rpfc

I would agree with you - except for the fact that we have quotation marks around Blucher's (Tom's Manager) comments. He is one of the three parties as Tom's representative, and he went on record to say both offers have been received in the past fortnight, Harrington has been informed and Tom will decide at the end of the season. This isn't rumour.

Jeez, haven't you walked back your certainty of him leaving... My position, stated earlier in this thread is: 1. Tom hadn't signed anything. 2. We are in much better shape as a club and we will keep our talent. If he decides to go, it will be a massive blow to the club and won't reflect well on either party. But I have never thought that was the likely scenario. Because why would anyone want to leave Serenity?

You really want to do this? With me? Ok. It's NAIVE for starters. And I could do the umlaut if I knew how to do them on here. And it is supercilious with one 'l'... Unless you are in to the Urban dictionary, which I doubt. Comprehension. Jeez... I may be arrogant but I can have a two and fro with people - a skill you lack. You must physically reel when you see someone reply to one of your posts... Tom has done what he said he had done - nothing. He hadn't signed anything when the jounos believed the sweet nothings in their ears. He said he would wait toill the end of the season, and now that he has both contracts held by his management he has two months to weigh up what he wants to do. The MFC should be confident of keeping their man.

Oh, I'm arrogant alright. But I don't pity you, RR... And what do you believe will happen to these journos who have claimed a done deal when now the most veracious story (because it actually has quotes from one of the three parties) I have read says that the deals are there - to be sorted out in two months time? Stevens, Barrett, Schwarz and their ilk will blame or explain away or not bother, because nothing will happen to them. And they will back on the horse in a fortnight.

False pity is not very becoming, RR... I mean, what the hell kind of a sentiment is that? I'll be fine. I feel for those that don't think this club can keep an kid or think he is a deceitful liar based on rumour.

These are on record quotes from his management. Not the "some people say" nonsense. My "sources" have said crap. This is actual news. Anyone who honestly believes they can understand this paragraph is very naive...

Again, no it doesn't. We evidently gave our $3m over 5 deal to his management. Most likely as a 'this is the best we can do under the cap and still keep our wage structure. The GWS have given their offer at the behest of Tom's management. Tom decides in Sept. Nothing more, nothing less. Oh, and your journo friends were consistently wrong and nothing will happen to them. That too.

No he doesn't. He said he would wait. A great many people didn't believe him and questioned his integrity - his management now has the two deals apparently. Nothing will change between now and September. He can play these last 8 games and then make the biggest decision of his life. And I, may I add, am getting pretty confident.

And watch as nothing happens to these journos for being wrong, and they soon go back to 'making the news' in a couple of weeks.

And this rumour is 'the right' rumour...

He is the focus because the footy media is hanging off every rumour with equal veracity. How do they not see their own stupidity when they move between contradictory rumour to contradictory rumour? First Tom had signed, then he had tried to get out of a non-binding HoA, then he was 98% confirmed to have signed, then he hadn't signed anything but the offers had been tabled. The footy media move between them without the slightest self-awareness over what they said last week...

You get less attention with "I've heard noises," and how can someone be 98% or 99.5% sure? Either they are certain or they are not. You can't be 98% pregnant. How do journos lose credibility? They don't. The players criticise their ability to saw what they want but that is it. TV and radio stations like ratings and controversy. How do we know that? If there are no repercussions and you think someone is genuine - you believe them and repeat what they say. And if journos can say what they like, sources don't have to worry. My point is that journos get burnt. And nothing happens. He is still "the best footy journo in town" and he is talks with Gubby Allan. Your guess? I couldn't disagree more with that guess. Utterly unfollowable. Scully is a liar. Scully told the club the awful truth. The club won't do anything about it, except leak the info? If we knew we would be bringing this to a head in an instant. Allan is the architect of this nonsense. It doesn't mean that he is the voice on the other end of the Stevens/Schwarz phone calls. These rumours are coming from north of the border - not the Demons. And not Tom. And journos love being the news when they give 'the news.' You are taking it at their word, and I am taking Tom at his.

Look at the date of the posts.

This is where you are showing your naivete when it comes to footy 'journalism.' There are no repercussions for journalists getting things wrong. There are no repercussions for their sources. These guys go to the same well. Sheahan is friends with Allan - Allan burnt him with Buckley lies, as Mike has admitted. Who do you think Sheahan is asking for information from? He can't choose who the Football Director is at GWS - he has gone back to the Allan well. Where do people think all these rumours come from? And do you really believe, RR, that the journos give a crap that Allan has a reputation? Some of them don't even know about the business with Buckley and the unethical bullsh!t he engaged in.

? I don't think you read my post correctly. And Morton's first two years were promising. The last two have been disappointing. And I don't know what the highlighted means - what was Jamar's strength when we all wondered why we kept him ahead of Jolly? His height? His worth to us at the trade table is miniscule, we will be better off attempting to resureet his career at the Dees.

You are getting rid of players for the sake of getting rid of players?! Strauss and Gysberts had 40 (albeit wayward) touches between them. Garland had a 1 tackle, I contested possession game if you want to make a statement from the last round. Moloney was down on output, Sylvia was ineffectual, Green has been, well, the less said the better... Maybe - if someone HAS to be dropped after that performance against a team outside the eight (which of course we are now...)... OUT: Bennell, Garland, Sylvia, Green and Moloney the sub. Now that is a statement!

Fine. My point is that Tom will get his chance to join "those who turned down big money offers to go to GWS" in Sept/Oct when he will discuss his contract. Having a go at Tom for not doing as Dustin and Matthew have done is, again, damning him in the hypothetical.

Strauss is resurrecting his career and Gysberts is a thin Pendlebury. And Blease has played a qtr and a bit. Don't see why really.

Surely you would give the trade bait a chance at redemption? Might lift his trade value...

Yes. You're right. Disregard my earlier post. In real terms - if you are 26 and not in the top 10 earners you can go where you like. If you are 24 and not in the top 10 earners you are looking at the draft if you are unhappy with your money.

I guess Matthew and his management didn't have a "I will wait until the end of the year" mandate for contract discussion and renewal. Comparisons are simple, getting them relevant isn't.

I agree. However, I believe that the 8+ and 10+ apply for those in the top 25% 'pay bracket' - for those outside the top 25% 'pay bracket,' they are fair game if they are out of contract.

If only it were as simple as that...

I obviously agree with Nutbean. I mean, I hardly think my argument can be dismissed as easily as that. ADC tried that months ago and it didn't hold water. I trust our impressive 19 year old before I trust rumour. That doesn't mean he will stay - it just takes him at his word that he hasn't had dealings with GWS and Gubby Allan is blowing smoke (I guess that's where the 'fire' is coming from...). Hardly head in the sand stuff...

I didn't compare any one player to another. I compared the constant criticism of a player's softness - Goddard and Watts. I compared the time it took for a player to wake up and take their finger out - Sylvia. I compared the time we gave a player to reach an acceptable standard - Jamar. I compared the a player with a slight frame who has become a very good player - Garland. It isn't as simple as a direct comparison to another player - Cale has a lot of work to do to be a solid AFL player. What I am saying is that we have had patience with talented players before and we will again - whether we have it with Cale I don't know. But the benefits of letting him continue at the club may outweigh the third round pick we would get for him...