Carlos Danger

Personally I think it's ridiculous trying to degrade the names of international AFL players.

Zero interest in Rance. Defence is probably the one position that has been considerably strengthened in the recent period of awfulness. Getting Frost and O-Mac on top of what was already there, I'd be highly content with spending elsewhere in FA.

I don't believe Port made an incorrect call in his leadership group inclusion. I do believe an incorrect call was made in resurrecting this thread. He's a Port player in the AFL, always has been. Get over it.

It came across very agenda-driven. As if you were dead opposed to Cook ever working here and were even willing to throw in unsubstantiated material to help said cause. "Even though this guy built a club bereft of premierships for over 40 years into a side who won 3 premierships, let's totally ignore that and harness all our negative attention into what he did for the rest of his time at the club (along with this probably made-up rumour)". If you seriously dislike like him and don't want him working here, fair enough. But to advocate he's incapable of the job in question? That's certainly incorrect and not right at all.

I highly doubt Bartlett is flicking through a roledex of fantasy options in regards to negotiations with PJ. If said situation is actually legit, then it's safe to say Cook has shown interest. Either we keep Jackson or we get Cook, that's definitely a win/win. A situation as good as this could only be a potential loss/loss if Schwab was still at the helm.

As CEO... Jackson: 1 flag Cook: 5 flags Is it also worth mentioning the 2 he oversaw at WCE were the club's first ever and the 3 at Geelong ended a ridiculously long drought? As much as I rate Jackson and all he's done for the club, Cook is also incredible at the job. Appears to be a win/win whichever way we go, hardly worth complaining about.

This club can't be sold as a destination for reasonable dollars in FA if there's strong interest elsewhere (he also doesn't appear to be unhappy with WCE nor them with him). It'd take generous overs for him to even consider it and I think that money can be better spent elsewhere. And with all the focus that's been put into the midfield recently (along with the McCartney factor), there's a fair chance he will be surplus after a couple of years anyway.

Fair enough, maybe I misread your post. I like Burgan mainly because of what he was writing on the AFL site prior to Melbourne, he was a hell of a lot better than most of the writers that have proceeded him. I'd say that is his strong-suit as he does a lot of good work via the articles as far as I can tell.

In his time here he eventually struck me as a player who looks fit, like he does the exercises and works hard in the ways where he can physically look good. But that same application couldn't be harnessed to train for things that will make him a better player. The fit physique and his natural ability, it was enough to consistently get games here. Going to Fremantle and what has occurred basically confirms my theory. It'd be interesting to see him bounce back from this but it doesn't look likely.

You say that like he intended the outcome to be as positive as it played out. He hated all the heat he got for being the highest paid player in the VFL (which he managed to turn around in the final year of his belated contract, which unsurprisingly is when his big interview occurred) and I remember seeing somewhere he attributed it all to being Melbourne supporters. Like he couldn't accept the whole AFL community outside of Carlton finding it funny that a player getting paid that much couldn't get games in the seniors, it had to be all bitter MFC supporters. It makes sense that his hatred of Melbourne over that period was the biggest motivator for said comments when finally given a platform.

Yes, it's a dog act to throw your former club and everybody still actively involved with it under a bus. Just to try to get more attention/ratings for a stupid interview. What's unbelievable is somebody trying to commend McLean's actions and go as far as to praise him for the Jackson appointment.

I voted Tyson. I've seen enough to know that if he can avoid injury, he will consistently be part of the elite at this club. I voted yes for a recruit and it went to Lumumba. He's a soldier that would make any AFL team's starting 22 better for him being there. That's what Roos was looking for and what was found, his immediate inclusion into the leadership group isn't a coincidence.

The guy is renowned as a devlopmental genius. All he'd have to do is drop a couple of names to make said interview highly interesting.

Didn't happen because Libba Snr recanted his comments when questioned by the AFL. McLean had the same option but decided to make a stand and to snitch as much as he possibly could at the detriment of this footy club and to become the sole reason why tanking actually became something to officially investigate. I really liked him as a player at this club and didn't entirely dislike him for leaving but I lost all respect after he did that. Dog act. Totally unnecessary. And the biggest impact Brock ever made at AFL level.

Cheerleaders?

I can see Viney really stepping it up a notch under the tuition of McCartney, becoming more Libba-esque.

I don't believe FA is all about premiership tilts. Goddard, Dal Santo and Daisy didn't walk out on their previous clubs for a legitimate flag contender. They walked for money. This club can afford to offer a much more lucrative salary than any other club, which gives Patrick 3 options: A) Stay at Adelaide for a possible long-term premiership B) Move to a legitimate premiership contender for considerably less dollars than market value C) Get the "marquee" money overs here for a possible long-term premiership

A bidding war that favours the richest clubs with no salary cap repercussions? Very filth, very 2 chins.

Has any other club got more cap space than we do? And would they be willing to spend as much on a midfielder as we are willing to pay for Danger? Is there a bigger personnel drawcard for him at a rival club than Goodwin and Vince? These questions have me optimistic about how things will play out this year, it's a long shot but the MFC is certainly a chance.

The fact that Clark quit before ever playing a game in the same forward line as Dawes is what most bugs me more than anything. Depression, wanting to move to a club in flag contention: okay yes, they are reasons to move on. But just give it a try, another year to run on the heavily funded contract it surely wasn't too much to ask. But he left and the way he did so, I don't have much respect for Clark. I'm thinking we got glimpses of what Fremantle and Brisbane saw before us. I'd say he's going to do well at Geelong if his injuries can be minimalised, it's really going to suck seeing him in the same forward line as Tomahawk before ever getting to see him play alongside Dawes or Hogan.

Footscray has been a mess since Griff requested a trade. Not that I care at all, my sole interest is what McCartney can do with the young guys on this list.

The players have far too much power and it's only getting worse (i.e Ryder, Beams, Clark). Implementing this would give some of the power back to the clubs. I like the concept of all players being employed by the AFL so being traded/drafted by clubs should be part & parcel of the trade (regardless of player consent), if you want to play this game at the highest level then it's something you have to accept.

That's my take on it as well. I highly rate Malthouse as a coach but he can be somewhat particular with players; Garlett, Duigan, Waite, Scotland, Robinson were obviously out of favour very early in the set. And the off-field stuff heightened the inevitability of departure for Garlett/Robinson whilst also reducing interest and value on the trade table.

Flower, Stynes, Lyon, Neitz, Jones, Tyson.

Has anyone seen Catfish? How can you be sure whatever said letter from said unknown is what it claims to be? The club did a great thing for the kid and that's what the article is about. Why focus on the speculative negative of the story when there's a clear positive?