1 hour ago, 0livers Army said:

What we watch from the boundary line is all we can really comment on with any added value though. This is a footy forum and I’m not sure anyone can disagree with Pickett’s comment here. Viney has been a great servant and very good player (I do disagree with the good ordinary assessment) but he doesn’t compare with Oliver, even the 2025 version, honestly. Beyond that, we’re either speculating or passing on second hand info when it comes to leadership and off field stuff.

I can sit on tne boundary line and see Jack and his family have given and contributed to our club in many ways. In this case Jack has been a captain, vice captain and been an up standing person who bleeds for this club. Clarry maybe a better player (albeit a few years back), but the contribution to the MFC is very different.

How anyone wants to value them is up to them, but don’t put one down to make the other look better.

3 hours ago, picket fence said:

Jack Viney is a Rugby player, not a bootlace on Clayton Oliver!

But the club recognises we are not going anywhere with the 2025 list, and it’s about building for 3-4 years time. Would you prefer Clarry or JV to be setting the standards for Langford, Lindsay, Windsor etc

7 minutes ago, Watson11 said:

But the club recognises we are not going anywhere with the 2025 list, and it’s about building for 3-4 years time. Would you prefer Clarry or JV to be setting the standards for Langford, Lindsay, Windsor etc

They both bring different things.

Viney, hard working, constantly talking to others about skills, professional.

Oliver, always smiling, takes time with the new players, never better than the other, has that pestering type of humour, jokes around, always working with Fritta, goes hard at training.

On 10/10/2025 at 21:09, Demon Disciple said:

as Goody said himself, he didn’t know his role or what we stood for anymore after winning the GF. If nothing had changed, we’d simply be papering over cracks and letting the problem fester even more.

What has happened needed to happen. One step back then a couple forward hopefully. If the status quo hadn’t changed we’d have taken several more steps back.

As for the booing, I’d rather not. As I’m pretty sure we’d be booing many many times a game given their proclivity for finding the football.

I continue to be astonished at how much heat Clarry and CP5 get compared to Goody on 'Land and in the media. Goodwin's admission is diabolical and a gross dereliction of duty and has virtually gone unnoticed, comparatively, in the media and on 'Land. Imagine the pilot of a 380 getting it to cruising altitude and saying, "not sure who I am anymore".

1 hour ago, Watson11 said:

But the club recognises we are not going anywhere with the 2025 list, and it’s about building for 3-4 years time. Would you prefer Clarry or JV to be setting the standards for Langford, Lindsay, Windsor etc

Setting the standards for what????

15 minutes ago, picket fence said:

Setting the standards for what????

Off field professionalism. Cut out the ignorance.

On 09/10/2025 at 07:23, dazzledavey36 said:

Not how it works.

You're not only pushing the player out deliberately but willing to still pay a huge portion of the salary, then expect to get peanuts back.

On 09/10/2025 at 08:05, Ted Lasso said:

Not how it works Dazzle...

Generally speaking with salary dumps the portion the current club plays dictates the trade outcome, normally if the new club takes on the whole deal it's a very late pick, a pick that gets better as the money goes up and up for the current club.

with Clarry specifically though i think you're right, i suspect the Giants will pay roughly 900k pa, leaving the Dees paying about 400kpa and we'll end up with a very late pick that'll likely not be used.

and that's a good outcome for everyone. we were never getting a first round pick or anything good

On 09/10/2025 at 10:06, Very Jaded said:

I don't think the reports are correct, I think we'd rather take less for him but also pay less of his salary

If we are paying $700k per year for him to play for the Giants, then I expect we get pick 12.

If it's a pick in the 30s, I expect us to pay around $300k a year for him

A pick in the 30s in this year's draft is equivalent to a 4th rounder in most other drafts

👀

1 minute ago, dazzledavey36 said:

👀

This could turn into a PR disaster for us if we pay a large amount of his salary and get nothing back and he plays good football for the Giants.

I think we need to pivot and get into a player, to make salary cap space for the Giants who probably need it and get a player who could help us.

At least we then have the chance to come out of this mess with something.

Gruzewski, Leek, or one of their running players who can’t get a regular game would be better than the sh-t storm that is coming I fear.

Edited Saturday at 22:193 days by Redleg

Just now, Redleg said:

This could turn into a PR disaster for us if we pay a large amount of his salary and get nothing back and he plays good football for the Giants.

I think we need to pivot and get into a player to make salary cap space for the Giants and at least get a player who could help us.

At least we have the chance to come out of this mess with something.

Gruzewski, Leek or one of their running players who can’t get a regular game would be better than the sh-t storm that is coming I fear.

As i have said previously.. when you deliberately push a guy out the door and advise them to look at other options then you immediately lose all leverage as we have here, especially when you're the ones also willing to pay a chunk of his salary.

Clearly this is a cultural and financial decision. We get a part of his salary off the books which helps also.

6 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Clearly this is a cultural and financial decision. We get a part of his salary off the books which helps also.

Sure it’s about that but it also has to be about a rebuild and we need draft picks or new players to do that.

Surely we can’t pay $700k of his wages and get a future third round pick for a player that has been in our best 22 every week even when not fit and if he gets back to his best will be a top 10 player in the comp.

1 minute ago, Colm said:

Sure it’s about that but it also has to be about a rebuild and we need draft picks or new players to do that.

Surely we can’t pay $700k of his wages and get a future third round pick for a player that has been in our best 22 every week even when not fit and if he gets back to his best will be a top 10 player in the comp.

First of all its absolutely rare for player swap now days, and secondly, clearly the motive here from the club is simply to just get him out of the door asap and just take whatever you can get for him.

Whether its a 3rd rounder this year or next, its looking like a late pick.

Yup everything you’re saying seems to be how it is. I just can’t get my head around it- why didn’t we just give him the same speech at his exit interview that we have to Steven May? Or quietly shop him around like we did last year?

Or have our starting position that if we get a decent pick we are willing to pay a big chunk of his wages.

Bailey Smith had off field/mental health issues yet Geelong still paid his full wage and gave up a late first rounder.

Still hoping what’s been reported is 100% and we get some sort of return for him. Preferably a decent pick next year.

For those upset about the deal we’re about to do, what does it say about Oliver that a new, highly respected coach comes in and the first thing he does is push him out?

If he was fit, committed and professional off field this would not happening

He is the Giants problem now. Him and Stringer will have some cracking nights out

27 minutes ago, Redleg said:

This could turn into a PR disaster for us if we pay a large amount of his salary and get nothing back and he plays good football for the Giants.

I think we need to pivot and get into a player, to make salary cap space for the Giants who probably need it and get a player who could help us.

At least we then have the chance to come out of this mess with something.

Gruzewski, Leek, or one of their running players who can’t get a regular game would be better than the sh-t storm that is coming I fear.

If things happens as 'feared', it will be interesting to see how overtly and negatively the PR includes Clayton's interactions with the Club's environment and reactions to the Club's new requirements of him.

I hope it can at least settle 'was he pushed or did he spit?'

I dont know how much more of trade week i can handle. I knew this off season would be a hard one, but losing Oliver really hurts.

I think its because we have lost Brayshaw, Petracca and Oliver and that excellent drafting period is dead.

For some reason ive been fine with losing Trac for the past 12 months. Losing Oliver for nothing is a real blow.

McVee leaving has really upset me too.

38 minutes ago, Colm said:

Sure it’s about that but it also has to be about a rebuild and we need draft picks or new players to do that.

Surely we can’t pay $700k of his wages and get a future third round pick for a player that has been in our best 22 every week even when not fit and if he gets back to his best will be a top 10 player in the comp.

If we end up paying half of Oliver's salary for a F3, I will be first in line demanding Tim Lamb's resignation. If an F3 is all we can get, thats fine, but we shouldn't be stumping up half salary as well, that is absolutely criminal.

51 minutes ago, Colm said:

Sure it’s about that but it also has to be about a rebuild and we need draft picks or new players to do that.

Surely we can’t pay $700k of his wages and get a future third round pick for a player that has been in our best 22 every week even when not fit and if he gets back to his best will be a top 10 player in the comp.

Yeah but on form was he really best 23 for the back half of last year or the first half of this year?

8 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

Yeah but on form was he really best 23 for the back half of last year or the first half of this year?

Clearly not but he showed that he was getting back to form in the tail end of this season. Which is what GWS will be looking at. Averaging 28 disposals.

If we end up paying the reported $700k of his wages for the next 5 years this thread may end up being the biggest in DL history.

No doubt this question will get opinions rather than inside knowledge, but here goes anyway:

What happens - teammate-wise, football-wise, Oliver-wise - if we make him stay?

12 hours ago, Queanbeyan Demon said:

I continue to be astonished at how much heat Clarry and CP5 get compared to Goody on 'Land and in the media. Goodwin's admission is diabolical and a gross dereliction of duty and has virtually gone unnoticed, comparatively, in the media and on 'Land. Imagine the pilot of a 380 getting it to cruising altitude and saying, "not sure who I am anymore".

Jeez QBD have you read the Sack Goody thread’s, SG has received more heat on DLand and in the Press than anyone in the Footy bubble Ever may have been edged out by the “kings” antics a few years back but it has been relentless.

1 hour ago, DubDee said:

For those upset about the deal we’re about to do, what does it say about Oliver that a new, highly respected coach comes in and the first thing he does is push him out?

If he was fit, committed and professional off field this would not happening

He is the Giants problem now. Him and Stringer will have some cracking nights out

King has barely been in the door 5 minutes. What interactions has King had with Clarry to make an assessment of his fitness, commitment or professionalism?

Did King speak to Clarry about the reasons behind his dropoff in form? Or was the decision to cut Clarry loose made by others within the club, and it was King's job to spin it in a subtle way.

2 minutes ago, mo64 said:

King has barely been in the door 5 minutes. What interactions has King had with Clarry to make an assessment of his fitness, commitment or professionalism?

Did King speak to Clarry about the reasons behind his dropoff in form? Or was the decision to cut Clarry loose made by others within the club, and it was King's job to spin it in a subtle way.

It would have been a board decision ultimately.

Moving on goody provided the clear air to make changes I reckon.

4 minutes ago, BDA said:

It would have been a board decision ultimately.

Moving on goody provided the clear air to make changes I reckon.

Exactly. That's my point. It's not a Steven King decision.

20 minutes ago, mo64 said:

King has barely been in the door 5 minutes. What interactions has King had with Clarry to make an assessment of his fitness, commitment or professionalism?

Did King speak to Clarry about the reasons behind his dropoff in form? Or was the decision to cut Clarry loose made by others within the club, and it was King's job to spin it in a subtle way.

Talking to coaches, all staff, sources in the industry, teammates, leadership group, and Clarry himself. 5 minutes would be enough i’d imagine