. I wasn't at all happy when he left.

    Secondly, You're declaring that because Melksham is a former top 10 pick he must be a good pick up. How about we take Morton and Sylvia as delisted free agents then? They were both TOP FIVE PICKS!!!! You need to accept that sometimes clubs get these picks wrong, or they stuff up the development badly enough to wreck them.

    You may notice the best picture they have of him is one where he's being beaten to the ball.

    Just because the Bombers supposedly play hardball on trading doesn't mean we'll cough up more than his value. The last 2 years have shown us to be very smart at getting more than we give. Garlett, Vince, Lumumba, Cross. Any exceptions? Wouldn't we expect the list builders to remain smart? If we can get him for value, we'd be crazy not to as he's just coming into the ripe stage of his career.

    Actually, we've shown ourselves to consistently pay overs for players we don't really need. Look at the overpayment for Dawes and Lamumba. The Bombers will demand more than the Pies did. We got lucky with Vince and Garlett was out the door anyway. They took some junk picks rather than see him go FA.

  • Quote
    • Like 4

    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

    Guest
    Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
    Reply to this topic...
    Go to topic listing

    Featured Content

    • NON-MFC: Round 11

      Round 11, the second week of The Sir Doug Nicholls Round, kicks off on Thursday night with the Cats hosting the Bulldogs at Kardinia Park. Geelong will be looking to to continue their decade long dominance over the Bulldogs, while the Dogs aim to take another big scalp as they surge up the ladder. On Friday night it's he Dreamtime at the 'G clash between Essendon and Richmond. The Bombers will want to avoid another embarrassing performance against a lowly side whilst the Tigers will be keen to avenge a disappointing loss to the Kangaroos. Saturday footy kicks off as the Blues face the Giants in a pivotal clash for both clubs. Carlton need to turn around their up and down season while GWS will be eager to bounce back and reassert themselves as a September threat. At twilight sees the Hawks taking on the Lions at the G. Hawthorn need to cement themselves in the Top 4 but they’ll need to be at their best to challenge a Brisbane side eager to respond after last week’s crushing loss to the Dees on their home turf. The first of the Saturday night double headers opens with North Melbourne up against the high-flying Magpies. The Roos will need a near-perfect performance to trouble a Collingwood side sitting atop the ladder.

        • Like
      • 153 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • PREVIEW: Sydney

      The two teams competing at the MCG on Sunday afternoon have each traversed a long and arduous path since their previous encounter on a sweltering March evening in Sydney a season and a half ago. Both experienced periods of success at various times last year. The Demons ran out of steam in midseason while the Swans went on to narrowly miss the ultimate prize in the sport. Now, they find themselves outside of finals contention as the season approaches the halfway mark. The winner this week will remain in contact with the leading pack, while the loser may well find itself on a precipice, staring into the abyss. The current season has presented numerous challenges for most clubs, particularly those positioned in the middle tier. The Essendon experience in suffering a significant 91-point loss to the Bulldogs, just one week after defeating the Swans, may not be typical, but it illustrates the unpredictability of outcomes under the league’s present set up. 

        • Thanks
      • 3 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • REPORT: Brisbane

      “Max Gawn has been the heart and soul of the Dees for years now, but this recent recovery from a terrible start has been driven by him. He was everywhere again, and with the game in the balance, he took several key marks to keep the ball in the Dees forward half.” - The Monday Knee Jerk Reaction: Round Ten Of course, it wasn’t the efforts of one man that caused this monumental upset, but rather the work of the coach and his assistants and the other 22 players who took the ground, notably the likes of Jake Melksham, Christian Petracca, Clayton Oliver and Kozzie Pickett but Max has been magnificent in taking ownership of his team and its welfare under the fire of a calamitous 0-5 start to the season. On Sunday, he provided the leadership that was needed to face up to the reigning premier and top of the ladder Brisbane Lions on their home turf and to prevail after a slow start, during which the hosts led by as much as 24 points in the second quarter. Titus O’Reily is normally comedic in his descriptions of the football but this time, he was being deadly serious. The Demons have come from a long way back and, although they still sit in the bottom third of the AFL pack, there’s a light at the end of the tunnel as they look to drive home the momentum inspired in the past four or five weeks by Max the Magnificent who was under such great pressure in those dark, early days of the season.

      • 0 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • CASEY: Southport

      The Southport Sharks came to Casey. They saw and they conquered a team with 16 AFL-listed players who, for the most part, wasted their time on the ground and failed to earn their keep. For the first half, the Sharks were kept in the game by the Demons’ poor use of the football, it’s disposal getting worse the closer the team got to its own goal and moreover, it got worse as the game progressed. Make no mistake, Casey was far and away the better team in the first half, it was winning the ruck duels through Tom Campbell’s solid performance but it was the scoreboard that told the story.

        • Like
      • 3 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • PREGAME: Sydney

      Just a game and percentage outside the Top 8, the Demons return to Melbourne to face the Sydney Swans at the MCG, with a golden opportunity to build on the momentum from toppling the reigning premiers on their own turf. Who comes in, and who makes way?

        • Like
      • 350 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • PODCAST: Brisbane

      The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Monday, 12th May @ 8:00pm. Join Binman, George & I as we analyse a famous victory by the Demons over the Lions at the Gabba.
      Your questions and comments are a huge part of our podcast so please post anything you want to ask or say below and we'll give you a shout out on the show.
      Listen LIVE: https://demonland.com/

        • Thanks
        • Like
      • 35 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland
    View All