Red and Blue realist

We got Lever last year, have picked up Hibberd and Melksham the years before that and Lewis chose us while he could have gone anywhere. We don't have a heap of spare salary cap (like Nth/StK) to be linked with everyone, and I'm happy we pick up guys with a lot of scope to improve and have time left (excluding Lewis - a free kick really).

Wouldn't be surprised if we are talking to him with the view of getting him at the end of next year (if needed then), through free agency. I can't see GC taking draft picks this year, they could wait until next year and get a near guaranteed top 2 or 3 pick for him like Lynch this year. If they traded now GC would want proven players but I don't know who'd we put up they'd actually be interested in (talking about players we'd happily give up).

Lucky that in no way is it up to the fans to make this decision, if he did leave these factors would have zero impact on that decision. It'd be purely either Jessie wants to go home or the footy department gets an irrefutable god-father offer.

I think he was a victim of the poor defensive cohesion we had at the start of the year, everyone seemed a little off down back when Lever first came in. It seemed like some where in some way confused about their role, and once we sorted it out we went on that winning streak and since then even if someone's gone down injured the next player has come in to play a role. Hunt got injured not long after we sorted this out, and by the time he got back in he got injured again. He's one who'll have a massive job over the preseason not only to stay fit but learn some different roles. I think he'll be fine though and will be a massive inclusion next year.

It would, because they then slot him into the draft position he was bid on. For instance we put a bid in on Callum Mills with our first rounder back in 2015 and he's seen as the 3rd pick while we got Clarry at pick 4. Don't think Bedford has been talked up in the first round though.

Any word on his contact, I thought this was nearly done a couple of months ago??

Yes but their not limited to a set number of each and clearly we've been after players who are flexible enough to go into other roles throughout the game. Saying how does our forward set up look would mean ignoring TMac starting on the wing or Hogan going into the center square occasionally, it evolves during the game and is a great tactic if done right.

The top 22 or the bottom? It's a combination of the very best playing at their very best and role players playing their roles. No point having the best 6 playing great games and everyone else letting them do it, and no point the bottom 6 having great games but not having support from the more senior guys (generally the better players are more senior).

Given TMac started on the wing for a number of games, there's every chance either him of Hogan would start there then go forward or even back as the need presents. Unless they introduce the 6-6-6 format then putting positions on paper is really useless. For mine Weid stays as the deepest forward (and goes into the ruck), then Hoges and TMac swap between around the half forward (around 35 - 60 meters from goal) and roaming anywhere in-between the 2 50 meter lines, pushing hard forward when they get the mismatch.

He could come out and sign a new extension and later that day someone on SEN would say he's a chance to leave, no matter what he or the coach/FD does/says there'll be rumors of Hogan leaving until the day he retires.

I'm not against the club looking at all possibilities, and hope they do, there's just been a lot who've jumped onto trading Hogan because they think he's at his highest value, and that just seems to be the old MFC way of thinking. Draft picks won't do a heap for us for the next few years, we've got a very young list and only really have Lewis, Jones and Jetta who'll come out of the weekends team in the next 3/4 years (due to age, form/injury can happen to anyone).

The problem with most of the argument is there's nothing that's been suggested on here at this stage that says we'd be getting his true current value. We don't need an early pick/young kid that badly anymore - that's the MFC of 3 years ago. We should be seeing ourselves as well and truly in the hunt for significant finals action for the next 4/5 years+, so while Hogan might be at his best value right now and it might get us pick 5 and Brayshaw/Cerra (or whatever is the right pick/player), I don't see that as an improvement to us now, and I don't think many on here do. Just because a player is at their highest perceived trade value doesn't mean they are not more valuable than keeping them. I'm yet to see anything in this thread that says if we trade Hogan we get XYZ, I've thought it seems fair and makes us better short/long term. So unless someone comes up with that situation it's easy to say no don't do it. Of course if he comes at the end of the year and says he wants to go home his value or what we accept then changes, anyone could do that, but I wouldn't be pushing him out the door.

I thought he played mostly as a forward but had the ability to go back and had a huge impact in a couple of games when he did (from memory he iced a game when he went back for the last quarter or 2 in an important game - not certain though). He also has kicked 47 goals in 20 games, that's doing his job by anyone's measure. He's only played 70 games, and clearly has a lot of development to go, this year I think he's added a lot more of a team first element to his game along with increasing his use around the ground, I believe it's only his leading patterns that need to improve to have a bigger impact against the better teams and that will come. Remember he didn't have TMac next to him all pre-season where they should have been working on this. He's not a Colin Sylvia type who's just waiting for that break out season, he's improving dramatically each year, in a very hard position and is already counted in the elite there, and people want to get rid of him???? DL at it's finest.

That's the line we'd be going back to West Coast with, we've got some fringe players, maybe Kent, JHK etc. plus a second rounder, or take the band 1 as it's as good as you'll get. Any contracted players would have to want to move themselves, so the idea of Hogan is just silly as we'd get more from Freo, or we'd be asking WC for Gaff plus a whole lot more

It could depend on where they finish, clearly Gaff will get them band 1, so if they end up in the grand final they'll get pick 20/21, with other free agent moves. Whereas if they bomb out in straight sets this could be pick 16/17, if he wants to go to Essendon then trying to get pick 9/10 out of them and a player might be easily accepted. If he wanted to come to us then they'd have to decide if it's worth just taking a pick between 16-21 or trying to force a trade for players plus lower picks this year or a first rounder next year (which will be in that band anyway), might all depend on what their thoughts are around needing to fill his gap this draft or wait until the year after.

I'd be hoping the Nick Reiwolt is a better comparison in the long run, Hawkins does all his damage in the forward 50, but while Hoges isn't the worlds best field kick, his work rate will destroy some opponents and then can still get into goal scoring positions himself. He'll demand a tall back to go with him, so if he can run up and connect with the backs then get back to try and score will be very dangerous, especially as when he needs to rest TMac can do the same, Melk could do similar. Plus with a couple of minutes to go in each quarter they could drop into the back 50 to stop any scores. Wait until we've got a forward line of Hoges, TMac, Weid, Melk and 3 of ANB, Kent, Spargo, Hannan, Garlett or JHK and they've had a full preseason together to work out how not to get in each other's way.

Our draw also didn't help, only 4 home games (at the 'G) before the bye (yes I know we played 2 away games at the 'G in that time), as compared to Richmond who played 9 games at the 'G in the same time period. Surely the way we play will give us a few more cracks at prime time as well, which in turn helps to drive memberships. The Tigs get 6 Sunday games while we're left with 11.

Another record I'd like to see broken, is that we haven't had a single player kick more than 50 or more goals in a season since Brad Green in 2010 - the equal longest in the comp with Brissy. Even Carlton (Andrew Walker 2011) and Freo (Pav 2012) has managed it. If we take it up to 60 goals then we go back to Neita in 2006. Hoges is on track at the moment and we've got a few others who might even get close.

His old man was on SEN this morning, from the sounds of it just about every club inquired, and they narrowed it down to 4. He then talked up the development system and coaches as the reason they chose the Dees. He named Egan, Rooke and Rawlings (maybe a couple of others) which I think is a massive tick for our development team. He also said learning from Gawn was a big factor too. One of the best things he said was that Austin is best mates with the King boys at school, their both potentially going to go top 5 in the draft (in most early phantom drafts) and both are talls. So even though he's not allowed to play footy for the next 6 months (to get to the 3 year out rule), he'd be having a kick at school with some of the most talented kids. Hopefully he'll be coming in only marginally behind those who've gone through the elite pathway, but I still wouldn't expect that we'd see him in the seniors until at least 2021/22.

I did hear that in his final draft year there were a lot of question marks around Trac's tank, so he went out of his way to build his fitness so he could play through the midfield not just as a high half forward. I suspect that as he builds this even more (big difference between under age and AFL) that he'll demand more time in there, but very happy with what he's doing at the moment, just needs to not try too hard. Hard to seem them being a danger/selwood or martin/cotchin combo, because you've got to get Oliver and Viney in there too!

Sometimes the pure membership number doesn't mean a heap, some clubs include 3 game, dog memberships etc. Be interested to see the breakdown of our membership compared to other clubs, naturally I'd think we'd have a higher MCC crossover membership.

Not as simple as just dumping the funds into the bank and getting a 3% return if we're lucky, it'll be about what they use those funds to invest/build so that we either replace the lost revenue or alternatively be able to reduce down costs overall - for instance removing some/all of the leasing we are currently paying (which was around $1.8m last year - but the financial report doesn't break down what that covers).

The more I think about this, the more it seems like a pure business decision. The Age article has been updated to show we sold out of Leighaok for $11 million, noting that we've still got Bentleigh for 3 years then have that asset to deal with (which you'd expect a better return). While having a 'feel good' element about the deal, there's every chance that due to the continual changing nature of the gaming industry and the increase in costs associated, it was just the best time to get out. Generate a return on the sale of the assets, and then use them to invest into other income generating assets (although they haven't said what they are). If those funds are used to help fund a new admin/training facility which might also be used in a commercial sense and we stop having to pay rent for our existing spaces, then this could be the most important move this administration has made.

The article really only mentioned that the funds from the sale of Leighoak will be invested in other areas - there's actually no cash coming in from not renewing the entitlement on the Bentleigh pokies in 2022. From what I understand most/all the debt we have relates to the purchase of the Bentleigh club outright, so they must be comfortable to hold that until they deal with what they do with that venue/land once the pokies cease to operate. I can't see the club holding onto a social club on such a big land holding, so they might look at either selling or a development project at that stage, which should cover the debt and more. I to think there might have been a bit of "assistance" offered by the AFL and Govt's that if we get out of pokies they'll help with home base model.

Really depends on what they could use those funds on? They seem to have a plan in place to replace that revenue, because they've said it won't be to repay debt.