deanox

i think BB that he has some things that we lack on our list. he is quick an agile, and can play the crumbing role, or the small defender role. agree im not sure how up to it he is, but he will cost nothing and has potential, and plenty of time to deliver. if he impresses i wont say no to picking him up.

well they were both bottom age picks, so even though we've had em for 3 years, they are the age of your standard second year player. i think newton might have been bottom age also... but im pretty sure if they were left in that draft they would have been snapped up early the following year. i think one of them was so young that they were actually before the cut off, but an exception was made for another player so they put in a late submission and it was accepted very late... so dunn is 20 (wont be 21 til mid next year) and has now played 24 games. some say it should have been more... bate is the same age, and has played about 35 games...they were picked up at 15 and 13 respectively in 2004. newton is the same age as those two (a month older) but was drafted in the same year (2004) also as a 17 year old. we drafted 3 talls that year and it looks like all could become long term players, unfortunately only newton looks to be a traditional KPP...

interesting regarding frawley being taken earlier than expected...i thought WC were very keen on him and given that we were keen we were pretty happy to snap him up when we got him... we did pick dunn and bate early, but we drafted them as bottom age players, with the expectation that both would have gone top 10 if they had've been allowed to stay in the under 18s another season...

hey normally its me who has to point out that what you said was ridiculous, but it looks like everyone else has done that for me if you cant get your head around the tj deal, go back and read the threads about tj. some good discussion was had there, in particular a post by hannabal. im guessing you havnt read the rest of this thread about sampi either, so go back and read the first page and you may be enlightened somewhat.

due to salary cap issues i believe. if they sack him now they have to pay any contract stuff in this season, not next. im not sure what the deal is with his contract, but if they wait any repercussions won't be felt until next season so they can't be stung for that...

sorry queenc, i wasnt questioning your judgement. i was actually pressing you because i know your up there and wanted to hear more. i suppose it is like if you said the nrl wanted to force their way into melbourne by putting an extra team here. i wouldnt believe it would work, no way. and you're right, it will probably just halve storms coverage in the local rags... i just get the feeling that the afl think bullying their way is the way to get what they want. that seems to be their only plan of attack atm, they either push until they get somthing or just claim what they believe. its very dictatorship. cousins could have been shorting drugs of AD's shoes at a press conference and he still would have claimed that there was no issue with drugs. if they want it, they will force their way in. pull in favours, and spend big...and i think if they do it properly (with the appropraite grass roots growth etc) they will ultimately be successful, but that could take 50 years of waiting...

you don't think that if there was a sydney/west sydney game every week in sydney, and every week interstae it would be easier to get guarantee exposure? at the moment the exposure is fleeting - not live against the gate, competing with nrl for the live slot etc but if the package was more than 11 games, but now 22 away games and 44 games for the season, is the afl not in a better position to negotiate a deal that would see a constant time slot? that seems a problem to me atm, that the coverage is spasmodic, not enough to own a slot... so you think that the media will simple shun the new side, as they shun sydney atm?

i think someone mentioned he was 23?

queenc, a lot of that makes very good points, but do you not think the insertion of another team will help fill some of those voids? an extra team means double the tv exposure and double the press coverage from the get go. there will be competition from the swans so hopefully both sides will have to advertise to get members etc. another team means much more saturated cover of footy which is what you are asking for. provided the media doesnt fall off the bandwagon...

regarding the psd, is it just me, or do players who are border line generally end up at the clubs they nominate in the psd? if that a courtesy thing? or is it pure chance? obviously if judd went it would be fair game, but for so so players who train with a club, they seem to go to the team that invites them and then asks to get them dont they?

in all honesty, i wish they wouldnt spend so much on sydney let alone increase the spending. i do think a second team will help to saturate the market better. ie footy will be on and in the news every week rather than once a fortnight... and i do agree with queenc that the grassroots level needs to be in place solidly before the elite team comes in. however, the afl is talking GC by 2010 which means a second sydney team couldnt really be before 2015 could it? thats 8 years away. if the grassroots level has been in for 4-5 years now (auskick etc) and we have special sydney recruits these days, the first group of auskick kids (8 years old) would be 20-21 and could have been drafted 3 times over. the timing seems pretty perfect to me. for the first year of the club, let them secure 5-10 names from other clubs they are keen on, preferentially ex-nsw players, and then give them first 5 draft picks but only from nsw. give them the best nsw talent to start the club off. but this isnt for 8-10 years...

i hear just then on the radio (triple j i think it was) that chris' dad has announced that he hasnt gone missing, that was misreported. but didnt shed any light on where he was or what the situation actually is...

they changed their name from north meloburne to north. we changed our name from melbourne demons to melbourne fc. we are making strategic moves to ensure that we are 'the melbourne football club', while north and western both made changes that have almost sealed their fate... there will always be a melbourne side in the comp. in some form. we have that at least. there is also an issue here in that north is 4 mil or so in debt, but is owned by shareholders. if the shareholders dont agree to the move, are they ultimately responsible if north is put into receivership? they wont want that... i think carlton were sniffing around to try and organise a take over, and then snare them carey...im not sure how keen they would be these days...

it would be interesting to know if there is more going on than a simple drug problem...picked up by mystery women in a car? who sent the car? or perhaps he wanted to organise one last bender...

is there a quota we must fulfil? i didn't realise...

my apologies. my intention was not to question your support of the mfc. more to question why you support it and why you pay your money. you answered that you support the club because thats what you do - you love the club. same position im in. if so, does the rest of this stuff really have a big influence on whether you spend your money or not? people wont sign up because of the free goodies, they will sign up because of the game entrance etc. last years members got a scarf, they dont need a new one, so a tie isnt a bad idea. a pen could float around the house all year with the mfc name on it. the stickers could be a mistake, it is good seeing red and blue on the cars...i reread my post, the last line was harsh and wasnt meant to be sorry, but the essence of the post still stands. on the note of stuffed up consecutive membership, i am pretty sure they have stuffed mine up also, but i dont have cards from 10 years ago to prove it...

i wasnt having a go, i think this is good discussion too. what i was saying was that it is more important to have 7 good solid consistant players than it is to have a 'star'. the star could be the difference, but if you could have yourself one star where would you want it? full back for 10 years? mid field for 10 years? or CHF for 10 years?

prompted to pay by december isnt a downside. if you pay every year in november its still a once a year thing. and it is out of the way before xmas. it is a way of trying to get everyone signed on and committed before the dawdle away next year. no worries on that one. we have had so many problems with the stickers it doesnt surprise me if they have scrapped them. couldnt get them right dont do it again. i now have three mfc scarfs plus my old old one. i dont need another scarf. but i dont have an mfc tie... you pay for entry and for voting rights. not stupid trinkets like a pen etc. don't whinge support your club and go to the games.

interesting point. and i think this statement is where we differ. i would rather see a 16 team competition with 16 healthy teams with even supporters bases, income and draw, making the competition a good game of footy. good recruiting, good coaching, and the best players will then bring you success, not any of the other business nonsense we've been talking about. the afl, and you presumably agree with them, would rather see the overall health of the afl increase making money (for someone), even if its at the expense of certain teams. i am of the opinion that the afl is there to manage the league responsibly and look after the clubs. the clubs should just be there to play football. i dont care about the health of the league. i couldnt care if overall membership is down slightly, or if players have to maintain the same payrates for 4-5 years (god knows they dont need an increase, and their demand for an increase can only come about if revenue increases anyway). as long as the competition is an even and fair competition, because i want to watch elite sport, not business.

i've been saying the same think all week, but everyone just keeps telling me that either 'success will get us a better deal' or 'bums on seats will get us a better deal' but in all honesty i cant see how we can achieve either of those things without getting the better deal in the first place (and fwiw i proved that the success will get a better deal is a falsity).

one of you is incorrect, or maybe im reading the posts wrong...does anyone know which is correct?

the midfield for me has 2 wingers (who are flashy outside skilful types), 3 in the guts and 2 on the bench (those 5 need to probably have 1 outside skilful midfielder, 3 in and under and a tagger... im not sure about the allocation of a genuine all round gun. if the individual players are good enough at what they do you will find that they all become stars. we have jones and mclean in and under. i think sylvia will become a combination player if he gets his body right but probably more outside. moloney might crash and bash, but i think he is more of an outside player, in that his strength is his long kicking, not his ability to win the ball in the clinches. junior is first dibs atm, for his year or two. what this thread has really hit home for me is that we are lacking any real class and pace outside the midfield. TJ had the class, but was inconsistant, and while he had the agility to avoid the tackles, he didnt have the pace to break the lines. im not sure if i have seen enough from anyone on our list to suggest they could be that player. although i think petterd and bell posses the qualities required to become this player (but do we want to move them out of the backline?). we dont have a genuine tagger on the list. godfrey wasnt a genuine tagger, but now we have lost him also. i think that could be bartrams job, but if we start to move bartram, petter and bell into the middle who plays back? wheelan? or will he be injured...

what about nothing but the 150, and melbournefc underneath it? remind everyone who's 150th season it actually is... otherwise i would like to see us continue to use our traditional jumper in every game we are allowed, and auction off the jumper to whoever wants to pay the most the other weeks ala the light blue smarty at carlton. if we are forced to change our jumper for 2-3 games a year, sell it to pine-o-clean for 100K, and we'll wear green with a freakin tree on the front. it sure beats selling a home game interstate...

it appears to me that an afl membership is really just an mcg/td membership, with the option of spending a bit extra money to ensure your club gets something...

i think that the game is a sport. it always has been and thats how it grew strong. yes it needs to be run like a business but i think everyone involved needs to remember that at the end of the day we want to watch the highest level of competitive sport, not the highest level of business. make money, enjoy the spoils, but no at the expense of the integrity of the competition (which imo has long since gone...)