Oliver Trade Rumours

[deejammin' 2,358]

I just don’t see a trade to Geelong happening.

A. Geelong don’t have the currency, their first round pick is too low and with Smith and Clarry a future first is likely to be the same or worse.

B. What currency they do have is going into Smith first. 

C. We are low on quality mids and Clayton’s value is at an all time low. 
 

D. He has a huge, multi million dollar contract and if we want him to stay he stays.
 

E. If there’s any credence to the idea we’re pushing him out it’s idiotic. It would be a colossally stupid decision and the fact the club made a statement within a day of it coming out saying he’s staying tells me they know this. 
 

I’m taking a break from footy media until the end of trade week. They’ll probably throw up five more of my favourite MFC players who are disgruntled and leaving in the next two weeks as they clearly hate Pert, Goody and the club and are sticking the boots in. They’ve been waiting three years for our on field performance to drop so they could. The media is so Geelong friendly there is no doubt some of this is Geelong sensing weakness and trying to make it happen through their media mates. 

The sad thing is this has been the most successful period of my lifetime and yet the footy media coverage has been so negative since 2022 it’s been so difficult to fully enjoy it. What the AFL media is doing to us MFC fans through this period can never be forgiven. All clubs have issues, maybe we’re a basket case, only time will tell but these media [censored] have done everything in their power to make the last three years totally unenjoyable for us and it’s a disgrace. The treatment of Essendon through the drug scandal was more friendly in the media than this!! I have no doubt the back end of this year crowd numbers and this years memberships were badly tarnished by the constant negative critique of our club. Shameful, clearly some people just hate having a successful MFC or MFC supporters enjoying football. 

[Demon17 5,135]

21 minutes ago, DemonJack 14 said:

This is exactly how I feel about the situation. If Geelong think he is worth pursuing, Why don’t we want to keep him ? Particularly when we will get severe unders and still probably have to pay some of his wage. You need an elite midfield to win a flag , without Oliver we don’t have that.

We don’t seem to be attracting anyone else of note to fill the void this post season. So where are we at then ? Are we saying we are rebuilding ? 
 

We all know that can take a lot of time and that’s if we get it right with recruiting the right kids. It’s a real concern if we can’t land anyone of note in this trade period, Its really hard to see how we are in a better list position next year compared to this year at the moment unfortunately. 
 

 

Absolutely agree with you. But how does clarry walk back from yesterday's cats meeting.

Just waiting for the spin that"... I was never really going to leave etc etc..."

[greenwaves 489]

Geelong must think they can get Smith and Oliver for one first rounder each

[Young Blood 2,490]

2 minutes ago, Demon17 said:

Absolutely agree with you. But how does clarry walk back from yesterday's cats meeting.

Just waiting for the spin that"... I was never really going to leave etc etc..."

I think you answered your own question. He explores the idea then decides to stay at the dees like many players have done before. That's how I imagine that would go as it has often been in recent times.

2 minutes ago, greenwaves said:

Geelong must think they can get Smith and Oliver for one first rounder each

Not at all. It will have to be a multi-club deal in both situations I would imagine that will involve other clubs' first round picks and swaps of all kinds. Let the circus begin.

[demoniac 1,330]

1 hour ago, Mickey said:

My issue with the Clarry situation:

Geelong aren't courting him if they think he's cooked. They clearly believe, with the right support around him, he can return to at least 90-95% of the player he was, which is still one of the best in the comp.

Which means either a) we don't or b) we won't or can't put that same support around him. If it's a, fair enough. But it sounds more like b. And I have no interest in watching him get back to his best anywhere but Melbourne, simply because we won't put any more time or effort into it.

We don't go close to winning the flag without a fit and firing midfield, and a fit Clarry is still a key part of that. No draftee, short of a Daicos or Reid type (of which Ashcroft is the only one this year), will help fill that void. If we trade Clarry, we might as well admit we've given up on the next 2-3 years, which means on May, Gawn, Viney and probably Trac's time, and get started on a full rebuild.

It's time for the club to shut up, get its [censored] together (including at board and executive level) and knuckle down for a huge preseason.

Its fairly obvious that the Melbourne Football Club has devoted substantial resources in assisting Oliver with his non football issues in 2023 and likely before. Sometimes patience runs out and a clean start with a clean slate may be best option. Will the clean start work? Time will tell.

[FreedFromDesire 886]

If Melbourne are looking to ship Oliver off, yet Geelong are keen on him, I think that says all we need to know about where our culture truly sits currently.

It's a shame the football department review couldn't have started earlier so we could have sold some significant change to potential trade targets as part of the process. Not only will we now struggle to attract the genuine peak age talent we desperately need, but we'll likely lose some and we will be starting the season a year behind in our department progress.

[Rab D Nesbitt 8,334]

1 hour ago, The Lobster Effect said:

Rhys Stanley's farm?

It was just an observation that whilst we're supposedly looking to sell a metaphorical farm the Cats might be trying to entice Clarry with an actual farm. The fact that I have to explain it shows that it wasn't a very good joke.

Edited October 2 by Rab D Nesbitt

[Jumping Jack Clennett 1,774]

During the 57 years we were non-flag winners, I always thought that what we lacked were about 4 absolute star players.

Finally, by 2021, we had them!

Let's get rid of the lot! That seems like a pretty good idea!

[Rab D Nesbitt 8,334]

19 minutes ago, Demon17 said:

Absolutely agree with you. But how does clarry walk back from yesterday's cats meeting.

 

Is his license still suspended?

[Mickey 4,599]

16 minutes ago, demoniac said:

Its fairly obvious that the Melbourne Football Club has devoted substantial resources in assisting Oliver with his non football issues in 2023 and likely before. Sometimes patience runs out and a clean start with a clean slate may be best option. Will the clean start work? Time will tell.

Yep, get that. But given he is absolutely at his lowest market value, I think we need to suck it up and keep assisting him. He's clearly made progress, and while it might be something that needs managing going forward, I think the upside is worth it

[Oxdee 317]

5 hours ago, Jaded No More said:

If you are not extremely concerned that this club is seemingly being run by a bunch of blind monkeys flinging poo at the wall to see what sticks, then you should be.

Leaving the Clarry trade aside, you've had Green take over as caretaker president, and since then he's had his pants pulled down by Gutnick, he's got Pert running a review when he should be reviewed instead, all the while this sinking ship is leaking worse than the Titanic.

I am going to give Pert the benefit of the doubt here, and say that he isn't sitting in Noosa and ringing clubs around without the backing of the board. So if the board is letting Pert run the show, because they have lost faith in the FD, be it Goody, Lamb or Richo, then forget trading Clarry and get on with replacing the people in the FD and let their replacements make the list management calls!

One thing is certain, a bunch of doctors, lawyers and ex footballers sitting on a board, have 0 credentials to make list management calls. And having the CEO act as a proxy for them, is even worse! 

Why on earth is it an issue for pert investigating if clubs are interested in Oliver? It’s not the role of either goody or richo and probably requires more nuance than leaving it to lamb. 

[waynewussell 5,119]

Not sure if this scenario has already been mentioned. Perhaps Clayton has fallen short of behaviours and targets set previously. Perhaps it was decided that he needs another reality check. Perhaps it was decided, internally, that the football department should remain vocal in their commitment to keeping Clayton (so as no fracture is created when he remains at MFC). Perhaps this is the reason that Pert is the selected 'negotiator'.

[Fromgotowoewodin 1,587]

4 minutes ago, Oxdee said:

Why on earth is it an issue for pert investigating if clubs are interested in Oliver? It’s not the role of either goody or richo and probably requires more nuance than leaving it to lamb. 

Not a bad point, it’s not unreasonable to think that Clarry’s issues and whether other clubs are willing to take them on could be CEO to CEO level discussions.  

[Tracca 837]

32 minutes ago, Demon17 said:

Absolutely agree with you. But how does clarry walk back from yesterday's cats meeting.

Just waiting for the spin that"... I was never really going to leave etc etc..."

I went for a job interview/meeting with another company, not necessarily to go for the job, but to find out what they are like, how they work, whos who ,and just to see if there is something there. There wasnt. Clarry is more than entitled to do that if Geelong have said come for a chat we may be a club you could be interested in if something were to happen.

 

I dont think there is any harm at all in that. 

[ChaserJ 4,925]

32 minutes ago, greenwaves said:

Geelong must think they can get Smith and Oliver for one first rounder each

Of course they do. They’ll say we’re doing you a favour and the only way you’ll get a single first rounder is if you agree to pay some of that contract you gave him.

[KozzyCan 753]

8 minutes ago, waynewussell said:

Not sure if this scenario has already been mentioned. Perhaps Clayton has fallen short of behaviours and targets set previously. Perhaps it was decided that he needs another reality check. Perhaps it was decided, internally, that the football department should remain vocal in their commitment to keeping Clayton (so as no fracture is created when he remains at MFC). Perhaps this is the reason that Pert is the selected 'negotiator'.

Would be laughable if this is how the club is being run.

Pretty obvious that threatening to trade Oliver last year didn't work as we would have hoped. Trying the same thing again would only prove that it's an empty threat.

[KozzyCan 753]

13 minutes ago, Oxdee said:

Why on earth is it an issue for pert investigating if clubs are interested in Oliver? It’s not the role of either goody or richo and probably requires more nuance than leaving it to lamb. 

If the Board and Pert have decided that its time for Oliver to go they need to get in touch with Richo, Lamb and Goodwin and explain that this is the direction the club is taking and they are instructed to find the best offer for him. Basic chain of command. It's terrible to have the footy dept blindsided by the CEO going over their heads.

[DemonOX 8,767]

U watch if we get rid of Oliver to the cats we will prob take future 1sr plus some Other minor pics cause we are pushing him out. 

It’s the Melb way🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮

[layzie 33,659]

29 minutes ago, Oxdee said:

Why on earth is it an issue for pert investigating if clubs are interested in Oliver? It’s not the role of either goody or richo and probably requires more nuance than leaving it to lamb. 

Have you ever heard it happen before?

[Dr. Gonzo 24,070]

5 hours ago, Jaded No More said:

If you are not extremely concerned that this club is seemingly being run by a bunch of blind monkeys flinging poo at the wall to see what sticks, then you should be.

Leaving the Clarry trade aside, you've had Green take over as caretaker president, and since then he's had his pants pulled down by Gutnick, he's got Pert running a review when he should be reviewed instead, all the while this sinking ship is leaking worse than the Titanic.

I am going to give Pert the benefit of the doubt here, and say that he isn't sitting in Noosa and ringing clubs around without the backing of the board. So if the board is letting Pert run the show, because they have lost faith in the FD, be it Goody, Lamb or Richo, then forget trading Clarry and get on with replacing the people in the FD and let their replacements make the list management calls!

One thing is certain, a bunch of doctors, lawyers and ex footballers sitting on a board, have 0 credentials to make list management calls. And having the CEO act as a proxy for them, is even worse! 

Pert must go immediately.

[greenwaves 489]

11 minutes ago, DemonOX said:

U watch if we get rid of Oliver to the cats we will prob take future 1sr plus some Other minor pics cause we are pushing him out. 

Yes, other clubs know we want him out so they have the advantage, so it will probably be one first rounder

Edited October 2 by greenwaves

[Dr. Gonzo 24,070]

4 hours ago, mo64 said:

This.

If Oliver has transgressed again as being reported, that's on the player first, then the Football Dept. 

If the CEO and the Board believe that there are cultural problems within the playing group, and the Football Dept. won't act upon them, then the CEO and Board have no other option.

And it's little wonder that Goodwin and the Football Dept want to keep Oliver. After recent failed seasons, their jobs are on the line.

What cultural problems? We have the best culture Pert's seen in 40 years in the game 🙄

[Dr. Gonzo 24,070]

4 hours ago, ChaserJ said:

It’s starting to grate how much negative information about players (be it Oliver, Petracca, etc.) gets leaked once the club starts to look bad in a PR sense. 

Questioning our culture due to ‘recreational behaviours’ is something, but so easily backgrounding against your own players when the narrative runs against you screams terrible culture and weak leadership. We’ve seen this in political parties of all persuasions and usually ends badly. 

It’s corrosive and toxic.

Bang on the money @ChaserJ, it is despicable of the club to leak this [censored] into the media just to save their own reputations amongst the supporters to save their own hides.

[Swooper1987 3,322]

It won't be Pert going.  If Barrett is correct, and the review has uncovered player concerns about Oliver and his preferential treatment, on top of more behavioural concerns, Goodwin's position becomes almost untenable.  The CEO, no doubt with board authority, is acting against the reported wishes of the Footy Department and the Head Coach.  I don't see how that situation gets resolved. Or alternatively, most of what we are hearing is rubbish and it all goes away in a couple of weeks! 

[Fanatique Demon 2,637]

38 minutes ago, Fromgotowoewodin said:

Not a bad point, it’s not unreasonable to think that Clarry’s issues and whether other clubs are willing to take them on could be CEO to CEO level discussions.  

I have no idea what these issues are. Anyone care to give a hint?