Jump to content

Featured Replies

50 minutes ago, praha said:

Embarrassing if Brisbane pipe us here and he ends up in QLD.

Are we going to boo Elliot like we booed Judd because we were mad he didn't choose us?

omg im sooo embarrassed now  

you are trying to hard to fuel outrage

 

 
16 minutes ago, A F said:

Haha, I don't have the dreaded MFCSS. Mahoney has never laid his cards out before without knowing the answer to the question being asked.

I did say in this thread over the weekend that there may be an ulterior motive for mentioning contract length.

Look, it probably doesn't matter to be honest...

It just gives the hand wringers something else to cry about. 

32 minutes ago, TeamPlayedFine39 said:

Not for a couple of years though.  Should be a great facility, but Elliot won’t see much of it.

My point was that Brisbane now appears to be a very attractive club for players for many reasons - just not their facilities.

We also tend to exaggerate how bad our facilities at AAMI are.  They’re very good, just not exclusively ours. 

Goschs Paddock- Very good, compared to what?   And do not get technical and refer to non footy ground area. It is an embarrassment and a deterrent.

 
29 minutes ago, A F said:

He clarified the contract length. No need to say anything.

Interview was on Saturday, Elliott informed Melbourne on Saturday - presumably prior to interview. Mahoney gave naught away as potential trade was already rejected.

37 minutes ago, Whispering_Jack said:

The likelihood is that this was always a case of a player manager using another club’s willingness to bargain in order to get the best possible deal for a 27 year old client who has been injury prone for the last two years. He wanted to prize out the extra year for Elliott and found us agreeable to the three year term. 

I was never convinced about Elliott and am fine with the situation. I don’t believe this has an ramifications about us being a destination club either. I’m sure Josh  Mahoney is moving on.

This


26 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

If we had had a solid 2019 players like Elliott would have come across I believe. 

We are back in the “Can’t be trusted” category 

 

That's rubbish SWYL and you know it

All teams get rejected all the time by players due to

  • length of contract (long term security)
  • $ of contract
  • $ of contract compared to others
  • pitched role within the football system
  • experiences of friends within 'said' clubs system

With Elliott rejecting us, its all and none of those things.... there is no shame in it.

What would be shameful is OPENING THE WARCHEST for multiple big name players and having that become public knowledge post player rejecting us. A la North a few years back.

 

 

 

If you don't ask then you don't receive.  Not every player we chase will end up at the club, and this year that player is Elliott.  Didn't hurt us to ask the question and put a contract in front of him, and thankfully he has told us his intentions on the first day of the trade period so we still have time to use that cash in other ways, or keep it to re-sign others next year.

Onwards and upwards.


40 minutes ago, A F said:

He clarified the contract length. No need to say anything.

Why? i mean all he said is we offered a three year contract, how someone can find a reason to blame JM is so Melbourne. We are worse that Richmond when they were no good, we eat our won like no other team.

7 minutes ago, jumbo returns said:

That's rubbish SWYL and you know it

I don’t think it is rubbish at all. 

That is how bad 2019 was. How can you look at it any differently. We still don’t really know how well Goodwin can Coach. 

Fagan or Goodwin...?

17 minutes ago, Sorry kids said:

Goschs Paddock- Very good, compared to what?   And do not get technical and refer to non footy ground area. It is an embarrassment and a deterrent.

Yet Collingwood won a flag out of Goschs in 2010. Go figure!


Will be interesting to see what our plan B for a small forward is if we have one. 

59 minutes ago, Engorged Onion said:

Interview was on Saturday, Elliott informed Melbourne on Saturday - presumably prior to interview. Mahoney gave naught away as potential trade was already rejected.

My point was our strategy probably should have been to say he's not coming if that's the case. Even do a Hawthorn and say we never offered anything.

But, I've gone back on knocking Mahoney here. It's all good. It's really small in the scheme of things and not worth even pointing out.

4 minutes ago, Demonland said:

They must have scorched the earth when they left.

 

Certainly didn't load the dirt with PEDs upon leaving!

30 minutes ago, Sorry kids said:

Goschs Paddock- Very good, compared to what?   And do not get technical and refer to non footy ground area. It is an embarrassment and a deterrent.

Didn’t say they were great, said people exaggerate how poor they are.  ‘Embarrassment’ and ‘deterrent’ back up my point.  They certainly didn’t deter May and Lever who were courted by many clubs.

Would the players even spend 1/10th of their time at Gosch’s Paddock?


7 minutes ago, TeamPlayedFine39 said:

Didn’t say they were great, said people exaggerate how poor they are.  ‘Embarrassment’ and ‘deterrent’ back up my point.  They certainly didn’t deter May and Lever who were courted by many clubs.

Would the players even spend 1/10th of their time at Gosch’s Paddock?

May and lever prove the point that we have to pay overs to attract quality players. Sorry but if you do not think the playing arena is not of critical importance you are wrong and go against the MFC stated aim of finding an MCG sized venue for training.

28 minutes ago, Moonshadow said:

Yet Collingwood won a flag out of Goschs in 2010. Go figure!

10 years on a new generation of players and an arms race in facilities mean it is not acceptable or AFL standard. Honestly you are just having a crack, if you cannot agree our facilities are sub standard for the multi billion dollar industry we compete in.

6 minutes ago, Sorry kids said:

May and lever prove the point that we have to pay overs to attract quality players. Sorry but if you do not think the playing arena is not of critical importance you are wrong and go against the MFC stated aim of finding an MCG sized venue for training.

Again, you’re countering my claims of exaggeration with more exaggeration.

Agree to disagree.

 
11 minutes ago, Sorry kids said:

10 years on a new generation of players and an arms race in facilities mean it is not acceptable or AFL standard. Honestly you are just having a crack, if you cannot agree our facilities are sub standard for the multi billion dollar industry we compete in.

Not having a crack, not being a defeatist either.

You think Elliot didn't come to us because of Goschs?

I'd say he was always going to stay or go to Brisbane, where he spent his youth and where his bro lives. Also probably because we might be outbid in terms of amount per year.

Our facilities aren't the best, but they haven't deterred May, Lever, Hibberd, Melk, Tomlinson or Langdon

Edited by Moonshadow


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...

Featured Content

  • CASEY: Collingwood

    It was freezing cold at Mission Whitten Stadium where only the brave came out in the rain to watch a game that turned out to be as miserable as the weather.
    The Casey Demons secured their third consecutive victory, earning the four premiership points and credit for defeating a highly regarded Collingwood side, but achieved little else. Apart perhaps from setting the scene for Monday’s big game at the MCG and the Ice Challenge that precedes it.
    Neither team showcased significant skill in the bleak and greasy conditions, at a location that was far from either’s home territory. Even the field umpires forgot where they were and experienced a challenging evening, but no further comment is necessary.

      • Like
    • 4 replies
  • NON-MFC: Round 13

    Follow all the action from every Round 13 clash excluding the Dees as the 2025 AFL Premiership Season rolls on. With Melbourne playing in the final match of the round on King's Birthday, all eyes turn to the rest of the competition. Who are you tipping to win? And more importantly, which results best serve the Demons’ finals aspirations? Join the discussion and keep track of the matches that could shape the ladder and impact our run to September.

    • 216 replies
  • PREVIEW: Collingwood

    Having convincingly defeated last year’s premier and decisively outplayed the runner-up with 8.2 in the final quarter, nothing epitomized the Melbourne Football Club’s performance more than its 1.12 final half, particularly the eight consecutive behinds in the last term, against a struggling St Kilda team in the midst of a dismal losing streak. Just when stability and consistency were anticipated within the Demon ranks, they delivered a quintessential performance marked by instability and ill-conceived decisions, with the most striking aspect being their inaccuracy in kicking for goal, which suggested a lack of preparation (instead of sleeping in their hotel in Alice, were they having a night on the turps) rather than a well-rested team. Let’s face it - this kicking disease that makes them look like raw amateurs is becoming a millstone around the team’s neck.

    • 1 reply
  • CASEY: Sydney

    The Casey Demons were always expected to emerge victorious in their matchup against the lowly-ranked Sydney Swans at picturesque Tramway Oval, situated in the shadows of the SCG in Moore Park. They dominated the proceedings in the opening two and a half quarters of the game but had little to show for it. This was primarily due to their own sloppy errors in a low-standard game that produced a number of crowded mauls reminiscent of the rugby game popular in old Sydney Town. However, when the Swans tired, as teams often do when they turn games into ugly defensive contests, Casey lifted the standard of its own play and … it was off to the races. Not to nearby Randwick but to a different race with an objective of piling on goal after goal on the way to a mammoth victory. At the 25-minute mark of the third quarter, the Demons held a slender 14-point lead over the Swans, who are ahead on the ladder of only the previous week's opposition, the ailing Bullants. Forty minutes later, they had more than fully compensated for the sloppiness of their earlier play with a decisive 94-point victory, that culminated in a rousing finish which yielded thirteen unanswered goals. Kicks hit their targets, the ball found itself going through the middle and every player made a contribution.

    • 1 reply
  • REPORT: St. Kilda

    Hands up if you thought, like me, at half-time in yesterday’s game at TIO Traeger Park, Alice Springs that Melbourne’s disposal around the ground and, in particular, its kicking inaccuracy in front of the goals couldn’t get any worse. Well, it did. And what’s even more damning for the Melbourne Football Club is that the game against St Kilda and its resurgence from the bottomless pit of its miserable start to the season wasn’t just lost through poor conversion for goal but rather in the 15 minutes when the entire team went into a slumber and was mugged by the out-of-form Saints. Their six goals two behinds (one goal less than the Demons managed for the whole game) weaved a path of destruction from which they were unable to recover. Ross Lyon’s astute use of pressure to contain the situation once they had asserted their grip on the game, and Melbourne’s self-destructive wastefulness, assured that outcome. The old adage about the insanity of repeatedly doing something and expecting a different result, was out there. Two years ago, the score line in Melbourne’s loss to the Giants at this same ground was 5 goals 15 behinds - a ratio of one goal per four scoring shots - was perfectly replicated with yesterday’s 7 goals 21 behinds. 
    This has been going on for a while and opens up a number of questions. I’ll put forward a few that come to mind from this performance. The obvious first question is whether the club can find a suitable coach to instruct players on proper kicking techniques or is this a skill that can no longer be developed at this stage of the development of our playing group? Another concern is the team's ability to counter an opponent's dominance during a run on as exemplified by the Saints in the first quarter. Did the Demons underestimate their opponents, considering St Kilda's goals during this period were scored by relatively unknown forwards? Furthermore, given the modest attendance of 6,721 at TIO Traeger Park and the team's poor past performances at this venue, is it prudent to prioritize financial gain over potentially sacrificing valuable premiership points by relinquishing home ground advantage, notwithstanding the cultural significance of the team's connection to the Red Centre? 

      • Like
    • 4 replies
  • PREGAME: Collingwood

    After a disappointing loss in Alice Springs the Demons return to the MCG to take on the Magpies in the annual King's Birthday Big Freeze for MND game. Who comes in and who goes out?

      • Thumb Down
    • 528 replies