rpfc

What the hell is going on here?

Yeah, I am also going to have to disagree with that last line. They'll like us when they are on the list. If you put yourself out there in the AFL industry you may not go to the club of your choice. I wasn't put off by Luke Ball being intransigent a couple years ago. Schwab wasn't put off by Clark's desire to be on the other side of this huge continent. Caddy might quickly learn the lesson that you don't always get exactly what you want. If we want him, and GC don't see a good deal elsewhere - Caddy will have a decision to make.

Tale out the tone that you read it with and take it as I meant it: It would be nice if the "Editor & Chief Football Writer" went and did a piece about how it all works as no-one in the corporate media seems to know/care/bother to understand.

I didn't say he did write it. I said it was from the club, which it is. But it is just a CTRL C, CTRL V job from this article: http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/130820/default.aspx I would but I am not a journalist.

Doesn't say that - players that are there for 7 years or less have no FA until they are delisted. It's complicated and the MFC website has done itself a disservice by simply cutting and pasting from a 6 month old article - Burgan should go and do a real piece and ask the AFL HQ some Qs.

Mitch Clark wanted to go home. Was he mentally fragile? He also was quite emotional about Jimmy passing. It seems that emotional fragility is either a bad thing or completely ignored when it doesn't help your point.

With all due respect - that is a beaten attitude. What would the more ruthless clubs do in our stead? We are trying to be more ruthless. Maybe we will see.

Supercoach? You can't even do deals across competitiors... These deals are pretty straightforward and hardly controversial - the two teams we are dealing with are just doing what is in their best interest by not stepping all over us. GWS want Pick 3 and GC want Tippett - if our picks can help them get those things, then they will be less inclined to screw us over. And stuie, do you remember The Veale Deal? Because you should - it involved our Backline Coach: The Bulldogs wanted the Hawk Rawlings, but so did the Kangas, and Rawlings wanted to go to the Kangas. The Bulldogs had first pick in the PSD and then this happened: Ess Got: Mark Alvey and ND6 Ess Gave: Danny Jacobs Haw Got: Danny Jacobs Haw Gave: Lochlan Veale WB Got: Lochlan Veale WB Gave: Pick 6 and Alvey All this to stop the Hawks from trading Jade Rawlings to the Kangas and force him into the draft and to a club he didn't want to go to. What we would do is far more innocent.

It ensures, assuming a conversation occurs over the likelihood of GC getting 13 in the event they go for Viney occurs, we get this: 3, 4, Caddy and Viney. And not this: Viney, 4, 13, and 30. So the deal would net: 3 and Caddy for 13 and 30. I would do that deal. (I think that makes sense - tell me if I am getting into 'olisik level logic fail'...)

Viney in the second round.

Not if it came with certain caveats...

Irrelevant to the point I was making.

Scott Thompson left the Dees for similar reasons and is fine upstairs. I am not saying Toy will become what Thompson has become, but let's not leap of a cliff into the Gorge of Specious Conclusions.

Yes, but they may want some bigger bodies...

- Mark Neeld Doesn't sound like we are going to go for a trade. It doesn't matter - he may get a few FA credits or points or whatever they are going to call it and we might get a decent pick regardless.

We have already made it known we will let Moloney go as a FA. So what you are saying used to be unlikely - now it is impossible.

I don't know if I want Caddy if we lose Pick 13. But who knows what the stakes are...

If you built a time machine you can save us from all this and go back to 2001 and become CAC's assistant recruiter...

He is from Qld as 1re1be posted. Bail and 13 for Caddy will tempt some but I know that the FD rate Bail so they may not like this. I am not that keen on it either but would do it if we could spin a pick back our way.

Oh.

A repeated one at that too. It's amazing how Carlton does this far more blatantly and the experience is used as a sort off hand 'joshing around' conversation piece in the media and when we do it is as if we are the third rising of the fallen angel Beezlebub. Fitting I suppose...

Essentially, yes. But we could say to Moloney that you have agreed this contract with Ess and we will match it with the intent to trade you so we can get something for you. BUT he has to agree to that, and Essendon have to be willing to trade. It's called a sign and trade in US sports.

Yeah, surely it's a forced outrage. We had as many touches, clearances, more Inside 50s but have no one to kick goals. But so many didn't see this coming apparently and are outraged at the blase disinterest that the Bailey...er, Neeld apologists are showing to these displays... Believe it or slash your wrists with it - sat night was an improvement.

And for those saying to themselves "why should I move on?" It's hard enough trying to keep this club heading in the direction of where we want to be without the continued desire to keep the club fractured from that time. People need to know that forgiveness is given not because people deserve it (whether they do or not) but because they need it. As I have forgiven those people that spurned someone close to me. Forgive and move on, or we will still be shackled by a past nobody wants to remember but no-one can forget.

Absolutley, OD.