Nasher

All the best coaches were new coaches once. I'd rather take a shot at the next great coach - with all the risks that includes - than take on proven middle of the road coaches like Voss or Ratten. These names are the only really viable alternative to the new coaches; the best in the business don't tend to move around a lot. I know you're afraid of getting another Neeld. We all are. We could get another Neeld, but we could also get another Ken Hinkley, or another Neale Daniher. I'm pretty comfortable with that. Unless we get really lucky and Alastair Clarkson feels like a change of scenery, it's a new coach for me.

What would you offer to Adelaide? Conversely, what would you accept if the situation were reversed? Say it was Nathan Jones on the table (and look past "nup, not on the table" for the sake of interesting hypotheticals). During the Bailey years I knew someone who worked at a club and participated in trade week. He said that all the clubs had a different approach to trading: some like Essendon would do its best to offer ridiculous trades to try and screw you and ultimately do very few trades because other clubs would stop wasting their time. Other clubs like Sydney under Roos would work out what they wanted and offer up a fair price straight away and the deals would get done quickly with no fuss. They had a model of being easy to do business with, and had a lot of success at the trade table a result. I want us to focus less on being tight and focus on getting the job done. Don't try and get Dangerfield cheaply, acknowledge that he is an asset and will be expensive, offer accordingly and get the job done. Don't forget that in this trade it is Adelaide taking all the risk, given they are loading up on draft picks. We of all clubs should be aware of how horribly that can go wrong.

I think history shows that there's a reasonable chance that you can risk getting a modest player at 2 or 3 and that it's not that much bigger a risk at 9. As supporters we greatly overestimate the value of draft picks IMO.

Is it massive overs? It's two maybe guns (2 and 3) for a known gun and a maybe gun (Dangerfield and 9). Toumpas is an unknown quantity - call him another maybe gun, to help balance out the risk on Adelaide's part. Not sure if I'd do the trade, but I think I would. I'd at least give pause if I was on either side of the trade. Edit: beaten to it by sweet Dee!

I didn't get the impression that his running was anywhere near the level of Matt Jones. That is *the* reason #45 gets a game, and why he'll keep getting a game for a while yet. On Clisby - I thought he looked okay last year, so it's disappointing that he didn't come on. No big deal though, he was a minimal risk venture.

Agree - fell away towards the end, but was consistently outstanding before that. The polling in the B&F agreed. I've never had such a complete and thorough reversal of opinion of a player in all my life supporting this team. Let's hope he's able to continue - in my mind he's gone from one of the worst players ever to play 100 games for the MFC to setting on the path to be a well respected 200 game player. Well done Dunny.

Gosh, that was an horrendous spelling effort by me there. *Gives self an uppercut*

It could be that Neeld exerted his power over Todd, or it could be that Todd rated Toumpas the better player, like everyone else in the industry who counts. Just putting it out there. Not sure what I'm even doing in this lounge anyway. I hate this topic and I hate the flagellators who keep bringing it up.

I think we just need to stop with the self-flagellation. I don't understand why Melbourne supporters want to inflict mental anguish on themselves by reviewing this over and over and over.

It was definitely Robinson. http://www.foxsportspulse.com/assoc_page.cgi?c=1-118-0-0-0&sID=60264&articleID=9389642&news_task=DETAIL

An upgrade on what we have is what we're after, isn't it? Incremental improvement - as much as I'd love for Luke Hodge to fall on our lap, I suspect slow improvement is what we can expect trades until we can home-brew our own star off half back.

A minor pick upgrade is better than nothing I'd have thought. That's about the limit of his worth though.

Whenever I am tempted to dismiss a running defender out of hand, I remind myself that Dean Terlich spent a considerable amount of time playing that role for us this year.

Surely you can see this difference between being allowed to discuss, or even criticise religion, and saying it is okay to religiously vilify an individual. One is fine, the other is reprehensible.

DA, I find encouraging religious vilification just as offensive as practicing it, hence the ban. We (forum admin) generally support people's right to an opinion, however we also believe that this is an important social issue, and saying "religion is free game", i.e. you are welcome to abuse people as much as you like about their religion, is not a message we will support, or find acceptable in any way.

He has his weaknesses, but this is just silly. No player who plays like that plays 200 AFL games.

Pointless stat: if he comes across, his first game for us would be his 200th AFL game. He's experienced, still relatively young, has hardly missed a game in the last 5 seasons, and is exactly the type of player we need as described by Scoop above.

Thought you were talking about Trengove initially!On Toumpas - players in general are more likely to get homesick when injured and things are going badly. I think he would get through it in time. He's clearly a nice kid and I'm still confident he'll be a good player. If we traded him I'd be genuinely sorry to see him go - but I'd get over it pretty quickly if it ended with us landing Dangerfield.

I reckon the critics far outweigh the supporters P_Man.

I think many have already made up their mind and won't change it no matter what happens, to be honest.

The coach is a fan. Think you're all going to be disappointed on the trade front. I won't be though. I'm looking forward to Jack taking another step next year.

On general society, you're spot on - mature community standards set what is acceptable. On Demonland, which is not a Democracy, standards are set by the admin, and h_h's post fell well below the bar.

Well said. I don't normally "quote for truth" but I think your post deserves to be repeated.

Deplorable comment. Have two weeks off. Religious vilification is no more "fair game" than racial vilification. Anyone else who wants to suggest it is can join h_h on the ban list.

Jury out after one season? Get. Out.