Grand New Flag

GNF, I refuse at least at this point in time to abuse MC.

You apparently have a good contact at the club.

ATM I don't know what happened to see him leaving us.

I can picture at least 6 scenarios.

What I do know is that the club, at least publicly, has said or done nothing to try and keep him. Even Roos on 360 had a perfect opportunity to just say he would like him to stay, but refused 3 times when asked to do so.

Given the above circumstances how can you accuse people who suggest that the MFC pushed him out and don't want him, as being delusional. That is a pretty fair conclusion to draw.

If somebody at some stage sets the record straight, we will at least all know. Do you want to do that, or do you not know either?

Interesting, my memory of that 360 was Roos saying he "owed us", and had a clear undertone of anger.

Well it reads well but in fact Pyke won the ruck duels and Swans did ok in centre clearances. I do agree however that Swans gave away a lot in letting Mumford go but would they play another ruckman in the side with Tippett already in the side?

I think we should make a real pitch for Malcevski. Really can play and brings character and leadership to the table

With Chip gone and a likely pick 3, or possibly ~pick 10 we will not go for Malcevski. It will counter our FA compensation, thus we would lose this early pick.

Change the rules on Free Agency before it destroys our competition. Public interest will diminish if half the teams never have a chance to win a flag, this will result in lower attendances and inevitably lower broadcast rights. What is currently happening breaks my heart.

It is fairly obvious that Roos moved on pretty quickly from his crocked CHF. We haven't fought very hard to keep him have we?

I don't think we wanted it to end like this but Roos is a pragmatist - why have such an investment in a bloke who cannot get on the park and doesn't help where we need the most help - in the midfield?

Roos once blindsided was furious. I think it is fair to say at this point Roos wanted nothing more to do with him except for extracting the best trade for him.

That might be true GNF but what have you heard the MFC will get as compo.

I was [censored] at first when the MC news came out (he was our best player) but if we get close to fair compensation I'll be happy (considering we should have got nothing with him retiring).... Don't need his issues at the club anyway

I have heard nothing except they have no interest in Varcoe....... which I think was made public anyway.

We are having a crack at Tom. I been given no word on how we are going.

I can't believe anyone is defending MC. Those who suggest MFC pushed him out and do not want him are delusional.

Hunt is 23, Varcoe 26

Varcoe is 27 next season and a shadow of the player he was in 2011. He has one or two ok seasons in him. Hunt is a tagger with poor skills. We already have plenty of "Hunts" on our list...... though to be fair I thought he was a couple of years older.

We picked up Dawes for pick 20 in 2012. At the time Dawes had mental issues that had stopped him from being able to kick straight or mark yet pick 20 was considered fair. This being the case considering that Clark is our best and most highly paid player, taking into account the risk and upside associated with him but also considering that I am told Clark impressed in physical tests at Melbourne, Geelong and Collingwood and clearly also passed mental assessments at Collingwood and Geelong I think a pick of about 20 is fair.

If Dawes was worth pick 20, Clark is worth pick 20.

I refuse to believe that Roos would except Taylor Hunt and Travis Varcoe for Clark trade. Two old has beens for our best player. I don't think so.

Varcoe has issues, is damaged goods, is injury prone (not in 2014) and is a shadow of the player he once was. He is 27 next season we MAY get 1 or 2 ok seasons out of him but we will never see him as the player he was in 2011. Varcoe is way unders for our best player, a KP Forward no less who from all reports has performed excellently in all physical testing at the MFC, Geelong and Collingwood. I am not saying Clark is without risk but he comes with massive upside. Varco may be considered with other players and picks but knowing what I know I would be disgusted if this is the trade. We need to trade Clark for a younger talent that we can at least get 5 years out of. He is actually worth a player who Geelong don't want to lose rather than a damaged has been who Geelong have been trying to off load for years.

I am sure Roos will not get sucked into Varcoe (unless only part of the deal). We can do much better there is some exciting young talent on the Geelong list.

GNF - when you say something like that it makes me very very very nervous...

...please tell, what is the cause of your nausea?

Just the Clark dog act.

I am feeling ill.

Regardless, he can play and should be considered.

He is damaged goods. Proceed with caution.

edit: Please don't post allegations which are potentially defamatory

Heard Dangers manager on SEN. Sounded like a standard line from a manager to be honest.

"Dangers happy at Adelaide, I haven't spoken to him for a couple of weeks but he's happy..."

Sounded full of confidence...not.

To me this sounds like Danger is almost certainly on the move. Firstly there is no way that Conners has not spoken to Danger in the last two weeks....... an out and out lie. Secondly Conners failed to commit Danger to Adelaide. Thirdly this is exactly the same language used for Clark, Frawley, Rivers, Scully. "Clark loves the MFC"...... PLEASE!

Swans loss was not the forwards fault, it was the midfields. In particular it was in the ruck that they were smashed. Hawthorn mostly had first use of the ball. On the odd occasion that Sydney did win the clearance it usually ended with a set shot on goal. Sydney will try and address its ruck situation. They lost Mumford to get Buddy, they now need to replace Mumford with another decent ruck to win the Premiership...... they will go all out. I think their midfield can match Hawthorns but not without a ruckman winning their fair share of taps to advantage.

I wrote this in the equalisation thread a few weeks ago and I want to repost it. It breaks my heart to see what is going on with our great competition. I no longer have expectations that the MFC will ever play in a GF again....... this is not right. The reason is FA. It simply does not allow teams like Melbourne any opportunity to climb the ladder. Every year since FA came in we have lost a top 5 player. This year we will lose our best KP player in defence and our best KP player in attack. 2 of our top 5 (one to FA). How can any team rise when they lose there best players at the end of each season to the leading clubs. Unless urgent changes are made to FA Melbourne and other teams will die and the competition will be weaker as a result.

This is what I propose as from the Equalisation Thread:

FA is destroying our competition. Between 1996 and 2006 every team played off in a Preliminary Final, now we have a two tier comp with the smaller clubs nothing more than feeder teams for the large clubs. The AFL needs to step in quickly before its too late. The AFL needs to adopt the US NFL FA system and must urgently make the following adjustments.

Tier 1: Teams 1 - 4: Forbidden from Free Agency. These teams can only lose players not gain players. There is no compensation for lost players.

Tier 2: Teams 5 - 8: Restricted Free Agency. These teams can only gain players if they lose players. There is no other compensation.

Tier 3: Teams 9 - 12: Open Free Agency: These teams can poach FA with no restrictions, they can also lose players to FA. No draft compensation.

Tier 4: Teams 13 -16: Open Free Agency but can't lose players. All players wishing to leave must be traded. Therefore no draft compensation required.

Making these changes would reverse the flow of players. The good teams would lose players to the poor teams, the reverse to which it is today. The big teams will still have an advantage when down the ladder as naturally players will want to play for them.

I call on the AFL to urgently make these changes for the long term health of our competition. No one wants to see the same teams win every year like in the EPL. AFL is only played in Australia, destroy the competition and the sport will suffer.

Unfortunately, I was interstate at a wedding and unable to attend the GF. The GF has in previous years proven the most fertile field for finding out who we are targeting and what is likely to occur. As such i have no further news on Danger. I will see how I go this week, but alcohol indeed loosens lips. It is disappointing not to be able to take advantage of such an opportunity.

For those who are confused, unlike Roos last year, I have never said we will get Danger, I have only said we are going hard at him. We can offer him the most coin and offer AFC the best deal....... but we need to convince a Danger. Obviously this is a tough sell, Roos will need to weave some magic.

I am however aware of other A graders we are targeting, some have been mentioned, others if successful will be a suprise to the media and demonland but are very exciting prospects....... much the same as Tyson last year. Danger however is the only superstar on the market this year.

I am sure you all understand why it is not in MFCs interest for me to let on who these players are. Particularly since it has become clear that there are those in the media who follow these threads.

It has become clear that we are closing in on Danger. It would appear that all that is now required is for Roos and the MFC to convince Danger to pick us. I find Roos' comments very interesting. Him acknowledging that we are pursuing Danger is massive in my book. Last year I was told absolutely at about Round 8 by a board member that Roos would be our coach in 2014. This was then confirmed and reconfirmed to me for the remainder of the season. I watched on as Roos dismissed, then denied, then slowly and methodically pretended to gain interest in coaching us. Danger failing to commit to Adelaide, Adelaide opening up the potential of a Danger trade and Roos acknowledging MFC interest is telling. Considering we can offer Adelaide the best deal and Danger the most money we have to be a very good chance of landing him. As I said all that is left is to convince Danger.

I am sorry but this time around I can't shine any light onto whether there is any truth to rumour that Danger to MFC deal is close to being agreed. If true I am a little surprised it is out pre GF. As I have previously mentioned I can confirm the MFC are making a play and have been behind the scene for much of the season, but that is all I know.

The only thing that could excite people is that both my sources (1 admin, 1 board member) have failed to take my calls today. Maybe my time as a reliable inside source of info is over, then again maybe.........................

I for one will be disappointed to lose Blease. I still think he can make it.

Danger has expressed (maybe not publically) a desire to return to Melbourne (city) for the 2nd half of his career.... much like Judd. He has publically and openly refused to entertain an extension to his current contract. He is at least entertaining MFCs approaches, which is now a MFC offer. No doubt he is also entertaining other clubs offers. He is highly likely to leave Adelaide .

I agree binman, it would be a 5 - 7 year deal

............. or is Danger considered a midfielder? or is pick 10 in exchange enough to secure the midfielder Roos wants?