Nasher

Actually I went to fix it on the back of constant nagging from Rogue and found someone had already done it. One of the other server guys I reckon (silent [and involuntary] partners of Demonland).

Where's the fun in that? It's much more fun to whip ourselves in to an hysterical frenzy without having any facts at all at hand other than a few good rumours here and there. Demonland in the last 24 hours has reminded me of 'Lemmings' a bit. Everyone just following each other off the same cliff to their deaths. We need one of those 'blocker' dudes that stand there with their arms out shaking their heads.

The reason I mentioned McDonald is that if there was that big an issue, McDonald could've easily said "screw this, I can't work here anymore, I'm retiring". He wouldn't be the first. And I didn't 'note' Bishop or Armstrong, was just responding to a post that did.

I know this will get lost in the myriad of posts in this thread, but I'll post it anyway. McLean's generosity went way above and beyond the call of duty during the debt demolition campaign, and I for one will always remember him fondly for that, and be forever grateful for how he behaved at that time. His willingness to dig deep when called upon speaks volumes about his character. For me, it's a pity that things didn't work out as well as it looked like they may in the early stages of his career. He wants out and that's disappointing given his generosity to the club, but that's a personal thing and in footy, there's no room for 'personal reasons'. For business reasons this move makes logical sense, for all three parties concerned. We've received 'due compensation' (and Carlton have paid over market value IMO, but that's another topic altogether), and it has all been arranged lightning quick without any drawn out period of 'faffing' that usually comes with these deals. I think both clubs deserve a pat on the back for that as well. Overall, I'm as happy as is possible with how this has turned out under the circumstances. That's the last I'll say on this topic. Now in my mind, he is the enemy when we play Carlton, and just another player to watch when we're not playing them. Just the same as every other non-Melbourne player in the competition.

Excellent post Biff. I'd also like to add that Morton, Martin, Maric, Grimes and McDonald all signed recently with zero fuss and bother. The culture can't be that bad. Slight nitpick - Armstrong relocated because he was delisted, and West Coast happened to be the club that picked him in the rookie draft the next year. And Bishop was no great loss.

Pardon? The alternative is to have the rumours drag on and on for however many weeks until the official trade week like every other trade does. How much more transparent could this possibly be? Especially given that he told the MFC he wanted to be traded on Monday.

To be fair, nobody of any real credibility wanted that.

Craig Cameron once posted on this board that his biggest mistake was convincing himself that Simon Black would be a poor choice to draft. Stop: Jurrahtime has a point.

I think they're both deserved premiers this year, and at this point would be happy either way. I'll have chosen a team and will be barracking hard by about the 30 second mark though. I can't help myself.

Yeah look, you're really grasping at straws with the Raines comparison. Sorry. He reminds me a lot of James Frawley though.

He is also unlike Raines in that he is not a poo footballer.

My premise is that if you're not up to the task of being useful 22 rounds a year, or close to, then you're not useful at all. Miller is useful for about 10 rounds a year if that. We've waited forever for him to become useful more often and he just hasn't. He is clogging the list. As rpfc said, if all those disaster scenarios happened at once then we're stuffed anyway. It would make no difference whether we had Miller in the side, or some other NQR kid we pick up in the ND to fill his space. At least with the kid, there's always the remote possibility that he might become consistently useful in the future. Personally I reckon in footy that you're better off with the devil you don't know than the hack you do.

One of three reasons that I watched the footy every week despite the fact that the result was nearly always a foregone conclusion. Fantastic development year. Can't wait to see how he goes next year, though knowing our luck he'll develop stress fractures in his foot now.

That doesn't matter. If he's not up to the task, he should be delisted, regardless of who else is on the list. Bitterly disappointing year from Miller. I, like a few others, backed him in after a reasonably good year last year, but this year he looked little more than a symptom of a rubbish side. He's now 26 and still hasn't blossomed in to a consistently good AFL grade player, and being in and out of our side that finished last and was desperate for goal kickers is as damning as it gets. He's in exactly the same boat as Newton, but he's the unlucky one of the two who is out of contract. It's all over.

If I were a player I'd be extremely unhappy with having a contract so heavily front-loaded in the 450-50k example. I'd be asking my manager to get a (much) better deal than that.

Yep, definitely one of the funnier Hitler rants. There have been some awful ones.

Would I pay him the full 700k? The answer for me is yes, IF: - We can fit it in the cap in the short term (this is obviously yes) - We can fit it in the cap in the medium term (i.e. after the first year when our gun players begin to blossom properly) As I've said before, this is bean counter stuff that I just trust the club to get right. And I'll add the usual "if his is knee is right" blahdiblah just in case it's not as obvious as I think it should be. He would be the best player on our list if he was on it next year, and by miles I'd hasten to say. Putting it in that context, I wonder what other clubs are paying for their best players? I wonder how that compares to our current "best players" like Green and Bruce?

Agree with all of that, good post. As far as the knee and the money goes, perhaps it's just blind faith, but I'm just trusting the club to do the right thing in both those circumstances. Quite frankly, I can't be bothered worrying about any of that. All I am worried about is that we are, even if it is ever so fractionally, in the hunt for getting a fantastic player for our club. If we can attract Burgoyne to the club it's a huge win; attracting gun players is something we've been embarrassingly rubbish at in recent times. It's pretty clear we're being used as tool for negotiations, but it is my firm belief we should see the negotiation process out anyway. You never know your luck in this world, and as long as we're still in it, there still remains the slightest of chances things might fall our way. Pick 2 I could understand, but if the club elects not to pursue Burgoyne because they'd prefer pick 18, I would be very disappointed.

I did very little work at all* and my results reflected it (equivalent of ~65 ENTER, then getting through uni with a pass average). It has all worked out well in the end, but more out of good luck than good management. So my advice would be, you don't need to destroy your life with excess study, but don't go too far the other way, because that's very easy to do. *MY definition of "little work": attending probably 80% of classes (less at uni) and for some subjects, only submitting the bare minimum of work required to not be excluded from exams. For the exams I relied solely on whatever I was allowed to take in (some maths/science subjects allowed a page of notes etc), and what I naturally retained in my memory from the classes I attended, plus whatever I could cram in in the hour before the exam, which usually wasn't much. In short, I relied wholly and solely on my natural ability to retain and process information easily. The only thing that stopped my pathetic work ethic during school from roadblocking my career completely was that I was able to demonstrate a strong interest and understanding of my field of work to my first employer, and beyond that schooling results became irrelevant. As I said, good luck rather than good management.

Yes, thanks for that. I meant, in what way to you aggregate the ages? Median/mean average, split in to groups etc. Each is going to give you a different ranking for age. PS only certain times I can do that (i.e. when I'm not at work) -- later!

The other question is how do you define 'youngest?' I too have a hard time believing that anyone's side could be as weighted towards youth as ours.

Because his name is not as big as Scott West's and our midfield sucked this year, therefore it must be all the midfield coach's fault. Der.

I read this thread and wished I could find something profound to say in response to such a touching article, but I've got nothing. All I can say is that I sincerely wish you all the best and hope that your obvious bravery holds you in good stead for your fight. I also have to add that I find it a terrifying reality check that this is happening to someone very close to me in age and circumstances.

Likewise. My mother and one of my older brothers go for Collingwood. My poor 1 year old son doesn't know if he's supposed to say "go dees" or "go pies" when the football is on TV. My three year old just says the team of whoever she is trying to impress at the time. I'm doing my best, but I'm severely outnumbered unfortunately.

You need to play a lot of games early to get to the 250-300 mark, since 250 is 10+ seasons of not missing a game. When you think about it that way, there's a lot of players in the 19-21 year old age bracket who have probably already missed the boat for 250 games, and Maric is probably one of them, as is Grimes. Cale Morton is on track so far though.