Jump to content

Oliver Trade Rumours

Oxdee
in Melbourne Demons

Featured Replies

4 minutes ago, mo64 said:

The only reason we would be shopping Oliver around is that his off field issues are similar to that of Jesse Hogan.

If he's being shopped around, I don't know that any of us know the reasons. The internal workings and the internal dynamics of a playing group and club are not generally accessible to the wider public.

But to throw my own baseless speculation into the ring, I do wonder whether deep down here at some level the club has decided to close-off on this playing group and look to rebuilding around the next group down (JVR, Rivers, Judd, Windsor etc) plus going to the draft - and in particular this draft which apparently has plenty of talent. We've got Pick 5, perhaps we can massage our way into a second first-round pick. But if we could get a third first-rounder as well, it could go a fair way to setting us up long-term.

So ... Oliver: getting older, would get us some decent picks plus clear salary space. Also, much as we love him, he's not bringing leadership or a wise head either - and this when we've lost Gus and ANB.

Random thoughts.

    • Like 7
     
    16 minutes ago, Jaded No More said:

    Perhaps it’s because Pert is going against the wishes of the FD

    Or perhaps not.

     
    37 minutes ago, DeesignerAU said:

    Sure, I wasn't aware of this until I made some enquiries with "connected" people during Petracca-Gate.

    I was told that a number of high profile Melbourne "people" (influential members/coterie types) are getting sick of Pert "working from home" in Noosa.

    I initially was sceptical however Google is a wonderful thing and a little bit of digging confirmed that there's a "close family" business listed on the Dunn & Bradstreet register where the address is Noosa. I won't say who or what.

    Now before anyone pipes up, this could absolutely be a way to claim back flights to and from the family holiday house or.... the truth that he in fact lives and "works from home" in Noosa and the information I was given is correct.

    @Superunknown 

    15 minutes ago, Return to Glory said:

    I'm not across the review. Am I right in suggesting that Gary Pert is, in effect, partially reviewing himself? 

    On the basis of what we know, the review is into the Football Department.

    • Like 1

    We either keep Oliver and throw everything into the next two years, or dump him and start building towards 2028. We will get [censored] all for him. 

    <iframe src="https://gifer.com/embed/VgT" width=480 height=361.290 frameBorder="0" allowFullScreen></iframe><p><a href="https://gifer.com">via GIFER</a></p><iframe src="https://gifer.com/embed/VgT" width=480 height=361.290 frameBorder="0" allowFullScreen></iframe><p><a href="https://gifer.com">via GIFER</a></p>a train going over a bridge with a blue sky in the background

    • Like 1
    • Haha 1
     
    2 minutes ago, bing181 said:

    Or perhaps not.

    So 24 hours ago the club via Richo releases a statement claiming Oliver is a required player and we look forward to seeing him in red and blue next year and beyond. 
    24 hours later we have 4 different leaks, suggesting the club is pushing Clarry to look at this options after Pert rang around clubs to see if they’d be interested. 

    Make it make sense, because as far as I can tell, those are two different positions being taken by two different parts of the club.

    • Like 6
    • Clap 1
    1 minute ago, Jaded No More said:

    Make it make sense, because as far as I can tell, those are two different positions being taken by two different parts of the club.

    Publicly the club has to deny deny deny. If Richardson comes out and says "we've suggested to Clayton that he explores his options", we'd be lucky to get a future second-rounder for him, especially on his salary.

    • Like 2

    2 minutes ago, bing181 said:

    Publicly the club has to deny deny deny. If Richardson comes out and says "we've suggested to Clayton that he explores his options", we'd be lucky to get a future second-rounder for him, especially on his salary.

    The club can say nothing, as other clubs have when their players are being floated for trade. 
     

    Why does no other club have their player movements plastered all over the media?

    We are a [censored] mess 

    • Like 3
    1 minute ago, bing181 said:

    Publicly the club has to deny deny deny. If Richardson comes out and says "we've suggested to Clayton that he explores his options", we'd be lucky to get a future second-rounder for him, especially on his salary.

    How does that work? Pert is calling up a bunch of clubs and saying "hey are you still keen on Oliver?" and we think we can con them into paying overs because we release a public statement to the press saying we will never trade him.

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1
    9 minutes ago, Jaded No More said:

    So 24 hours ago the club via Richo releases a statement claiming Oliver is a required player and we look forward to seeing him in red and blue next year and beyond. 
    24 hours later we have 4 different leaks, suggesting the club is pushing Clarry to look at this options after Pert rang around clubs to see if they’d be interested. 

    Make it make sense, because as far as I can tell, those are two different positions being taken by two different parts of the club.

    Club is Rudderless!

    16 minutes ago, bing181 said:

    If he's being shopped around, I don't know that any of us know the reasons. The internal workings and the internal dynamics of a playing group and club are not generally accessible to the wider public.

    But to throw my own baseless speculation into the ring, I do wonder whether deep down here at some level the club has decided to close-off on this playing group and look to rebuilding around the next group down (JVR, Rivers, Judd, Windsor etc) plus going to the draft - and in particular this draft which apparently has plenty of talent. We've got Pick 5, perhaps we can massage our way into a second first-round pick. But if we could get a third first-rounder as well, it could go a fair way to setting us up long-term.

    So ... Oliver: getting older, would get us some decent picks plus clear salary space. Also, much as we love him, he's not bringing leadership or a wise head either - and this when we've lost Gus and ANB.

    Random thoughts.

    If I was in charge I would be thinking something similiar. 

    • Haha 1

    1 minute ago, KozzyCan said:

    How does that work? Pert is calling up a bunch of clubs and saying "hey are you still keen on Oliver?" and we think we can con them into paying overs because we release a public statement to the press saying we will never trade him.

    Exactly right. 
    Clubs aren’t stupid. If we are floating an A grader with 5 years remaining on his deal, then we are willing to take unders. It’s not as if Clarry has asked for a trade, and we stand firm and say no way unless we get 2 top 10 picks etc. 

    If it’s us driving the trade, we will lose in the deal. Which is why we are an amateur club.

    • Like 2
    4 hours ago, picket fence said:

    He is the best mate of the source who is an influential person. 

    Oh no...not an influencer....bit like Laura Loumer then......he/she is not Chinese by any chance and whispers a lot?

    • Like 1
    8 minutes ago, bing181 said:

    Publicly the club has to deny deny deny. If Richardson comes out and says "we've suggested to Clayton that he explores his options", we'd be lucky to get a future second-rounder for him, especially on his salary.

    This makes no sense. You don't categorically deny the rumours and say a player of his popularity and calibre will be at the club next year, while at the same time privately shopping him around, mere weeks after the club was leaking stories almost daily about Petracca (and now Kozzie).

    Either the club is straight up lying to its supporters, in which case we should he disgusted and very angry, or the club is in disarray. 

    Which one? Are supporters being take for mugs or is the club breaking down?

    • Like 1
    19 minutes ago, bing181 said:

    If he's being shopped around, I don't know that any of us know the reasons. The internal workings and the internal dynamics of a playing group and club are not generally accessible to the wider public.

    But to throw my own baseless speculation into the ring, I do wonder whether deep down here at some level the club has decided to close-off on this playing group and look to rebuilding around the next group down (JVR, Rivers, Judd, Windsor etc) plus going to the draft - and in particular this draft which apparently has plenty of talent. We've got Pick 5, perhaps we can massage our way into a second first-round pick. But if we could get a third first-rounder as well, it could go a fair way to setting us up long-term.

    So ... Oliver: getting older, would get us some decent picks plus clear salary space. Also, much as we love him, he's not bringing leadership or a wise head either - and this when we've lost Gus and ANB.

    Random thoughts.

    If the club thinks we should rebuild around our young players, why sign Viney long term? Why keep Langdon? Why not also trade Trac? Why chase Houston?

    Oliver just turned 27. That’s prime age for a midfielder. Cripps won two Brownlows in his 30s.

    • Like 6
    • Love 1
    2 minutes ago, praha said:

    This makes no sense. You don't categorically deny the rumours and say a player of his popularity and calibre will be at the club next year, while at the same time privately shopping him around, mere weeks after the club was leaking stories almost daily about Petracca (and now Kozzie).

    Either the club is straight up lying to its supporters, in which case we should he disgusted and very angry, or the club is in disarray. 

    Which one? Are supporters being take for mugs or is the club breaking down?

    us supporters are mugs for thinking that the club hasn't been breaking down in front of our eyes for the last 18 months

    • Like 1

    I had a good chat with one of our assistant coaches a couple of months ago and he told me that Clayton had made his mind up to leave last year and wanted out for various reasons but mainly his injury management and also wasn’t in a good headspace which then turned into what happened this pre season.

    The club had to work really really hard to convince him to stay.

    Now this .

    The Cats have been trying to get him for two years now.

    • Like 6
    • Thanks 3
    1 minute ago, Jaded No More said:

    If the club thinks we should rebuild around our young players, why sign Viney long term? Why keep Langdon? Why not also trade Trac? Why chase Houston?

    Oliver just turned 27. That’s prime age for a midfielder. Cripps won two Brownlows in his 30s.

    Club needed to make this assessment a month ago. Is this group still up for it or are we fooling ourselves? If it's the former you put all your efforts into getting this group right and bolstering them through solid trades and a high end draft pick or two. If it's the latter then do what Richmond have done and get as much value out of your players at the trade table and load up at the draft. Our behaviour implies the club is being pulled in two different directions from within.

    • Like 1
    24 minutes ago, bing181 said:

    If he's being shopped around, I don't know that any of us know the reasons. The internal workings and the internal dynamics of a playing group and club are not generally accessible to the wider public.

    But to throw my own baseless speculation into the ring, I do wonder whether deep down here at some level the club has decided to close-off on this playing group and look to rebuilding around the next group down (JVR, Rivers, Judd, Windsor etc) plus going to the draft - and in particular this draft which apparently has plenty of talent. We've got Pick 5, perhaps we can massage our way into a second first-round pick. But if we could get a third first-rounder as well, it could go a fair way to setting us up long-term.

    So ... Oliver: getting older, would get us some decent picks plus clear salary space. Also, much as we love him, he's not bringing leadership or a wise head either - and this when we've lost Gus and ANB.

    Random thoughts.

    in theory that has some merit but it seems likely we wouldnt be getting anywhere near the compensation necessary for him and may still be forking out part of his contract for years to come, which would be extremely unpalatable

     

    I love DL.  People hear or read things, then make all sorts of assumptions about what is going on and then reach conclusions as if their conclusion was written in holy writ, especially if it is consistent with their own previous disapproval of a person or the club. 

    How about some "If this is true, then X" rather than just saying "X"?  Just occasionally?

    In this case try insering an IF at the beginning of the sentence:  Pert is shopping Oliver around without the knowledge or in opposition to the list managers, he should be sacked. 

    We can vent all we like, but very few of us know anything about what's goig on.

    • Like 6
    1 minute ago, KozzyCan said:

    Club needed to make this assessment a month ago. Is this group still up for it or are we fooling ourselves? If it's the former you put all your efforts into getting this group right and bolstering them through solid trades and a high end draft pick or two. If it's the latter then do what Richmond have done and get as much value out of your players at the trade table and load up at the draft. Our behaviour implies the club is being pulled in two different directions from within.

    At a guess Goodwin's pushing for top ups and others are saying "time to trade and draft to future success" I'll take the latter as I reckon we've lost the game on option 1.


    Guest
    This topic is now closed to further replies.
    Go to topic listing

    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.

        • Thanks
      • 133 replies
      Demonland

    • 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.

        • Thanks
      • 1 reply
      Demonland

    • 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.

        • Thanks
        • Like
      • 1 reply
      Demonland

    • 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? 

        • Thanks
      • 4 replies
      Demonland

    • 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?

        • Thanks
      • 383 replies
      Demonland

    • 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/

        • Thanks
      • 47 replies
      Demonland
    View All