Ron Burgundy

For a start, the statement to which you refer was prefaced with my earlier statement: "my thoughts are based on the following facts and stated remarks". I have seen and heard it stated numerous times that the MFC offered Scully $3M over 5 years. I also regard it as a fact that Tom Scully has not yet agreed to terms with the MFC beyond 2011. This was one of the facts to which I referred under my earlier statement, which conveniently (or perhaps mistakenly) you have overlooked. I also stated that I did not regard "any of the above points (being facts or stated remarks) as being particularly contentious observations". I don't believe they are. If you ultimately disagree with the conclusions I have taken away from those facts or stated remarks, then fair enough. Those conclusions are contentious and perhaps wholly wrong. But to focus on this as the contentious point in my post strikes me as quite misguided. In this regard, if you want to read further on what is a fact and what is not, I refer you to Rene Descartes' Principles of Philosophy (1644), and in particular part 1 of it in which he makes the statement, "Cogito ergo sum". In short, we could do circle work in this territory for literally ages and still get nowhere.

Apologies - typo. I would've thought, a wholly obvious typo too (given that everyone knows he was offered $3M over 5 years by the MFC). Wood from the trees? FFS get a grip?!

IMO we need to be calm right now. A 186 point belting, followed by sacking the coach, then sacking the football operations manager, then sacking the CEO, then sacking the captain, would be amateurish in the extreme. The current administration has done more from this club, off-field, than any other that I can remember. Let's not forget where we were a few years ago. We ALL need to get behind the club right now. Continue to turn up to the next 5 games, turn up to the debt demolition function, make positive statements to your non-MFC mates etc - in short, continue to show support. This is as much a test of the supporter base, as it is of the administration. Let's not lose sight of that.

I don't know what's fact and what's fiction, but I know that Scully: 1. is clearly stringing out his negotiation to the detriment of the club; 2. is only 20 years old, and should have respect for the fact that he's a young player in a club that also has obligations to other players, sponsors and supporters; and 3. if in GWS stripes next year, should result in us getting two first rounders and a saving a fair clip under the salary cap (which I would like to see the Dees' spend on our loyal, equally talented juniors (eg, Trengove, Watts and McKenzie, and potentially also some hard arsed gun from another club). I also hope the MFC don't lose Sylvia because of this saga. I don't know Schwab - but, let's not forget, we were in deep trouble prior to his appointment, and I think he's clearly had a hand in turning it around. If this article's true, it disappoints me. For a start, I think Schwab deserves more respect that being offered up as a sacrificial lamb to try and convince some kid to stay at the club. It seems desperate and entirely unprofessional.

Like all of you, I've been giving this issue a lot of thought since the weekend. Apologies for the length of this post - obviously feel free not to read it! For some reason, it led me to think specifically about Scully and Sylvia, and the way in which the club has handled their contracts. There are some curious aspects to this. My thoughts are based on the following facts and stated remarks. - Scully has been offered $3 million per year over 5 years to stay at the Demons. In terms of the length of the contract and the amount of it, it is the biggest contract I can recall ever being offered to an MFC player. He is only 20. His performances don't justify anything near those contractual terms, absent some ridiculous offer from GWS. Even then, the amounts still don't stack up. - Scully is said to be very unhappy with the way Cameron Schwab has handled his situation. On the face of it, this doesn't make sense. All I have ever heard from Cameron Schwab are very positive statements about Scully. The MFC has also offered him an exceptional deal, even though Scully has said he doesn't want to discuss terms until the season's end. - Sylvia is getting restless. He is clearly one of our best players and his whole career has been spent at the Demons. From all the reports I have ever heard, Sylvia wants to play his whole career at the club. He is now said to be looking at other options. On the face of it, a bad sign from a senior, required MFC player. In short, not a player we can afford to lose - and everyone knows that. - I recently heard Cameron Schwab say, 'don't worry about Col - he'll be at the Dees next year, and he'll be paid very well'. He said this in a way that gave me confidence. On the face of it, a gulf seems to exist between what the club thinks and what Sylvia thinks about the situation. - Cameron Schwab has been a very committed Melbourne man in recent years. It seems clear that (i) he loves the club; (ii) he does not tolerate personnel who do not share the Jimmy Stynes-led "love of club" ethos; and (iii) he has very competently addressed our off-field issues in recent years (debt, facilities, branding, MCC relationship etc) and we are now in an infinitely better position, off-field at least. - It seems also that, even though Schwab is not in the football department, he has been actively engaging in its affairs. I do not regard any of the above points as being particularly contentious observations. So what do the above points mean? Potentially nothing, but I have taken away the following: 1. The Scully issue has been an enormous headache for this club this year. Despite what some of you believe, the way in which Scully and his management have handled his next contract has clearly placed enormous pressure on the club, our players, our coaches and our management. This is so, even if he ultimately agrees to stay at the MFC. Schwab realises this. 2. Sylvia and some of the other players are annoyed that they seem to be getting a raw deal relative to the new kid on the block who hasn't yet done much. They are also annoyed by the mishandling of some of the senior players previously. I suspect that, despite the current manoeuvrings with Sylvia, Schwab realises this. 3. Scully stated that he doesn't wish to discuss terms until the end of the season. But here's the rub, the MFC, through landing its massive offer on young Tom's (or Velocity's) desk, has created big problems for Tom. For a start, his unwillingness to accept the offer seems ungrateful and disrespectful, and is potentially also disrupting the other player's negotiations with the club. Schwab realises this. 4. Schwab knew in advance of making the offer to Scully that he wouldn't/couldn't accept that offer at that point in time. Nonetheless, the MFC still made it. It is possible this offer was made: (i) because the club wished to ensure supporters were on its side in the circumstances and also to attempt to kill any suggestion that the MFC wasn't trying to retain its key players; and (ii) to force GWS's hand and to then start the dialogue with the AFL about compensation for losing Scully (which then happened). Schwab may have planned this. 5. Schwab knows how important Sylvia is to this club and doesn't wish to lose him. I'm not so sure Schwab shares that view of Scully (not showing enough "love of club" characteristics), even though the contract negotiations to date suggest completely the opposite view. Hence, I have concluded that: A. Some of these moves may be part of a bigger strategy designed at: (i) retaining key players eg, Sylvia; and (ii) getting appropriate compensation for a young player who doesn't appear sufficiently committed to the club, or B. Absent the above conclusion, and given that the above facts appear inconsistent and do not otherwise make much sense - it could be that we're absolutely out of control as a club (which is at odds with the competence this administration has displayed in every off-field respect over the past few years). Hope it's not the latter. Despite what the media would have us believe, I just don't think it is.

Would be a disaster to let Sylvia go.

Absolute no brainer bringing Junior back to the club IMO. I've said it many times before (and been told to get over it), but the way in which the MFC handled Junior's 'retirement' was an absolute disaster - and the effects of it are still playing out. Ironically, despite the players all apparently being behind Dean Bailey, I think Junior may now actually entertain roles back at the MFC given that Bailey is no longer at the club. Apparently Junior thought he was treated very badly by Dean Bailey, something which I think Bailey has since acknowledged (and apologised for). We need the stability and leadership Junior would bring to the place at the moment.

Ironic really - particularly given that Bruce and Yze were club leaders for much of the past decade, and their softness/selfishness respectively probably contributed to people's perceptions of the MFC's 'soft club culture' more than any suggestion that we tanked. If Yze posted that comment, I find it absolutely pathetic. Junior and Neita aside, many of our senior leaders over the past decade were selfish front runners who directly contributed to people thinking we have a soft, losing culture. Thankfully we have players like Beamer (and the younger brigade) now coming through.

Nice post. Absolutely share your sentiments.

Absolute quality. It's a real pity it didn't work out for him at the MFC. Bailey was without doubt a selfless coach and, despite Saturday's debacle, he has set us up well for the future. Clearly a man of enormous integrity. I wish him all the best for the future.

Totally agree with everything you have stated here.

I wouldn't be surprised if GWS were strongly considering him. Sheedy was/is a big fan of him, and they will need some good, senior leaders. He probably also has a good relationship with number 31.

Good post.

Agree. Add Dunn to the list too - he tried his heart out all day.

I agree.

None of them will leave their clubs to join us. Ironically, Sewell wanted to come to the Dees several years ago in a proposed transfer with Ryan Ferguson. Great decision that one.

In fairness, the margin should have been five points less. Colin Garland touched the footy as it went through the sticks - I think the margin was about 150 at that stage. Could've been a turning point. After all, momentum's everything in the modern game.

I think James McDonald's axing revealed a lot about our culture and perhaps also Bailey's flaws as a coach. I am not seeking to suggest that the reason we got beaten by a simply seismic margin today was due to McDonald's 'retirement' - rather I am suggesting that the issues surrounding the handling of that issue probably reveal much about our weaknesses in other areas as well. Slicing your best clubman, particularly in the way Bailey carried it out, simply cannot have a positive impact on the other players. For a start, it suggests that loyalty is a one way street - this is not the way a top club operates. Virtually all of our other senior players that have retired in recent years seem to have an axe to grind with Bailey/the club. This is not a good sign - and Junior's axing seemed to highlight this more than any other. Junior aside, I am not suggesting any of those players should still be on the list - I am merely highlighting that Bailey seems to have a communication and man-management issue with the very players he needs to assist him in developing a sustainable, winning culture. Ultimately this has to impact on the team's on-field performance. It's not all about white boards IMO - a team game requires really effective senior players who influence the culture, both on and off the field. In my observation, Bailey seems to focus too much on stats and the technical aspects, and too little on the intangibles, such as the effect certain players can have on the playing group and the development of a good club culture (eg, James McDonald). It perhaps also suggests that Bailey lacks judgement. In this regard, Bailey often appears doggedly determined to carry out a strategy, even in circumstances where the landscape has changed and that strategy may no longer be appropriate. One sees it on match day, one sees it in our game plan and, unfortunately, it seems to come out in the way he has managed some of our more senior players. I would not be surprised if this, rather than the dough, is ultimately very influential in Scully's decision as to whether he stays or leaves. Time will tell. I think more will emerge on this very point by October/November this year.

I've said it before (and been howled down), but the handling of James McDonald's 'retirement' last year was an absolute disaster for this club. In my opinion the effects of it are still evident. I didn't expect to win today, but bloody hell - I am absolutely numb having watched that game. And I thought last week was bad. It is now abundantly clear - we are a mile off the top teams. We need to get Malthouse asap. Desperately.

I agree. Sylvia is an absolute MUST re-sign priority. IMO much more than Scully (where at least we'll get some really good compensation in return). Over the next few years, assuming we actually start making the finals (hard to imagine after yesterday), Sylvia is exactly the type of player we will need. He is definitely worth $450K a year too (if the report is true) - I'd rather lock him away for five years on $450K per year rather than Scully for 5 years on $600K per year.

I had tears watching him win the yellow jacket and then speaking after the time trial - he is just a total legend.

Robbie, I suspect we're on the same page here - but I don't think the issue is simply as black and white of 'stay or go'. I would like him to stay, but only on the basis that: - he doesn't rip so much dough out of our cap that we compromise our future, resulting in the loss of other required players as a direct consequence of his contract terms, eg, Sylvia; and - he puts an end to this pathetic saga immediately and abandons his selfish desire to 'sign in his own time', respects the club and the damage this saga is doing to it (which is firmly in his control), and signs now. Given that I doubt that either of the above will occur, I am leaning to wanting him to tell the the MFC that he intends to accept the GWS offer and allow the Dees to re-sign our other important players (principally Sylvia) and to secure two first round draft picks as compensation. I suspect we picked the wrong horse in Scully. But, if that ultimately proves to be the case, at least we did so in good faith. The potential lessons learnt - interrogate what actually motivates these kids to want to play AFL football. There must be a massive 'team component' to their motivation. IMO it beggars belief that anyone (let alone a 20 year old without any tertiary qualifications) would wilfully not want to know the terms of a proposed employment offer of, say, $5-6 million over 5 years. That in itself smells very bad to me. Clearly I'm not the only one holding that view.

The MFC should perhaps consider withdrawing Scully's offer and spending it on Jack Trengove ($3M over 5 years). He's more deserving IMO. The MFC should then hunt two first round compensation picks with a ferocity not ever witnessed before.

You could be right hardtack. BUT - remember how we got completely ripped off the year before. We could've/should've got picks 1 & 2, yet instead got pick 4, as a result of the infamous Carltank game.

I agree. Disciplined list management is required, now more than ever. This whole saga leaves a dirty taste - it's just a real pity. I was absolutely stoked when we secured picks 1 & 2 (and 11 & 18) - I hadn't contemplated at the time that the contract extensions of any of those players would be such a total and drawn out pain in the @ss. I hope we know sooner rather than later what Scully intends to do, as I genuinely fear some of the other contract negotiations may hit the wall in October. For instance, I really don't want to see brinkmanship being applied in the context of Sylvia's contract talks just prior to trade week. And, rest assured, there will be other clubs circling our number 12.