rpfc

He would be right behind Jones, Vince, Viney, and Tyson as our 5th best mid until Brayshaw, Petracca, and/or Vanders go past him. We would be more competitive in the middle when the above need a rest or are out of form. I want stars and Redden ain't that but that midfield star will need help and Redden would provide that.

Dawes would be close to untradeable the way his knee was buckling a few weeks ago, and on Watts - you're having a laugh. Like he will be traded now. Clubs will not give up the equivalent that the club now sees in him.

Strong midfielder in his prime who tackles, has neat skills and gives a sh!t.

He would help a lot.

Yes. Like, just yes.

Yes, it's something I thought about last week with all the huff over Roos' remarks - I think he realised this before we did - the early naming of first year players above more seasoned bodies is not Roos' style at all but he gave JKH and Salem games very early last year and did the same for Brayshaw, ANB, and Stretch this year. With the list changing so much that there is the prospect he will leave it with just 5 pre-2012 recruits, I think Roos struggles when we bring up the failure of the past decade - it's a different list and club, still struggling but not suffering from the same problems of the 2007-2013 era. I don't think he likes the 'lumping in' of 2014-15 into 2007-13.

So the logic is: Step 1: Trade Toumpas Step 2: ??? Step 3: Trade for Established Elite Player Jimmy Toumpas is more likely to become an elite player than be apart of a trade to get an elite player, and in terms of money - he would be on less than the average salary. The Case Of Giving Jimmy Toumpas Another Contract is irrelevant to any trade for an elite player.

We have only 22 players on the PL that are not Roos-era recruits. That number will fall again for 2016 (to approx. 14 or 15) and by the year after might only be made up of 8 or 9 players. With Kent, Viney, Hogan, and Toumpas arriving the year before Roos came included in that 8 or 9. N Jones, Dunn, McDonald, Watts, and Gawn being the only pre-2012 recruits that look like staying through the Roos-era. That is a complete teardown rebuild in 3 years. It is hard to get your head around but it tells me how far back we are coming from compared to other teams doing a similar rebuild.

Too early to tell for that draft. And that was Taylor's first I believe.

...for what gain? The talent we would get in would be comparable or worse to the one shipped out. I am all for reducing the amount of 'projects' that this club bothers with. But there are fewer than in recent memory with the deletions of the last few years, the recruiting of established players, the better drafting, and the improvement of Watts and Gawn. We can afford to give Toumpas a chance of becoming something.

Some insightful effing posts here... What do you think he would get in a trade, and don't give me the old "I would take a packet of crisps" nonsense - he was highly touted for a reason and the club evidently wants to find out whether he can salvage something. "If he wasn't ND4, he wouldn't still be on the list" is not an argument against keeping him - again, there was a reason he was taken so early and was touted as such a talent. There are plenty of other spots on the list to clear before Toumpas for a myriad of reasons - but I will give you one; he could be a far better player than about more than half a dozen still on the list.

The ruthless decision that shows we are Doing What's Best For The Club is to politely move him on. There is nothing more to gain, and a little to lose, by acting petulantly toward someone who has been here for so long. Clubs are not lists and teamsheets - they are a collection of people trying to do right thing by each other, for each other, and for the future. And you can't get far without respect. I would tell Mark that a decision has been made and that we would like to play him against GWS and it is up to him if he plays. Note: Has a decision been made?

The draft should be altered - all eligible players should be 2 years removed from high school. The number of terrible decisions made by clubs would go down dramatically. I have argued this for years and I know it scares people but the usefulness of the draft as a measure of equalisation would only increase if this were the case.

Getting a deal done before the new TV deal landscape changes is the perfect time to do it because a huge pay day will be immediately alleviated when the cap goes up. It will move from $10.2 to at least $13m or $14m over one or two years I think, especially if the AFLPA get a percentage share that they gag for. So suddenly Hogan at $1m a year over 5 years goes from 10% of the cap to nearly half that as the cap progressively increases. One thing to note - I think that the TV money will mean that all players get more money but the largest increases will be for the ~50 best and most important players.

Yeah, there are some that equate the failure of Toumpas and other kids to a judgment on the SANFL itself - it's not that simple.

Well said, grazman. I just really want to move on - no more mention of it from Roos or Jackson - and just look to the last two games and this coming summer where Roos has his last chance to put his last imprimatur on the list. Getting better will help all that has been spoken about, in fact, it's the only real remedy - not waffling critiques or forced apologies. Winning games of footy heals all wounds.

There's nothing wrong with the SANFL - we just recruited the third best player from the NEAFL and he would be lower than in the SANFL. The problem with recruiting kids based on promising SANFL or WAFL performances is that they are not shouldering load - they are bit players playing a role that may mean getting footy more easily than it would be if they were the focus of the opposition like they would be in juniors.

The timing is appalling but he is talks out of clumsy sympathy, not whatever motive you and others are attaching to it. Whenever he talks about the fans he is trying to tell a tortured story to the football masses that he, himself, is slowly coming to terms with. He loves to critique things - I think we can all agree on that. And his continued mentions in 2014 to the scars of the past is testament to that - that last line of his in that quote about 'being sick of talking about it' is a reference to that tired argument I think you would agree. Another irony is that this quote looks like the statement of someone who wants to stop talking about the past he inherited but had no involvement in. Now he has thrown himself into it - that I agree with - he has thrown himself in there like a good Demon... But we are - with the help of a few in the media - are smelling blood that will lead to self defeating conclusions if we don't back off.

Ah, yes, the 'direct quote' of the notorious waffler. He spoke of the vibe of the club, that we are a part of, and we are a part of the club aren't we?, has affected some of the players. He did not say that we are the reason why we lose - only that we expect to, and that some players feel the same, and in the very next breath that I quoted and you didn't, he said that those players need to get over that mindset and that he is sick of talking about it.

The irony in all this is that he mentions us to convey that he gets the emails, the letters - and that he sympathises with what he has only had to deal with for 42 games. He waxes lyrical in an attempt to let people 'in' on what Dees fans have had to put up with and how painted on the failures of the past are. We have taken what he has said to the worst possible extreme of him pushing blame onto us for how bad we are. How can anyone think that a special coach like Roos, in his right mind, would think that? It wasn't eloquent, it wasn't concise, it wasn't proof read by rpfc - but it was a bloke who is better connecting to footy players than fanbases trying to say 'he gets it' when Dees fans tell him 'we have waited too long.' Cut the Demon some slack.

Yeah, clint bizkit linked to it the other thread. Don't agree, and forcing hollow apologies for things he didn't mean is a very Melbourne way to embarrass a coach and distract the club. But, yeah, [censored] it, we are a joke, why don't we continue bringing the laughs for others. Edit: There is that casual syndrome again...

He is not 'bang on' - Roos was not blaming us for our predicament - he waffled his way to a critique of the mindset of Dees fans and he happened to do it after a terrible loss and with regard to fans saying we would lose on the weekend. We are the ones attaching causation to his remarks. I think we should do something very un-Melbourne like and take the 'slight' on the chin and leave it. Asking for a public apology for calling us negative is more than excessive - it's ignoring the truth in his remarks.

That was an up and down trade and draft period - I remember being emotionally invested in Wines and then turning on a dime to support Toumpas - I think we all hope we can salvage a player there... But getting Hogan for ND3 (and a slide from ND13 to ND20) and Viney at ND26 are huge wins. Those two competitive blokes will drive the club for a decade. *Those that immediately thought "if we can keep Hogan" - that is the negative mindset that irritates Roos.

'Pretty bloody directly?' - he mentioned the word 'vibe' FCS, and that the 'vibe' of the place rubs off on the players. Sounds a great deal like The Scar argument to me. The fans expecting to lose are indicative of the 'vibe' of the place - still trying to find the place where he says we are the cause of the 'vibe.' And the rest of the quote is all about The Scar argument - as he references the fact that he is sick of talking about it: Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/negativity-comes-from-melbourne-fans-not-club-coach-paul-roos-20150825-gj7jt6.html#ixzz3jvIx52YD The only thing he is sick of talking about and we are sick of hearing about is The Scar argument. He may have said it all clumsily and vaguely but he doesn't think Ned from Carnegie riding in thinking we will lose is the reason we lose... That's the kind of nonsense you usually boorishly rail against.