Nasher

That's exactly what I thought too. I'm still yet to read a single compelling 'con' to this argument.

Thompson. Could not give a rat's tossbag (thanks Malcolm) about any of those others.

From what I understand Lake had been accepting chickenfeed for years*. Given his age, this is probably his last opportunity to earn big bucks before hitting the slippery slope. I say good on him. His signing at that price also works in every other club's favour, including ours. We may not have gained his services, but now WB are paying proper market rates for a very good player, in a year where they are probably going to have a salary cap squeeze. All in all, even though it didn't really affect our club at all in the end, it's a result I'm comfortable with. *Edit: This quote from the article confirms it: So he was on approx $275,000. That seems incredibly low for one of their best players.

It's standard practice to commit to a younger player for two years at a time. I challenge you to find anyone under about 26 who has been given less than two years in recent times. I bet that unless you're dealing with a player who has a chronic injury, you're not going to find anyone at any club of that age who has had their club hedge their bets on a one year deal. It was either zero years or two at the time. Obviously there was a compelling case for zero at the time, but I don't begrudge the club for giving him the two in a final chance to have him deliver.

I'm amazed at the sheer number of people who still haven't pulled their heads out of their behinds for long enough to realise that contracted players are only ever released in the most extreme situations. It makes reading these forums incredibly frustrating when people don't understand, or worse, refuse to accept how the system works.

Yeah I get how it works and I knew about Judd, but I didn't realise that Visy was actually a bottomless pit of money for Carlton to dip from when they needed money outside the cap. Ouch. Yes, it does make you wonder wtf the AFL is doing. One player you might understand, but 11 is ridiculous.

Maybe I'm naive, or just recklessly optimistic, but surely there's only so much under-the-table dealing Carlton clubs can do? Given that, I doubt anyone has even close to the salary cap space we would have.

We can have it as a sub-forum of the Demonland Footy Message Board, but then it'd appear in here instead of where it currently does. I'd never thought of doing that actually, good suggestion, thanks. What's everyone else think?

My point is, make him an offer he can't refuse and he will nominate us. Players don't just choose clubs off the tops of their heads unless the club has already approached them and done all the hard work first. We did this with Judd and Warnock. It didn't pay off in those cases but it's what will need to happen again if we want him. My point was that if he goes in to the PSD, if we want him, he'll have no choice. By nominating, you have to accept whichever club picks you. Given our current position with the salary cap of having to frontload contracts to get to the minimum, we should be able to match any cash anyone else throws at him and then some. It goes without saying that it is subject to fitness. I thought some things were obvious enough to not need to be said. Hell, I even said it earlier in the thread. However, like godees, H and I have already alluded to, I'm assuming the extent of his knee is being grossly exaggerated because it sounds like bollocks. I do expect the club to do their due diligence though. If you don't chase hard first, the player will not nominate you. Not chasing hard is the quickest way to have the bloke nominate Carlton, because we all know those SOBs will have done the legwork. Again. Wouldn't we all love that? There is always, always, always a need for more players capable of playing an A grade game. Always.

We're in prime position. Assembling a list with an exciting future he can be part of, we should have a bucketload of cash to chuck at him, and we've got PSD #1 if Port won't play ball (in which neither Burgoyne nor Port will have any say in the matter). I don't want to just sit by and wait for him to choose us, I'd be on the phone to his manager right now , and organising flights to put on the best sell job I had ever done. I'll be disappointed if I am forced to die wondering.

By that logic, Chris Judd was damaged goods. He isn't "being moved on", he is "moving himself on".

I agree completely, but nobody's talking about injured former stars in their twilight. We're talking about Shaun Burgoyne. He's is 27, meaning he could and should still be around when we are challenging -- and better yet; could potentially bring our window of opportunity for a flag closer. In terms of injury, until this year barely missed a beat since starting his career. Like godees I'm taking the knee talk with a grain of salt, though clearly there is due diligence to be done there. I see this as an opportunity for us to nab an A-grade player who is capable of tearing a game apart.

I don't quite understand the logic some have in not wanting to take him just because he is 27. That made sense last year when we were aiming for a priority pick, so anything that would accelerate our rise up the ladder would be strictly no go. Surely now the aim is to do whatever is necessary to make us a better side? I reckon we should pursue him hard. Pick 18 wouldn't be off the table for me. Having PSD #1 up our sleeve should become a very useful tool; we currently have salary cap space to burn, and we're (obviously) in Victoria. We should be in a prime position to get him if he's serious. Unless of course he nominates Carlton.

Someone had to say it I guess.

Mark Seaby has put a price on his own head? He is a complete spud. I'm surprised there's enough interest in him for him to be choosy. I would've thought he'd be jumping at whatever club showed any vague interest.

Perhaps that's an indication that he's a downhill skier. Andrew Embley anyone? And who would argue that Brisbane are a top 4 team?

I'm a Petterd fan, but as has been alluded to, it's faint praise really.

The same thing crossed my mind when seeing the title too, but I deemed it too lame to bother posting

There's already a thread on Lake here: http://forums.demonland.com/index.php?showtopic=16936

Their side is pretty bad, but ours isn't much better, if it all. All I can say is I hope you're prepared to put up, because that's a risky bet. 50/50 I reckon.

On a completely unrelated note, what happens when Collingwood have a full (or close to full) squad available and don't have enough spots in their VFL side to play everyone? Since they don't have a Reserves side, do their rookies and lesser players feed in to the local clubs like normal VFL listed players, or do they just not play?

How exactly have Casey been "treated", and what should the MFC have done differently? There are (or at least should be) proper avenues for putting forth your views should you be genuinely concerned. However it sounds to me like you'd just prefer to blow a bunch of hot air with no views to address, or at the very least, clarify any issues you may have. I guess it's just easier to urinate on the MFC than it is to try and get to the bottom of the perceived problem.

There was unconfirmed talk about McKenzie going under the knife for a foot injury. Good post btw. Nice to see someone attempt to actually gather the facts surrounding this.

No. We'd simply be carrying two useless forwards next year rather than just the one we're going to be stuck with. Being better than Newton is faint praise. I both love and hate this time of year.

More than handy? He's rubbish. I could not be less enthused.