titan_uranus

Generally agree. We have no leg to stand on, and they know it. Unlike with Trac, where we’ve at least put up a public position of wanting him back, the way we’ve dropped this news on Clarry, so late and so abruptly, has destroyed any bargaining power we have. Coupled with a contract that no one wants (us included), we’re absolutely stuffed. We have no choice but to take their lowball offer and move on.

Unsure about this. We need pace and a willingness to take the game on, but we don’t need poor kicking. Not sure where CJ lands on that matrix. Hopefully nothing beyond a 3rd round pick for this one.

Or it could say we’re just not very good at negotiating.

Thanks for answering the smoke signal, @Chook in Perth . All this means is we’re back to what we’ve debated since this all started. Are we prepared to have Trac come back and play for us next year? If yes, we’re a chance here. If no, we’re no chance. Any insight on the club’s relationship with Trac?

Can we get @Chook in Perth to put this one to bed one way or another? (…please?)

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.

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

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.

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

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

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.

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?

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.

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.

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

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?

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.

Mate, if St Kilda are going to offer pick 7, GC will be signing this deal up ASAP. We’re out of this race.