Dr. Gonzo

Martin will be lucky to be on an AFL list after next season. Take the blinkers off.

No one has indicated how they think we might be able to get Butcher. Is he actually on the table? As far as I can tell he signed a 2 year contract extension last year so is contracted until the end of next season. Has he actually said he wants out of Port or is this just another trademark Demonland fantasy trade?

The funny thing is I can't see Collingwood wanting Martin now that Lynch is going there but I guess if they lose Dawes they may want him but I just don't see it.

He said a proper source - ba-doom tish!

Yeah heard that - could be best for both club and player, not sure who would want him or what we would even get though to be honest. Morton, Cook, Gysberts hmm I'm sensing a theme here.

Martin is not our best ruckman, he's probably not even third or fourth best being behind Jamar, Clark, Gawn when he's fit, Spencer & even possibly Fitzpatrick in coming years. He's a pretty terrible footballer who can do some athletic things on occasions.

It's not boring to watch when you're winning.

I don't particularly want Dawes but if we got him as a replacement for Martin I'd take it in a heartbeat. I agree with the posters above I just don't see what all the fuss is with Martin. He can plug a gap down back, up forward or in the ruck but can't really do any of them any well at all. He is an athlete first and footballer second and he is not a very good footballer at that. Dawes can only play forward but at least he can do it to a satisfactorily level. Having said all that I doub Collingwood would want Martin now that they have Lynch.

Do you actually understand what we're talking about? Culture is the environment and expectations that exist at the club, I can't see how it is so difficult to understand. BTW Nietzsche would be better - nothing in life worth anything comes without struggle.

I hope GC believed that as well, then it would have worked.

I agree however where we're at I think it would have benefited us to have someone like him for a year or two until we can get someone else in (hopefully Hogan). Not gonna happen now though obviously.

Jesus please no!

How about we give them Petterd for a 5th round draft pick??? It's nothing personal against you it's just getting tiresome to sift through the [censored] here, making Demonland almost impossible to read.

You do realise that Petterd is hopeless and unwanted, can't get a gig in the worst team in the league and GC actually have to REDUCE the size of their list this year? Why the hell would they want a spud like Petterd? They're not a dumping ground for NQR's that can't get a game with a proper team, this isn't the Bad News Bears or even the 1990's Dockers. The comments on this board absolutely astound me sometimes I can't believe people who watch football all the time and read about it so often to the point they comment on a footy messageboards can have no idea about how the AFL and the clubs operate. To put it another way, would you take Josh Fraser off them if the situation was reversed? I wouldn't even want to waste a spot on the list for him even if we got himf or free.

What do you expect them to say? "We will be taking Jack Viney no matter what whether we have to use pick 3 or 26. If GWS or GC bid for him we will definitely take him with our first pick." I mean really, are people that thick???

I would assume the players new contract would also play a big part. So Goddard on $800K/year would be worth much more than Rivers on $350K/year or Moloney on $250K/year or both of them combined. The fact that these guys had high finishes in the B&F will be a very minor factor in determining the compensation we get. Again I would be absolutely shocked if we got anything higher than a pick in the late 20's or 30's.

Or it could make us even weaker...

Exactly H_T - culture doesn't necessarily mean something that is endemic to the club and built in to the bricks and mortar. It is something that is created and changes with the people who make up the club. The culture can be passed down from the old guard to the new but can also disappear with the people who created it in the first place.

Not if TOLL have anything to say about it apparently. I think in theory FA is good but in practice the weaker clubs are going to get raped by it. Look at our situation. We are a poor club at the bottom of the ladder. Haven't looked like playing finals or challenging for a flag for 6 years. Players who qualify for FA status on our list want to look elsewhere for the opportunity to finish their career on a high instead of finishing it in a bottom placed team who will shunt them off to Casey as soon as a kid comes along that we want to "get games into" & "develop". So we lose guys like Rivers and to a lesser extent Moloney for nothing but a mid range pick (say 30's). We have free cap space now but due to our status as a poor underperforming club with the perception of little chance to play finals in the immediate future we then have trouble luring other FA across to our club to help us rise back up the ladder and/or replace those who left. At the end of the day we are left with a list which has had the veteran's picked out of it, has a group of mid-age players who have played in poor teams their whole careers and a bunch of kids who can't compete with the elite players/teams in the comp. This all adds up to teams like us and Port ending up like Fitzroy with players desperate to leave and the bigger more successful clubs circling like vultures to pick the bones of our list. We are then left with a mediocre list that is forced to pay 95% of the cap despite having no-one deserving a big "franchise" type contract. Look at our list next year and compare it to the clubs at the top and tell me how we should possibly pay the minimum cap requirement. This may seem like doom and gloom but it is genuinely where I see the league heading in the future.

Most of the reasons have already been covered here, but the main one I think is the deterioration in the quality of the game, it's admistration and umpiring/rules. I have never found it more frustrating to watch games as a neutral due to the ridiculous "interpretations" of the rules and lack of consistency. I still attend most MFC games that I can get to but attending games as a neutral just doesn't interest me any more whereas in years past I have attended many "games of the round" or Richmond matches with my Richmond supporting cousin. You can only ignore the fans for so long before it starts to bite you on the arse. When everyone is telling you that the game is being ruined by ridiculous umpiring decisions, ridiculous tribunal decisions and ridiculous off-field decisions it might be time to listen. Of course the AFL doesn't care as long as people turn up but if this starts to change (as these figures indicate for one year anyway) they may have to hopefully rethink their decision. Oh by the way, for those that hate the twilight timeslot, get used to it because next year there is every chance the GF will be a twilight game. Makes for a long wait for those queuing up outside the MCC from the night before.

That is some extremely specious reasoning not to mention completely flawed logic.

I don't think this is the case. WCE offered Lynch only one year, he has also struggled to cement a spot in their forward line. I think he is leaving for opportunity and length of contract, not $$$. I agree.

Thanks WJ. Again not having a go at you and appreciate your comments. I just find it hard to believe we haven't chased anyone. If not what was all that war chest talk about? I find it hard to believe we haven't at the very least had a crack at Lynch. And if they baulked at Tippett because of price they should realise we could afford to pay him close to an entire 4 year contract in year one so I wouldn't be too concerned about the 8% thing. Just seems like spin to me. Thanks for passing it on nonetheless.

Can't really disagree with that was my lowlight as well - although I would have said Melbourne rounds 1-9 & 11-23.

No offense to you as I appreciate your contribution and relaying info from these forums, but this sounds like absolute rubbish and the defense mechanism of a spurned lover. "Yeah but I never wanted them anyway" is the refrain of the loser after being laughed at when their advances are shot down. I believe we never offered 7 years for Cloke because that is just ridiculous rumour mill rubbish butto say we never seriously wanted Lynch or Knights or Wellingham or Tippett because they would cost too much is hilarious particularly in the case of Lynch and Knights. Edit: Thanks for the info anyhow always good for the common supporter to know what the club is spruiking. Can't say I'm too happy about the 75% figure either but I understand it, I hope they're not just buying time though until the next mob comes along and reveals they were actually rubbish! These guys do have the runs on the board though so I have a bit more confidence in them in that department.