Wiseblood

Didn't see the report but is he looking to pull the pin or be traded?

Okay, I'll humour you 1. The thread is called "Who we should pick up" not "Who should we TRY and pick up". The very mention of Gaff was ludicrous from the start. 2. The poster who suggested that, for the right price, he may consider a move was ignorant in the extreme. A bloke doesn't sign a new contract unless he wants to stay, and a club doesn't offer one to him if they want to let him go. 3. I mentioned the contract situation as it happened this year. The Eagles won't sign a gun midfielder they just re-signed this year. That was the point. 4. I didn't need to be corrected as I didn't say anything wrong. 5. This one makes no sense to me as I didn't edit anyone's posts. My point still stands - we have as much chance of landing him as we would Swan or Franklin. Clubs don't offload gun players who are happy where they are to get a 17 year old kid. I thought that aspect made quite alot of sense. Gaff is, certainly, not worth the same as a Franklin or Swan, but we would need to give up much, much more to land him than what you suggest. 6. The Croad situation was different, again, as Freo offered up the number one pick in the superdraft plus other picks as well, not a mini draft pick so they can take a skinny 17 year old. The Croad situation shows it has happened, true, but it didn't come nearly as cheap as what you are offering. Not upset mate, I'm just stating facts. You're the one who seems to be getting his knickers in a twist. As others have agreed the very mention of Gaff is silliness as it won't, under any circumstances, be happening. Would love him at the club, don't get me wrong, but it's just a dream.

Since when did stating facts become a troll? You want others to listen to your thoughts and then someone has a differing view and it's a "troll'. The Jeff White comparison is way off the mark as he WANTED to come back to Victoria and we had the picks to give to Freo. If Gaff wanted to come back to Victoria who wouldn't have signed a new deal which, therefore, shows he is happy in WA and the Eagles want him there. The Eagles LOVE him and there is no chance they'll part with him so I see no reason why his name would even be thrown up, although Melbourne fans seem to have an obsession with him.

Not shutting anyone down, just stating fact. I want Dane Swan to come to Melbourne but, like Gaff, it won't happen so there is no reason to waste space over it.

You know what I'm talking about? Good. Then you know it won't happen. Sorted.

We have about as much chance of Gaff coming to Melbourne as we do getting Buddy Franklin - Zero. None of this "don't think it could happen, but this is the only way I can see it happening" stuff. I know it's this time of the year but it's ridiculous in the extreme. Why West Coast would trade a PROVEN player for a bloke they won't get for a year and is NOT proven is totally beyond me. No club is that stupid. Move on from even the smallest notion of it happening, as it won't.

Gaff just re-signed this year, he is not going anywhere no matter what we do. I would have thought anyone paying attention to football in general would have known this.

Unwatchable? I'd give anything to see our club playing that high intensity stuff for even 5 minutes during the game. That's what finals football is all about.

While I'd love Tippett we would be zero chance of landing him. Many will point out that we swayed Clark to change his mind but Tippett won't give up being at such a club that will go deep in to the finals unless he goes home - I wouldn't have thought any amount of money would be able to sway him. Would love to be proved wrong but I don't think we can come into any sort of calculations. I would have thought the club would look long and hard at getting someone to play forward. With Cook on the way out we don't really have a specialist tall forward outside of Mitch Clark on our list. All we have are ruckmen who can play forward or medium sized forwards. Wouldn't be against an experienced tall like an Edwards and also drafting a young forward as well, although I have a feeling the club will look at midfielders in the draft. If we can land one without giving too much up then that would be a win.

To be fair to the bloke it's been reported by other journos outside of Hagdorn. Doesn't mean there is any truth to the rumour but he certainly didn't pluck it from nowhere.

How quickly it all changes. I always find it interesting when one journo claims a deal is happening and then another journo from the SAME paper then claims we aren't into him at all. Classic stuff.

Just posted on twitter by Jay Clark from the HUN that Monfries is the small forward we have signed to a 4 year deal. Apparently rival clubs are convinced that it's happening. Obviously not a lock yet but the wheels are certainly in motion.

To me Moloney was the face of everything that has been wrong with our club for the last 6 years - a flat track bully who would look good when we played the lesser teams and couldn't get near it against a team with some talent. He loved to finger point and he revelled in the fact that he could boss people around. It's well known that he is a pretty average bloke off the field and there is a reason why, when Neeld brought in the blank canvas, that he wasn't voted in to the leadership group. What we have lost are people we NEEDED to lose. Moloney was never going to take us anywhere and we now have a spot that can be filled by a player who will, either straight away or over time, contribute more to the cause than Moloney ever could. I thank him for his contribution to the club but I am excited that Neeld and co. have no qualms about doing exactly what is required for the club moving forward. We will only get better from this.

Here we go. With Moloney and Jurrah gone every player who hasn't played much footy this year or is out of contract will want out of the club "according to my source". Not offence but I'll believe it when I see it.

Well... do you know who else was interviewed? You make assumptions left, right and centre. It's not a fragile environment - it's largely a group of footballers who have been taught not to work hard and get by through doing "just enough". The ones who want to go, or who will be let go, are players who don't have the capacity to work hard and do the things needed to become part of the club going forward.

To be fair nothing is set in stone and he hasn't said when he wants to continue his footy career. Remember - Port approached him, not the other way around. If he gets through the court case he might look to play in the SANFL for a season and get his career going again in 2014.;

No doubt that they were recruited simply to fill a few gaps over the next year or two while Neeld develops the younger players or trades for better ones. They do enough but there was a reason why they were overlooked for so long. Can't fault their endeavour, courage or work ethic but they won't be around for the long haul.

Strauss, like Rivers, is pure speculation. Nothing in it at all. I'm gutted also by this - I can understand why he has gone and why he needs to be around his family and I always thought it would happen sooner rather than later in his career. However he could have handled this far better and shown Melbourne some of the support we have shown him. Blaming Neeld, or anyone in the FD for this, is wrong on so many levels. How could it possibly be Neeld's fault? Just another excuse for people to come out and pot him at every opportunity. This club has been down the toilet for a while now, we asked for the change, and then when he starts to make the necessary changes to turn this club around we start to criticise him for it? What a fickle bunch we are.

I think you'll find that most are simply saying that it's not worth going ape over practice matches. Plus we won both of these games last year in Adelaide, where we never win. And again I'll say it meant nothing after you look at the year we had. I'll be worrying if we look like that in the first few rounds.

For everything posted in this thread... we won this game. We won it. We never gave up and, with a game in these conditions already played, we got the win. THAT is a good sign. Skills were poor but the conditions were awful. Decision making does need work and our talls will have much more of an impact in better conditions. Lots of positive but special mention to Matty Bate. Worked his backside off in both games and looks like he can have a future in the midfield. Kudos to him for making such a hard effort to change his fortunes around.

You're talking to a board of Melbourne fans, 90% don't understand this.

This replies are hilarious. Let the necking begin!

Agree completely in this game, decision making is not flash. We just aren't playing the conditions well at all, long bombs when we get it and little composure. Still not worried in the slightest as after 5 months of training in good conditions we were bound to find it tough in the wet. I'm more interested in the games against the Pies and Hawks in better conditions to see how we go.

Last point is spot on. We won both our opening NAB cup games last year. Look where we ended up. These games have zero reflection on the season and you would think that people would understand this by now. So we lost in the rain by 3 points? OH NO!!! Season over!!!! Give me a break.

Plenty of positives in a 40 minute practice game. Plenty of our top line players didn't play, Clark looked good, Tynan and Magner showed a bit and we are already getting the ball forward far more than in previous years which allows our forward line more of a chance. Plenty of tired legs in the wet for their first run which allowed the Suns to come up over the top, and the only criticism would be we went a little too tall across the ground. Anyone whinging about a meaningless game in wet conditions is kidding themselves.