nutbean

chose to believe, chose not to believe. it will all be over soon. BTW - you are welcome to join BB and myself for a glass of milk of magnesia ( for our ulcers) when this is all over ! cheers !

ok - I will concede that if you believe the club already knew then you are 100% right - they would have been allocating the Scully money elsewhere. Didnt realise you had added this gem into the picture as well

So much wrong here i dont know where to start So I will give you this one - times everything you said by five as its a five year contract. Secondly put the next multiplier on that GWS (as GC17) are heavily front loading their contracts - so are the MFC but obviously with the bigger amount on offer from GWS it is a bigger amount. Is it an indictment on Geelong, Bulldogs, Adelaide, Port Adelaide, Hawthorn that their players up and left for GC17 ? That someone leaves for bucket loads of money is purely a reflection on the player that he is motivated by lots of money. Trengove on the other hand is not.

You are trying to link Trenners re-signing with Scully and GWS. You stated that he signed when he did because his management knew Trenners was no longer available to GWS because GWS were taking Scully. If Trenners was at all interested in GWS then the reason could only be for money and if it was about money for him then he would wait until the announcement was official because if Scully goes there will be $600K PA more in the kitty to splash about. So tell me - how on earth was the timing of Trenners signing beneficial financially to him at that time ? As opposed to after Scully has declared his hand and there is $600K more PA

No - i haven't taken you to task on most of your stuff because it was logical opinion even though i didnt agree with it. You are trying to have an each way bet. Your original post suggested that Trenners signed with MFC because he knew that Scully had signed GWS and that basically made Trenners off limits to GWS. If he was even contemplating GWS being after him then he would contemplate it for the money. So common sense dictates that you wait for the SScully announcement to be official and then there is more money for all. Common sense tells me Trenners signed when he did because he is happy with his offer and doesnt compare to what others may or may not get and i take him exactly at his word that the timing was a good omen in bad times for the club. Edit: as soon as you try and link GWS with Trenners thinking you argument comes unstuck - GWS = money and he would have had more bargaining power after an official announcement not before. He signed when he did because money and GWS is not a motivating factor

I gotta bite again - For Trenners to sign three weeks ago because he was certain Scully was going to GWS is just plain dumb - simply zero reason for Trenners to do it when he did when he could wait a month and know for absolute certain when announced. Trenners contract is not up until next year. Common sense would lead you to the conclusion that the club is still suggesting that Scully is staying. Common sense would lead you to the conclusion that had Trenners waited for the announcement that Scully is leaving, that this announcement frees up $600K per year. Common sense tells you he may have got a large slice after the announcement with more money available than before the announcement. Common sense would lead you to my conclusions not lead you to your conclusions.

If he has announced to the playing group - it will be on the news tonight. This will not be able to be kept secret.

I still have no idea either way but I would like to share this recipe relating to this topic and everything "news" related. Egg on your face 1/ Start with an issue or situation 2/ Read and believe everything you see/hear in the media and allow the media to drive the agenda. 3/ Check issue or situation on completion - the media's reporting fluctuates dramatically between success and failure 3/ In many cases Egg on your face is now ready

This idea that we are "entitled to know facts" is such a nonsense. Heres how it works - Clubs are always quick to put out positive spin stories. Any internal rumblings or maccinations, less than happy news stories are kept internal ( and unfortunately leaked) and then the journo's ask the questions and make up stories or just make up stories without asking questions. If the story is way off the mark then the club will come out and issue a counter story. Collingwood have not proactively issued one story about Mick Malthouse. Everything issued has been in response to questions or stories in the press. To expect communication that Davey hasnt been selected - hardly newsworthy - and if it newsworthy a question will be asked by someone and the club responds.

i just love the idea of a game finishing and two minutes later lighting up

Nah - the best solution was Scully sign up again in March hence saving us all this aggravation. Ahhh...life before ulcers.

Alright - its time to think three years time - who is going to be the Next Big Thing. I'm going with Jeremy Howe. He will be Robbo mark 2 except he has already shown he is prepared to do the little extra team things that may have been missing in Robbo's game ( no disrespect Robbo - you were great !). To make it interesting - outside our beloved Demons - who in another club is the NBT - out of left field - Harley Bennell. Who is your next big thing ( both MFC and other)?

The 3rd player (non key) frustrates the hell out of me. His effort on the wing/ half forward in front of the members in the 3rd quarter showed what he can do. Grabbed the ball turned the player inside out by turning on a dime then shoved it straight to Green for a goal. And then we get the other Cale. Damn him.

GOLD

Not unless it turns into media circus and feeding frenzy for anyone with half an opinion. So I suppose we have to tell all our players that 1/ It is ok for the club to delay talks until the end of the year because everyone must play for the club and bow to the clubs wishes and it is in the clubs best interest to do so. 2/ It is ok for the player to delay to the end of the season as long as the papers, supporters, TV and radio journo's dont turn into a huge "will he or wont he go" story - THEN 3/ If it does turn into a shark feeding frenzy then I'm afraid the player cant wait until the end of season - the player just has to make up his mind now.

Would you call it a major distraction as others have ? Would you suggest that just as Jeremy Howe is about to launch himself to take a hanger he thinks to himself - bloody Tom Scully. Barty lines up for goal and just as he goes to kick he thinks of all the ways he could spend a million dollars a season and bingo - a point. Chip streaming out of defense and sees Tom on a lead - no way I am kicking to that defector. I am sure it has proven a major distraction.

I thought Bartram did a reasonable job on Ablett - I though Abletts influence was fair. ( as opposed to Judd who tore us a new one). I have stated elsewhere I am not a fan of Bartram - I will never question his heart or desire - its is his decision making and finishing that worries me. Watching him closely, when he keeps it simple and reacts first time with either a short kick or a hand pass he is more than adequate - i.e the link in a quick chain. When he has time to think or is the last in the chain and has to push the ball 40 metres plus out to an option ugghhh. Its fantastic how he has led in the forward line to get a better angle shot at goal than his team mate on the boundary over the last two weeks - just wish it was a player you trust more with a set shot at goal. Maybe a good coach can turn this weakness around. Know your strengths and weaknesses and play to them.

Brings to mind Viney's comments on Sunday when asked about Brian Royal saying on radio last week that "We are definitely going to win" and Richmond using it as the impetus for their win. Viney - "yeah I heard about it later on. Do you really think thats the reason we lost ?" ( love Viney's straight speak) Are we really putting Tom's delaying signing to post season as a reason for our year ?

And there's the rub - we can all be genius's NOW but operating on what everyone knew at the time there is not a club that would not have taken Scully at no 1 pick. ( again I am falling into the same trap as many others - my "everyone" is actually all the TV and print commentators and some player managers and Shifter Sheehan - I have no insight as to the thinking of actual club recruiters - although I do recall that recruiters on the actual draft day on TV were asked who would go number one and to a man they said Scully - doesnt mean they would have taken him number one though - yeah right) )

We will never know and I cant and wont dismiss what you have written about the timetable and truthfulness of statements. We dont know and you well may be right - I just choose to believe differently. I will take you to task on what someone called revisionism. I will debate you until I am blue in the face ( bluey in the face ? demonology ...ewwww) on your attempts to suggest that AT THE TIME we should have known better and picked up Martin instead instead of Scully and that somehow we didnt do our due diligence.

Yeah right. So much reflection and backwards gazing here it makes my head spin. People are still shaking their heads at the money being touted for Scully. When we drafted him GC17 were having their dash at uncontracted players. GC17 were not targeting youth. The suggested money being offered to Scully would make him the second highest paid player at GC17 - unprecendented. Talk to the people at the club why Trengove and Tapscott were offered three years not two ( incidently - three years still didnt keep them out the GWS window or are you forgetting that ?) - the three years was to keep the SA boys here longer and get them setttled - an insurance against the go home factor not the GWS factor. Even though Schwab fought to keep first contract players out of the GWS clutches there are more than a few scribes who are more than bemused by GWS targeting youth with one footy manager saying that they never expected 2nd year players to be targeted. The GC17 model of going for more mature footballers to suppliment their raft of draftees makes sense. To target second year footballers ? You need a spread of talent across ages to be successful - just look at how we are tracking due to void in middle to late age talent. You are seriously asking us to have foreseen this coming when not one scribe, not one so called expert and nobody on this board with all we know now TODAY thinks that Scully is worth $1M a year. Yeah - we should have forseen at draft time that a club in two years time is going to offer him $1M a year. Scully wouldnt even have thought it possible.

And as said previously, he was so far and away a stand out as number one pick - the only knock was his disposal - not his attitude. Was touted at number one for at least 12-18 months previous. Retrospective and hindsight is so hard to argue with. Maybe part of our questioning going forward for all potential draftees is "you will be offered $1M a year as a third year footballer - do you stay with us or go ?" - " I'd go Mr Prendergast" - scratch him off the list.

Yessss.... Because the boards were full of concern that we should have taken Martin instead of Scully because of the looming GWS threat and the very apparent attitude of the kid that when he is offered $1M a year to GWS ( which of course we all knew was going to happen) that he ups and moves interstate ! I am logically also surprised at Hawthorn taking Hodge over Judd until I realised that Hawthorn knew Judd would leave WCE and come back to Carlton after they offered him half of Visy ( such insight !) and how wrong did StKilda get it with Luke Ball at no 2 - even made him Captain - they should have known he was going to the Pies for nothing. And fire all recruiters that let Chris Grant get through to the 90's and Aaron Sandilands as a rookie. Again i respect your opinion on Scully leaving as you have been nothing but consistent but to try and float the argument that the recruiters got it wrong on Scully with what was available at the time is not your best effort

Tapscott played his ONLY footy in the backline - yesterday was his first adventure up forward.

Yet you are prepared compare McDonald after one game that he "will always be behind Frawley and Garland" ! wow.....