Jump to content

Featured Replies

Posted

We're keeping tabs according to AFL.com.au and have held long term interest.

Comes out of contract at the end of 2026.

 

 

A yes please from me.

Kicked 4 snags in one of Port’s finals last year and was/is expected to be a key part of Port’s future forward line.

Don’t reckon they will let him go with Dixon well and truly cooked. 

 
1 minute ago, Heart Beats True said:

Don’t reckon they will let him go with Dixon well and truly cooked. 

Dixon has announced his retirement and Marshall might not make it back from concussion, so I agree there is no chance 

31 minutes ago, Heart Beats True said:

Don’t reckon they will let him go with Dixon well and truly cooked. 

 

28 minutes ago, Demons11 said:

Dixon has announced his retirement and Marshall might not make it back from concussion, so I agree there is no chance 

We didn't want to let Jackson go either...but when he's out of contract (2026) if not before, the race is on.


Lord is an interesting option - cost the only issue assuming he is available 

Would like him but he is not the gorilla we crave

 

Love this option, this kid showed a lot last year.  This year ruined by injuries.  I'd prioritise getting him over that GWS kid.  Both would be great of course. 

I'd have him just to hear the MFC fans yell "Praise the Lord" whenever he does something good.


Can't see him going as they need their tall stocks more than ever.

But if there's even a slight chance..

1 minute ago, Roost it far said:

I always thought we were in the market for Georgiades but that never eventuated.

we were until he did his acl in the sanfl, i believe

after that he rehabbed at the pear and then moved into the position of being their key forward given lord's injury run in 2024, marshall's ongoing concussion concerns, and dixon's failing body

he'll be their prime forward for the foreseeable future, you'd imagine

Port are linked to Lukosius, Cumming and Perrymen.

Currently they only hold picks 36 and 54 in the 2024 draft.

Houston and Soldo have asked for trades but are no certainty to leave if they cant get it done.

If we make a compelling offer, or if Lord firmly says he wants out, it may force Port's hand so they can get other deals done.

Marshall, Lukosius and Georgiades is still a good set of tall forwards to have if they lose Lord.


1 hour ago, seventyfour said:

Port are linked to Lukosius, Cumming and Perrymen.

Currently they only hold picks 36 and 54 in the 2024 draft.

Houston and Soldo have asked for trades but are no certainty to leave if they cant get it done.

If we make a compelling offer, or if Lord firmly says he wants out, it may force Port's hand so they can get other deals done.

Marshall, Lukosius and Georgiades is still a good set of tall forwards to have if they lose Lord.

Marshall might not play again.

Cumming and Perryman are free agents.

They could probably get Lukosius with those picks, Soldo and a future 2nd. Certainly with a future first.

They have no incentive to trade Lord.

Lord trained with us as part of the afl academy, he was pick 49 in the 2020 draft.

It was the covid year and list cut down draft. We didn’t have a 3rd rounder, we took Fraser Rosman in the 2nd round.

Probably fair enough given we had a strong list in 2021 and half the kids in the draft missed most of the year but in general this is exactly why I’m in favour of always having at least 4, if not 5 national draft picks and rather than picking the eyes out of the draft just take lots of lottery tickets.

Much better off drafting our own Ollie Lord than make desperate offers to a guy contracted for 2 years who may or may not actually be any good 

Edited by DeeSpencer

2 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

Lord trained with us as part of the afl academy, he was pick 49 in the 2020 draft.

It was the covid year and list cut down draft. We didn’t have a 3rd rounder, we took Fraser Rosman in the 2nd round.

Probably fair enough given we had a strong list in 2021 and half the kids in the draft missed most of the year but in general this is exactly why I’m in favour of always having at least 4, if not 5 national draft picks and rather than picking the eyes out of the draft just take lots of lottery tickets.

Much better off drafting our own Ollie Lord than make desperate offers to a guy contracted for 2 years who may or may not actually be any good 

Unlikely if we have just got Wade D to commit to us. We still have Jeffo and Kentfield to come.

4 minutes ago, Redleg said:

Unlikely if we have just got Wade D to commit to us. We still have Jeffo and Kentfield to come.

We’ll be doing well if Jeffo is a good player and one of the other 2 proves useful in anyway at all. So it doesn’t hurt to be on the front foot to try to get Lord in 2026 and even more so when he’s a free agent post 2028 (if he extends until free agency as most players do).

It’s just very hard to get quality key forwards to move to any club, yet alone for the Dees to land one. 

 

18 hours ago, Demonstone said:

I'd have him just to hear the MFC fans yell "Praise the Lord" whenever he does something good.

James Brown Church GIF


Given he's the grandson of 1960's Geelong player Alastair Lord, I reckon there will be a strong pull to get him back there (although maybe in 5-10 years time when he's early-mid 30's) 

On 25/09/2024 at 21:50, Demonstone said:

I'd have him just to hear the MFC fans yell "Praise the Lord" whenever he does something good.

Forget something good, I'd  yell praise the lord if he hit a target by foot.

 
On 26/09/2024 at 14:55, Redleg said:

Unlikely if we have just got Wade D to commit to us. We still have Jeffo and Kentfield to come.

Reading this makes me think we need him even more 

  • Author
44 minutes ago, Ugottobekidding said:

Straight swap lord for ANB? We ain't gonna get much from Adelaide 

No


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.

      • Thanks
    • 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.

      • Thanks
    • 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.

      • Thanks
    • 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.

      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 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? 

      • Thanks
    • 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?

      • Thanks
    • 527 replies