Rogue

No surprises - they've both said that previously. As Yze reportedly admits, I think he has a minimal chance of getting picked up.

I thought it was fair enough. Archer didn't defend the conduct of the Sun (pretty sure he said it was poor/he wouldn't do it or something), simply said that Wilson would have done the same.

On Demonology, RobbieF reported that on SEN this morning it was said that objections from some of the old Board were the reason Schwab pulled out initially, but that was smoothed over by the new Board.

^ Yes. It's not surprising - Holland probably won't be getting a send-off game, isn't a Club Champion, and didn't hold a press conference. This is on the MFC website, and in the weekly Members email. There's a function, and it's at Olympic Park I imagine it'll be at the same place the Queens Bday function was at. Stynes, Bailey, and the players will be in attendance. Apparently there are activities for kids.

Check out this thread on Demonology. - I doubt any Club has made up their mind. - If it is confirmed, we'll never know.

Yes, wins in rubbish years are meaningless. I want a flag, and decisions that are aimed at winning us a flag give me hope as a supporter. TJ won't be around for our next flag tilt and was thus expendable. Another year, and TJ's value would have plummetted. No thanks. This is all ignoring the off-field side of TJ.

Everything I've heard from Schwab today suggests he's singing from the same sheet as Stynes when it comes to Casey.

Don't bother sending that memo to Schwab, he's well aware of that ...and that's why we're going hard at Casey, and why we argued for a 30 year presence in the area when it came to the contract renegotations post-Stynes' ascension.

White was on his last legs, while PJ and Jamar hadn't nailed down a ruck role either. Far from being concerned we have too many rucks, we need more. Not bad. Upgrading by more than a couple of players for White'd be a steal, though. I mean King was traded for nothing (a pick that Geelong didn't use, iirc?).

Possible, but considering we just posted a record membership, I think we're okay in that regard.

They're bigger than us, so it makes sense.

Interesting...

While it was the Sun, I didn't think it was Hutchy who nabbed the interview. Didn't think Wilson copped too much flak tonight, either. I do agree that Archer's poor on that show, though. He was better than last time I saw it, but that's not saying much. His attempt at a soapbox moment re: Firrito's gesture was cringe-worthy.

He shed some light on this when he was asked the question on SEN. I posted a brief run-down of some of the discussion in post 45.

I'd reply, but 45hotgood's done it all (give or take a lazy 100K). ...and providing your assumption's correct, that % donated by the majority is probably inflated, given that some would have donated more than $500, and not all who have donated $500 will be able to make the luncheon / have organised to attend yet.

Suggests that most of the $ comes from a relatively small amount of people.

SEN had an interview with Schwab earlier this evening. On his 'u-turn' - Responding to his apparent 'u-turn' on the job offer, Schwab confirmed that he had pulled out last week. However, he said he had met with some of the Board on Saturday(?), and had changed his mind. Schwab said that the calibre of Board members impressed him, noting the fact they were passionate about Melbourne, and were realistic about the plight of the Club despite being new to the industry. Schwab admitted that there was an emotional plea (the fact that the MFC might not be around much longer), and that the challenge of the job was part of the allure. SEN asked who specifically had managed to get him to change hid mind, and specifically who of Stynes, Lyon, and CC had nabbed him. While indicating that he was impressed by Styne's Debt Demolition, Schwab said that it was actually a couple of the Board members had a big say in him coming to the Club (I don't think he mentioned them by name). Schwab explained while he respected Stynes, and had an involvement with him when at MFC previously, Schwab hadn't looked Stynes up socially since the late 90's. IIRC, Schwab said that he hadn't really spoken to CC about the job, as he had pulled out of the process earlier on, before calling him today to let him know he was interested. Other points - Schwab talked about the fragmentation that occurred around the Club post-merger, suggesting it was a very difficult time to be involved in the Club, and said that there seemed a 'unity of purpose' this time around. Schwab spoke about the financial situation of the MFC, and labelled it 'dire'. However, he suggested it that it was no worse than Richmond's 'SOS' campaign, and Fremantles $8M debt. Echoing Stynes, he said that making the Club profitable - financially independent - was the #1 priority. When asked a question 'as an outsider, who hasn't had time to look at the books', Schwab indicated that you'd be silly not to look at the books before taking on a job like this, and said that he had looked at them. Schwab said that Melbourne had not been able to put together a sustainable business model since the 60s, and mentioned Richmond's arrival at the MCG as a turning point. When asked about Hawthorn and Fremantle's turn-arounds, he said that there may be similarities, a business model tailored for Melbourne needed to be created. However, Schwab indicated that there are similar things that get people interested in being involved in a Club. Fwiw, I thought Schwab came across pretty well.

I agree.

Gold :D Thanks for your match reports.

We'll only face sanctions if we offered him a contract.

What does it matter if TJ's played good footy this year? How would that have helped us? Best case scenario, it may have allowed us to put in some better performances, although whether that would have meant (m)any more wins is debatable. However, in the scheme of things, wins in the next couple of years are virtually meaningless when it comes to winning a flag, as we're a long way off contending, and TJ will be over the hill by that time.

You missed pulling him up on Moloney etc too. Anyhow, to comment on the actual post, I guess the rankings aren't too bad, although trying to fit players into categories is problematic. Is Davey a small forward? He's played more in the midfield over the past year or two. Robertson plays as a KPF, although the height criteria excludes him. Morton hasn't played as a KPF, so I'd have put him in the midfielders group.

Recruiters have suggested that Nat will be a project player, so I don't think he's the quick-fix option. I'd hate to think our recruiters were factoring in the marketing potential of prospective draftees.

I don't know about Maric, but I think Valenti's pace (or lackthereof) may have had something to do with his demotion.