For those sh*t canning the club this is what Chris Pelchen had to say about our drafting(apologies if this has already been posted):

https://www.sen.com.au/news/2017/10/17/dees-deserve-big-tick-says-list-guru/

Melbourne supporters should be pleased with what the club has done in trade period, despite letting go fan favourite Jack Watts and giving up two first round picks for Jake Lever, says Chris Pelchen.

He believes by signing their number one trade target, and maintaining four selections in the top 50 for this year’s draft, the club is in a very strong position.

 

“If you look at it, they’ve picked up a key target in Jake Lever, he’s a player who should be able to play for the next ten years barring injury, he was clearly their target coming into the trade period, (and) they’ve secured it. They get a big tick,” Pelchen said on SEN Breakfast.

“They do lose Jack Watts, and I think most people would admit Jack’s had every opportunity at that club under several coaches, nothing to do with person’s character, he’s a good young lad, but ultimately his game style or willingness to adapt to a game style hasn’t been there.

“Ultimately they’ve given away pick 31, and I think what people are losing sight of is Melbourne have four picks inside pick 47, and they’ve got their key target in the draft, so I think they’ve done extremely well.”

In obtaining Lever, the Dees currently don’t have a first round pick in next year’s draft, which has been tipped as a bumper crop.

However, Pelchen believes they are capable of redressing the situation.

“The biggest or most significant loss is next year’s first round draft pick, but they’ve got 12 months to rectify that,” he said.

“They can go into next year’s trade period knowing the key target is to get another first round draft pick, and they trade accordingly.”

15 minutes ago, A F said:

Some are showing themselves to be absolute muppets when it comes to this debate. 

I've been wondering if this thread has an expiry date...

To be honest the thread should have been closed when renamed Farewell Jack Watts. Or a new thread started for people to thank jack for his service to the club and not use it to have more shots at him or the club for how they have handled the whole thing.

Jack showed his class with his farewell comments. its not too much to ask i reckon for passionate dees fans such as us to show a bit as well.

Good luck Jack. I hope things work out well for you. Thank you for your service to the club i love and for many fantastic memories - non grander than this years QB game

(PS thanks for performing well in 2016. I enjoyed seeing PD using your avatar for 6 months). 

11 minutes ago, CBDees said:

How come Geelong score a compensation pick 19 when they offload Motlop to Port but we get zilch (apart from the trade of pick 31 and the privilege of paying part of his salary) when we similarly offload Watts to Port? ?

40 minutes ago, demonzz said:

why don't you explain to us all EXACTLY how you would of asked jack to look else where without the media knowing about it.

1) Post Season Jones and Goodwin say nothing.  Yes they were asked questions about Watts.  Standard answer should have been a straight bat eg

Our List Management Team, like those of other clubs are looking to review and to improve our playing list.  When any information is available about any player we will let you know. 

Instead they carried on with: not meeting expectations, Jack had been in a rut for 9 years,  off-field behaviours, setting example for young players etc etc etc.  Of course, the media jumped all over those comments which fueled more and more questions.

They should have stuck with straight bat, straight bat, straight bat.  Better still not put them on them on air.  Post round 23 Mahoney should be our only spokesperson.

2) After the GF Mahoney should have come out and said something like: 

Our List Management Team has met and we have asked Jack Watts to explore his options with other clubs.  We believe that other list opportunities will result in changes to the structure of our forward line and it is in both parties interests to take this path.  If no suitable trade is found, Jack can remain at mfc. 

Instead he came over real heavy echoing Goodwin's and Jones criticisms and added a few more about being tired of having these conversations with Jack.  

Everything in itallics is factual.  The dirty laundry wasn't necessary.  The media could say what it wanted there was no reason for the club to validate it.

The WB had a similar problem.  Cutting Stringer was swift and brutal.  Thereafter, no one at the club made a single solitary comment.  They let the rumours float around but did not give them validity because they said nothing.  Result:  Supporters were shocked and upset at the decision but were accepting of the process.

Instead MFC made it a death of a thousand cuts for Jack by having coach, captain and football manager give a regular commentary on Jack's deficiencies over a 5/6 week period.   Result:  Supporters were upset at the decision and the process. 

On this thread even most the ardent fans of the decision lamented how it was handled by the club.

14 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

1) Post Season Jones and Goodwin say nothing.  Yes they were asked questions about Watts.  Standard answer should have been a straight bat eg

Our List Management Team, like those of other clubs are looking to review and to improve our playing list.  When any information is available about any player we will let you know. 

Instead they carried on with: not meeting expectations, Jack had been in a rut for 9 years,  off-field behaviours, setting example for young players etc etc etc.  Of course, the media jumped all over those comments which fueled more and more questions.

They should have stuck with straight bat, straight bat, straight bat.  Better still not put them on them on air.  Post round 23 Mahoney should be our only spokesperson.

2) After the GF Mahoney should have come out and said something like: 

Our List Management Team has met and we have asked Jack Watts to explore his options with other clubs.  We believe that other list opportunities will result in changes to the structure of our forward line and it is in both parties interests to take this path.  If no suitable trade is found, Jack can remain at mfc. 

Instead he came over real heavy echoing Goodwin's and Jones criticisms and added a few more about being tired of having these conversations with Jack.  

Everything in itallics is factual.  The dirty laundry wasn't necessary.  The media could say what it wanted there was no reason for the club to validate it.

The WB had a similar problem.  Cutting Stringer was swift and brutal.  Thereafter, no one at the club made a single solitary comment.  They let the rumours float around but did not give them validity because they said nothing.  Result:  Supporters were shocked and upset at the decision but were accepting of the process.

Instead MFC made it a death of a thousand cuts for Jack by having coach, captain and football manager give a regular commentary on Jack's deficiencies over a 5/6 week period.   Result:  Supporters were upset at the decision and the process. 

On this thread even most the ardent fans of the decision lamented how it was handled by the club.

so you would of liked them to totally [censored] to everyone??????    I think they where done with jackyboy hiding behind the soft shoe shuffle that previous footy departments had laid out for him.   sometimes its just a case of enough is enough.

12 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

1) Post Season Jones and Goodwin say nothing.  Yes they were asked questions about Watts.  Standard answer should have been a straight bat eg

Our List Management Team, like those of other clubs are looking to review and to improve our playing list.  When any information is available about any player we will let you know. 

Instead they carried on with: not meeting expectations, Jack had been in a rut for 9 years,  off-field behaviours, setting example for young players etc etc etc.  Of course, the media jumped all over those comments which fueled more and more questions.

They should have stuck with straight bat, straight bat, straight bat.  Better still not put them on them on air.  Post round 23 Mahoney should be our only spokesperson.

2) After the GF Mahoney should have come out and said something like: 

Our List Management Team has met and we have asked Jack Watts to explore his options with other clubs.  We believe that other list opportunities will result in changes to the structure of our forward line and it is in both parties interests to take this path.  If no suitable trade is found, Jack can remain at mfc. 

Instead he came over real heavy echoing Goodwin's and Jones criticisms and added a few more about being tired of having these conversations with Jack.  

Everything in itallics is factual.  The dirty laundry wasn't necessary.  The media could say what it wanted there was no reason for the club to validate it.

The WB had a similar problem.  Cutting Stringer was swift and brutal.  Thereafter, no one at the club made a single solitary comment.  They let the rumours float around but did not give them validity because they said nothing.  Result:  Supporters were shocked and upset at the decision but were accepting of the process.

Instead MFC made it a death of a thousand cuts for Jack by having coach, captain and football manager give a regular commentary on Jack's deficiencies over a 5/6 week period.   Result:  Supporters were upset at the decision and the process. 

On this thread even most the ardent fans of the decision lamented how it was handled by the club.

I somewhat agree but also think it's a bit ambitious to think they could get away lightly no matter what they said (or didn't say).

Jones and Goodwin had media commitments and it's unreasonable that they avoid their commitments or don't answer questions.

Watts was always going to tour clubs and be asked about why he was put up for trade. 

Answering that his position was obsolete in the game style or that we had other key forwards ahead of him was likely to result in the same supporter backlash and theories of devaluation. Plus it puts the head of Tom McDonald/Weeds and backs Goodwin in to a corner if he plays 3 tall forwards.

There's still a lot more to be learned from the start of Watts' career than some slightly clumsy work on the way out.

1 hour ago, Wadda We Sing said:

2y @ 200k....about the same amount as a home game in Darwin....

Great. The Jack Watts Game!!

I think there will always be a Jack Watts thread .

If he kills it on the field with Port we will debate why we moved him on so cheaply.

if he is the same old Wattsy we will still comment, what a good move it was for us.

Even when he is old and grey and a recreational shorts billionaire and in the news there will still be a thread.

24 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

1) Post Season Jones and Goodwin say nothing.  Yes they were asked questions about Watts.  Standard answer should have been a straight bat eg

Our List Management Team, like those of other clubs are looking to review and to improve our playing list.  When any information is available about any player we will let you know. 

Instead they carried on with: not meeting expectations, Jack had been in a rut for 9 years,  off-field behaviours, setting example for young players etc etc etc.  Of course, the media jumped all over those comments which fueled more and more questions.

They should have stuck with straight bat, straight bat, straight bat.  Better still not put them on them on air.  Post round 23 Mahoney should be our only spokesperson.

2) After the GF Mahoney should have come out and said something like: 

Our List Management Team has met and we have asked Jack Watts to explore his options with other clubs.  We believe that other list opportunities will result in changes to the structure of our forward line and it is in both parties interests to take this path.  If no suitable trade is found, Jack can remain at mfc. 

Instead he came over real heavy echoing Goodwin's and Jones criticisms and added a few more about being tired of having these conversations with Jack.  

Everything in itallics is factual.  The dirty laundry wasn't necessary.  The media could say what it wanted there was no reason for the club to validate it.

The WB had a similar problem.  Cutting Stringer was swift and brutal.  Thereafter, no one at the club made a single solitary comment.  They let the rumours float around but did not give them validity because they said nothing.  Result:  Supporters were shocked and upset at the decision but were accepting of the process.

Instead MFC made it a death of a thousand cuts for Jack by having coach, captain and football manager give a regular commentary on Jack's deficiencies over a 5/6 week period.   Result:  Supporters were upset at the decision and the process. 

On this thread even most the ardent fans of the decision lamented how it was handled by the club.

Thank you Lucifer. You have saved me a lot of time.

Lucifer sums it up perfectly 

45 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

1) Post Season Jones and Goodwin say nothing.  Yes they were asked questions about Watts.  Standard answer should have been a straight bat eg

Our List Management Team, like those of other clubs are looking to review and to improve our playing list.  When any information is available about any player we will let you know. 

Instead they carried on with: not meeting expectations, Jack had been in a rut for 9 years,  off-field behaviours, setting example for young players etc etc etc.  Of course, the media jumped all over those comments which fueled more and more questions.

They should have stuck with straight bat, straight bat, straight bat.  Better still not put them on them on air.  Post round 23 Mahoney should be our only spokesperson.

2) After the GF Mahoney should have come out and said something like: 

Our List Management Team has met and we have asked Jack Watts to explore his options with other clubs.  We believe that other list opportunities will result in changes to the structure of our forward line and it is in both parties interests to take this path.  If no suitable trade is found, Jack can remain at mfc. 

Instead he came over real heavy echoing Goodwin's and Jones criticisms and added a few more about being tired of having these conversations with Jack.  

Everything in itallics is factual.  The dirty laundry wasn't necessary.  The media could say what it wanted there was no reason for the club to validate it.

The WB had a similar problem.  Cutting Stringer was swift and brutal.  Thereafter, no one at the club made a single solitary comment.  They let the rumours float around but did not give them validity because they said nothing.  Result:  Supporters were shocked and upset at the decision but were accepting of the process.

Instead MFC made it a death of a thousand cuts for Jack by having coach, captain and football manager give a regular commentary on Jack's deficiencies over a 5/6 week period.   Result:  Supporters were upset at the decision and the process. 

On this thread even most the ardent fans of the decision lamented how it was handled by the club.

You've misunderstood that the part in bold italics was not factual.  MFC FD decided to trade Watts - as is their right.

Watts came out in public and said he loved MFC and wanted to stay.  Where is your "explore his options with other clubs" then?  Dead in the water - that's where.

Nek minnit Watts is traded to Port Adelaide for pick 31 - try explaining how that happened.

The only reason the Dogs haven't come out in public about Stringer's problems is because they are far more serious than Watts "poor preparation".  More recently the Dogs have been claiming that he could stay at the Dogs - as if!!!

were richmond supporters this upset when 'lids' left?

15 minutes ago, Danelska said:

were richmond supporters this upset when 'lids' left?

nope, they understand theres more to afl than being a top bloke and being great with supporters and their kids.

16 minutes ago, Danelska said:

were richmond supporters this upset when 'lids' left?

relevance?

19 hours ago, Bobby McKenzie said:

The Melbourne Football Club mathematical equation

Jack Watts = Draft pick #31 or even lower ( A 17 year old kid in a shallow draft). Might be a thought if Jack was 33 and we were rebuilding. How long before we stop looking at the far away future instead of present time. We have been rebuilding for a bloody long without success. QED.

This was about the now!

Watts was contracted for another two years, but we wanted him off the list.

1 hour ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

1) Post Season Jones and Goodwin say nothing.  Yes they were asked questions about Watts.  Standard answer should have been a straight bat eg

Our List Management Team, like those of other clubs are looking to review and to improve our playing list.  When any information is available about any player we will let you know. 

Instead they carried on with: not meeting expectations, Jack had been in a rut for 9 years,  off-field behaviours, setting example for young players etc etc etc.  Of course, the media jumped all over those comments which fueled more and more questions.

They should have stuck with straight bat, straight bat, straight bat.  Better still not put them on them on air.  Post round 23 Mahoney should be our only spokesperson.

2) After the GF Mahoney should have come out and said something like: 

Our List Management Team has met and we have asked Jack Watts to explore his options with other clubs.  We believe that other list opportunities will result in changes to the structure of our forward line and it is in both parties interests to take this path.  If no suitable trade is found, Jack can remain at mfc. 

Instead he came over real heavy echoing Goodwin's and Jones criticisms and added a few more about being tired of having these conversations with Jack.  

Everything in itallics is factual.  The dirty laundry wasn't necessary.  The media could say what it wanted there was no reason for the club to validate it.

The WB had a similar problem.  Cutting Stringer was swift and brutal.  Thereafter, no one at the club made a single solitary comment.  They let the rumours float around but did not give them validity because they said nothing.  Result:  Supporters were shocked and upset at the decision but were accepting of the process.

Instead MFC made it a death of a thousand cuts for Jack by having coach, captain and football manager give a regular commentary on Jack's deficiencies over a 5/6 week period.   Result:  Supporters were upset at the decision and the process. 

On this thread even most the ardent fans of the decision lamented how it was handled by the club.

Except the fact that by not answering the question the media make up their own story. With Watts it's common knowledge he's not a hard worker and that those in the FD have had enough, just look at his preseason and end of season. You're still not facing the reality that only 2 clubs showed any serious interest. That sums up the player and totally supports the FD. Read what Pelchen said about how the FD handled the trade period and then go cry in your weetbix

1 hour ago, CBDees said:

How come Geelong score a compensation pick 19 when they offload Motlop to Port but we get zilch (apart from the trade of pick 31 and the privilege of paying part of his salary) when we similarly offload Watts to Port? ?

Because Motlop was a FA, the AFL manipulates the rules as they see fit so they gave Geelong extra comp so they can secure the Ablett deal and pick 31 was Ports first available pick in the 2017 draft.

9 hours ago, Wiseblood said:

I reckon Garry Lyon summed things up quite well on SEN this morning. Link to it is here:

https://www.sen.com.au/news/2017/10/17/popular-easy-and-safe-don-t-win-flags/

"Quite simply, previous regimes have been prepared to settle for less from Jack and I don’t think the Simon Goodwin cartel will."

Firstly, my post was a hypothetical to answer a posters question on how the club could have handled it.  ie Process not the decision.  So it contained  hypothetical text.  I'm sure the club could have developed better words if it had chosen a straight bat strategy.

Anyway, I will respond t the various comments.

1 hour ago, demonzz said:

so you would of liked them to totally [censored] to everyone??????    I think they where done with jackyboy hiding behind the soft shoe shuffle that previous footy departments had laid out for him.   sometimes its just a case of enough is enough.

As I said info could be provided without the dirty laundry.  WB did it.

1 hour ago, DeeSpencer said:

I somewhat agree but also think it's a bit ambitious to think they could get away lightly no matter what they said (or didn't say).

1)Jones and Goodwin had media commitments and it's unreasonable that they avoid their commitments or don't answer questions.

2)Watts was always going to tour clubs and be asked about why he was put up for trade. 

3) Answering that his position was obsolete in the game style or that we had other key forwards ahead of him was likely to result in the same supporter backlash and theories of devaluation. Plus it puts the head of Tom McDonald/Weeds and backs Goodwin in to a corner if he plays 3 tall forwards.

There's still a lot more to be learned from the start of Watts' career than some slightly clumsy work on the way out.

1) See my comments about playing with a straight bat.

2) Could be explained in the light of Mahoney 'hypotetical text' I suggested

3) It was hypothetical text to demonstrate a point, not intended to be exact wording.

1 hour ago, Fifty-5 said:

You've misunderstood that the part in bold italics was not factual.  1) MFC FD decided to trade Watts - as is their right.

Watts came out in public and said he loved MFC and wanted to stay.  Where is your "explore his options with other clubs" then?  Dead in the water - that's where.

Nek minnit Watts is traded to Port Adelaide for pick 31 - try explaining how that happened.

The only reason the Dogs haven't come out in public about Stringer's problems is because they are far more serious than Watts "poor preparation".  More recently the Dogs have been claiming that he could stay at the Dogs - as if!!!

1)True but that isn't what Mahoney said.  He clearly said they had agreed for Jack to explore options and if a trade suitable to both parties was not found Jack would remain at the dees and he knew what the club's expectations. 

23 minutes ago, Roost It said:

Except the fact that by not answering the 1)question the media make up their own story. With Watts it's common knowledge he's not a hard worker and that those in the FD have had enough, just look at his preseason and end of season. 2)You're still not facing the reality that only 2 clubs showed any serious interest. That sums up the player and totally supports the FD. Read what Pelchen said about how the FD handled the trade period and then 3)go cry in your weetbix

1) True.  It was common knowledge that Watts was not a hard worker, the coach had been saying it since the preseason.  Yes the media make up their own stories.  But with Stringer the WB said nothing so did not validate them.  By hanging out the dirty laundry mfc fed the media stories.

2) Have no idea how you formed that view. 

3) no need to be insulting.  My whole post was a hypothetical response to a question about process not the decision.   Read my post in that context.

 

Anyone wanting to make other comments - I'll repeat: my post was a hypothetical on process not the decision.  People can go back and develop their own hypothetical response to the original poster.  I'm done on this. 

 

12 minutes ago, bing181 said:

"Quite simply, previous regimes have been prepared to settle for less from Jack and I don’t think the Simon Goodwin cartel will."

Spot on.....

1 hour ago, Bonkers said:

For those sh*t canning the club this is what Chris Pelchen had to say about our drafting(apologies if this has already been posted):

https://www.sen.com.au/news/2017/10/17/dees-deserve-big-tick-says-list-guru/

Melbourne supporters should be pleased with what the club has done in trade period, despite letting go fan favourite Jack Watts and giving up two first round picks for Jake Lever, says Chris Pelchen.

He believes by signing their number one trade target, and maintaining four selections in the top 50 for this year’s draft, the club is in a very strong position.

 

“If you look at it, they’ve picked up a key target in Jake Lever, he’s a player who should be able to play for the next ten years barring injury, he was clearly their target coming into the trade period, (and) they’ve secured it. They get a big tick,” Pelchen said on SEN Breakfast.

“They do lose Jack Watts, and I think most people would admit Jack’s had every opportunity at that club under several coaches, nothing to do with person’s character, he’s a good young lad, but ultimately his game style or willingness to adapt to a game style hasn’t been there.

“Ultimately they’ve given away pick 31, and I think what people are losing sight of is Melbourne have four picks inside pick 47, and they’ve got their key target in the draft, so I think they’ve done extremely well.”

In obtaining Lever, the Dees currently don’t have a first round pick in next year’s draft, which has been tipped as a bumper crop.

However, Pelchen believes they are capable of redressing the situation.

“The biggest or most significant loss is next year’s first round draft pick, but they’ve got 12 months to rectify that,” he said.

“They can go into next year’s trade period knowing the key target is to get another first round draft pick, and they trade accordingly.”

Spot on.....We all loved Watts but also need to read Lyon article.....

1 hour ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

 

On this thread even most the ardent fans of the decision lamented how it was handled by the club.

Please don't speak for me LH

 

Goodwin wants us to win a premiership, and doesn't believe Watts can help us with this aim.

I'm grateful that we have a coach who can make the hard calls.

It isn't a popularity contest, it's a race to the flag.

1 hour ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

On this thread even most the ardent fans of the decision lamented how it was handled by the club.

No they don't.

In any case, no-one's an "ardent fan of the decision", and as for "lament" .... Jesus wept, it's a list management decision that you think helps or you don't.

You're also confusing the decision (i.e., the way it was made and the processes employed to reach it) with the outcome (JW leaving).

So much has been said... I didn't think I had anything to add leading up to Jack's transfer. Now I feel the need to say something about the significant contribution Jack has made to our daily football diet here at the MFC. I have met Jack a few times inside and outside of the MFC precinct. He is a model citizen in my opinion. Jack is gifted in the sense that he is intelligent, handsome, and athletic. He is a 'natural' people person. He oozes charm; is a mother's dream as a positive role model for boys.... oh, did I mention extremely marketable!

That is my opinion of Jack as a person... as a footballer, sublime skills... can make time switch to slow-motion in tight situations - in my top three deliverers by foot alongside Robbie and Flash! Jack plays football like a basketballer! Andrew Gaze reckons he had a career with the Boomers if he wanted it instead of AFL. This is where the cracks appear! Goodwin doesn't want his team to play basketball (Roos had a soft spot for that skill set).

I love Jack and what he brings... I wish him the very best in this next chapter. For Jack there has always been more to life than football. To win a Premiership we need 22 blokes who believe football is everything! 

2 hours ago, Rogue said:

PS. I know footy players don't need to be smart, but I worry if it's true that Weid can't see why we're shipping Watts out...

If it's true, it's all the more reason to ship Watts out, and only confirms Mahoney's comment re Watts' "negative influence" (whatever the exact wording was) on younger players.