Someone had to start it.

Hate to say it, but I'd take him.

"Harvey’s manager, Shane Casley, said earlier this month the five-time best and fairest-winner would retire a one-club player if his contract at Arden St was not renewed for 2017."

I hate that kind of mindset. When a club shows no loyalty at the end, then you don't owe it to them to be a 'one club player'

I think the one club player thing is a loyalty circlejerk sometimes. Players play AFL football. There is loyalty to the sport. Boomer retiring actually sucks. I feel robbed of a great footballer who still has something left to give to the game. But if he doesn't want to go on, then fine. Bit of a shame really.

4 hours ago, johndemons said:

"Harvey’s manager, Shane Casley, said earlier this month the five-time best and fairest-winner would retire a one-club player if his contract at Arden St was not renewed for 2017."

I hate that kind of mindset. When a club shows no loyalty at the end, then you don't owe it to them to be a 'one club player'

I think the one club player thing is a loyalty circlejerk sometimes. Players play AFL football. There is loyalty to the sport. Boomer retiring actually sucks. I feel robbed of a great footballer who still has something left to give to the game. But if he doesn't want to go on, then fine. Bit of a shame really.

People have been known to change their minds.

Such a silly decision IMO. Still a top 100 AFL player.

 

If we were a top 6 team looking to take the next step then yes he would be usefull. Unfortunatly we are not, Boomer is a star and may have deserved another year, but not for us. I suspect that he will reluctantly retire a one-club man and be happy that he went while he was still playing good footy. Hate watching players who limp to the line. 

I'm out of here. Nightmare scenario.

 

14 minutes ago, ArtificialWisdom said:

If we were a top 6 team looking to take the next step then yes he would be usefull. Unfortunatly we are not, Boomer is a star and may have deserved another year, but not for us. I suspect that he will reluctantly retire a one-club man and be happy that he went while he was still playing good footy. Hate watching players who limp to the line. 

What if we're a 7-12 team looking to take the next step into the 1-6 group, and could face 2 to 3 years of similar form if we don't move on trades that add experience to accompany our developing youth? Have you got 3 years to spare? The right pick up could give us an added spike that adds gives us confidence and momentum to take us higher.

Just because we have great youth, it is no guarantee we will improve over the next few years and others won't.

I don't understand the rationale in the context of our current list. Do we have such a hot list that there are literally no spots? NO. Our VFL side is full of old Melbourne players in the 24-30 range. We can't get rid of them all in one year. We have such a young side that players are constantly cycling in and out due to consistency issues. An extra year in the VFL was essential 20 years ago, now young players have to play and develop?

I think there will be no space on our list after two draft cycles, which gives one year to an experienced head we can trade in.

 

Edited August 24, 20169 yr by johndemons

Of the four, there are two we should consider and two we shouldn't.

The main reason that we consider them is that we are one of the youngest side's going around and with Melky and Hibberd on horizon, we will also already have even more outside run than this year - which means we should be one of the faster lists in the comp, as well as youngest.

As a result we are one of about four clubs that are the right mix for them, just as GWS or the Bulldogs were the only two clubs where Stevie J could have gone last year without him just slowing their side down even more.

The two players who we can't consider are:

1 Nick Dal Santo - while he is skillful, we already have strong depth in our midfield ranks and he will just slow our midfield down. Goody can't get rid of Grimes and Trengove and justify such a replacement.

2) Barnaby Firrito - he's as tough as old nails but now just too slow as a defender and Goody has made it clear he wants quick transition. He would be a Mark Neeld type backward step.

The two who we can consider are:

1) Brent Harvey - he is still pretty freakish as a player and kicks the ball as well as ever. If he wants to play on, then we'd be mad not to talk to him. Is he better than Jeff Garlett? Based on this year's overall work - yes. The likely losers if we go Harvs are Jeffy and Ben Kennedy - but injuries do happen and his inclusion would give us great depth and quality in the small forward ranks. But he may just decide to stay loyal to the Roos and call it a day.

2) Drew Petrie - As with Boomer, he has to want to play on before we consider him. We also have to check that injury-wise there's no issues with him going into the ruck - as he used to do before Brown kicked on. His arrival would solve our current problem of not having a reliable forward/back-up ruckman and he would come way cheaper (free agency) than Vickery (who's going to Hawthorn), Daw (who will now stay at the Roos) and Vardy (who sounds like he's going to the Swans or GWS).  His arrival would also mean that both Dawes and Pedo are delisted - some would argue that's no big deal. His arrival would also mean Weideman would have to wait a bit longer for games - but clearly he is a project player and is still at least a year away. Having an older head like Petrie around the club, who tackles hard, would also help with both Weids and Hoges, who of late have forgotten the importance of that role once the ball hits the ground. His arrival would also reduce the chance of Jack Watts getting injured as back-up ruck.

In Petrie's case, there may be another tall forward/ruckman who becomes available - so it may be a wait and see what's around for a few weeks before committing.

In Harvey's case, he's still a freak. He will be able to choose where he goes if he decided to play on for another year.

The good thing is that we now shape as a side that is no longer merely a developing side. As a result, we appeal as a one-year potential finalist for either player.

 

Would take Harvey or Dal - Daniel Cross did a wonderful job with us - why couldnt one of them? I dont think Petrie is a good step for us because of Weid and Hogan and Spud doesnt seem the right step considering both Browns are on the FA market. 

I cannot wait to see how this plays out. Part of me wants to see Dal go back to the Saints. 

16 minutes ago, johndemons said:

 

What if we're a 7-12 team looking to take the next step into the 1-6 group, and could face 2 to 3 years of similar form if we don't move on trades that add experience to accompany our developing youth? Have you got 3 years to spare? The right pick up could give us an added spike that adds gives us confidence and momentum to take us higher.

Just because we have great youth, it is no guarantee we will improve over the next few years and others won't.

I don't understand the rationale in the context of our current list. Do we have such a hot list that there are literally no spots? NO. Our VFL side is full of old Melbourne players in the 24-30 range. We can't get rid of them all in one year. We have such a young side that players are constantly cycling in and out due to consistency issues. An extra year in the VFL was essential 20 years ago, now young players have to play and develop?

I think there will be no space on our list after two draft cycles, which gives one year to an experienced head we can trade in.

 

I'm 23 I have decades to spare

I agree we should be getting senior players to continue our move up, but Boomer has 1 year left. We should look at players who we can get 2+ years of service. I think there will be other senior delistings over the coming weeks that could provide us more than Boomer can.

1 hour ago, AngryAtCasey said:

Someone had to start it.

Hate to say it, but I'd take him.

Me too !

I'd take him just to play him at Casey every week.

I hate that cheating little [censored].

Lets be honest, he'd still be in our best 10 players, he'd add experience, skill, speed and 30-35 goals to our side next year and going forward would be a great mentor for a lot of our players, if we're putting his age aside and basing this decision on form, he is an obvious choice, he'd significantly improve our side and he'd cost us nothing.

He has defied all reasonable expectations on longevity but he has to hit the wall sooner or later.  We don't want to be left paying out his super. No thanks. 

Edited August 24, 20169 yr by america de cali

Will retire as the league record games holder and still playing good footy at 38. Pretty great achievement. 

I wouldn't mind him as a junior assistant coach.

Boomer should go to GWS or Sydney and do a Brian Lake.

 

1 hour ago, Deespicable said:

2) Barnaby Firrito - he's as tough as old nails but now just too slow as a defender and Goody has made it clear he wants quick transition. He would be a Mark Neeld type backward step.

"Barnaby" ???

Edited August 24, 20169 yr by Fifty-5

4 minutes ago, Fifty-5 said:

Boomer should go to GWS or Sydney and do a Brian Lake.

 

"Barnaby" ???

Why not come to Melbourne and do a Brian Lake?

I'd take Harvey. But only as a runner. He has two of the required attributes. He can run and he can talk. Perhaps he could also sledge opposition players. 

On second thoughts i don't want him at the club. Even as a runner. 

I felt sick even opening this thread.

2 hours ago, johndemons said:

 

What if we're a 7-12 team looking to take the next step into the 1-6 group, and could face 2 to 3 years of similar form if we don't move on trades that add experience to accompany our developing youth? Have you got 3 years to spare? The right pick up could give us an added spike that adds gives us confidence and momentum to take us higher.

Just because we have great youth, it is no guarantee we will improve over the next few years and others won't.

I don't understand the rationale in the context of our current list. Do we have such a hot list that there are literally no spots? NO. Our VFL side is full of old Melbourne players in the 24-30 range. We can't get rid of them all in one year. We have such a young side that players are constantly cycling in and out due to consistency issues. An extra year in the VFL was essential 20 years ago, now young players have to play and develop?

I think there will be no space on our list after two draft cycles, which gives one year to an experienced head we can trade in.

 

North Melbourne list manager from two years ago;

"Have you got three years to spare? Let's bring in some really high quality mature players to bring us into that top-6 group! As Free Agents, they wont even cost us anything."

North have only taken 11 draft picks in total across the last three drafts, despite also trading out Greenwood, Currie and Bastinac.

Before that, they drafted reasonably well and had a good group of young players coming through. They tried to bank it all together while Goldstein and some other mature high quality players were still at their peak. Now they are likely to crash and crash hard, Melbourne 2007 style.

It is not a path I'm keen to go down, and I think if we do recruit Harvey, he becomes the 'story' of our 2016 season, overshadowing too much of the real progress and changes we need to see happening.

 

 

I believe he would be a good fit. Has speed and leadership. Would be an ideal for a yr or teo like a Cross role.

Can't see him playing on with anyone else though 

43 minutes ago, Little Goffy said:

It is not a path I'm keen to go down, and I think if we do recruit Harvey, he becomes the 'story' of our 2016 season, overshadowing too much of the real progress and changes we need to see happening.

 

You concerns are fair enough, but you're pointing out an actual list management direction they took in drafting many experienced players. I'm just asking that we bring in ONE player again, like Crossy to give us that extra touch to ensure standards are met, who's a proven consistent performer.

Personally I think we've already had the 2016 story of a rapidly improved young team with a huge scope for improvement and potential. 2017 is the next chapter of taking an extra step and anything less is stagnation, Even improvement within the context of other teams improving around us can be stagnation as we could still be in the same ladder pos with the same teams around us.

Bringing an experienced player in to help solidify some confidence and momentum and push us into the bottom half of the 8 for the year is a minimal risk, maximum reward type of trade. 

I think the club could use another 'out of left field' story to bring even more people into the gates and pike interest. Imagine if Stevie J came to us last year.

Edited August 24, 20169 yr by johndemons

Recruiting Harvey would be going against everything the club has been working on over the last three years. 

Please. All this talk of Harvey wearing the red and blue is doing my head in - I've disliked him intensely for so long. Just throw Lindsay Thomas in and I'll take the long walk off the short pier.

Voting split 50/50 right now!!