Jump to content

Featured Replies

IMO GWS wouldn’t have done a deal with the Crows if they didn’t have assurance from the dees that we won’t bid on Green. 

Why wouldn’t we pick him if he is what we are after is beyond me. We don’t need to help gws get better our job is for our team to get better. 

Last I looked we weren’t in the grand final this year.

 
1 hour ago, Davos said:

I was at that game. Walked away thinking he was the best player I saw. Put on a clinic.

One game does not make a swallow Davos but he was very good.

The game against SA however, ok and one of the Allies better players imv but not quite at the level of this one.

I guess they are all young and going to have some major variations on the day.  Quality of opponents, recovery times etc.

On 11/20/2019 at 10:35 PM, DemonOX said:

IMO GWS wouldn’t have done a deal with the Crows if they didn’t have assurance from the dees that we won’t bid on Green. 

Why wouldn’t we pick him if he is what we are after is beyond me. We don’t need to help gws get better our job is for our team to get better. 

Last I looked we weren’t in the grand final this year.

I think it's as simple as the Giants rate Jackson higher than Green, and they'd grab him if we did bid so they don't care. 

 
4 hours ago, Patches O’houlihan said:

I think it's as simple as the Giants rate Jackson higher than green, and they'd grab him if we did bid so they don't care. 

Based on needs i would guess so PO.  They have plenty of mid field power.

On 11/20/2019 at 9:44 AM, ProDee said:

Blah blah blah

You had to edit that post?

Did you spell blah wrong?


8 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

You had to edit that post?

Did you spell blah wrong?

Jellyfish have survived for over 600 million years without a brain.

There's hope for you yet, Junior.

13 hours ago, Watts the matter said:

Is that the All Australian Matt Crouch you are talking of? If the range was Matt Crouch to Patrick Cripps he would be the first pick in the draft.

If you think Green is Cripps then draft him, but if you think he is Matt Crouch and you think Jackson is Grundy then you go with Jackson. 

On 11/21/2019 at 10:37 AM, DeeSpencer said:

If you think Green is Cripps then draft him, but if you think he is Matt Crouch and you think Jackson is Grundy then you go with Jackson. 

I think you can’t lose with those 2. If we’re genuinely happy to get Green, which I think we should be, we bid.

And we settle for Jackson if GWS matches. That way, we get 1 of the 2 players we want and we stop GWS from getting a second bite at the cherry.

 
13 minutes ago, Mach5 said:

I think you can’t lose with those 2. If we’re genuinely happy to get Green, which I think we should be, we bid.

And we settle for Jackson if GWS matches. That way, we get 1 of the 2 players we want and we stop GWS from getting a second bite at the cherry.

Getting the player we want more is the most important thing. GWS are going to be a good side with or without Green. In fact letting them get Green - who is unlikely to make them better in the next 2 years - and not having any future draft picks as well as a packed salary cap could work in our favour if we're proactive in grabbing one of their other young mids like a Caldwell/O'Halloran in next years trade period. The footy gods might smile back on us.

 


  • Author
5 hours ago, KingDingAling said:

We will bid on Green because he is a top 3 player in the draft.

Only if we want him more than Jackson or anybody else.

I think there is a very good chance the Giants wouldn't match the bid for Green so i guess it comes down to who we rate 3 in this draft. 

7 hours ago, Patches O’houlihan said:

I think there is a very good chance the Giants wouldn't match the bid for Green so i guess it comes down to who we rate 3 in this draft. 

I would prefer Green to Jackson.

Green could make a difference to our midfield rotations in his 1st year 

If GWS don't match the bid then I think his brother wont want to go the club either and will probably go into the draft, so if the brother is any good they wont want to burn bridges.


5 minutes ago, durango said:

If GWS don't match the bid then I think his brother wont want to go the club either and will probably go into the draft, so if the brother is any good they wont want to burn bridges.

I'm not sure that theory holds water, can you name one instance where that has happened?

 

16 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

I'm not sure that theory holds water, can you name one instance where that has happened?

seeing as this is the first instance where two very talented brothers are both part of one of these farcical next generation academy thingoes i doubt very much it's ever happened

green will be taken by gw$ no matter what

i doubt we will nominate him, and thus gw$ will get two super players - it's an absolutely ridiculous situation

8 minutes ago, whatwhatsaywhat said:

seeing as this is the first instance where two very talented brothers are both part of one of these farcical next generation academy thingoes i doubt very much it's ever happened

green will be taken by gw$ no matter what

i doubt we will nominate him, and thus gw$ will get two super players - it's an absolutely ridiculous situation

A much more fair system would be academy bidding etc occurs before the draft as in teams can bid their picks for that player and if they do the Giants have an opportunity to match. but it means surrendering the picks to that value before the draft.

I think that a bid at 3 by the MFC is a win/win situation since it will either force GWS to match it and if they don't then we get a player which is regarded by all recruiters as the next best player after the Sun's picks.

As a club we are not there to make life for GWS easy in getting 2 guns not 1.

I only think we should bid on Green if we think he’s best available, the idea of bidding on him to screw the Giants is foolish. 

But at same time I think this will be the biggest pick of the night and will have a knock on effect on several teams weather GWS match or not. Ripple effect may  still be felt at 10 and might decide weather we trade that pick or not. Does anybody know if Giants would be allowed to split with another team and hold on to one pick even though they would have a point deficit ?Say we bid on Green, they split with say Port for 12&18 then use 12 on Green and 18 on another player.  

If we decide not to pick Green and pick Jackson things might play out a bit more predictable. 


43 minutes ago, Colm said:

I only think we should bid on Green if we think he’s best available, the idea of bidding on him to screw the Giants is foolish. 

But at same time I think this will be the biggest pick of the night and will have a knock on effect on several teams weather GWS match or not. Ripple effect may  still be felt at 10 and might decide weather we trade that pick or not. Does anybody know if Giants would be allowed to split with another team and hold on to one pick even though they would have a point deficit ?Say we bid on Green, they split with say Port for 12&18 then use 12 on Green and 18 on another player.  

If we decide not to pick Green and pick Jackson things might play out a bit more predictable. 

They need to match the points. If we bid 3, they can swap to 12&18 but if the points are more than 12, then 18 drops back.

Their other option is to trade for a later pick and a pick next year. That future pick is quarantined from matching the bid

Whomever we bid on at 3, if there is not a match, many will perceive that we picked the lesser of the 2.

Although a few will think a backroom deal was done.

Coming last in consideration will be, we picked the player Melbourne need the most for the next few years. That's my punt.

Edited by Damo
a comma

2 hours ago, whatwhatsaywhat said:

seeing as this is the first instance where two very talented brothers are both part of one of these farcical next generation academy thingoes i doubt very much it's ever happened

green will be taken by gw$ no matter what

i doubt we will nominate him, and thus gw$ will get two super players - it's an absolutely ridiculous situation

 

To be fair, a similar thing eventuated in our favour when Frawley went to Hawthorn, with the absurd FA framework. 

 
39 minutes ago, Mach5 said:

 

To be fair, a similar thing eventuated in our favour when Frawley went to Hawthorn, with the absurd FA framework. 

yep, but that's cos we were down so low so we got what he was valued at in terms of it being a pick after our first rounder, ergo pick 3

also a farce, but not a ridiculous one like these nga players and discounts and points accumulation and rules on the run...

2 hours ago, Good Lord George said:

They need to match the points. If we bid 3, they can swap to 12&18 but if the points are more than 12, then 18 drops back.

Their other option is to trade for a later pick and a pick next year. That future pick is quarantined from matching the bid

Thanks for that GLG. 


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

  • 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.

    • 25 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? 

    • 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?

      • Like
    • 232 replies
  • PODCAST: St. Kilda

    The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Monday, 2nd June @ 8:00pm. Join Binman, George & I as we have a chat with former Demon ruckman Jeff White about his YouTube channel First Use where he dissects ruck setups and contests. We'll then discuss the Dees disappointing loss to the Saints in Alice Springs.
    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/

      • Angry
      • Like
    • 47 replies