titan_uranus

I’ve slept on it and I’m still not a fan of 7 & 8 for Trac and McVee.

That doesn’t feel like a trade that turns our heads. That doesn’t feel like a trade that is the best result for the MFC.

10 minutes ago, demoncat said:

This x100

7 and 8 is actually a decent deal for Trac, but it goes against our position of needing a deal that “turns our heads”

Once again our comms about our overarching strategy is terrible

If this is a fire sale/rebuild - say it, and stop leading supporters on that you’ll hold out for a great deal or Trac and Clarry will come back to the MFC

But if we send 24 back, then 7 and 8 aren’t our haul for Trac, they’re our haul for Trac and McVee.

1 minute ago, Ted Lasso said:

The issue is the sum of all parts of the off season.

I get what you're saying, 2 top 10 picks for Trac and his salary off the books in isolation is okay.

Losing Trac, McVee, Clarry plus 700k and a bunch of later picks, for 7, 8 and 36 in a compromised draft after Tim Lamb and Paul Guerra talked so tough about "Best interests of the MFC and have to turn our heads" is the issue

The messaging is shocking, and we will end up with what amounts to a fire sale

This is correct.

I’m confident part of the decision to sack Goodwin was PR-related - helping convince members to stay members and show up to games.

If our trade period results in the above (Trac, Clarry, McVee out, and 7, 8 and 36 in), I suspect a large segment of our membership/supporter base will be upset. It will go against Guerra and Lamb’s tough words, too.

Personally, I don’t think 7 and 8 for Trac and McVee is “head turning”, for example.

51 minutes ago, Colm said:

Sure it’s about that but it also has to be about a rebuild and we need draft picks or new players to do that.

Surely we can’t pay $700k of his wages and get a future third round pick for a player that has been in our best 22 every week even when not fit and if he gets back to his best will be a top 10 player in the comp.

Yeah but on form was he really best 23 for the back half of last year or the first half of this year?

1 minute ago, Demonland said:

Why does the X post say three new additions but the Instagram post says four (with McLennan)?

10 minutes ago, SPC said:

Loved him as a player, was unbelievable for us and dragged us over the line on so many occasions.

However, he and Trac were not only poor leaders, but were counterproductive to our development of younger players.

I am now a firm believer, strong system will beat superstar players on a disconnected team. We have a nucleus, but just need to build the system- which I’m confident that King can do.

We were never going to get the best out of Clarry or Trac again, comparing them to 2021 version is not fair. They might blossom at another club, but so be it.

Mark this trade period down as a positive for the clubs next 4 years. We will free up valuable $s and hopefully add some key pieces.

I love this club… this club! The members, fans and anyone wearing our jumper. Players who leave to me, regardless of status are always part of the story, but ultimately ex-players.

I largely sit here, but with sadness too.

It’s just an all round sad situation that we’re in.

Can’t imagine anyone will complain about spending a future 4th on a ruck who at least has some AFL experience under his belt.

Hopefully he turns into a great AFL level ruck but even if he doesn’t, this is still a good trade.

Eagles, Broncos, Chargers

Also, the absolute gall of Kane to say Koz has been let down by the club.

All year Kane’s been saying we can’t keep playing Trac and Oliver in the midfield.

If we’d kept them and made no changes into 2026, he’d have said the same thing - “all well and good to reward Pickett with the money but by continuing to play Petracca and Oliver in that midfield, they’re just not letting him be the best player he can be”.

No one in their right mind would have thought on 11 June that Goodwin was anything other than in danger of being sacked at any time in the upcoming 18 months. No matter how hard he might have wanted to deny it in his mind.

Trac wanted out last year. Clarry’s issues are well known to the playing group.

It might be surprising that it’s all happened in 4 months, but that’s all. None of this has happened totally out of the blue.

Meh.

I’d prefer McVee to pick 23, but in the circumstances it’s ok.

I haven’t felt this annoyed at a player leaving us in a long time.

Everything about this is just so sad and [censored].

Doesn’t matter whether you’re in the “the club is a disgrace” camp, or the “good riddance” camp.

The mere fact that it’s 2025 and we’re on here squabbling amongst ourselves about Clayton Oliver touring GWS in preparation to be traded out is a rubbish situation no matter which way you look at it.

Yeah. Twomey’s a good journo but has absolutely jumped the shark when it comes to creating content.

Just now, bing181 said:

Just nonsense. What players think is the opposite of irrelevant, it's why all this is happening. If they're going to buy in 100%, they need to know that every one of their team mates is doing the same. The talk even before the Petracca meeting was that the players felt that Trac wasn't completely invested, which is fatal.

As for "Steven King is on record". Of course he is, and if you believe him for one moment, I have a bridge to sell you. He said what he had to say. Also, King gave him a phone call, but didn't even make the effort to sit down with him in person.

Hard to believe that supporters could be so gullible here, but there you go.

Source?

"Didn't even make the effort" - is that because he was a bit busy preparing Geelong for a prelim and then a grand final?

1 hour ago, deanox said:

I thought Lamb just straight batted most things in a reasonable way, and I thought he answered the questions about Clarry's role and off-field well.

But the questions overall were poor. Too much focus on things they all knew Lamb couldn't answer - will you pay salary, what trade would you accept - and not real question ls like:

• What is the role King would require Oliver to play? Did Oliver say he was or wasn't prepared to play that role?

• You've talked about how Trac is a modern day great, but Oliver has 4 X Bluey and 2 X AFLCA MVP and you don't talk about him in the same way, why?

• You mentioned that to trade Trac the offer needs to be head turning, but you aren't using the same language Oliver. Is that because you see him as surplus to your current needs?

• Are WCE in the conversation for McVee? Would you be prepared to send him to the PSD if Fremantle didn't offer a reasonable trade? Would you be prepared to re-draft McVee ahead of Freo in that situation?

Personally, I am a bit disappointed that there has been a clear decision to pump up Trac as a great but effectively down play Oliver. There is no reason the club couldn't say similar things "Clayton is a great player and if he would prefer to seek a trade because he doesn't like the role outlined for him, we expect to see a deal that provides value to us versus the value he'd provide in role we think he'll play on King's game plan moving forward.".

Isn't the reason for the different language between Trac and Oliver obvious?

That is, the club is prepared to take Trac back, but we don't want Oliver back?

If we did the same dance with Oliver, but then flogged him off for nothing, our words on Trac would look cheap.

In some respects this is smart - we're making it clear to the market that Oliver (and May) are players we're happy to facilitate a trade on, but Trac we're not, because if it were up to us his name wouldn't be up for discussion.

26 minutes ago, old55 said:

But do you acknowledge that the club's messaging about Petracca - "he wants to expore new opportunities and we're open to that only if it provides a good return" has been different from Oliver and May who we've openly encouraged to look for new opportunities without the good return caveat?

I guess you're going to say that the only reason we were able to say that about Petracca is because he wants to leave, but what if he didn't? Would we be pushing him out too like @BLWNBA implies for "future second rounder".

And if that is the case and it's as obvious as you both imply and that "only in the delusional world of football supporters" would believe it then why would GC be fooled and offer more than an F2?

I don't think your "reading in" holds water. Petracca won't be traded at a discounted price.

Agree.

If we’re “delusional” for suggesting we’ll hold Trac, it follows that it’s obvious that we won’t. Which therefore GC knows, and we’re up for that future 2nd rounder @bing181 mentioned.

For our stance to work, we have to genuinely be prepared to take him back, which is 100% consistent with every line that has come out of the club to date. Those lines are markedly different to what we’ve said about Oliver and May.

6 minutes ago, Jaded No More said:

The club has said publicly and privately they are not trading Petracca for picks alone.

Yet people keep saying that is what we will do.

How spineless do you think we are?

Spineless? Not sure.

But capable of extracting the best possible price? I have no confidence at all. None in Lamb, none in our club’s current vibe, none.

Maybe in a year when King’s been able to embed himself on the culture of the group and/or we have a stable training ground situation. And/or someone other than Tim Lamb is our list manager.

2 hours ago, bing181 said:

No we can't. It would be toxic for the playing group and undermine everything King and Guerra have been saying.

For better or worse Trac is gone. Sure, we have to go through the motions (the offer needs to turn our heads etc. etc.), but the reality is we'll end up accepting whatever we have to.

Yes, [censored] situation, but it is what it is.

In what way would it undermine everything King and Guerra have been saying?

15 minutes ago, Ghostwriter said:

Can you tell us what his reaction was? I don’t mean what was reported in the media, I mean what his real reaction was. None of us can, right? Sadly the majority of people choose to believe what the media is saying, yet again.

Completely ignoring everything the media reports is as unhealthy as accepting everything the media says.

You are better connected than most on here, but for the majority of us who love this club but don’t have your connection, we have nothing else to go off and therefore start with what’s reported.

And with the reports being that we had a discussion about 2026 with him, following which the next day he was on a boat with GWS, is it unreasonable for us to link the two and conclude that he’s considering a change following that meeting with King?

29 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

Doing the "how many of our best 23 would get a game in a top 8 side" I would have difficulty coming up with say 12 players.

In the back six Bowey Turner and Rivers

Midfield.. Gawn, Petracca, Oliver, Langford Windsor and Lindsay

Forward: Kozzie Fritsch

You could make a case for a few more such as Viney, Melksham and Salem but each only has 1-3 years left. Lever is an unknown.

TBH I have no idea as to the correct answer posed by the question in the thread title. I like what Richmond has done but I'm not sure it's the answer to our dilemna

This is one of those argument that actually means nothing.

If we had more players who’d get a game in a top 8 side…we’d be a top 8 side.

Run the analysis again on Carlton, St Kilda and Port. Can you find more than 12?

Clearly we won’t be challenging for finals unless/until we bat through to 15-18 players who are good enough. Which means, in your analysis, Viney and Salem playing strong football, perhaps Petty going back and rediscovering form, and then otherwise the development of Tholstrup, Culley, AMW, etc.

54 minutes ago, Demon Forever said:

Flanders is far from done. His PREFERRED destination is the Saints. It's up to the gold coast where he goes now.

Same as Trac, we don't get the deal, we will look for a place that will give it to us.

I haven't written this off yet

If it's straight forward, it should get done on Monday. If it prolongs then you can bet that the suns are looking at us.

There is a bit of hatted between the Saints and suns. #NEPO babies #draftconcessions #academies

Mate, if St Kilda are going to offer pick 7, GC will be signing this deal up ASAP.

We’re out of this race.

I’m happy it’s just a 2 year deal.

Have always rated him but at his age the end could come very quickly. Just 2 years IMO is suitable to bring in someone who knows how to play a leading forward role in modern footy.

Should help JVR and Kentfield develop whilst allowing Petty to return to the backline, where he belongs.

10 minutes ago, praha said:

crazy how people think adding TDK and Silvagni makes them finals caliber overnight. Didn't seem to help the Blues much.

Yeah St Kilda is such a triggering club on here.

They’re going sideways from Marshall to TDK but at double the salary hit.

Silvagni’s played, what, 3 games in 2 years? A great role player but does he move the finals needle?

Ryan’s well past his best (imagine the reaction if we were interested in him!)

Aleer’s a promising defender but promising is all - unproven at AFL level.

Which leaves Flanders. A good get, one I wished we had snared, and confirmation we are a really tough sell to any prospective player.

But contrary to @Bring-Back-Powell ’s pessimistic scaremongering, St Kilda’s true form this year was firmly bottom 6 and worse than us. Again, if we had won 4 of the last 5, all against bottom 6 sides, and all by single digit scores, anyone on here who would dare suggest that was a sign of improvement would be howled down. They had a bad year but with salary cap space they’ve thrown money and it’s stuck.

A reminder to people on here that we’re by and large less attractive to play for than what ought to be considered an irrelevant club not anywhere near a flag.

If Trac’s gone and there’s any way that the price for Trac is Humphrey, that’s a deal I can get around.

Put to one side whether you think moving on from Clarry is a good idea.

Is this the right way to do it? Tell him 2 business days prior to trade period to find a new home? Let it leak? Destroy bargaining power? All the while remembering that he’s under a sizeable contract that can’t be ripped up - meaning the only outcome now is for us to trade him for a packet of chips whilst we pay him 30-50% of his salary?

Be supportive of the new management all you want, but we are still, right now a mess.