Ron Burgundy

Beat me to it by 90 minutes.He's absolutely Matty Whelan mark II. Both picked around the same number in their respective drafts too.

I don't know about that. It's possible they'd dominate.

I wouldn't. We need more class, not less. A team full of Dan Nicholson's trying their guts out won't win a flag for anyone - including in the VFL. I rate Watts. Pleased we have him.

Toumpas and Trengove will be very good players. Neither were remotely controversial draft picks at the time - both were exceptionally highly rated. They should not been exited Neeld-style in some knee jerk way. To the contrary, they should be seen as part of our future, as I expect they are.

Perfect assessment rpfc - could not agree more.

Grimes is heart and soul MFC. You don't trade players like him without negative consequences. Surely people have learnt from the Junior debacle by now.

How we managed to bugger up so many draft picks over the years, and then manage to let someone like Stef Martin go for, essentially, nothing - well, it simply beggars belief. I absolutely loathed that game on Sunday. It was bloody appalling.

Our club has been poorly run. Over the period of time we're talking, it's not just bad luck. I'm hopeful that Roos, PJ et ors will now demonstrate that.

Joke.

Toumpas and Wines are both good footballers. Wines is obviously an absolute gun. But it's not as though Toumpas would've been picked at no.76 had we not selected him. The reality is, for a very long time (ie, at least the 8 years prior to Roos and PJ), we were a tres ordinaire club. Edit - added the words 'at least'.

Just to add another ouch - I'm fairly sure we had committed to Rory Sloane at pick 35, but then, when it came to it, we let him slide too. Barry Prendergast. The human wrecking ball. Read this and weep: http://www.theroar.com.au/2012/06/30/melbourne-demons-will-take-long-road-to-rebuilding/

And Kent. But it was only those two - absolutely pathetic.

I rate Watts. He wasn't the only player to have a bad day today. Very happy about Malceski if true.

As I understand it, the 'go home' factor loomed large for Pavlich at the end of each contractual period.

What about the list of senior players who have readily signed up to their respective clubs? The list is long.

And the Boak re-signing is hardly comparable. I was actually surprised anyone wanted to play at Port, even an amateur, after that season. It was a basket case. That Port is now in the position it is, is ironically due to the leadership of the likes of Boak. Hence, I probably wouldn't be using him as the poster boy for having one's club sweat on a required player's signature for the entire season. Port's situation differed greatly at the time, and Boak is clearly a leader who, despite Port's near insolvent/absolutely hopeless position, loved the club. But then again, when you're desperately clutching at straws, you have to use any name you can cling on to. Cloke?! Fair dinkum.

It beggar's belief that a senior player who has been at the club for a very long time now does not know what he wants to do at the end of the season, so close to the end of the season. It's either head in the sand stuff or he is fanatically following his player-manager's advice/script. Neither of which are particularly helpful to the club in the current circumstances. I do, however, think certain posters here are stupid. How, one might reasonably ask, have I reached this conclusion without ever having met them? Well, I have observed the way that they write, and appear to think, over a very long period of time. In much the same way as I am able to observe the way in which Frawley conducts himself in interviews and the like, ie, through his conduct and what he says. I don't otherwise know the bloke - but it doesn't mean I can't form a view, and that such a view is without any legitimacy.

$1M per season. Think of the players in that bandwidth. He's getting paid more than Nate Fyfe.

It's fair to say - one thing Frawley has seemingly been especially loyal/committed to this year is not letting the club know what he intends to do at the end of the season. I would've thought, by now, he pretty well knows whether he would like to leave or stay. And, if he doesn't, he really is not much more than a simple spud farmer.

Other than if it's money alone that's his driver, I reckon he'd be crazy to leave. Word has it, he wants a long contract, so it can't be a flag next year that he demands/expects. There's a lot of upside to the Dees over the period of a longer contract - surely success with his buddies has got to be more appealing than the concept of success with a group of guys he doesn't really even know yet. That is, if money's not his overriding driver ...

I seem to recall reading in Moore's pre-draft bio that he was hoping to get picked up by the Dees.

I have finally accepted it. For the whole of his career, I have massively overrated Sylvia. Vince is now my favourite player anyway.

This sucks. Seems that very similar representations were made by the club to Rory Sloan, only for him to be overlooked and then recruited by the Crows. What the hell was the club doing during those years?! No wonder we were a complete basket case before Roos/PJ. I wonder if we could get Stef Martin back ...

I reckon he's worth it. Particularly to this club in the current circumstances.I'm sick to death of seeing required players leave the club. I want it to become a sought after destination. So, I hope this is true. And that we somehow also manage to land Malceski. And Shiel.

Not me. I'm big into the loyalty piece. I also think clubs are obliged to be open and direct in their communication with players at all times, ie, to let players know where they stand. Fairness demands this. At the time the MFC decided not to extend James McDonald's contract, along with the utterly incompetent way in which the club handled it, I went absolutely crazy. I thought it was an appalling decision by the club and, relevantly, that it demonstrated a complete lack of understanding by the organisation as to how to develop genuine culture and leadership within the club/player group. Many here told me to get over it at the time: "Junior was past his best, was taking ages to recover from soft tissue injuries, we needed to give our 'talented' younger brigade more opportunities" etc. Over time though, when it became abundantly clear that the club was bereft of quality senior leaders, people started to change their tune to the Junior issue somewhat - ever so slightly. Now it seems to be virtually axiomatic that the club adopted completely the wrong approach to Junior. I wonder how many of those now arguing that Frawley can do whatever he wants (which, clearly, he can) were those who, at the time, failed to see the importance/intagibles of keeping a senior leader like Junior on the list for another couple of years. If someone could actually be bothered, it'd be interested to conduct an audit of certain posters' opinions on that issue now ...