rpfc

Right now I just want us to deal with what is in front of us: Casey from October to March and MCG/Bubbledome from March to September, intermittment use of either during off-peak times of the year. GOOTJ! Get Out Of The Junction. Mission nearly accomplished, and I will criticise the club for its shortsightedness if this Docklands thing ever gets off the ground. And I don't know Robert Doyle that well, but I do know motives. And they are rarely unselfish...

There are a number of delist threads running around, but... 1, 2, 18, 34, PSD1, and Spencer would be my 6. Robertson, Whelan, and Wheatley are gone. Batram, Johnson, McNamara, Dunn, Miller, and Buckley might be a chance. Buckley could be an option for the RL. McNamara is reportedly homesick. Trade week might change this with new homes for one or two of these players or Bell and Newton. Johnson, Buckley, and McNamara would be my bets at this stage.

Keep Picks one and two. No trading of prospects for a 28 year old. If Lake is the best OOC player in December then of course we take him.

No, you're right. It's only our money that we gave to the club to invest in the future of the club. Who knew the future could be 5 years? Better start living... About two-thirds down the page and... ...we paid for our part of MOPT. It was $800k at the start of last season, with an eye to $1.8m... The Red and Blue Foundation was setup to help the club invest in facilities that would help the club and its players improve. Will we raise the money for the Docklands adventure? Personally, I can't wait to give more money for temporary training bases, because I am a poor investor. Here is this same thread, except substitute Docklands for MOPT

It was our contribution to getting the bloody thing built. Rent has nothing to do with it, we are not going to be allowed to reside in there without paying rent. $1m. I can't believe the MFC heirarchy would be as blase about $1m as you seem to be. This Docklands nonsense is pie-in-the-sky rubbish from Doyle, let's get out of the Junction and into MOPT/Casey and then deal with the Docklands when/if it happens.

Do we have to have this borish argument over CAC again? He brought you such names as Morton, Grimes, Petterd, Frawley, Garland, Warnock, Bate, Davey, Maric, McLean, Sylvia, and Rivers. But he also picked a lot of crap too. Blah, blah, blah. Move on.

You think that is a good deal?! That's not including rent. That was the setup cost that we provided for a facility we look like spending 5 years in, and the FD only in winter. I believe it's the final mil of the debt we are trying to get rid of...

What nonsense. And why would he pick those two? Because they are black and there are more black people over in the west. Never mind the fact that both are from the NT. Drunken fool.

Oh, quit the hysterics. They were slated for operations to get them ready for our early start to preseason. The success of Sandringham should illustrate to the Casey supporters how seriously we take our 'reserves.' And anyone that has to have the screenname 'insider' - is no such thing. "No, I am sure am an insider Mr.rpfc. Honest. I have all the info and everything, but I just happen to think that 'Casey player availability' is worth breaking a trust and informing the public, over other obviously more important things I know about because of my insider-ness." Please.

You want to win a flag in 2013 - 2017? You have to play Jack Watts in 16-20 games in 2010. Instead of someone that would give you more on the day, someone like Miller. Now is that 'playing to win.' No it isn't. But it's what we have to do.

As many would agree, there are not too many better 'loose men' in the game than Rivers. But they are not as valuable as someone who can beat a CHF (Warnock), beat a FF (Frawley), and play tall and small while being a offensive threat (Garland). I feel we should leave our defence as is, but if we were to get an enticing offer for one of the four, I know which one I would move on.

Anyone you can get for pick 34 in this draft isn't worth worrying about. And pick 34 would get neither.

I am so excited about these players as they could possibly grow to being the 20th player picked in our team if we had injuries that kept some decent players out. Snoring here.

Kid's crap. Move on.

Riv is too slow to keep up with the CHBs that Warnock keeps up with. And Rivers can adequately play on the best or second best tall forwards but Frawley and Warnock are better, as Rivers is better at the loose man. It's no myth. If given the choice I would trade Rivers instead of Warnock because Warnock can play on the best or second best forward better than Rivers.

So we spent a million bucks for 5 years? This nonsense has to stop, and hopefully someone can get our cheque back.

I love Jared Rivers. But, I love the club more. I wouldn't trade him for anything that another club is willing to give but I would trade him before Warnock, Frawley, and Garland. Warnock and Frawley are ahead of Rivers because they can hold down CHB and FB respectively, Jared cannot. His value is being that loose man peeling off and killing contests, and he does that better than most, but it is a trait that can be taught as I recall Clint Bizzell was also fantastic at it. One just needs a decent footy IQ and enormous amounts of courage. Garland is quicker, more agile, a better kick and more versatile than Jared. Jared's value to us is higher than other clubs are willing to give, but if a club gave us something silly for one of our backman, Jared would be the one I would move on. But I wouldn't shop any of them around as our backline is in very good shape and I wouldn't tinker with it.

Here is some realism on what happens during trade week... (tumbleweeds)

PSD1 is only valuable in that it could land an OOC star for nothing. It rarely eventuates, but it is a possiblity however slight. The difficulty isn't putting up the money, we have money and space in the cap, it is making a 'back-to-back wooden spooner' look attractive to a young up-and-coming star that wants more money than he deserves. Went hard for Warnock and missed last year, but you never know...

I sincerely hope that much power is not in the hands of the players. If a player refuses he will stay at a club that wanted to get rid of him. He is untradeable. Congratulations you have won you semantical argument. The only problem is I was operating on the idea that the inherent rules of a trade were being met; there is an interested club, and the player agreed to go. RR certainly didn't need to be prompted to know these rules of the argument. I will state it again - there is no player on our list that cannot be traded. Provided there is an interested club and he agrees. I hope I don't have to provide that rider everytime...

You have clarified nothing. A player can be convinced to go rather than stay at a club that tried to trade them. Look, I don't want to get into some semantical or metaphysical argument that goes nowhere but players are the assets of the club and they can be 'sold' at the club's will. No player cannot be moved on. As for that last part, I have no idea what you are talking about.

You are struggling with your language here. Given the right deal, anyone on our list could be traded. Nothing you have said has broken that tenet. And trade being boring is neither here-nor-there. Everyone can be moved on, no-one ever is, but any player on our list has their value. No-one is priceless.

That sounds like a guess to me. Someone find out.

Our backline is settled and our best 'line.' Martin can be a very good and very versatile back-up ruckman for a decade. I think it was an inspired decision that will see Martin get better and better in the coming years.

Considering it was my 'throwaway line' I guess I will defend it. Hawthorn didn't think Croad was 'tradeable' until some idiot offered them Pick 1 and they said "[censored] off, Trent." I never suggested everyone is on the table, but if someone comes with an irresistible offer, there is not a player on our list we wouldn't trade.