Lutz

Will flourish under Neeld.

Cyril Rioli?

Like Bails, he'll suffer from being heavily underresourced compared to the top teams.

You're confusing what we give up with what GWS get. We essentially traded Scully for 2 picks. Then we'd trade the 2 picks for 1 pick.

No, end result is Scully OR the 2 picks, not AND. Scully for the 2 picks, the 2 picks for O'Meara. It hasn't cost us both. GWS might end up with both, but that's a different matter.

Those who want him have been seduced by the draft pick he was taken with, and that alone.

What makes you assume they use the interviews to choose the nicest? It's to determine who is the most DRIVEN

Burns???

I'm thinking Buntine, Kavanagh, Greene, Sumner or Grigg. But I actually think we will trade the pick to fill a hole.

I wouldn't do any of those moves. They're all horrible suggestions.

It's incorrect. No explanation necessary.

Yes and no. I'm replying to questions asked, that I didn't think had quite been answered clearly or sufficiently. Or in some cases I missed the answer being given on first skim. Either way, it's a minor issue. But it has raised other issues in my mind. The process is far from clear. I'm sure there are aspects that haven't been considered by the AFL. For instance, the draft picks - how is it determined which pick is traded for? GWS will need to field offers stricly for pick 1, then only once pick1 has been given can they field offers for pick 2 and onwards. Otherwise, you could get a team bidding for pick 2 and winning it, when the pick 1 asking price is deemed too high. In the end if pick 1 doesn't get traded due to too high an asking price, in the absence of a pick 1, pick 2 BECOMES pick 1. Or, there is a firesale to move pick 1 and a strange situation occurs with a team paying subjectively more for pick 2 than has been paid for pick 1. Or, depending on how it is policed, a team could bid for and win what they believe will end up being pick 1, then it turns out to be pick 2 and they've paid much more than they were prepared to for a player. It just leaves open issues and could be very messy. Or clubs will be extremely hesitant to make a move & it'll be a failure. The thing is, it could set a maximum bid for picks that teams aren't prepared to go over or near, but GWS thinks they are worth, so nobody moves. Argh! Total mind f***.

Sounds great, but can't find it on the website. Want to order a case. Little help?

Have you ever watched the kid play?? Terrible incorrect appraisal. Simply wrong.

Underrated by opposition supporters in my experience. Probably due to lack of exposure on tv. Soon they will know. So reliable it's not funny.

Never heard of those tv shows, but I love them already! However, I think it's best that I don't ever watch them and stick with the images in my head. Glorious.

No love for Nasher..? Matches it with the best. But you could write a decent list of considered, reasonable, intelligent posters with a good grasp on the game. I think MFC supporters are fortunate to have so many contributors of that ilk.

That's the risk, but the potential reward is far greater. And I think it might cost a lot of money and time, but eventually it'll work and the juice will have been worth the squeeze.

What?? I've no idea where this notion comes from that it is a tender situation. It's simply like Sheedy deciding he doesn't want to use pick 1,2,3 or 5 this year. He trades them to whoever he likes based on what they offer. He picks the deal that gets the best return for GWS, just like MFC would if they decided to out pick 12 on the table. There's not mystery beyond that.

That's for a different mini draft. Picks traded in 2012 will be for the next batch of 17 year olds. They'd be 16 right now.

You're not trading for players - you're trading for picks. Conceivably a team could trade for pick 1, but choose Crouch as their first choice not O'Meara. It's like us trading for pick 15 in the ND - we don't know who we'd take at 15 until draft day.

Jordan Lisle has family connections at North and is a gimme to end up there.

https://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/124620/default.aspx O'Meara also sounds like he has no problems leaving Perth. I think our priority during trade week should be using our compo picks to acquire the pick for either O'Meara or Crouch. Along will filling the holes in our list, of course.

The way the rules on compo picks read, when one is traded, if it is not activated for that year, the team receiving it can choose to activate it for the upcoming draft, or keep it for later years. That also indicates that a team receiving an activated pick can actuality de-activate it, saving it for later when it might be worth more. Based on that, if we were to trade for Brisbane's pick 30, actually the end of 1st round compo pick for Harbrow that the Lions received in the Sherman trade, we could deactivate it and use it at pick 20 in 2013 or 2014. Obviously the rules would need to be clarified with AFL house. Maybe not worth it in the end, but an option worth considering if we are to trade with Brisbane at all. I wouldn't mind Jack Redden.

People in Tasmania already support AFL teams and watch AFL games on tv. This has always been about INCREASING audience numbers and furthering the game. Cost-benefit analysis of going to Tasmania would have show little benefit. Deserving as they are.