Rhino Richards

I think Hislop's personal issues are far far worse than Brock notwithstanding the fact that Hislop is also injury riddled and has produced nothing to date at Essendon. Hislop and McLean are chalk and cheese.

Are that big word again? My you are a tough boy! :D So the fact that Bailey did not extract a Port player from his old job his fault? And also should we have traded the Morton draft choice for a big name player? MFC did not have a 1st round choice PP to trade when Bailey joined? So your comparison between ND and DB is simplistic to suit your purposes (whatever they are??) and is critically flawed. Still waiting on the game plan/ coach for our list Mo? And the players we had this year to rival Lyon, Tingay Ox and co? Ready when you are?

Whether White was picked up in the ND or PSD does not change the fact of the Coaches involvement in the recruiting process. Aslo note that Daniher had picks 1 as PP while Bailey had no PP pick. Damn those facts Mo. The return of Lyon, Tingay, Schwartz and to a lesser extent Lovett and Stynes were critical in getting MFC to a preliminary final in 1998 after finishing stone motherless last the previous year. If they weren't in their prime then they were playing pretty good football. Ox won a B& F in 1999 too. Not bad Mo? Now name the players of that calibre that we had in the MFC side this year that could have provided that same sort of skills lift and leadership direction? Careful dont make a fool of yourself again with the answer. Still waiting for coach/ game plan that would suit our list.......champ? Its ironic that on field debates are the area where I and other posters have pinned you as a rancid vacuum of spite that shows a desire for vective ridden sweeping statement only to shown to be as shallow as a saucer. Keep the b#llshit flowing legend.

And I have been asking you since you first raised your cocked theory what coach/ game plan would suit a slow, underskilled, inexperienced, leadership lacking group? And not surprisingly you have not answered. You have proven nothing except confirmed your silly fantasies that the list is fine and competitive and Bailey has had it easy this year at MFC. White was a PSD# 1 when MFC finished last in 1997. Daniher inherited the benefit. Whats available in the PSD these days? Of course that's Bailey's fault. Daniher had those aging players in their prime and secured them to contracts that hang around our necks like millstones. Bailey has the job in front of him and he will be judged with his record over the period. But its laughable that the blatant deterioration of the list over the past 12 - 24 months would have even penetrated the dullest mind. Clearly And the frequency of your need to use the word b#llshit (or its dervatives) in your posts is a fair indication of their lack of content and substance.

Wake up is probably more appropriate. The issue is not a Ben Cousins vs speculative pick. There is no doubting Cousins football ability but there are other issues. Firstly, I dont believe he wants to play at MFC. Secondly given we are tight on the salary cap I doubt if we can afford him. Cousins desperation for football has nothing to do with overcoming his personal addictions. If anything his previous career added to it. The state of his mind something you can only speculate about and clearly most clubs that are interested will have this totally roadtested. I noticed Sydney backed off. Why? Finally, given Cousins destroyed his career and public standing and is in the process of rebuilding from the shame I am not sure he wants to be a "poster boy". I dont read any plans of St Kilda to do likewise. And there is reasonable arguments both for and against about the worth of Cousins to side where MFC is. It is not cut and dry. And the matching of public profiles of Judd and Cousins could not be further from reality. Its not a matter of conservatism but more understanding that there are more issues than just "bright lights" with Cousins and given them due and proper consideration.

He'll snap in two in a light wind by the first round!

He was disappointed in the player's decision. Redleg is spot on about the need to handle these issues carefully. Possibly the silliest take on events I have read that slices the facts to be rather self serving and needless.

You are right Mo it cant afford it. You have banged on about the bleedin obvious for some time now so what are the realistic options Mo to where we are now? BTW, Daniher, had Lyon, Tingay, Schwartz and others return from long term injury a No 1 draft top young ruckman called Jeff White join too? What aces did Bailey get at the start?

Should he have said that after 5 years, Chris is a fringe player that we believe is going to struggle to cut it in the AFL. We were not going to overextend ourselves for someone who we believe have got covered on the list? I don't think so. Given we have a perception of a Club that players dont want to come to, its bad policy to dump on a departing player. I still cant work out the excitement over CJ. Its must be the off season.

I have seen one opinion erroneously condemn AJ. The gap between CJ and his father was large when he joined 5 years and has not changed now he has gone. Alan Johnson was a very talented gun at MFC. I didn't think you were one of the people fooling themselves but thanks for putting your hand up and coming forward. Get over it.

......Typically by blood sucking two faced player managers. People who think its a discussion only between the player and Club and its centred on loyalty and bleeding for the jumper are fooling themselves.

I take it back. Lets get him for the ruck!!!!

He did have one outstanding year where I recall he almost won the media player of the year awards. I recall the Age polled him in 16 straight games. I think ihis big year was 1978. Then he did an ACL the following year and went to Sydney where the injury had robbed him of the valuable athleticism. Wore no 1.

He is a fringe C grader that another Club would not even do a token trade for. Glad MFC is focussing on the important stuff.

Where did I say it was not worth pursuing? I have recognised that the lack of support of the MCC member is a financial millstone to MFC. The substantive absence of the cashflow of 30,000 is indeed a financial I have already recognised that the problem is a complex and difficult one and not easy to solve and therefore will continue to be a millstone. I think the solution is probably more complicated that a hooker in a bar! I have suggested that the MFC and MCC deepen their relationship which other posters also seemed to think was a sensible move (a touch of negativity on your part. ) And indeed it is fair play to me as I tried to explain the situation clearly while you delved into name calling. Well done.

Bit touchy arent we? I could ask the same thing Fatty why you discount what I call a millstone and you call an opportunity when you put up a grabbag of suggestions (tongue in cheek with some) that are neither financially viable or sustainable (but the Bull ring one is interesting!).

Its good reason to be suspicious of them and particularly when they have not impressed when they have played MFC. Guerra filled a stop gap role that was a weakness at the Hawks and was not a bad player at his old club. Pike is a poor example yo give because his playing ability was evident and valued at every Club he played at. However he e was a social ratbag of the highest order and his problems burned his bridges at a number of Clubs. I agree the football department should and will sift through the opportunities. But I wonder if they will be more excited by Dawson that I am?

The ultimate merger/JV/takeover of MFC with MCC has many hurdles. Its a different opporunity to the conversion of MCC members to MFC members. And as you have pointed out just as difficult and complex. Such a venture is very much dependent how MCC sees itself as a sporting organisation in the 21st century. In its current form the MFC has little to offer the MCC member that they cannot get through their MCC membership. And the blanket idea on the ground would only p1$$ off the perennial Salvo collectors and be such a demeaning terminal image of the MFC. No wonder they dont stretch for a full membership in MFC!! Fatty, what are the many ways that MFC can take advantage it? What are these ways that represent financially sustainable and viable avenues to getting more MCC members financially involved in the MFC? The efforts to date have been ineffective because the issues are so substantive and difficult.

Yes. Its the holy grail. If only..... The problem is that the Club have been aware of the problem (sorry opportunity) for since the MFC split from the MCC. It has becoming more pressing in the last decade. The Club has explored numerous ways to get MCC members to join the MFC. There are some fundamental barriers preventing the conversion of MCC members to MFC members. For MFC supporting MCC member there is very powerful argument: "Why should I pay for a (MFC) membership which gives me 10/11 home game entry when I already fork out $500 bucks or so for MCC membership which gives me game access and a better viewing position? For many MCC members the MCC membership is a significant financial impost and its very hard to justify a further " $110 donation" to MFC. The $40 is a compromise to at least get something out of a group of "supporters" that: 1. rarely if it all purchase a full MFC membership 2. rarely if at all purchase Club paraphenalia, attend Club functions or participate in some other way in the Club financially. BTW, this is not a slag at MCC members who dont buy MFC membership and I understand those that dont and the reasons why. FWIW, I am both an MCC member and full MFC member and to me my MFC membership is a donation to a passion of mine. This legacy of history does provide a challenge akin to climbing Everest in Boardshorts. For many MCC members there is not the "value" in an MFC membership. And a tacky MFC pen and an acrylic red and blue scarf made in China does not bridge this value gap. There are other reasons at play here and the absence of a home base (including training facilities) to identify with does not help the situation. Where a Club has generally a low supporter base and a considerable cache of these supporters are non financial to the Club, it hurts the bottom line and while the spin calls it an "opportunity", to me its a weight on the current structure. In my mind, the sooner MFC forges a closer and deeper financial and operating relationship with the MCC, the better.

You need a dose of reality The concentration of MFC supporters in the MCC is a financial millstone around the Clubs neck. The actual take up of MFC/MCC membership is low and was not a key driver for recorded membership. At the end of the day its only $40 per person and the Club enjoys very little leverage off MFC/MCC members in the form of sale of functions, memorabilia and raffles. And the AFL has extensive surverys on club support and who people follow. Melbourne is one of the lowest supported clubs. Vickick registrations have Melbourne down as the least suppported club amongst kids. Its generational and its a problem at the grass roots level. Get the drift....... AFL has had us in contempt for years now. FFS they tried to engineer a merger with Hawthorn in 1996. In regard to your points: 1. We collapsed out of the EF in 2005 with barely a whimper. It was embarrassing. I think you mean 2006. BTW, NM made the PF in 2007. Big deal there still financial rooted and will go the same way as MFC at this rate. 2. Carlton have facilities, a huge membership and supporter base, strong corporate support, Dick Pratt. Aside from Board incompetency which nearly destroyed them 5-6 years ago, they have the wherewithall to be a marque club in the AFL quickly. MFC in its current guise will take 10-15 years of solid on field success and strong administration to approach that position.

Correct. I dont begrudge either for doing that. However the eulogies on "loyalty" on this thread particularly over such an ordinary player is silly.

Better still.....let's not do that.

Plus the fact we have Rivers, Garland, Frawley, Martin, Cheney and McNamara on the list and are trying to get rid of another player who is ordinary and a culture issue. I dont care how many cms, kgs or benchpressing power he has, why do we want to chase a defender who was rejected by a Club that would not buck at getting a good defender?

Then there would be no point in doing it. I'm with you. Just tell him not to be around the Club and we pay his contract out.

I agree TimD. I look forward to the future not dwelling over NQRs that never looked like making it. Good summary Graz.