7 minutes ago, Young Angus said:

None of the above is MFC problem...above all the deal needs to be awesome for us remember.

Let's hope they're not just taking a talk they can't stick to because none of what is being tabled makes us better. If they don't get something good out of this, or walk away if it isn't good enough, they will be off to an absolutely shocking start with the new coach and Tim Lamb needs to go.

All so true Angus with Traccs creds we need a great deal to match his worth or tell them to [censored] off ,he is a required player

25 minutes ago, Young Angus said:

None of the above is MFC problem...above all the deal needs to be awesome for us remember.

This ..this...and THIS

It's up to GC to make it work... not us.

I’m in the ‘good riddance’ camp but it’s definitely not a great deal for two best 23 players, one being as decorated as he is.

5 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Pretty good deal ?? 🤮

F m d ... who writes this 💩

Just now, beelzebub said:

Pretty good deal ?? 🤮

F m d ... who writes this 💩

AFL Trade Radio twitter account.

We don't HAVE to make ANYTHING work for GC.

It's actually the other way around !!

Just now, beelzebub said:

Pretty good deal ?? 🤮

F m d ... who writes this 💩

Who writes this? The journalist who works for Team Trac is who!

Wants to get this deal done for Trac by putting pressure on the Dees to accept a deal they are not happy with

I’ve slept on it and I’m still not a fan of 7 & 8 for Trac and McVee.

That doesn’t feel like a trade that turns our heads. That doesn’t feel like a trade that is the best result for the MFC.

Tom Morris makes me sick with his fan-girling for Tracc to get this move for next to nothing.

12 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

It’s a terrible deal for just Petracca, let alone weighing in with McVee: what is this - some sort of internal AFL whitewash to ensure the Gold Coast franchise get their man?! This will be picks 11 and 12 in a [censored] draft - these selections have little to no value, even as trade chips.

15 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

I still think we give them later picks that will equate to pick 24 on points

We’ll give them 24 and then a club will take Latrelle before our 28 🤦‍♂️

For comparison - the Rioli trade from last year:

Rioli has joined the Suns on a five-year contract in exchange for picks six and 23, while the Suns will get four late picks - 51, 61, 70 and 76 - back from the Tigers.

To think all GC has to do is trade Humpty and 7 or 8 and they have enough points.

It's not that hard really.

Come on GC....hes going next year anyway 😉

1 minute ago, Roger Mellie said:

For comparison - the Rioli trade from last year:

Rioli has joined the Suns on a five-year contract in exchange for picks six and 23, while the Suns will get four late picks - 51, 61, 70 and 76 - back from the Tigers.

Dif being tigers wanted picks.

We dont really. We need players

24 = 621

28 + 41 = 725

Would rather them take our later selections and let us use 24 how we see fit.

They want Petracca.

They want JUH.

They want their 3 talented academy kids...2 are top 10, both probably going higher than 7 & 8.

We want a player, probably a player and a pick, then they can get all their academy riches.

They cannot get all they want, unless we absolutely roll over for picks that we would cover in points for them anyway.

It is madness.

BH coming into play makes most sense, they simply have to give a player of quality to get it done. They know it too.

I'm reluctantly ok with the trade if JT's ok with it.

It will also confirm to me that we have no interest in retaining Trac as long as the trade offer from GC isn't a joke and an insult.

17 minutes ago, Demonland said:

We don't want your steenking picks !!

37 minutes ago, Dannyz said:

Tom Morris makes me sick with his fan-girling for Tracc to get this move for next to nothing.

Well if he's proven correct, then direct your anger at the club.

BTW, all the journos are throwing up this trade scenario.

1 minute ago, mo64 said:

Well if he's proven correct, then direct your anger at the club.

BTW, all the journos are throwing up this trade scenario.

So what ?.. seriously

They're footy mouths... they need stuff to rabbit in about.

It's collective group speak to make it sound like they know w the actual f is going in.

The clubs know....

A lot of folk...the experts at the time said the sun rotated the earth.... how'd that work.out for them ?

Simon got one thing dead right..... footy waffle is fugazi

8 minutes ago, mo64 said:

Well if he's proven correct, then direct your anger at the club.

BTW, all the journos are throwing up this trade scenario.

Of course they are - it's a nepo baby v a club in the 15-18 range of HQ love. HQ have a vested interest in GC being good so picks only best outcome for them on that.

I know this will be an unpopular view, but at this point, with seemingly no one on GCS list that is tradable, 7+8 might just be enough.

We shouldnt be sending anything back to them, 7+8, nothing else.

He doesnt want to play for us, if we hold him to the contract, we will be going through all this again in 12 months.

Is that we we really want to do?????