Dr. Mubutu

Watts would be 3rd man up at best. He is not suited to the ruck position (quasi or genuine) at all.

2 players for 1 player? The maths checks out.........

Nowhere near Nathan Jones, who has played in 150 losses. (Garland has played in 102) Robbie Flower tops the list, having played in 184. Current MFC players who have a worse win-loss ratio: Matt Jones Tom McDonald Dom Tyson Jeremy Howe Jack Grimes Nev Jetta Edit: should quote my source, the excellent AFL Tables: http://afltables.com/afl/stats/alltime/misc_players.html It's worthwhile noting as well that all of the players mentioned above are in the bottom 20 for current players' win-loss ratio, along with Jordie McKenzie and Rohan Bail.

Why not? It's a perfectly cromulent word.

And we would have had to keep Lucas Cook, Rory Taggert, Dom Barry, among others, for 4 years. It's a two-way street.

Me? Never.

Yes.

What? Was Kent playing? Was Frost? Petracca? Spencer (who, like it or not, will be on the list next year)? Who's to say he didn't have some soft-tissue complaint, or that they wanted to have a look at some fringe player to see if he showed some promise? There are far better arguments than "He didn't play in a rubbish late-season game". You, I and Blind Freddy can all see that.

ANB will take some time. He's a midfielder, without the tank to be so at the AFL level. He's been played as a small forward due to a dearth of options, and showed some promising signs. With another preseason or 2, he could become a real weapon rotating forward on displayed performances. Edit: Apologies this isn't about Michie. But, realistically, ANB will hopefully fill the spot Michie is currently far better at the end of 2016.

Well, if you read the article, it's only tangentially so. They take into account the AFLCA player of the year votes, and select players based on the players with the most votes in each positional role. Who decides which players fit in each role is never actually addressed. Sure, it's a nice gesture, but to say it's chosen by the coaches is misleading at best.

When all is said and done, here's the question we need to ask about Jack. Is he better for our team than whatever we may get for him (given exposed form, B&F finishes and whatever else other clubs may see value in) this year? For me, the answer's yes. If he chooses to leave next year, well fair enough, that's the game now with free agency. I have no doubt that a few clubs would back themselves in. Draft positions, at this point, are all academic. He's a Melbourne player, and contracted to play at Melbourne in 2016. Would he receive the same scrutiny if he wasn't a number 1 pick? Well, no, but the fact is that he was. The most important job for the coaching group, I think, is to downplay that fact internally. The most important facts are thus: He possesses some sublime skills He is currently at the crossroads. He showed what he can do against Collingwood, then stunk it up against Footscray. If he can bring some consistency to his game, supporters/media will still have a field day, but I'm sure he'll be getting some very positive reinforcement from the club. We'll not receive his fair worth in a trade, given all of the media scrutiny. He's still a good player, and he's on our list. It would be in our best interests to support the bloke, and hope the coaching group can insulate him enough so that he repays the faith. I still haven't lost mine.

Probably meant to say "He could have ended up a Demon." Was our first choice, but the Swans were unwilling to let him go. Nothing to see here.

Was good, until his foot fell off.

Well done, Daniel. You have wrung every ounce out of yourself. You have the true respect of the Melbourne Football Club after only two years. If there's a person who follows the AFL who doesn't respect your drive and application, they have obviously never seen you play. Hopefully you'll be able to mentor the next generation of AFL players to be as bloody-minded as you were.

Well, he's officially been delisted. Honestly, I think he'll be the only player I'll be sad to see go this off season. Loved the way he went about it, always gave his all and kept trying to improve his game. Unfortunately, the game has once again changed, and his set of skills, imperative only 5 years ago, is on the outer now. Thanks for all your hard work, Jordie. You did all you could to get the most out of yourself, and we can't ask for any more than that. I, personally, will always hold you in the highest regard due to your attitude and application. Hold your head high, as you were one of the few who can stand tall having been through one of the darkest periods ever experienced by a football club, and not being disgraced (even in 186). All the best, and hopefully you'll continue to be an upstanding MFC person.

Not sure if serious?It was brought in to be a token gesture to look like the AFL weren't engaging in restriction of trade, so the players' union didn't kick up a stink.

Whilst $400k sounds like a lot now, bear in mind that the average player salary is now only about $360k. This takes into account the first and second year players, as well as rookies, who are on well below $200k. Given the new TV rights deal, I think that $1.6m over four years will be a standard contract for a player on the cusp of the best 22 who is essentially depth at about the midpoint of the mooted contract period. Yes, this sounds like a lot to the standard supporter, but when the big picture is taken into account, it's really chump change compared to the sycophants at AFL House, who take on nowhere near the risk the players do.

He'll hand over the reins, but still be in the front seat. Think of it as $1.5m spent by the AFL to keep a healthy 18-team competition (as that's basically what it is). I realise that that's quite an indictment on the club, but it's the reality of where we were at.

As much as I've been on his case over the past two years, reevaluating his season this year, he's done his job. With little to no fanfare (barring the Geelong game). As of right now, I'm OK with keeping him on the list. Sure, ideally I'd prefer someone more skilled, but we need to deal with reality here. He's trying his hardest, and as long as everyone on the list does the same, we'll improve. To be blunt, he's better than these 4, and better than the equivalent pick we'd get by delisting him. Trade 'week' is a long time, and he's one of those expendable, but if our list doesn't undergo massive changes by October 31, I'll understand if he's still at Melbourne in 2016.

Looking at it when we're no longer playing in the season, one could argue that on-field performance was one of the last things that we brought Roos in for. (I'm sure I've heard Roos say, or at least intimate, that point himself. Maybe I imagined it.) Roos will still be the public face of the club. Without a doubt. He will probably still be leading the player management (as, IMO, this is where his true strengths lie). But the nitty-gritty, day-to-day, training and gameplan stuff that is traditionally the role of the senior coach is probably already in transition to Goodwin. It just means, while he's finding his feet as a senior coach, there aren't media-led witch hunts as to why 'Goodwin's team' aren't performing/meeting expectations/whatever. It also removes some of the pressure of being the public face of the MFC, which as we have seen, is half the job anyway. Take some of the heat off, while the team set about trying to meet his expectations. I have no doubt that it's all a front, and luckily, the media are all too happy to play along. If it works, Jackson looks like a genius. If it doesn't, well, at least we get a few more years before we completely implode.

Looks like they took my suggestion seriously....

Was going to make a post all in past tense, but even though the drums are beating, he's still on the list, so I'll hold off. I'm a big fan of Jordie, and love the way he goes about his footy. That'll do for now.

Really hoping the 'Beta Spuds' advertisement at 0:20 isn't indicative of his playing ability......

You know you're talking about olisik, right?