Adam The God

Emilia Clarke's gorgeous. That is all.

Would love Hartlett.

Who we do think are our bottom 10 players? That is, on our entire list.

I think this will be McCartney's role once Roosy moves out of the FD.

Well, some will say he would get in Goodwin's way here, but he headed up the academy at Sydney and didn't seem to step on Longmire's toes there. No reason why it couldn't work again. I agree with this idea. I want him around for a 4th year.

I don't rate Melksham, but he's better depth than Matt Jones, Terlich or Bail. Is that a valid reason for bringing him in on a 4 year deal? Not sure. I hope McCartney stays and Goodwin knows what he's doing.

I'm not saying a MFC player has to fit into one of those two narrow categories, but I am saying Matt Jones fits into the former. A player that's middle of the road is someone like Garland or Dawes or Kent. So there is grey. If you've read many of my posts, you'll know that I don't rate the DE stat, it's useless, so that won't win me over here. IMO, Matt Jones is easily in our bottom three or four players on the list. The way you're talking about him here is as though he's in our best 30 or so. I don't think he should be on the list at all. I think we can do better for depth and should do better for depth, otherwise we won't be ascending the ladder very far. We just share a different opinion on this one, mate.

Prestia's new number?

He's not going to be on huge money, mate, no. But as a turnover merchant, he should be gone. He manages to limit his horrible, game changing turn overs for one or two games a year, the rest of the time he kills us. Why not get another runner in there that can do the same job, without E grade disposal?

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.

It shouldn't. Grimes is in the same basket as Matt Jones and Terlich and should be moved on if we wish to improve.

Terlich has a year to run and unfortunately, so does Matt Jones.

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.

I'm sorry, but whoever is responsible for Terlich's multi-year deal should use their own salary to pay him out. One of the most inexplicably shizen decisions in the last 5 years.

What does that even mean? Maybe I should lie down.

Captain King Obvious. That is not news. Dumbest article ever. Roos has said as much himself.

Jesse Effin Christ, shut up. So much negativity.

Just trying to one up olisik, but would anyone trade Tom McDonald for someone like Dangerfield or Fyfe? Just putting it out there, because I would.

I rarely do, dazzle, but sometimes there are posts that are just so outlandish and mindboggling that I have to comment on them.

I'm looking forward to the memes when Worsfold/The Chemist is announced as the drug-cheats coach.

Nice bit of [censored]-teasing there, Chook.

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.