Trac went about it the wrong way last year. Certainly diminished his standing with the faithful the way he carried on

But the club are obviously open to trading him this year so not sure why posters are now potting his character. He has given 11 years of excellent service. that needs to be acknowledged

If we are to rebuild we need to trade out players with value. Trac is the only player that will net us something worthwhile

he is doing us a favour i reckon

58 minutes ago, Jaded No More said:

Rachele is probably the most realistic, if we can convince him to come

Victorian boy, was in and out of the side this year, and is more surplus to Adelaide's need than a bull inside mid like Trac is.

Rachele plus a F1* and Adelaide takes Trac's entire salary.

*Even pick 18 next year, is better than pick 14 this year.

I reckon that's a possibility. The finals showed crows they are way off the pace still to win a flag. Trac may just get them in real contention and be worth the cash risk

10 minutes ago, Young Angus said:

Rachelle sounds great, but Darcy Fogarty certainly is intriguing since we reckon we've been crying out for a forward for a while...I wonder if we really need one or would prefer a Rachelle and just get our forwards up to scratch, we have quite a few young gun forwards up and coming that could be very very good in JVR plus Kentfield and Noah Yze but they are unknowns...but might be awesome!

Rachele and Koz together is pretty tantalising. I also like the age profile of Rachele, would give a decade of service and likely 'peak' when we're back in the window (IMO).

1 minute ago, BDA said:

But the club are obviously open to trading him this year

They are, but it is not their preference.

King wants him to stay, but you can't keep a grown man against his wishes forever.

On SEN, Trac decided Sunday and with the club's permission, to visit Adelaide and test the market. That's all it is atm, but it did slip that Trac has had a chat with Hardwick at Gold Coast.

The subtle MFC message, and from Gary Lyon, is that he will cost you, or to quote Gaz, "Pony Up". The message is that MFC want a player in the deal, and if the deal doesn't suit, Trac stays where he is. I have heard 3rd hand that Trac won't go to Adelaide, but may look good in a Suns jumper. It is no surprise that GC states that Humphrey is not negotiable so I guess we know who Melbourne wants, and of course, Flanders may be more gettable.

In the words of Sun Tsu, be patient, always hold the high ground and do not compromise

I'd love Rachele as he's such a point of difference in front of the sticks.

However, he'd be an absolute untouchable from Adelaide's perspective. They would view him as a key to their next premiership.

I know that JJ proposed this trade last night on trade radio, but I think he's off the money with this one.

Adelaide rate him that highly that they were prepared to roll the dice on him in a semi final after 2 months out. (yes he was omitted in round 24 2024 but that was due to attitude issues not ability)

26 minutes ago, old55 said:

I'm still good with my original idea - 6 + Flanders for Petracca + 23.

Adelaide give us 14 +41 + F1 for Petracca and we hand that on to GC with 23 for 6 + Flanders.

14 + 23 + 41 is more a lot more points than 6 and they get Adelaide's F1 for Flanders.

Pretty straightforward.

I put something up like this a while ago. It makes a lot of sense as GC need points, Adelaide need missing pieces and we need Picks and a Trac replacement. It works and 6+flanders is a good return on Trac. Id hold onto 23 though. We are overpaying on that one.

13 minutes ago, Older demon said:

On SEN, Trac decided Sunday and with the club's permission, to visit Adelaide and test the market. That's all it is atm, but it did slip that Trac has had a chat with Hardwick at Gold Coast.

The subtle MFC message, and from Gary Lyon, is that he will cost you, or to quote Gaz, "Pony Up". The message is that MFC want a player in the deal, and if the deal doesn't suit, Trac stays where he is. I have heard 3rd hand that Trac won't go to Adelaide, but may look good in a Suns jumper. It is no surprise that GC states that Humphrey is not negotiable so I guess we know who Melbourne wants, and of course, Flanders may be more gettable.

In the words of Sun Tsu, be patient, always hold the high ground and do not compromise

Wouldnt disagree with this OD, but im really not sure we can go through this for the next few seasons if this trade doesn't happen this time around.

If it doesnt haqppen, maybe he Tracc need to come out and say that "no trade will ever happen, im committed to MFC" and play his time out with our beloved club.

20 minutes ago, Jaded No More said:

They are, but it is not their preference.

King wants him to stay, but you can't keep a grown man against his wishes forever.

The club hold all the cards. If they don't want to trade him they can do what they did last year.

The club does not want to weaken its negotiating position by stating they want to trade him. Plus they don't want to burn bridges in case a trade doesn't eventuate

I'm just surmising, you may well be right, but i wouldn't necessarily believe the club when they say they would rather he stay

5 minutes ago, Deestinga2 said:

Wouldnt disagree with this OD, but im really not sure we can go through this for the next few seasons if this trade doesn't happen this time around.

If it doesnt haqppen, maybe he Tracc need to come out and say that "no trade will ever happen, im committed to MFC" and play his time out with our beloved club.

I've been making this point lately.

Long term contracts are more about protecting trade leverage than holding players to them if needed. We seem to be moving more towards the case where if a club finds that they need to hold a player to a contract, things have already broken down.

You need team unity and buy in. Yes, players test the waters and speak to other clubs a lot. I'm open to Christian having a think about his future, meeting with clubs and then deciding that his future is at MFC as well. The chance is very real though that he desires a fresh start elsewhere.

32 minutes ago, Older demon said:

It is no surprise that GC states that Humphrey is not negotiable so I guess we know who Melbourne wants

We were apparently desperate to get Humphrey in his draft year. Victorian lad. I reckon if Trac is thinking Gold Coast, we will throw the kitchen sink at Humphrey - it is definitely worth a shot!

Just chatting to Trac. He said the thing that disappoints him the most is that this thread is not dedicated to him exclusively…

I’ve got a soft spot for Rachelle and think he’s exactly the type of player we need to bring in, so would do him + a first round pick in a heart beat

Hopefully we’re testing the waters with his manager to see if he’d want to come home, as this might be his best chance given he’s contracted to 2029 I think

Reckon Petracca and his wife would much rather live on the Gold Coast than Adelaide.

1 minute ago, layzie said:

I've been making this point lately.

Long term contracts are more about protecting trade leverage than holding players to them if needed. We seem to be moving more towards the case where if a club finds that they need to hold a player to a contract, things have already broken down.

You need team unity and buy in. Yes, players test the waters and speak to other clubs a lot. I'm open to Christian having a think about his future, meeting with clubs and then deciding that his future is at MFC as well. The chance is very real though that he desires a fresh start elsewhere.

The AFL need to intervene on two fronts here. 1) they have to equalise or balance the flow of players smaller clubs to bigger clubs and 2) in particular for contracted players, intervene in determining fair trade value (so to avoid a pick 17 for B.Smith)

How they determine fair trade value can be built on a couple of items, but contract value, salary, age, etc can all be used. Once this has been determined, the pursuing club can then agree or disagree to continue the conversation.

I also think the rules for out-of-contract players below the age of FA/RFA needs to be reformed. We should be allowed to match any offer that comes the way of Judd and receive compensation if he still choses to pursue the alternative offer. Its mind boggling how this can be allowed for RFA/FA but not for those that have yet to reach this threshold.

I am still not convinced Essendon will trade Merrett.

I was talking to one of Hawthorn's assistant coaches on the weekend and he was saying how poor a kick Petracca is.

This is the clubs moment. This how we get back into contention.

14 minutes ago, Fat Tony said:

I am still not convinced Essendon will trade Merrett.

I was talking to one of Hawthorn's assistant coaches on the weekend and he was saying how poor a kick Petracca is.

Except Hawthorn are obsessed with kicking skills and not enough with guys that can actually win the pill. All well and good to be a great kick, but if you need others to get it for you...

3 minutes ago, Adam The God said:

Except Hawthorn are obsessed with kicking skills and not enough with guys that can actually win the pill. All well and good to be a great kick, but if you need others to get it for you...

Correct. And them likely losing Worpel makes this problem worse for them.

5 minutes ago, Adam The God said:

Except Hawthorn are obsessed with kicking skills and not enough with guys that can actually win the pill. All well and good to be a great kick, but if you need others to get it for you...

We have the bulls, they have the skills....

Merger anyone? 😂😂

1 minute ago, ElDiablo14 said:

We have the bulls, they have the skills....

Merger anyone? 😂😂

I hated it in '96 and I hate it now. It's taken me 18 years to convert my Hawthorn-supporting wife to Melbourne. I didn't do all that hard work for us to merge.

1 hour ago, old55 said:

I'm still good with my original idea - 6 + Flanders for Petracca + 23.

Adelaide give us 14 +41 + F1 for Petracca and we hand that on to GC with 23 for 6 + Flanders.

14 + 23 + 41 is more a lot more points than 6 and they get Adelaide's F1 for Flanders.

Pretty straightforward.

It’s as if people are forgetting that petracca is on $1.5m per year for the next 4 years and currently no club will pay more than $1m. The only way that we are getting any picks/players in a trade is if we eat up $500,000 of his contract for the next 4’years.

1 minute ago, Oxdee said:

It’s as if people are forgetting that petracca is on $1.5m per year for the next 4 years and currently no club will pay more than $1m. The only way that we are getting any picks/players in a trade is if we eat up $500,000 of his contract for the next 4’years.

Tom Morris just said on SEN that either the Crows or Suns can and would absorb Tracs contract.

1 minute ago, Ted Lasso said:

Tom Morris just said on SEN that either the Crows or Suns can and would absorb Tracs contract.

That's huge news if true.

Just now, dazzledavey36 said:

That's huge news if true.

you're the links master! Tom Morris posted a short video update on Trac via SEN about 10 minutes ago! maybe you can find it and post it?