rpfc

Not too early. Bate, Dunn, Warnock to go. Maric maybe. Rookies released except for Nicho and Evans. Sylvia and Morton to be re-signed but if they don't agree, traded for ready made players. Scully - we will see. Bennell, Batram, and Davey kept.

It's not just about kids. I would bring in a 30 year old pro for a couple of years if the price was right and he was an upgrade on our curent senior players, especially in terms of leadership. Fevola is a child upstairs. He would be a burden for our young leaders to handle.

I think the kids are great. They need to take over, however. We talk about being brave and taking initiative (another poster thinks that means we should draft Fevola...i don't think that is the best way) We should have the Leadership Group made up of the U/24 brigade with every other player on the list told that they may be a part of the future but that the future will be driven by the kids who will now lead them. If they arc up - calm them down. If you can't do that - let them go. Our 'senior' players have a level of responsibility and influence at the club that the haven't earned and don't deserve.

I'm all for taking risks. I'm all for bringing in older heads (as our senior players are rubbish). But I want to win a flag. Fevola doesn't bring that.

Just good to have something to work with. As a leader of a team that has moved our 15 goal losses to 8 goal losses, it makes a huge difference to the team dynamics and how the players see the future.

We ahve a massive issue with on-field leadership and people on here want to, understandably make Trengove captain with JW, JM, JF as understudies. How do we rationalise the decision to lump those kids with the massive headache that is Brendan Fevola. I would do it for a flag. I would. He isn't the difference between us and a flag, and he will push it back by taking the development space of a kid who might be in that flag team. Tell Mahoney, or get someone else, to build a functioning forward line around Howe, Watts, Jurrah, Jamar/Martin, Cook, Wonaeamirri, and Petterd. By all means look for someone to be a FF from another club or state leagues - but if they aren't helping us to win a flag, they are useless to us.

Well said. We have bigger things to think about than Tom's contract, and that has a timeframe to be resolved, and one of two known eventualities ie. he will go and we get the two picks on offer, or he stays at around the reported $3m over 5. The question of the restructure of the FD is the issue that has taken my attention... Will CC stay? Will our assistants be shown the door? Will Todd throw his hat in? Is Malthouse interested? My inklings? Yes, Yes, No, and Yes. But this is for another thread...

I guess it's time to jump the gun...

They're our leaders every week from what I can see...

Yeah... I know... I am saying that that Act should be repealed. Marriage © is a religious construct that has been co-opted by early governments who favoured said religion. I am not religious at all but I happen to respect belief quite a bit and if those religions do not wish to include people for whatever reason - they are free to do so. Civil unions with legal rights for all - including gays. And marriage is a private thing - between a person(s) and their church.

Well, you mustn't be looking too closely... You're thinking of Jamie Bennell.

It isn't just form. He isn't a natural leader, and I don't want him leading other natural leaders just because those other leaders are 8 years younger than him.

If you think our problems onfield start and end with Dean Bailey you are kidding yourself. We have the worst set of leaders in the league.

I would say that having a look at CC and a possible replacement for him would be the best way to go. The idea of having a former Dees player as footy director is because they have to be elected to the board (outside of Garry doing Jimmy a favour by stepping into the breach). Having a Leoncelli or a Healy or any former player gives the board a idea of what is going on from a loyal subject who knows a bit about footy. I really don't think it would be a good idea to put an non-Demon in a role such as that - especially when it requires being on the board. Go and find an upgrade on Connolly. But the Footy Director should be a Healy or an Ingerson or someone of that ilk.

Not a great piece. It's going to hurt and some players won't like it - but we have got to move past Brad as a leader. I feel for the bloke, I do. But the right decision is sometimes a painful one.

Different roles to what you are thinking fellas. The Footy Manager - Connolly - is the day to day manager of the footy dept. The Footy Director is a board member who has the ear of all areas of the footy dept and admin. And all personnel in the footy dept is encouraged to chat with the Footy Director as that person is the best vehicle for the board to know what is going on at the club. So that they can step in, be proactive, and let things fester the way the evidently did.

I don't see how gays can claim a right to marriage. It is a religious construct - bound to the rules of said religion(s). However, I therefore don't think the 'state' should give anyone a right to 'marriage.' The state should stay out of it and only give rights to people for legal reasons - they can call it whatever they like - a 'civil union' a 'legally recognised partnership' whatever. So one (namely two...) could have a union (the state cares only about that) and a marriage (their church cares about that) and that is it. The US ideal of separation between the church and state works both ways. I understand this only solves one aspect of the argument here but there it is.

Chicken and the egg. You have a clear agenda. You have some great points. You are never around to discuss anything unless it is about the previous board, or problems with the current board. That's rich coming from a poster whose relevance revolves around two topics. Which makes me wonder why you are even posting in a thread such as this? Are you ingratiating yourself? We are a friendly bunch of people - why even BB59, who has had some disagreements with me in the past, thinks of rpfc as a lifelong friend and confidant.

You misread my post. I was implying that I have disagreed with you in the past without the need to PM you. I was also intimating that every society, of which Land is a microcosm, will have some, let's say, aggressive individuals who feel the need to bully/harass those that disagree with them. And if it gets to a point that is uncomfortable - you can block them from 'PMing' you.

You have also given a few PMs on your occasional visits... And you would have to be a bit more relevant and prolific to be maligned on this site...

It is a donation, WYL. We do it well. But it is still a donation.

Yeah, I have a similar sentiment. The issues have been laid bare. We can fix them before they become the difference between winning a flag and not... Possibly like the Saints? Just throwing that out there...

I'm torn on this. If we did bite the bullet and take him would it have made such a huge difference - I'm not entirely sure he would even be captain. Green would still have expected it for tenure reasons (I know how sickening that sounds but the MFC culture consistently rewards the easiest to reward, the easiest to justify, and those that feel entitled). Just look at our former 'stars' White, Yze, and Robertson. They are still bitter over the decision to cut a year off of their careers as they felt entitled to that extra year - soaking up a $1m between them as we sit in the bottom four... We have a bad culture... Hopefully the new coach, Viney, new assistants, one senior professional from another club, and Watts, Trengove, Scully, McKenzie, Frawley, and Grimes can do something about it. Sorry, tangent.

Well if there is no smoking gun in what he said - why are you calling me insane for not being persuaded by it? Libel? An earlier point that you made was that if the journos were wrong then Scully would sue them - ipso facto - him not sueing them means they are telling the truth. Now they haven't yet met the criteria to be sued? And they are sitting on information? When they all ran the 'he hasn't signed yet, but was given the contracts recently' I felt that that was vindication of what Tom said. You blew it off as smoke and mirrors... You seem to lack the ability of self-reflection. I stay on these threads because I don't like MFC players being unfairly called liars and traitors. But that is where it stops - I will not reply to another RR post on the Saga; it is pointless for all involved.

You hadn't even seen the Silvagni interview and only heard of it here a couple of days ago and it is the smoking gun? Where are the news articles from your beloved and oh-so-right journos liberating us with the truth by relaying Silvagni's words?