Dr. Mubutu

The Hawthorn blueprint. Hopefully we strike as much draft gold as they did 7-11 years ago.

I've invested enough to be expecting Parish to be called out at #3, but not enough for wailing and gnashing of teeth if that doesn't happen. As has been observed numerous times before, it's different and strangely refreshing to be headed to the draft with two top ten picks, and not being overly attached to any draftees.

I wouldn't be surprised that it was that very reason Hawthorn traded pick 94 for him.

To be fair, Hogan and Viney saw some with GCS as well. They took Jaeger as pick 1, and also didn't bid on Viney.

1-2. Scache/Weitering (Carl/Bris) - the best 2. Simply a matter of who Carlton rate more highly. 3. WILDCARD. If they lose Dixon and Smith, I can see them taking Weideman over Francis. This is highly dependent on other trades - but realistically they could go anywhere, given they've just lost Bennell, and are probably expecting to lose Prestia in the near future. (GCS) 4. Francis - if available. Otherwise? Probably Parish. (Ess) 5. Mathieson - They need to replace departing players. The best bet to replace Montagna. (StK) The way I see it, Curnow will probably still be available. I'd wager we're trying to shake a few trees and see what drops. Given the reliance on talls in the pointy end of this draft, I'd be very surprised if we were actually interested in keeping pick 3 in the mooted trade with GCS. Edit: This was all over the place. Changed my mind mid-post and forgot to take out some of it.

Found it, was in reference to Bennell. http://demonland.com/forums/index.php?/topic/38895-harley-bennell/?view=findpost&p=1155712

Guys, this talk of trading 2 second-rounders for GWS' first pick isn't new. It was posited on BigFooty a month ago, and I'm sure I brought the idea over here too. I'm sure if the club saw it as a good idea, they'd be all over it.

More likely to be Pendlebury, he supported Melbourne don'tcha know......

This just reminds me of how hard we won the 2012 trade week. Even if we did get in Chris Dawes and Dom Barry. Hogan, plus Viney at pick 26. About the only thing done properly at MFC from 2008- mid 2013.

Now you're using Demonland logic!

Goodes reveals he almost retired after booing controversy Unsurprisingly, he almost considered not coming back after the awful treatment he copped from the notoriously awful West Coast fans. I'm certainly glad he did. Not only did he leave with his head held high, but he almost single-handedly dragged the Swans back into the game against the Dockers. An absolute champion of the game, and the best player for the Swans since they moved to Sydney (IMO). He's done some questionable things, but who amongst us hasn't? Well done, Mr Goodes. You're an ornament of the game, more than worthy to sit in the company of Bob Skilton and Barry Round, two men who you've name-checked as legends of the Bloods.

Thankyou to all here, at least we all know we share good taste. Living in regional Queensland, I may as well be in a foreign country. When we finally do win, we can count on the site being down for at least a week. It's the least we could give Nasher as a celebratory gift.

I'm Melbourne at this stage,Tony, I'm Melbourne....I'm Melbourne, and I'm Melbourne through and through. - Norm Smith, 1965. Perhaps Col has the same role models that most of us here do.

Could it be that he and Nathan Jones could be seen as 2 very similar players? Shining lights in eras of horrible darkness. Fitting, really, that they share the #2. I don't mean this as any disrespect to Robbie, more to highlight the hard work of our current captain.

Great article outlining the new football department structure for 2016. http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/2015-10-09/dees-announce-new-football-structure The article also has an enlightening interview with Josh Mahoney (Widely seen as one of the rising stars in football admin, and you can see why.) Essentially, we're beefing up our development and gameplan areas, as well as undertaking an annual review of requirements in the coaching ranks, with the relevant staff having input on this (the senior coaching staff structure). I see this continuous review as a massive upside, as I've said in a few threads over the past few months. The club looks to be ticking all of the right boxes as far as the off-field requirements go, with appropriate allocation of resources. The next step is the on-field part. Hopefully the constant mis-steps are a thing of the past. At least the football conversations are coming from the appropriate channels now, unlike under previous administrations.

At the risk of this thread devolving into more of a farce than it already is.......surely Jack Watts gets a look-in for the wing? (His best position, IMO. Would love to see him delivering the footy I50.)

Sure it's not Agent Stabler?

I think they're hoping that Adelaide will just give up on Dangerfield and let him walk. Keep pushing, Crows. As for the second part, all I can think is third-party deals.

Really? Brad Green doesn't strike me as that kind of fellow.

Can we leave the Big Footy slang on Big Footy, please? For Frank's sake.

We've seen nothing but quantum movements. Little steps. That's kind of the problem - we were hoping for massive changes. A "big fish" would almost bring with him a huge improvement, or at least that's how Demonland sees it. For now, I have to be happy with quantum movements. As long as they're moving forward.

Kennedy will not help with run. He's small, but that doesn't mean he's super fast. Thinking this is akin to believing that Nev Jetta would be a small forward, when it was abundantly clear he wasn't from day 1. He'd be OK as an inside mid, but we've just got rid of two of those types. No for me.