Skuit

With Jetta as the veni, vidi, vici plaque dated to 2018 and scrawled in mosquito blood.

This is the most done deal on gut-feel in recent MFC history*. Well, maybe Hibberd as well. We're gonna pay what feels like slight overs in wage and trade, and then we're all going to forget about after Round One, 2018, just like Hibberd this year. *So why do I insistently keep checking this thread for any hint of an indicative rumour?

If you'd put your foot down over Fitzpatrick and/or Toumpas you could have celebrated a premiership by now.

We've demonstrated that we're a fair club when it comes to trading. We have some chips in our favour if we're the chosen destination, but there are of course some other factors in play. I think somewhere between a first and a third (or a commensurate player) is fair for Jake - muddied slightly by the suggestion of a disparity in 2017/18 draft quality and current/projected placings - but that's exactly what I expect the end result will be. I think a 1st and 2nd (2017) is about right, and that the Crows should be pretty happy with that. If it falls somewhere close to that either side I'll be happy also.

Judd's Granny is an anagram of Grand Nu Sydj'. Grand New Sigil? A flag could be considered a type of sigil, right? Bam! The Riddler has been Scooby-Doo'd and we're still three weeks shy of Trade Week.

Hey wait. How come you get to say [censored] and we can't?

Too true.

We'll call it a truce LH as I have no facts to offer either - but I do believe the evidence you provided actually points to what I'm saying.

I'm not really that type of person, but I can't fathom why someone in their early 20s would really care if they earned $800g per year over $700g? Seems much of a muchness to me, and I would certainly be looking at other factors (which would immediately exclude Essendon and North) . Yeah, yeah, footy-players have a short career and have to capitalise while they can . . . sounds mostly nonsense to me in this day and age and with those figures. You'd have to be pretty stupid to be a multi-millionaire before 25 and not invest wisely enough to grant yourself your own post-footy career. Anywho . . .

The last extension the brothers signed at the same time for the same length. Seems more than a coincidence. And Tomald's reasoning for the short extension shouldn't be taken at face-value - anyone with even minimal insight could discern the direction in which our club was finally heading. Just to be clear - the suggestion wasn't a knock on Oscar. He was drafted and can earn a contract extension in his own right. But with UFA looming, Tomald can make it pretty clear he wants to play with his brother into the future. We're not going to match an offer if he signals his intent to depart. Hence, if we're looking to jettison a tall defender to make room for Lever, Then there may be some extra-normal considerations that are coming into play - or at least Omac could get the express nod over Frost in what might otherwise be a coin-toss.

I'm not so much concerned that Omac wasn't drafted on his own merits but that it may cause some ructions if he was jettisoned in favour of Frost when they're both performing at about the same level. Didn't the Macs sign together at the same time for the same length or am I completely imaging that? Also, I consider Omac as Tmac/Lever-light, whereas Frost has other weapons. So although I prefer Frost over Omac generally, in the sense of bringing in Lever and keeping Frost ahead of Omac, t's more a matter of personnel balance and having a ultra-dynamic back-line.

Anyone get the sense that the Macdonald brothers have formed a bargaining bloc? And if so, can anyone recall anything similar ever happening in the past? Don't want to add to the can-of-worms, but if we got Lever I would prefer Frost over Omac. Sam adds a different dimension to the mix, and I think would form quite a formidable attacking ensemble with Hunt - while Frost, Nev and Hibberd reliably hold down the fort. But genuinely think that may not be a possibility if we want to keep Tomald on side.

A milkshake and slice of pie with an extra scoop of humility for me, please.

Becoming pretty handy at the quick snap from the pack.

Puns may be lowest form of humour but they can still outwit demonstoney-faced pedantry.

A lack of indigenous coaches trumps a lack of emotional intelligence. A win for colonial MFC over those cry-babies at Collingwood.

How many current and passed rockstars read/post on Demonland thread.

Well can you at least share what really happened to Kurt?

I'm not sure if I agree. Actually, I'm not sure what you're agreeing about.

SWYL - when it's you calling for a more circumspect and patient approach then I know my concerns must be well out of line.

Once again - 39 points up by the 10min-mark of the 2nd qtr. and a hard-fought win by 24. Not complaining or being negative but the root cause needs to be identified and the problem addressed. We kick just two more goals after going up by 40 and the opposition are effectively buried. Leak two goals by fiddling around or taking the foot off and suddenly it's a four-goal game with an opposition sniff and the problems compound. One day it could really hurt.

The nick-name 'Tomald' is revelation enough. It can even be used as a verb. Like when you Tomal the ball directly to the single opposition player standing in the middle of four of your own teammates.

I was coming at it from the presumption of Lever leaving Adelaide and choosing between us and a wealthier suitor. That if for example, Lever was offered 650,000 by Adelaide and then 700,000 by us and 800,000 by Collingwood he would be more likely to take Collingwood than if he was offered 500,000 by Adelaide and then 700,000 by us and 800,000 by Collingwood. In the psychological sense that if Adelaide are seriously low-balling, then any much greater offer is already considered a significant 'win', which leads to greater consideration of other factors. I'll see if I can dig up a paper.

This was my take a few weeks back after the last comments coming out of the Crows. In a completely unfounded amateur pop-psych marketing-principle sort of way, I get this vague hunch that a serious Adelaide low-ball may be somehow extra beneficial for us. As in: if you're offered a choice of two monetary deals that are already significantly better than your current position, you may be less inclined to simply grab the higher figure and instead better consider other factors. @Danelska? Any behavioural economists I can cite here? Kahnemann or someone?

Ben reminds me of an enthusiastic young Labrador with boundless energy and the equivalent trainability. If North tell him to stay, he'll stay.