Adam The God

Ah, I see. Thanks mate. Well, both of them are turn over merchants and horrible decision makers. No. I think I'd probably prefer Toumpas, but if I was to do the trade I'd want the same secondary pick back. They've both shown about as much as each other.

I think Roosy and PJ opened the door on this one, RE: members/supporters emailing them. In a multi-million dollar organisation, I find it staggering that they take the time to respond to these emails personally. Initially, I thought it was amazing supporter engagement, then I realised it'd go down hill pretty quickly and a couple of weeks ago it blew up in Roosy's face. Don't read the bloody emails. Just stop. Anyway... Jake Melksham.

I feel like I have this conversation every week on Demonland. The disposal efficiency stat is rubbish. I'm using my eyes and I've seen enough of Melksham to know he turns it over too much. He might have some attributes that our FD think they can work with though.

Jesse Effin Christ, shut up. So much negativity.

The WADA thing doesn't bother me. I think they'll all get off. You do if you have to overpay someone. Surely, you don't see him ahead of Jones, Vince, Viney, Brayshaw, Tyson and Vanders? He's being brought in to 'bolster' our depth.

I'm surprised Demonlanders are surprised that we have to overpay players to get them to move. That's how it'll work for a few years.

I wouldn't take Melksham. He's a turnover merchant, but some of the posting on this thread has been a little hyperbolic. If true, we'd be going after him purely as depth. Whilst I don't agree with his recruitment specifically (for the aforementioned reason), unfortunately what it says to me, is that we are still struggling to attract even B graders to the club. This means we're having to settle for simply replacing the D graders (Bail, M Jones, Terlich etc), with ordinary C graders. Melksham probably has a higher ceiling than the blokes we'll get rid of, that's the only reason we're going after him. He's a slight upgrade on them. I just hoped we'd have a slightly higher standing now in the eyes of opposition players. Apparently not.

Not necessarily. They could just be low-balling him, as we're probably doing with Howe and potentially Garland.

I think you might be underestimating the potential of a package deal with Watts and thus he's a pretty good sweetner.

I wouldn't. We should be aiming higher. Melksham is the bag of peanuts that we should be avoiding. Get proper (read elite) compensation for Watts, otherwise he stays. The same goes for Howe really.

Reckon Danger was signed by Geelong at the end of 2014.

Do elaborate, please...

Michael Talia was pretty ordinary against us earlier in the year, but I'll back the club again on this.

Well, my friends are all drug addicts. But yes, it was hilarious yesterday. They were texting about Waite and Betts the night before. Great stuff. Ultimately, it's disappointing that we're having a conversation about Melksham, because it says a lot about the state of our list.

Not the Carlton supporters I know. They loved him, but admitted he might do better in a different environment.

Lol. When did people froth over Riley, Michie, Newton, Magner, Couch etc?

People are probably right when they say it depends what we'd give up for him. I still say it's pretty pointless and knowing Essendon they'd want a 2nd rounder, possibly even a first rounder. If we paid that we'd be idiotic.

Agreed. I'm certainly doubting his ability to contribute positively and consistently.

Exactly. I want us to get rid of Grimes too, so to be adding Melksham seems redundant.

I'm just not convinced he's much of an upgrade, if at all on blokes like Matt Jones and Bail. It'd be a step backwards in terms of where our list is. He can run, but he's a turn over merchant. Sound familiar?

I hope Goodwin's got it, but too early to tell. The players appear to really like him though.I posted my best 22 for next year on another thread the other day. It involves going after A graders in Prestia and Bennell and landing them both. Melksham wouldn't even make the emergencies in that scenario. Ultimately, I don't want us going after blokes with suspect disposal and decision-making. We've been there, done that.

They're past the point of no return a lot of these blokes. Much like a lot of our blokes who have moved to other environments (Blease, Sylvia, Moloney, Morton etc) and failed. The Milk Man has been Essendonised, so even if he was a reliable disposer of the football (clue, he's not), he's mentally scarred. Move on. We should be trying to improve our best 22, not going after depth. That's not how you build lists. We should be attempting to improve our 22. Some of the guys that we already have will become depth if we can improve our 22.

Lol. The Milk Man. Possibly the last player I'd want us to draft. With ASADA hanging over his head, talk about players being scarred.

History also suggests that changing clubs has no effect. Exhibit A, James Frawley. Are we seriously saying if Jack Grimes switched clubs, all of a sudden his horrid decision-making and disposal would improve? Come on. It's the same with The Milk Man.

I trust the FD, but if they go after this guy, a lot of that trust will be broken. I don't care how much intimate knowledge Goodwin has of him, I've seen enough of him to trust my own judgement and we don't need another Grimes, but what's potentially even worse is that he could he banned from playing. Dumb, dumb, dumb if true.