Mach5

Motlop wouldn't sign. He had a change of heart and has now signed. They were always reluctant to lose him, but if you have to, you might as well use him to get Danger.

Caro may say that, but Motlop was part of discussions before he was convinced to stay. The cats have been willing to give up such a significant piece, so they won't want to go backwards now.

VFL actually, but only really the one season.

Bastinac is Rohan Bail with slightly better disposal, and maybe a bit softer.

Forgetting Jordie? Your point still stands though.

Yes, but salary caps are finite, he'd be on very decent coin, and they have clearly indicated a strong interest in Dixon who won't come cheap. If he has been identified as a key culprit who is not performing to expectations, and eating up a large portion of the cap in the meantime, I imagine they'd be keen to capitalise while his value remains high.

They've probably seen him do it effortlessly at training that many times...

Your mate isn't the only one.

Que? More likely to have the opposite effect.

Mate, your trade propositions are sub-BigFooty quality.

The question has to be asked: why on the outer at Port? Pick 4. Very talented. Great long penetrating kick. Hard at it. Often compared to Hodge from what I've heard. I've not watched much of Port this year, so would appreciate some feedback from those who have. Has he been running only one way? Making poor decisions? Wayward kicking? Ineffective? Not finding the footy? Flashing in & out? Would love to know. And then would still probably go hard after him.

There is actually, if you know the area at all.

So? He'd never base himself in Mogg's Creek. I can't understand why this would be a factor. Being in Vic would be key.

I could see him maybe leaving for a top job, if it even still appeals. I can't see him leaving right now for a support role. It's just not him.

Make no mistake; we'd be much poorer for his absence. I also think the likelihood of him moving on is minimal this year.

Or rather: "we would be exceptionally [censored] off if he were not to come now." So my caveat is that it's not set in stone because "contracts can't be signed until the trade/FA period."

I can recall 2 distinct moments when Garland has been visibly frustrated with Grimes on the field, because he has called for the footy when he is no position to be receiving it, and rather than making good spatial positioning, has been merely happy to get a rushed possession that achieves nothing for the team.He is a habitual culprit, and I have loved what Grimes gave us at times over the journey, but I'm now more than happy to see him go. He's been Melbourne-of-2007-to-2013-ified.

I'm surprised so many are quick to believe that the Essendon 34 will actually get banned. Does no one remember the farce over in the NRL that WADA allowed to go unchecked? I'd say the distinct likelihood is that there are no suspensions to come for anyone.

He's fast, but what else? No chance in hell, regardless of what position he was played or how much hard luck he's experienced.

When Motlop asked to go to Adelaide, they were eyeing off a Motlop for Danger trade if this were to eventuate. Danger to Geelong been confirmed to me FYI.

No way.

Long before that, believe me.

I have also had the opinion that Grimes is concerned about his SC points, or rather racking up touches to increase his value, to our club or others, but not necessarily sticking to the gameplan. Only in the last year or so as he has appeared on shaky ground though. Looks like textbook self-preservation tactics.

The "highlights" are super average too.

Maybe if the club was parading him like a star signing, but so far it's only unsubstantiated rumours of a minor move that improves our list in some way, even if only slight. We could probably do without the drama.