stevethemanjordan

And I'd agree with you. But we wouldn't be 'disposing' him. And that's the point. We'd receive compo which could set us up to get someone decent through a trade. That's the whole point of this. He still has value.

I saw it also. In any workplace, the relationships you hold have to be strong while you're there. I don't think a 'hug' after a win is any indication that Garland is a required player... But that's just me.

Jamar and Garland along with Dunn, Frawley, Sylvia are and were a core group of underperforming, inconsistent players who were and have been with us since the pre-Bailey era. Howe came along not long afterwards. All of them, (for various reasons) have at times during their career shown a lack of care and commitment to be fiercely competitive at all times. They also share these following traits: * Lack of skill level and decision making. Sometimes to the point of making comical extremely comical errors. * Have never improved their individual games over the course of their careers in a consistent way like Nathan Jones. Form has always been up and down. * An extremely low level of leadership qualities present in their game and in the way that they play. When you have a group of older/experienced players such as these guys who share those sort of traits, it doesn't bode particularly well for your club, the list, the younger generation of players etc etc. There is a reason Frawley and Sylvia are gone. And no I do not believe that Roos would have preferred to keep them regardless of what he said to the media during that time. Jamar and Garland are another two that will be gone for the same reasons and Howe has seemed to follow trend with this lot and we can still net something really good for him. Someone please tell me what Garland adds to our club in it's present state? What?!

No. Why jump to a silly ultimatum when it's easy to see what the post is referring too? We are talking about blokes who have been here since the Bailey days and some from before. The blokes who are insignificant players at our club but who should really be the leaders. Nathan Jones isn't in that bracket and neither is Viney both for different reasons. Why is it so hard to understand?

In your view. Whilst I agree that this year he has been more consistent in his effort, I've seen enough to know that: A) We've won plenty without him as we have coverage for his position and over the past few of years I have never thought 'Gee, we missed Garland today'. B) Our backline needs to be more dynamic. We have far too many players who cannot kick. Garland is another. C) Our recruiting and trading over the past couple of years has been exceptional. To think he'd be a loss simply doesn't make sense when looking at the wins our club has had via trading/drafting. D) Even if we somehow managed to lose out on the trade/draft pick, there has been nothing to suggest that his position can't be filled and played just as well. As that has already occurred this year. Seriously. Did you just appear out of a cave? Have the last two drafts, recruiting and development done absolutely nothing to quash that view? Have you been following the club since the Bailey days?

I'm of the belief that both Garland and Howe will be shown the door by the club at the end of the year and I reckon Roos is comfortable knowing that it'll give us the ammunition we need to further compliment and improve our list. To continue to bring in blokes with a fresh state of mind and willingness to compete at all times. Whether it be specialised positions we'll be targeting or mids to complement our one-paced midfield or both. Our own supporters are scared of what the unknown looks like. Posters were scared and underwhelmed when we grabbed Bernie Vince, arguably our best mid (along with Jones). Posters were scared when we got Garlett for nothing on the back of a poor season at a club he was uninspired to play for and look at the impact he has not only on the scoreboard but in general play. I implore you to look at some of the vision of opposition players kicking out and how something as simple as kamikaze style running at that opposition player, (providing they play on) usually results in a miss-kick and a restart for us. We've been missing those kind of pressure acts from most players on our list for the best part of a decade. Do I even need to bring up Vandenberg again and the impact he has had in his first year as a bloke who had a shoulder op and did half a pre-season before he played. I can't fathom the idea that some supporters of ours want to keep underperforming players in the hope that they'll come good. Or because they've been with the club for so long that there's a sense of 'sorry' felt for them. [censored] me. First year players have shown both of these blokes up! Not only that. If you're looking at the needs of our list, it doesn't even make sense to want to keep someone like Garland! A player who's strengths we already have covered and who's weakness/weaknesses we already have enough of. Imagine if we'd kept Frawley like so many here were hoping we would!? It's astonishing. We need to continue to turn over underperforming experienced players who are NQR's. Roos knows it, the rest of the club knows it. We don't have the champion leader veterans of yesteryear like a club like St Kilda or even the Doggies have. We had to bring one of them in! Cross! When will people wake up to the fact that keeping as many 'experienced best 22 atm players who have been on our list for 6-7 + years' is simply not an option for the MFC!?! I will happily eat humble pie if we keep Garland and or Howe. But I honestly cannot see it happening for the sake of rebuilding and rebranding our entire list from top to bottom. Garland Howe Jamar. They'll all be gone by the end of the year. Save this post.

Garland and Howe need to go if we're going to continue to make inroads as a club. Take the picks and continue to trade well. Consistent, dynamic, hungry and skilled players across the list. All of whom need to play at the same level of intensity every game.

Your patience must be through the roof for a player like Watts then... Yarran has proven his ability and performed dominantly a number of times at the top level displaying elite level skills, pace and intensity. Like Garlett last year, he's form is suffering from possibly a number of reasons. Yarran possesses so much of what our list lacks. Speed and elite kicking. I think you're being short-sighted with this one.

He's been dropped to the reserves in order to work on some deficiencies a handful of times. Like many young players.Saying he hasn't been getting games is just a silly thing to say. As for Yarran. He's proven that when he plays at his potential, he's an extremely damaging and great player.

He's been deadly accurate. Whilst this isn't a knock on him, the only thing I can say I've seen that he doesn't possess is distance in his set shot kicking. He doesn't seem to have a huge amount of penetration from 45 + when kicking for goal. As for everything else. He's almost perfect.

Love the entrance

I think for us, players like the ones highlighted are part of the problem. It's the 'scarred mentality' thing. We need players who's game and psychology has not been subject to this MFC conditioning, (for lack of a better term). I'm with you in that we need to improve the depth end of our list just as we need to improve our midfield. There are many areas. And there are several identifiable reasons as to why we are stuck in the [censored]. And why we can concede record breaking opposition goals in halves of football. It's not simply just the 'midfield's' problem. Just as it isn't Garland, Grimes and Watts problem alone. But it's definitely those combined and then some. Moving on some of those more senior players is a non-negotiable and we'll see it happen, even if we're not going to 'get much' in return. If you hold the belief that our recruiting and football development teams are infinitely better than what we've had in seasons gone by then I wouldn't be worrying about what picks we'll be getting. Hogan, Viney, Brayshaw, Salem, Petracca, Toumpas, Frost, JKH, Kent. We need for these guys to remain hungry and competitive at all times and not have them follow in some of the footsteps of 'problem players' that we have. That can't be stressed enough.

Agree with this except for Toumpas. I'd keep him. He is showing the right signs now and once he becomes more and more comfortable in his 'skin' and how he identifies himself within the team, we'll see a really good player. His speed and power are starting to improve and his physicality has improved a lot which has come from greater confidence. He's slowly building and I'm happy with his progress. For those others you mention, I agree we need to be pretty ruthless again and think about list improvement all over the ground. We'll need to lose someone to gain for our team. Whether that's Garland, Howe or Watts I don't mind but it simply has to happen if we ever want to completely break the shackles.

No he's not 'the' problem. But he is most definitely an unfortunate result of one of the many problems we have with our list. One being that we've had so many top 20 draft picks fail over the past 5 + years. Had some of those guys come on like they should have, Matt Jones wouldn't be on our list. The plight of the MFC is complex and there are so many factors that have contributed to it. Our recruiting is simply one of many. I agree with posters who continue to back Roos and ask for patience. It's as if some people live in this fantasy world in which they believe players like Fitzpatrick, McKenzie and Bail will all make it if given enough time. The reality is we've had to hold on to average players over the past couple of seasons simply because we've had no other choice. We've had so many of them and there can only be so many delistings made at the end of each season. As well as being aware of when certain contracts finish etc. There are underperforming and mentally scarred senior players that still need to go just as there are players who are simply not good enough that will need to go. Next year will be the third year that Roos will have had to slowly but surely reshape our list in a mindful way. It's a waiting game. No club has had a list as bad as we've had for this amount of time. No club. It's not that amazing that we capitulate like we have been during games when there are still so many [censored] kickers running around.

Few that have been on our list for 7 + years would be deemed 'crucial' players in my eyes, which is only one of many contributing factors as to why we've been so bad for so long. Garland is one of those guys like Frawley and like Grimes who is incredibly up and down. The difference between his best and worst is astonishing. Defensively, when on song, he can be an extremely valuable member of our back six. His offensive drive, intensity, kicking skills and decision making however have all been questionable over the entirety of his career. When he plays a great defensive game and plays with a visible intensity as he did on Sunday, he (like others in the same boat) lift our side enormously. It's again a question of consistency. It's a question of intensity and concentration. He's another senior bloke who seems as if he's been really affected by what he's endured for many years. Of course it's not all the clubs fault as someone like Jones has been able to overcome it. In my opinion, the need for decision making skills and foot skills coming out of our back line is a priority along with adding to the midfield so losing Garland on current form would not worry me in the slightest. Especially considering our success rate for players we've got into the club from losing long time MFC players. He is part of the Dunn, Frawley and Jamar crew era. None of them are club changing players. I think Dunn is the one to hold onto as part of the 'old crew'. Garland leaving will net is something good. Unless he decides to play the remainder of the season like he did on Sunday. (With minimal skill errors).

The fact that the draft is such an 'event' now really doesn't help these young kids either. It's pretty disgusting really. The AFL are just constantly looking for $ signs wherever they can. We should be easing these kids into the next phase of their footballing careers. Not building it up. Because the reality is, many of these kids who had really great years at under 18's level won't be doing the same at AFL level ever. Petracca has some really exciting attributes to his name. His aerobic ability has never been a 'strength'. I'm glad that session on Monday was a shock to all the draftees because they'll now know the amount of work they have to put in to reap the rewards. Petracca will be absolutely fine as long as his desire to improve is fierce. Thank god we have blokes like Jones, Viney and Cross as players to look up to at training. I'm looking forward to him showing glimpses in the games that he plays next year. That's all I want from Petracca and Brayshaw next year. Glimpses.

I think it's time to let it go big fella. It's just not catching on.

The fact that they are both much more physically mature than both Scully and Trengove, (especially Scully) is one of many reasons why these two are much more likely to have a genuine impact early. I'm pretty sure both weigh more than Scully and Trengove even now. Not only that. These two are much more aggressive in the way that they play.The other reasons are obvious. They'll be developed appropriately. They'll be playing in a deeper and more competitive midfield. Under the tutelage of competent and driven leaders. The list goes on. Supporters have the right to be excited. I find it baffling that there are still comparisons of these two with drafts of previous years. There are differences on so many levels. They just don't compare. We were always bound to get our club to a stage where it is ready to develop the right talent. And I'm confident this will be it. We've never been in a more solid position.

Except he's not a [censored]. It's clear he is self driven. Something Sylvia never was. The fact he is confident in his ability is a positive. Landing Petracca and Brayshaw under our current FD format and environment will, in my eyes, be the break we've been longing for. It's time.

Agree. Glad we're not in the position of the 'aints. All three of Brayshaw, McCartin and Petracca have had pretty dominant years and it's hard to split them.

I assure you, you'll be the only one using that nickname.

Petracca and Laverde or Brayshaw and Laverde if we happen to do a 'Tyson type' deal with either pick 2 or 3 with 21 for a good mid and a pick in the top 10. That would be my dream. Laverde might just be the player of the draft.

You would have a point if we were going to the draft had the club not changed: - The recruiting team and head recruiter. - The senior coach, assistant coaches and development coaches. - The list and core group of experienced players that now lead the club Nutbean. Your post, and posts of that nature are nothing but ignorant and infuriating. No [censored] every pick has an element of risk, but all of those things I've pointed out have changed drastically at our club but under past management, they're the very reason all of those names you mentioned have all failed. Is it it that [censored] hard to understand?

If we end up with pick 2 and 3, (thanks to the Frawley compo), I'd be wanting to take Petracca and Brayshaw providing they're both there. Development for young players coming to our club is a non issue now that we have the right people in place and these two guys look to good to pass up. However, if we do decide to offer one pick up for a player and a later pick back like the 'Tyson' deal last year, I'd want to pick up Laverde. The guy looks unbelievable.

Your man crush is out of control.