binman

Wow - hard to recall a thread on DL with such (near) universal agreement. Wayne Carey bringing people together!

I'm confused - is that an exclamation mark or a note of sarcasm (which as if i understand Chook correctly has parenthesis around the exclamation mark)

I listened to a fairly big part of Jones's speech (it goes for 16 minutes!) and was surprised to hear that in his thank yous he gave Gerard Healy a huge wrap and said he had been mentoring him for the last 2 years. Said something along the lines that he had played a significant role in helping him achieve the plan he had set himself 2 years ago and when he doubted himself Gerard was there for him. Said Kelly O'Donnell and someone else from the club had connected them.

What the hell are you talking about? Perhaps you've got your posts mixed up as i was simply making a (poor) wordplay joke, was actually quoting another poster and to be honest have absolute zero interest in your random theories about our possible trading scenarios. And for what its worth i understand the trading rules.

I like her but she ends to over think things

You are The Lion King.

Not bad attributes for a footballer. Seriously though one of our biggest problems i reckon is how poor our field kicking is. It is one of the reasons Watts stands out.

Perhaps not but what chance Goldsack?

Big Jim i know your heart is in the right place but i have to say this is not helpful. Remember its high stakes poker the club is playing. The advantage of getting Viney second round is massive and should not be underestimated. Put simply if GC have no doubt we'll take him, well of course they'll nominate him and force our hand. If they're not sure they won't take the risk. I have no contact with anyone at the club or any inside info what so ever. However i suspect the club would prefer passionate fans don't tip their hand, particularly when it comes to quoting our CEO.

A question to the mods. How on earth has this fella got to 800 plus posts. In his last post alone he broke most of the code of conduct rules!

What are you talking about? Of course there is an advantage to be bluffing about this. If we think there is a genuine risk they will nominate Viney (and we really, really want him) we are more likely to do a deal with them that involves as part of said deal them not nominating him. For example (and in complete contradiction to your point about Caddy) we could offer pick 13 and Pettard (or Bate, Morton, Cook etc etc or even a combination deal) for Caddy and a promise not to pick Viney. Forget the AFL direction that this is illegal - impossible to prove so all bets are off in that regard. The extent to which we think any bluff they make (for example through orchestrated leaks to the media, football fan sites such as DL and social media) is for real will influence our preparedness to trade. The point about good bluffing is not knowing whether it is for real or not. I'd love to play poker with you BTW

Huh? Proven? Who said they want him at pick 2? Question mark? We'll soon find out if they want him at 2. If they do they will call his name out. If not it is bluff and bluster (good name for a legal from btw). As suggested by a few posters they want a sweetener not to call his name out. I reckon the dees won't mind giving up a little sugar (do you take Pettard with your tea caddy) but i doubt they will be too generous I'm a betting man and i'm betting they're bluffing. Chances they''ll read out JV's name at number 2 = 5-10%

Melbourne has the whip hand here. GWS and/or GC have to play their hand first and we get the opportunity to respond. If the motivation to nominate Viney is preventing us taking him min the second round as opposed to really wanting him with such a high pick then it is simply too big a risk i would have thought - and is one i doubt they''ll take. If they do nominate him and we rate him say a top 6 player then we get him number 3 and we win or. On the other hand if our assessment is we can a a better player at no 3 then we also win, though I think Viney will be good player so GWS or GC would hardly lose if they end up with him. High stakes poker, but i like our hand

Perhaps you have misunderstood me. Lets say it is true (ie 15 players want out). Does it change my view? Not one iota. If they want out, get out. Go to another club. Now. That leaves 30 blokes who want to be there. Lets be clear: it is about the club not the players.

Comedy gold! As i've said before when you wrote the same drivel get rid of the 15 who want to go - not Neeld. I think you'll find the club is currently helping any player who wants achieve their aim. Good riddance. That will leaves 30 who want to be there. Replace the 15 who want out with 15 who are committed and bingo we're halfway there. I wish a few DL posters would investigate their options to leave. Money on the demons to win the spoon already huh? How about you and i have a side bet. I bet we won't. Loser quits Demonland (and promises not to come back under another name). You on (or are you all talk)?

Blimey don't open that can of worms. My recollection is different - at least in terms of Cook.

I have read this 3 times and still cannot work out what you are trying to say. Its like some ingenious riddle.

Speaking of old ground - how is BP working out at the blues? I guess Malthouse will be super keen to have someone of his obvious talent in his team. And as for this thread - are you for real? Sure we might go after Jacobs but it will have no connection whatsoever with Jurrah.

Not even in hindsight?

That's funny. Just wrote on the Neeld Lyon thread that our membership tagline should be: BUY IN!

The tagline for next years membership drive shouldn't have been first and forever. It should have been: BUY IN!

Noooooooooo! I couldn't stand it!. One can only imagine the smug, sycophantic post from RR. Something like: Oh oh! or Woops! or A better mark than Jezza (and twice as attractive) - and we opted for a spud who couldn't catch a cold

Early contender for this weeks silliest thread.

Spot on. To commit to the sort of training loads the top teams (an wannabe top teams) apparently have to undertake takes, i would assume, compete buy in in order to push through the barriers. A player who doesn't get it or doesn't accept the vision is more likely to quit when the going gets really tough and not really put in the hard yards. Certainly that player is more likely not to take on board direction from coaching and fitness staff. There was an interesting post recently about 50% of players coming back from their break not having done the work they were told to do. Doing that work, even if you think its rubbish (or perhaps especially) is buy in.

I'm a little confused by this. I agree the culture of playing for draft picks has not been helpful but clearly under Neeld the club is now following the harder road and in many ways i see Neeld having a very similar approach to Lyon, particularly in terms of being clear about the need to change the culture of the club and not worrying about offending peoples in his attempts to do so. And the bit about looking for a savior to cure our ills? Wouldn't Lyon have been a saviour type? Neeld is a first time coach, which doesn't really look good on the savior CV.