praha

I don't know why he even comes out to say that. I get that it's a bargaining chip and he's just playing the game but at the same time, don't put yourself in a corner. At least say, "I would think 3 and 7 are untouchable" and then if asked if they would be traded for the right deal, "Well it would need to be a pretty special offer." If Sydney offered us Kennedy for pick 3 and, say, Watts + 43, we'd have to take that.

Still waiting on Dangerfield.

Wow, gained pick 3, 7, Kennedy, Bugg and Melksham, gave up 10, 6, future pick, Howe and Toumpas. Don't know about you guys but this has been a great trade period.

Makes a good point. The talent we have now is well above anything we had in the 2008-2012 period. In 2010 we looked like the next best thing. It's top 10 or bust next year. Would be a colossal failure for Roos is they can't finish 10th or above in 2016.

I keep hoping that this won't bite us in the bum, but just thinking of him shat his dacks in front of goal and fluff a handball in the last quarter against GC and I'm reminded of just how inadequate he was as an AFL footballer. Nothing against the kid and played more AFL games than all of us combined, but he was awful. Can't see him playing more than 100 games.

Wow, pleasantly surprised. Great deal.

Salem and Brayshaw both have had better starts to their careers than any of the other players you mentioned when you consider the team they've come in to and how the team played before they arrived. Sylvia and Brock came into a great side.

I do think that what's at play here is the club is slowly but surely cutting ties with bad draft choices and locker room cancers from the Bailey and Neeld eras. You can lose players and actually gain from that without receiving something tangible in return. I think it was pretty obvious that Melbourne just didn't really want to keep Howe. He seems like a hot-head bogan that's ahead of himself. Toump was just a bad draft pick and needs a fresh start.

We still need to get rid of Hogan.

I actually wouldn't be surprised if he kicks 40-50 goals next year.

Port + Toumpas, pick 32 - pick 29, 50 and 68 Melbourne + Kennedy, pick 29 and 50 - Toumpas, Howe Collingwood + Howe, pick 68 - Kennedy, Seedsman Adelaide + Seedmans - Pick 32

"Melb, Coll and Port all in AFL, signing off on a deal ... Also, Bomber Giles soon to be officially an Eagle ..." http://twitter.com/stevo7afl/status/655983984971612160

If we can't land another key forward, or get more pace through the midfield to help our forwards more, it's going to be harder to convince Hogan to stay. I suspect the presentation they gave him and the plan they have doesn't involve bringing in blokes like Melksham. As much as I like the trade for Melksham, it just proves that we're a feeder club willing to take anyone that wants to come to us. We don't have a Carlisle, Treloar, Aish, Dangerfield, even Bennell, wanting to come to us, yet all of these players offer us *exactly* what we need. It's quite depressing, really.

Reminds me too much of the Woey trade.

"Were we too hasty in delisting Fitzy?" No. /thread.

I suspect it's a contract extension.

So does this mean we're still a chance for Dangerfield or...?

So basically we're recruiting a hoard of run-with poor decision makers from other clubs...

So basically he's the Jack Watts of Norf.

seems that way.

Geelong is banking on their draftees more than you think. Yeah they've brought in talent but there's a strong core of inexperience there. Their depth will be tested in the coming years.

If Prestia goes to any club in Melbourne, it'll be Melbourne. His family is far too invested in the club and his dad has friendships there. I know that "supporting the club as a kid" has little weight these days but it's different in this case. There's no way he'd pull on the jumper of another Melbourne club. That's not to say he's guaranteed to come to leave GC but if he does it'll be to go to Melbourne. They practically have him gift wrapped, ready to be delivered. If he ends up elsewhere it would be a major indictment on the club. There hasn't been a player of his caliber with so many ties to the MFC in the club's history. If they don't take advantage of that, it would be an embarrassment.

We're still trying to work out how to get Dangerfield from Adelaide.

No they won't.

Yawn. I think it's typical in Australia to cry when those less fortunate, through whatever means, are disadvantaged. Fair enough but most of the clubs missing out on free agency are simply undesirable for free agents because they're poorly run clubs. The reality is that free agency makes the league more competitive, which is good for the game and fans. Melbourne was a very good amateur football club. It dominated in the amateur era. It never made the transition to professional sports club and ultimately has struggled. If you are run well, draft well, treat your players right and create a good working environment, you will attract players. It has nothing to do with your placement on the ladder. There is no luxury tax (going outside your cap and paying a tax on how much extra you pay) so top, big teams aren't allowed to spend outside the cap. Everyone has the same amount to spend. If a player is prepared to accept less, that's a product of a GOOD CLUB, not an issue with free agency. There's nothing wrong with free agency. Free agency actually puts more accountability on clubs to treat players well and create a good working environment. Sometimes players leave good clubs (Beams for example) but that's the exception. Danger wants to leave but Adelaide isn't necessarily a club crying out for success to attract members. You can use free agency to build a strong list with good depth. You don't need to sign a Dangerfield or a Franklin to win flags.