45HG

Fair questions. But at the moment we're battling to pay 92.5% it's not really a problem IMO. In a few years when they kids ask for more money we can reassess. However I'm not sure it's as big a problem as people make out.

And with Grimes, Scully, Sylvia, Moloney, Blease he will not have not be our premier midfielder and will be able to play less in the limelight.

Unless he has majorly infringed, this is not a good thing to do - especially with a young list we're trying to gel together.

Sort of reminds me of a Sylvia trade (though Sylvia is fast becomming more important). Other clubs would be reluctant to offer a decent enough pick to make it worth our while.

No and no

100% correct. He had 6 clearances or more 6 times this year, had 6 tackles or more 6 times. Goalkicking is one area I've already said he needs to improve, but I can't believe the whinging going on about Mclean on this site. He's also had 24 touches or more 9 times this year. Talk about a whipping boy. Moloney has had 24 or more 12 times this year, from two extra games, 6 clearances or more 4 times and 6 tackles or more 5 times. Both players have kicked 7 goals. Now I'm not saying Mclean has been better than Moloney, as I think he's had a very good season, but I just don't see why so many are having a go at Mclean.

My new Grimes t-shirt? My old Dees t-shirt?

(sorry for the poor quality, I just got sick of not seeing many Dees highlights and figured others would be too, so I'm just starting to record them with a camera of my telly, forgive the product placement)

Mine is obsessed with Davey.

I agree, no Rivers

Yes, you have missed something.

Maybe Jaded likes Bailey

I wonder if Brock Mclean has seen Men in Black

I'm offended. I was going to insert the idea of simulacra - but couldn't quite remember it well enough to accurately depict it. Basically that the symbol of an object has overtaken the reality of it.

Somehow in your oddness you summed up what I meant by my 4 words x2. I honestly don't understand the pack mentality of laying into Mclean of late, especially given the standard of some others on our list.

If you cross your eyes you can definitely see Judd eye gouging.

Then no wonder they didn't retire the guernsey, because they needed to pass it on to continue to give it meaning. So it would be an odd example. My biggest gripe is that after so long not caring which players get which numbers, we're suddenly placing heightened importance on it. It's almost like the further we've gotten from our past, the more we feel the need to underline it.

It's funny how I prefer this thread to pretty much any in the trading thread - have about 5 new posters signed up today? Back to Grimes.

Buckley's an odd example to use though RR, as Maxwell changed his number to 5 and it seems to have become the new "captain's" number. I don't see the harm in placing importance in numbers, we're nothing without our history. But it does go overboard and should be nothing more than a gesture IMO.

Kids these days

Unfortunately they do lie, but Grimes will be a gun rest assured.

It was Matthew Whelan, now it's Jack Grimes.

There's a good one on there already Bail's. Look for Melbourne's greatest ever comeback.

I'm expecting 7-9 years. We have a few players coming back, but will generally be putting lots of games into very young players - including first year players who will be taking the place of experienced players in Robbo, Wheatley and Whelan (if not more).

Odd...