59 minutes ago, ProDee said:

You do realise that this forum is not official MFC policy and that we have no idea what the club is doing behind the scenes ?

What I mean is there are no rumours of us chasing anyone except Hibberd, who isn't that greatly needed. Roos says we need elite talent and we're passing on everything available so far. I could be wrong and this club just doesn't leak who they're chasing.

Edited August 31, 20169 yr by johndemonic

1 minute ago, johndemonic said:

What I mean is there are no rumours of us chasing anyone except Hibberd, who isn't that greatly needed. Roos says we need elite talent and we're passing on everything available so far.

Which elite talent have we passed on JD? 

10 minutes ago, johndemonic said:

What I mean is there are no rumours of us chasing anyone except Hibberd, who isn't that greatly needed. Roos says we need elite talent and we're passing on everything available so far. I could be wrong and this club just doesn't leak who they're chasing.

Right John Couldnt agree more. Who know waht the footy department is thinking. Certainly there is no mention of a recruiting strategy

No body else is chasing Hibberd Why is that ?? So we wont have to over pay for  a position that isnt critical to our future

1 hour ago, johndemonic said:

What I mean is there are no rumours of us chasing anyone except Hibberd, who isn't that greatly needed. Roos says we need elite talent and we're passing on everything available so far. I could be wrong and this club just doesn't leak who they're chasing.

I think our recent list management strategy has been very good.  People were calling for Josh Mahoney's head half way through last trade period "do something", by the end the same people were saying he was a genius with the pick upgrade deals.  I think we don't leak and that is good.

1 hour ago, johndemonic said:

What I mean is there are no rumours of us chasing anyone except Hibberd, who isn't that greatly needed. Roos says we need elite talent and we're passing on everything available so far. I could be wrong and this club just doesn't leak who they're chasing.

So we don't need hard experienced players with elite kicking skills?

2 hours ago, johndemonic said:

The pickiness of people in this forum is a joke. This is the exact player we need and you've got Hawthorn head hunting him with a long term deal because they know that it's not about umming and ahhhing about will he or won't he be worthwhile. If he's shown glimpses of his best then you BACK your own system to improve him. You either believe you're a better club than Richmond or you don't.

Probably the difference between us and other clubs, they go after what they need and back themselves

 

It's fascinating.  To get better we need to take some risks in trade and they won't always work out e.g. Dawes, Lumumba and sometimes they will e.g. Vince, Tyson.  But if we're not prepared to take a risk we won't achieve anything.  Vickery, Vardy, Clarke - there's risk there but big reward too.

On 8/22/2016 at 8:17 PM, johndemonic said:

Rumor reported on talkingfooty and the superfooty podcast that he's off to Hawthorn next year. RIP FITZY? 

I doubt it, Vickery will not be no.1 ruck. Vickery will be a replacement for Hale and a backup/replacement for McEvoy

2 hours ago, ickey_11 said:

I doubt it, Vickery will not be no.1 ruck. Vickery will be a replacement for Hale and a backup/replacement for McEvoy

Not likely. Vickery refuses to ruck at Richmond. More likely to be a big log to bring the ball to ground for Puopolo and Rioli. Roughead unlikely to ever return, so Vickery becomes the stay at home FF (since he doesn't chase or run)

3 hours ago, johndemonic said:

What I mean is there are no rumours of us chasing anyone except Hibberd, who isn't that greatly needed. Roos says we need elite talent and we're passing on everything available so far. I could be wrong and this club just doesn't leak who they're chasing.

I think the last couple of years have shown that the footy department has tightened up immensely. The Dom Tyson trade came from absolutely nowhere, and there haven't been any blundering leaks since the new administration took over. We could be making a play for someone big, and I'd trust them to be keeping it under wraps. But personally I don't think we are, considering the state of our list, our needs and available trade currency.

We should be looking for big bodied experienced players to protect and guide some of the kids as they come through. Vickery would be good in this aspect as a foil for Hogan and while Weideman comes through as well as providing a proper chop-out for Gawn. Obviously it looks like the ship has sailed as he's off to the Hawks.

I also think Brent Harvey would be a good get if he was interested for the same reasons.

We've got the nucleus of young talent there, we need to top up with experienced players (to replace those we have who are getting to the end or under-performing) and keep replenishing with a few young kids each year in the draft. I hope we're able to somehow upgrade a pick to top 10 or top 20 at the least because without our first rounder and potentially trading our 2nd to the Bombers for Hibberd means this year could be a nothing draft for us which I don't think we can afford despite our recent recruiting (and taking into account our pick upgrade to get Oliver/Weideman in last year).

35 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

We should be looking for big bodied experienced players to protect and guide some of the kids as they come through. Vickery would be good in this aspect as a foil for Hogan and while Weideman comes through as well as providing a proper chop-out for Gawn.

That's why Pedo will stay.

1 hour ago, george_on_the_outer said:

Not likely. Vickery refuses to ruck at Richmond. More likely to be a big log to bring the ball to ground for Puopolo and Rioli. Roughead unlikely to ever return, so Vickery becomes the stay at home FF (since he doesn't chase or run)

Are you disagreeing with me to agree with me?  

If he goes to Hawthorn, he will play as he is told; he will chase, run, and relief ruck. 

1 hour ago, Redleg said:

That's why Pedo will stay.

No doubt, I think Pedersen is severely underrated. I was astonished he was dropped following the Port game. He is a far superior option to Dawes (who is or should be gone) and any of our other senior players like Dunn or Garland.

6 hours ago, johndemonic said:

What I mean is there are no rumours of us chasing anyone except Hibberd, who isn't that greatly needed. Roos says we need elite talent and we're passing on everything available so far. I could be wrong and this club just doesn't leak who they're chasing.

Drive and quality ball use off half-back has never been more important. 

Laird, Rampe, Enright and so on are linchpins in their respective teams.

Burgoyne, Birchall, Durea, Gibson and Hodge (last 4 left-footers - like Hibberd) are major reasons the Hawk's finished top 4.

We have a very young back-line.  Hibberd is most definitely a welcome inclusion (hopefully).

I'm all for snaring a Tom Mitchell, etc., I just have no idea what the club is trying to do.  But I'm confident they're doing all in their power to improve the list.  Without a first round draft pick this year there will be limitations. 

Edited September 1, 20169 yr by ProDee

Well my 1,000th post is a good time to discover I know nothing about football. I thought Vickery was a player of limited ability, who goes missing often and would struggle to find suitors. Hawthorn obviously see him completely differently. I'm backing the Hawks.

13 hours ago, johndemonic said:

What I mean is there are no rumours of us chasing anyone except Hibberd, who isn't that greatly needed. Roos says we need elite talent and we're passing on everything available so far. I could be wrong and this club just doesn't leak who they're chasing.

In the current PJ administration, IIRC, we have had next to no leaks.

I don't necessarily believe that, if you're not hearing our name out there, it means we're not interested.

I also don't agree that every player chased by every club better than us is necessarily someone we should be interested in. As such, the fact that Hawthorn is interested in Vickery does not tell me we necessarily should also be interested. 

I hope he goes to Hawthorn.. I need another reason to hate them!

One reason Clarko is a genius is because he's trained up a fleet of flexible players whilst also creating a lot of set roles and patterns of play that disguise limitations of players. 

Puopolo, Breust, McEvoy, Frawley, there's plenty who have simple jobs and excel at parts of the game plan. 

Vickery is 26 so he's young enough to find a bit of improvement, young enough to find a bit in the body whilst old enough to have AFL fitness under his belt. He's 200cm so he can pinch hit in the ruck. He's big and strong enough to attack the ball as a deep forward. He'll do all of that and with better training, fitness, standards etc he'll probably do it well. 

Most importantly he's a free agent so if the compo is right and Richmond don't match he'll be free! That means the Hawks can spend big on Mitchell or O'Meara and don't have to worry about replacing Roughy or Ceglar for the year.

The Hawks since about 2010 have been the masters of spending big on blue chip prospects and finding what they need elsewhere for budget price. That's where Vickery fits.

His problem is he has never played like a player of his size. Doesn't win anywhere near enough of the ball indicating he doesn't work hard enough, and majority of his marks are uncontested on the chest. Is a very good finisher but I'll be surprised if the Hawks turn him into anything above average.

16 hours ago, george_on_the_outer said:

Not likely. Vickery refuses to ruck at Richmond. More likely to be a big log to bring the ball to ground for Puopolo and Rioli. Roughead unlikely to ever return, so Vickery becomes the stay at home FF (since he doesn't chase or run)

They could try Dawes for the same rôle - though to give him credit, Dawes does chase and run.  

Edited September 1, 20169 yr by monoccular

10 hours ago, fndee said:

Well my 1,000th post is a good time to discover I know nothing about football. I thought Vickery was a player of limited ability, who goes missing often and would struggle to find suitors. Hawthorn obviously see him completely differently. I'm backing the Hawks.

The Hawks don't get them all right either...so hold that thought.

8 hours ago, schmuttt said:

His problem is he has never played like a player of his size. Doesn't win anywhere near enough of the ball indicating he doesn't work hard enough, and majority of his marks are uncontested on the chest. Is a very good finisher but I'll be surprised if the Hawks turn him into anything above average.

Um, Jack Watts ring a bell?? 

Would Take Vickery in a heartbeat

1 A better kick than Jesse

2 Can Ruck better than Jack

3 Can Mark better than Dawes

4 Is a better bet than Pedo!

Case closed, go get him!

Edited September 1, 20169 yr by picket fence

4 minutes ago, picket fence said:

Um, Jack Watts ring a bell?? 

Would Take Vickery in a heartbeat

1 A better kick than Jesse

2 Can Ruck better than Jack

3 Can Mark better than Dawes

4 Is a better bet than Pedo!

Case closed, go get him!

Conversely

1 A worse kick than Watts       

2 Can't Ruck better than Pedo

3 Can't  Mark better than Jesse   

4 Is a better bet than Dawes - OK 1 out of 3

Case closed, don't get him!

 

7 minutes ago, picket fence said:

Um, Jack Watts ring a bell?? 

Would Take Vickery in a heartbeat

1 A better kick than Jesse

2 Can Ruck better than Jack

3 Can Mark better than Dawes

4 Is a better bet than Pedo!

Case closed, go get him!

This Vickery kid sounds like a superstar, how can the lowly placed Tigers afford to let this guy go?

Just now, Ethan Tremblay said:

This Vickery kid sounds like a superstar, how can the lowly placed Tigers afford to let this guy go?

Coz, wicketless and Richtank are worse developers of players than we once were!!