Undeeterred

Time has passed, sadly. I still wonder, every now and then, how on earth he managed to end up as our first ruck for so many years. I think Jeff White would probably still beat him one on one...

Just want to say i object to this constant name calling ... it's not 'pencil', it's Spencer. Some of these new generation football supporters have no respect. it's a blight on a supporter website, plenty of other posts get dumped for trivial reasons yet we keep seeing these pathetic putowns repeated ad nauseum .... if i was a player it would certainly turn me off the club if i knew these were supporters.

In Disgust, BD.

PS would these people address the MFC players in these terms at family days, at training sessions or any other public functions?

Sooooo, guessing you never had a nickname in high school then?

My concern is not that it makes strong clubs stronger but that it makes the weaker clubs weaker.

Rivers leaving us did nothing for Geelong. But it hurt us.

Under the old system they would've given up a 2nd or 3rd (more likely) round pick for Rivers. Now we still could've got that in compensation but they still get their pick. So they haven't lost it.

The old system saw clubs like the saints take a fall after drafting too many mature duds - Peake, Jesse Smith, Andrew Lovett. Which then meant they lost precious draft picks to develop. Now they get those guys for free and still get their draft picks. They double dip and stay at the top. We stay at the bottom and have no priority pick for a jump start up the ladder.

Now in time a free agency market develops. A lot of players are still in contracts that had them avoiding Gold Coast and GWS. That will change soon and more names will become available. But that's not a good thing for the game necessarily.

This is a sensational point, just by the way. Hadn't thought of it like that before, but you're right. Our 'guns' are really top up players for the big boys, which has a disproportionate effect on us...

10 years in 2nd gear.

Thanks Col.

Good to see you posting this comment in the Age today, going for a wider audience?

It did worry me when he started on that 'bleed red and blue' junk. Exactly the type of thing someone says when they're about to march out the door.

Fantastic. I was a big critic, but he has torn it up this year and looked great.

It has to be said though - when he had that beard, had to be one of the ugliest heads in football...

Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of turds...

How abou he gives us 5 good reasons to keep him? Been around for 5 years and done [censored]-all except embarrass the jumper with his weak pea-hearted efforts. Can [censored] back to basketball as far as I'm concerned where he won't be in fear of copping a bruise.

Why do all you idiots keep using basketball as a proxy for softness?

Have any of you actually played?

Absolute. Bloody. Farce.

Jobe Watson, Ted Richards, Luke Ball and Dan Hannebery went to the same toffy private school. Don't hear anybody calling them soft...

Imagine what Freo and Adelaide are going to do to us in a couple of weeks... Not to mention Gold Coast up there next week!

Thank God for Foxtel.

If the league didn't have to broadcast nine games each week, they would literally just let us fold.

Pedo chased the little guys. Lovely.

How embarrassing.

Interesting to look at who's getting most of the footy to date:

N Jones

Viney

Pedersen

M Jones

Clisby

Byrnes

Trengove

Grimes

Kent

Terlich

Says something about Howe, Dunn, Sylvia and Watts, who are supposed to be leaders!

We really shouldn't have so obviously tanked to get our priority pick at the end of this year...

Playing like this, people will definitely get suspicious.

Well let's see how many of them survive here under a real coach shall we...?

Oh dear.

and that equates to 13 mentally fragile links in the chain. Neeld tried to Blast it out, but it didn't work.

Our list freezes under pressure, no matter how well they train. They are cooked.

I hate it as a financial member of this club but it is the truth.

2 inside 50's in a first quarter. That is not Neil Craig. That is a mentally shot group of players.

Sorry, but you seem to be saying in your first two posts that Watts, Frawley, Garland, Grimes, Sylvia and Jones should go because they played in the Geelong game.

That's probably the most mental thing you've said on this forum.

I see your point, but of the 49 players who were on our list in 2009, there are only 13 left (Jones, Watts, Frawley, Sylvia, Dunn, Grimes, Garland, Davey, Jetta, Jamar, Bail, Spencer, McKenzie). That's 26%.

That does raise another point, though. I can't imagine many people in 2009 would have thought that we'd turnover 3/4 of our list by 2013. Shows you just how poor player/list management/development has been at this club.

I see your point, but of the 49 players who were on our list in 2009, there are only 13 left (Jones, Watts, Frawley, Sylvia, Dunn, Grimes, Garland, Davey, Jetta, Jamar, Bail, Spencer, McKenzie). That's 26%.

That does raise another point, though. I can't imagine many people in 2009 would have thought that we'd turnover 3/4 of our list by 2013. Shows you just how poor player/list management/development has been at this club.

And I can name 7 of that bunch who won't, or shouldn't be here next year, too.

Please don't offer to run my business... Assets....... Renting.... WTF...Waffle waffle...

Just breaking down the situation, in terms and language I was asked to use, for people too thick to get it.

The point was...as is always eluded. To be able to coherently look at the situation on its merits.

Most wont. . I have not lobbied for delisting per se only to suggest that might be a reasonable outcome given circumstances as they may evolve.

Btw YOU are the one introducing naive. Im simply suggesting blinkered.

In buisiness terms explain to me why it is such a brilliant outcome , based upon "instincts" NOT to write down a devalued asset when it might be the most astute thing to do.

Much will be dependent upon what state of fitness MC approaches this coming preseason. Im not advocating jumping the gun, all I AM talking of is reasoned discussion about what might be available choices should he not come up.

And by way, if same said player is not capable of earning his dollar why would you not investigate the legitimate exit paths ?

In 'business' terms, the 'regulator' forces MFC to spend a particular amount each year 'renting' its 'assets'. If MFC doesn't pay rent on one asset, it must spend on another.

If you can realistically show us how we could go to the 'market' and 'procure' an asset for the price for which we are renting Mitch Clark, let's have it.

Business enough for you?

BB - you never answered my question, even though I answered all of yours.

If you get rid of Mitch Clark, as you suggest, where does his $800k go?

I suppose we could give it to Sylvia, or pay Daisy Thomas $1.5 mil to come over, for example, but given we struggle to make the minimum TPP anyway, I'd probably just take the punt that Clark has a few years left in him, until proven otherwise.

Now, I am on record as saying I don't think he'll play again. But what list change can you suggest, which uses his salary and is realistic, that improves us?

Once you sack him, you can never get him back.

Plus, what message does that send others coming along - as soon as you get injured, we'll cut you loose.

went right through to the keeper didnt it.

Not at all. I addressed your 'having to pay someone' comment in my response to old dee, and then responded to the rest of your misguided ideas separately.

Happy to be told I'm missing something though.

god help some of you if in business plssing away money.

The notion of having to pay 'someone's is THE irrelevancy. Look at Clark in isolation . If he cant take the park youd be better off paying for someone who can.

Firstly, the business we are running is part of a competition whose rules say that a certain amount of money MUST be spent.

You're not taking account of the environment the football club is in, it is completely different to what you would call 'business' and I'm not advocating paying unnecessary wages if you are running, say, a small business. That's not comparing apples with apples.

Secondly, and I reiterate, who else would you be paying - who is the 'someone who can'? The truck load of free agents we had last season just begging to come to Melbourne? Get real!

That is another story Undeeterred

However I and others have been there often

Why should we have to pay the same as Hawthorn?

Sorry I am getting on my hobby horse.

I completely agree - we should be able to pay about 50% of the cap, rather than front loading anyone, but that's the system as it stands.