Demons2riseagain

20 minutes ago, Satyriconhome said:

The reason a 'big name' has not nominated Melbourne, is for the last 3 years we have not encouraged that, we have built the club from scratch again with 22 players who are there to play a role on any given game day, listen to one of the reasons Hogan re signed "the team is not reliant on one player"

I think this is untrue actually. We tried taking recycled players from other clubs (just not A grade)... yes to fill roles but because we couldnt get anyone else. Do you think we would've said no to Dangerfield or Buddy if they nominated this club?

9 minutes ago, Petraccattack said:

Its been a lot longer than 3 years.. no marquee players ever nominate us because we have been a laughing stock for a decade.

I hate that this is completely true.

22 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

is there though.  Players line up clubs from a long way out these days.. All we see is the 'decision".

The only element of any of this I truly believe, it the what. The when, the who,the why  etc is all a game.

Will be interesting to see if a smokie slides acrosss.

Yeah I agree totally there is a lot of games and BS for sure. 

Player retention vs trading in...getting a big player (or future players) to nominate MFC (danger/buddy/Frawley/?mitchell) I see actually as very different (and much harder).

It should be much easier to get players staying and wanting to sign on (which has obviously been difficult in recent years at MFC) - retention is a no brainer for the elite clubs...

but getting a player nominating a trade to your club is obviously far harder (and besides second rate players MFC has a poor track record). Tyson the exception for mine- 

Hogan signing (as well as all the others this year) is huge as it seems to put an end to the recent trend of losing our talent. With player retention addressed- I'm now keen to see who we can get in (who's genuine A grade) to top up our forming list - and not have to give up picks in the process ... free agency - lets get amongst 

12 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

think about it 

Happy that I already thought about it cheers. 

I'm simply saying it would be nice if Meldbourne had a big name requesting a trade in.

it only took us all year to get Hogan's signature. I hope you can 'think about it' and see the difference

12 hours ago, KingDingAling said:

If last years transaction with Essendon is anything to go by then we won't be playing hardball. I'm just glad we don't have a first round pick to give them for Hibberd.

I admit I was pretty annoyed when I saw we gave way to essendons demands so quickly with that (melksham) trade, but it also allowed us to move on and get the subsequent trades done that definitely improved our clubs position. 

Would love a big name to nominate Melbourne...seems like it's always another club!

stoked hogan resigned. Massive to keep a genuine future champion

I can't remember the exact post but basically the idea was put forward for exchanging our 1st pick 2017 for a bunch of second round picks this year. Clubs like GC who are leaking players and will likely not use many of their later (even possibly their later second round picks) would be likely interested to offload them for the chance at gaining a higher pick next year. 

Just thinking if this years draft is as 'even' as recruiters are saying, might be worth packaging any recycled players (Dunn/garland/Michie/Newton) etc with our 2017 1st pick to get 2 or 3 reasonably high draft picks this year. 

Thoughts?

im not desperate to get into the high draft this year but if it's that even, there maybe some real value even with picks in the 20's

Lol. Never a truer word spoken wise.

hello demand land, I've been meaning to sign in and register for a while. Love reading all these posts...

go dees