The Chazz

Dom Tyson. That is all. After that, our premiership chances rely on Viney, Salem, Hogan, Toumpas, Trengove, getting to "elite" status, which will be one level below where Tyson is. I hope that by that stage, Jones, Frawley, Dawes and Vince still have something to offer.

Ah, The Wiz. My all time equal favourite player - shares that title with Robbie Flower, and with Sean Wight a close third. "The" day against Collingwood was interesting. Dragged in the first half, then got a chance for redemption when Ben Beams broke his arm. The rest is history. The first minute or two of the 1998 final against North had me believing. Wiz took a hanger, and I thought it was going to be our night. I knew if we could roll them we would take it out. I think that was probably the year that should've been for us, more than any, including 1987 and 2002. Was inconsolable when he left - was like the bloke on that Hilux ad when the ute went over the cliff. To rub salt in, I think he kicked a winner against us at Freo one night, and celebrated in true Wizardry style. Still brought a smile to my face...bastard! Jaded (post #5) - Miller needs to look that way, and maintain it for the next 35 years. Seen what he's married to lately?

If he has in fact chosen Geelong, which given the most recent source I've nearly drawn a line through the Cats as a likely destination, it's almost confirming that we won't get a Top 5 pick for him. My money would be an offer of $2m over 4 years, takes him up to 29, then will get a 3 year extension at the end of that. There is no way they would offer him the sort of dollars that would see us compensated with a pick that high. Their list management team are far smarter than that. Still, I guess we might use a mid-teens pick on luring a superstar midfielder to our ranks.

Done... On the MFC site. You f'n beauty.

RP, we will still have our first round draft pick to do "something" with. We don't need to hope/rely on getting top compensation if JF goes, just so we can add to our midfield. If only we knew what the criteria/formula is to working out the Free Agency compensation. Given it's short history, $700k a year will get you Band 1, I don't think $500k will. A majority of posters on here think we will get Band 1, but then a different majority don't think he's worth $700k. They are two different majorities, but I'm sure there will be people who are in both groups.

Nutbean, well said. RPFC said that our backline might be 85/100 without him, and 90/100 with him. I'd like to see James with another year or two under Roos, with the view that it would make our backline 100/100 rather than 95/100. To win a flag you must have the best you can get in the backline. That's why teams are apparently lining up for JFs services.

Ok RP, here goes... Read Pages 19 and 20. Is a player that "puts in half arsed efforts", "one of the dumbest footballers running around", is a "slow decision maker", that plays with "no urgency", is a "liability" going to be offered more than $400k a year by a premiership contending team? Even "fired up" (post #472) believes he isn't worth "any amount over 400 000", which I would expect all 18 clubs would be of the same view of a player possessing the above flaws. From there, a player getting picked up for less than $400k would not attract a compensation pick that would be of significant value in the pursuit of attracting a star midfielder through trade, or obtaining one through the draft. To do that we would require a Top 5 pick, which the majority of posters would agree, but yet a number of the posters calling for this would also agree with my opening paragraph. Ashdemon (post #49) called him "spud", which he could be getting confused with his uncle's nickname. That said, and again looking at the characteristics in my opening paragraph, I'd imagine if one player had all these flaws, then a "spud" would probably be a kind way of discussing his ability. Now, if you want to continue being a smart ass, that's fine, but I will have no more time for you on this matter.

STMJ - at some stage we need to have trust and develop what we have. At some stage we need to think that we can be a finals team - a train of thought that should be a prerequisite at the start of every preseason. Will we make finals this year? No. Will we make finals next year? Yes, and there's no reason that we shouldn't think we can't. We've won 4 games this year, and been leading in the last quarter in another 5 (from memory, might even be 6). Next year, we have to believe we can turn those games in to wins. That could be 10 wins, with 8 games still to play. Frawley could be playing finals for us next year, and he will a> have a significant say is us achieving this, and b> as you have stated above, play a serious role in September.

You answered, and agreed here... "Your argument that he would improve our backline is without a doubt true..." We are on 4 fcuking wins. Raise your bar FFS.

Can't "bump" RP as my "reply" button doesn't work. I'll let you know post numbers. Given that we will get a Top 5 pick because of our ladder position anyway, I'm happy to use that to bolster our midfield. Would much rather that and keep Frawley than lose him and have two picks, one of which is not certain to be a Top 5.

The main reason Rivers, Sylvia or Moloney leaving hasn't hurt us is because they were no good, and have been easily replaced. Frawley will be the first one that hurts us if he goes. It will be clear for everyone to see when/if he's running around playing against us.

I ask myself some questions regarding this situation; - Would our backline be better with Frawley in it? I am in no doubt it would be. - If a club, let's say Hawthorn, are willing to offer him reasonable money to join them, then why? They are not going to pay overs for a bloke, so clearly another club would see that he would improve their backline too. Makes me confirm the answer to my first question. Because of the answers to the above, I then ask; - Why would we let someone go, who obviously makes our backline better, just so he can go and make another team's backline better? I don't use the compensation of a draft pick to cloud my judgement in trying to work out my answer to that. STMJ mentioned that our compensation pick would significantly increase our chances of nabbing a star midfielder. Seriously? I find it funny how some think Frawley is an absolute spud, then put their hands out for a 1st round compo pick. Yes, there is a formula used, but why would another team pay top dollar for this so called "spud"? In my view, and I think it's pretty accurate, he'll need to be offered $600k minimum for us to qualify for a pick immediately after our first. Some on here wouldn't be willing to pay $400k for him, yet are happy to spend the top 5 pick they think we will get for him. Only on Demonland!

B59 - I can assure you, having access to the research side of a university is a lot easier when it's on campus (or even a walk from "A" Block to "J Block"), than having to go from one side of the CBD to the other. I know it doesn't make sense, but that's how they operate! The trade off would be for UofM to have a presence in AAMI Park, but room and facilities wouldn't be anywhere near as good as what they have at their "home".

Clearly, the best option for us as a "home base" would be in the MCG precinct. OK, so we missed out on the Westpac Centre area, so what, we move on. We are now training at Gosch's Paddock, and have a FD based in the AAMI Park area (shared with other codes), with our admin at the MCG. So, what are our options? - Expand the Gosch's Paddock area, with facilities good enough to cater for both FD and administration - Look at other greenfield areas within a close proximity of the MCG and CBD - Look at current facilities that may not be utilised In answer to the first point - have we not looked at this already? Is this why we are looking at alternatives, knowing too well that it (GP expansion) is not achievable? In regards to the second point - WHERE???!!! There is space within the MCG existing car parks, but that comes with a whole heap of barriers no doubt. Any other greenfield developments will come with a massive expense, something that I'm uncertain if we would be able to fund. If at all possible, the area between the MCG and Jolimont Station would be the best location; close to the National Sports Museum, not far from where our MCG changerooms are, etc, but such a dream on my behalf for thinking of it! The only "logical" option (presuming option 1 has been investigated) is to look at using existing facilities, but where? - Junction Oval - was our training home, reasonably close to the CBD, but have we allowed St Kilda to sneak in underneath us? - Punt Road Oval - ideal, but most probably a not-in-a-million-years option The Uni of Melb facility (may not be an idea according to Toots) is the closest to our CBD that isn't either taken by a club already, or isn't even built yet. We've got to weigh it up - expand the Gosch's Paddock area, get involved with the new Docklands area, or look at partnerships such as the UofM.

I think it's a great idea. The Uni of Melbourne is a leading, actually, it's THE leading university it Australia. It is rich with history, and (in it's own category) it IS Melbourne. There are a lot of similarities between the Uni of Melbourne and the MFC. It will give us exposure to a whole new potential membership base, where the "local members" won't have to drive an hour out the road to feel part of the club. Universities like the Uni of Melbourne attract experts of their field. For us to have access to some of these experts, through sports science/medical/etc is potentially a massive boost that our FD could have access to, without the need to spend millions of dollars getting it. Is it building our "Melbourne" brand in the CBD? Well, it aint a Collins Street address, so I guess not directly. But learning from an organisation that leverages the word "Melbourne" in their name on an international level is something that we could benefit from. I'll watch this space, but I'm very interested with the initial reports, and look forward to hearing about this in more detail.

C'mon RF, he's been playing forward most of the year, and is 2nd on our goal kicking. Are you implying that even when playing forward he still costs us goals? There were a lot of contributing factors as to why we lost yesterday. Frawley is a long way down the list of them.

_H_, I don't think finding 850+ members to put in $100 each will do the job with the salary cap. Don't think $85k will buy us much in terms of elite talent.

I would imagine if Frawley said "let's talk", we'd be all ears. Using the stat of how many goals we have shaved off this year isn't 100% due to our backline. It has just as much to do with a much improved midfield unit that is pushing back and helping out. I'd be interested to know how many more scoring shots our opponents have had this year compared to last. To say the backline doesn't need Frawley is obviously 100% correct - they are operating without him, and are surviving. Clearly, you're happy to survive rather than take it to higher levels, as you and I both know, he would make it significantly better.

Am I the only one that couldn't give a toss about Lynch? He was heavily involved in the $cully situation, and was just as crooked in the whole situation. Lynch can gof huck himself for all I care. Other than that, thanks for the report.

We've won 4 games out of 13, we sit 15th on the ladder, and you think an AA quality defender isn't an integral part of our backline? The question is how much would he improve our backline. The club will have a fair view of that, you have your opinion, I have mine. Is he worth $700k? Is that his asking price? You are making assumptions on nothing other than a newspaper article. Frawley's even admitted himself that it is incorrect, so given you are taking his word for everything else, it would make sense that you do with this too.

RPFC - he had to be replaced in the backline because he was needed forward. Tom Macs development was always going to be better in the long run by leaving him in the backline, Garland was unavailable due to injury, and Dunn, well, he was moved forward as well. As it has turned out, the backline has worked bloody well without Frawley, mainly because they had to. Frawley is our best defender, and our backline is a far better place with him in it. I can't believe your argument is that "it's functioning well without him". Is that your ceiling? I get excited about thinking about the level it could go to with him back down there. It could be the difference between a finals backline compared to a premiership backline. Surely even you can see the point now?

RP, are you saying that if Hogan was 100% fit, then Frawley would be playing at Casey, given you are of the view that Frawley is not required in the backline due to it currently "working without him", and that you have Dawes and Hogan as key forwards with Pedersen interchanging forward/back/ruck depending on match ups? Wow.

Why doesn't my quote button work? Very annoying. I'm of the view that if we were in a position where we could afford to do it, I would move Frawley back to the backline at the blink of an eye, and everyone would move around to fit him in. At the moment we need him to play KPF, mainly due to the fact that Fitzy isn't "eligible" to play seniors due to form at Casey, Clark has gone and Hogan is injured. If Hogan was 100% fit, there is NO chance Frawley would be dropped for him. Chip would find himself straight in the backline and someone will make way for him. How that doesn't equal a very important player (top 5) is beyond me. RPFC - for the sake of it, who's your Top 5 most important at the MFC?

I think he is going, and thought it for a while. But instead of saying that our backline has copped without him for much of this year, I'm in absolutely no doubt that our backline would be better with him in it. RPFC - If all things are fair and equal (ie no injury list, players playing in their position of strength, etc), Frawley is absolutely in the Top 5 of our most important players.

Saty, saw you mentioned Vince doing light duties. Was he copping any extra attention from the medical staff? I said in the "changes" thread that he appeared to be playing injured. I wouldn't be surprised if he is ruled out this week.