Demon Disciple

Tongue in cheek John. Conor McGregor is as tough as he is nuts.

Nah, too soft

Yes, which team will be the first to utter "we could not believe he was available at our pick" this year? My money is on the Dons with Hugh McCluggage!

We'd be lucky if he slipped down that far, imo.

How do you see him progressing, when compared to Max King after his first year at the club?

Agree. The club need to make a statement both to him and the rest of the playing group that such actions will not be tolerated. I'd be looking at handing him a 4 week suspension from round 1 (with the rest of his pre-season to determine is he is able to reduce it to only 2 weeks).

Maybe he doesn't need another pair to run in, but put on his mantlepiece and look at in awe

And that all relates to MFC how?

Saad (suspended for 18 months for drinking an energy drink), Keeffe and Thomas (2 years for clenbuterol), all the Essendon guinea pigs (1 year for Thymosin beta-4) = all were ignorant yet probably not deliberate in their consumption............................yet Whitfield deliberately avoids potential drug testing (breaking up with gf my @ss), and could get off with only missing potentially 7-8 games. Corruption within the ranks of the AFL (particularly at the top), put FIFA and Sepp Blatter to shame.

I think the club should definitely be aiming to break the 30,000 barrier by years end.

I think it's more due to where our draft picks lie, Nasher. We obviously feel that we would gain more out of having Wagner plus another nominated rookie available to play all year, as opposed to Wagner playing as the nominated rookie plus pick 84 from the draft.

If Salem's body will allow him a good run without injury, he will become a much better player than the others you listed alongside him.

You're right, i wouldn't called it a fact but, but i would call it common sense.

Top of the line grooming kit.

If you actually read my post correctly, i stated that Garland would be my first choice to go, but for the fact that he remains contracted for another 2 years. If he was only contracted for another year and he wasn't on much coin (he shouldn't be), then i would cut him. Garland is a very average footballer. He might have a high football thinking IQ, but on the field he is slow, reluctant to take the game on and not overly smart (ironic). A decent pre-season? How many do you want to give him? As for his 100+ games.............they very much flatter him. Like you said, Richards has played bugger all games, but he is still somewhat of an unknown. Garland is a known quality (that quality is not very good). Garland doesn't improve our side, Richards might. That's all i need to know.

My first choice would be Garland, but he is still contracted for a few years. Whoever gave him the contract really slipped up on that one. One of very few mistakes under this administration.

Yep, played mostly forward, but at 195cm, he could provide some decent depth to our KPD stocks. Get his retired brother to teach him a thing or 2 about it.

I'm not sure if he was pushed, but once we were told by the AFL what the likely compo would be, we weren't hesitant in letting him go.

The only reason Spencer has been able to stay on the list for so long is because of his height. It certainly is not his footballing ability (of which he virtually has none). He was lucky enough to have been around when we only had Jamar and Max Gawn as our sole ruck-man, with no-one else to play back-up.

Wow, this story just keeps getting better and better.

not the one's open 24/7

Slippery slope indeed.

Thanks for the clarification, that makes a little more sense now.

Seriously, a recruiting scout getting $680k a year! What does the GWS head of recruitment get paid?

Very succinct FG, and very accurate too. This alone should be enough to take away the Brownlow.