deelusions from afar

That's fair. It has a nice ring to it. But it's also just PR. We're bringing in lots of new players this year regardless and it would still mean the same number of first round picks in a 4 year window - just more weighted in stronger drafts? Not saying we should do this, just raising it as an idea. Eg if we are really keen on Dovaston who is said to likely go in the teens, then you could effectively split one of our picks say with GWS (12) or Dogs (14) for their first next year (maybe we give our second back which is tied to GC or whatever). Maybe they wouldn't do it... but it could mean we get the players we want this year and have 3 first round picks for next year which is useful for Butters / Humphrey etc or just to load up on the draft (particularly if next year is similar quality to last year)

Why have two when we could have three? Maybe a silly idea - others who understand draft quality will know better than me - but if this years draft is really lower than most, then maybe it is better to load up for next year? There are only 3 teams that have live picks before us (as WCE, Rich, Ess all have two picks in the top 6). This means many clubs don't have first round picks. Plenty of teams may be interested in bringing next years pick forward to get a top 10 pick this year like we often do. Obviously some have deliberately traded out of this draft. But would we rather have (for example) pick 8 this year, or Collingwood's first round pick next year (their first pick this year is 39)? Are they really going to finish top 4 / top 8?

With all the picks used for academy / father sons, would it come in enough anyway?

I'm not Buckley's biggest fan but I heard this interview a few weeks back - at the end he talks about Brody. He mentions him playing through injury and being banged up this year and then said: "...If I was coaching Melbourne or at another organisation and Checkers was available.. I'd get him over... definitely... just cause of his character, the way he goes about it, the way he trains, his attitude, his selflessness... I know he's a great team man... whoever he goes to will get great benefit from him - both on and off the field" https://podcasts.apple.com/co/podcast/jamarra-ugle-hagan-jamie-elliot-brody-mihocek-nathan/id1198117448?i=1000729419016&l=en-GB And also this: "Brody Mihocek is "one of the toughest blokes I've seen play the game", says Collingwood coach Nathan Buckley" https://www.theadvocate.com.au/story/6880465/brody-mihocek-is-one-of-the-toughest-blokes-ive-seen-play-the-game-says-nathan-buckley/ Brody is a perfect fit for our young key forward group! If he imparts all of that on to them - look out!

A hawks mate who follows it closely said: I think good pick up. I didn't want to let him go. I think he finally got his body back together this year, and will get back to his best in the next year. I guess Hawks maybe have too many similar type players, but really liked him as the professional sub given his explosive pace, and ability to play as a defender or winger.

Today is a sad day for the club no doubt about it. Would never have thought at the end of 2021 that Petracca and Oliver would finish their time at the Dees in this fashion only 4 years later. I don't know all of what some people hear know about what's gone on... but I know enough to know that (sadly) this is the correct course of action. Tim Lamb cops plenty of criticism here. Maybe it's warranted. He hasn't brough in any established player of note in years. But he / we did have Cerra on the hook at the end of 2021 (who was the most sought after player that year) and that was probably the only time we were a destination club. Since then the club has had a bad smell about it - whether that be the Entrecote incident, the stories in the Herald Sun about Goodwin etc or even the gameplan which while effective in 2021, was not as attractive as the Pies / Cats in 22 and Brisbane, Hawthorn etc after that. Clearly our training ground situation doesn't help. I liked the idea of getting Grundy but thought the coaches weren't creative in finding ways to use both Max and him on the ground at the same time (think of what Scott has done at Geelong) - seeing this fail so badly wouldn't help a player want to consider coming to us. So although there is a long list of busts for established players coming in, I feel like Lamb hasn't had a lot to work with. The criticism of length of contracts for some of these players is probably fair... although obviously that is part of what is required to get players to leave their club. I feel like this year has been different. While I hoped like hell (like most here) we would be able to land Humphrey for Trac, it seems like we tried everything. If any of us were in Craig Cameron's shoes, we wouldn't trade him - so to get 3 first round picks (with all the pick swapping), its a good deal. I'm left wondering whether the comments from Lamb re wanting a player for Petracca was just posturing to try and get Humphrey or whether we had to change our tune when any of the players we wanted either had no interest in joining us or GC made clear they weren't going to trade them (eg Rogers, Walter etc). At a minimum we have a headstart on most in going for Humphrey, Butters etc next year with the extra first rounder to play with (assuming we don't trade it before then). It's supposedly a weak draft - though the top 3 live picks are high quality players. Will we / can we trade up to them? Or do we back JT and co to find some quality with the picks they have. Because of the pain of losing Clarry and Trac, my only way of dealing with it is to look forward. And maybe it's not all bad. People often say that when building a list you need to have the spine first (as they take longer to develop) . Our spine has loads of potential - half glass full view is that the forwards will benefit from a more attacking game style and the likes of JVR, Jeffo and Kentfield could be ready to turn the corner and start imposing themselves on games. Having Mihochek should make a difference - as much during the week as on game day. Our defence looks more solid with Petty and Disco great options. Heath is a few cm smaller than Gawn - but maybe he gets to learn the running patterns, ruck craft that Gawn has. We won't be able to replace Gawn... but it seems like Heath has the tools and ability to be decent. Add to that a generational talent in Kozzie and some exciting midfield kids and who knows what is possible? I think it will take a while to get things to click... but I'm hoping by the end of 2026 we're seeing a side play with flair that is capable of giving most teams a scare on their day with plenty of upside going forward. With clear air (with no Trac and Clarry), no more leaks, exciting game plan we can be aan attractive place to be again.

I assume you're joking. White isn't rated in the top 50 for this draft

Makes sense - except surely taking that approach means we end up with even less leverage. We're shouting "We want him out". It encourages more clubs to talk to him... but then Hawthorn convince him to want to come to him but they are offering less than anyone else. He then doesn't want to accept who we want him to and we're left weighing up keeping him or trading him for well unders. I just think we'd get screwed further with this approach?

I didn't like this when I first heard it.... But it seems like we are trying to bring in some good citizens to get our culture back on track - Steele has been captain of the Saints - while Mihoceck has held the pies forward line together for years. Given we have lost Brayshaw, ANB, Brown, Spargo, Trac, Oliver etc we have lost a lot of our leaders - or at least players we expected to be leaders. We are banking on our youth to turn us around but it can't all be left to Max and Jack. The fact that we don't have an obvious successor to Max's captaincy to me says this may not be the worst idea. We all remember what it looks like if you bring in kids that don't have enough senior players setting the standards.

Is it just me, or is this offer that Carlton have rejected WAY better than what we are likely to get for Trac? Maybe Curnow has more value... but similar age to Trac. Has won Coleman medals but not a Norm Smith. Has had more injury issues and consistency issues than Trac but is a key forward which there are less of than midfielders. If this was offered for Trac, we would take it no? A first round selection next year (even end of first round) is likely to net a better player than pick 7 this year?

Actually looks a little like Tim Lamb if you use your imagination (sorry DF)

I'm happy with this. He's a versatile player with freakish athleticism, speed and strength for his size. He'll bring some excitement. An indication of the sort of attacking brand of football that King is going to be looking for perhaps?

I feel like De Goey and Trac play similar roles - why would you go for both when you already have BH in the team? Seems more like the media dragging collingwood fans into more clicks etc. If there was truth to it, it would help because if they trade two top ten picks for Trac, then what do they have left for De Goey if they need points?

I agree.. but isn't that what we've been doing? Ie King said he's aware of Petracca wanting to explore options and we'll only entertain that if its in our best interests... and if not, he is keen to work with Trac next year?

Giants aren't going to do that are they - others are talking about a future 3rd rounder

I disagree. WIth Oliver going there's more room for a midfield with him and Viney. He's a professional so will train hard and perform. WIth a new coach / voice and development of the kids and more attacking gameplan, he might fall back in love with the club. I think for the MFC it's better to hold than trade him for unders.

Is this the same Jordan McMahon that kicked the goal after the siren in THAT game? How is he connected to BH? A quick google shoes that he's an agent... a real estate agent!

What's this??

I want to agree with your interpretation but am wondering if I read the same article?? These were just quotes from CC's radio interview yesterday. I can't see any mention of "if he comes back, we’ll be fine… if he doesn’t, we’ll work through that". The two way street message and reference to shift in landscape (in my view) is just about him saying players and managers are increasingly thinking they can break contracts when they feel like it - But that's not how it works (because the club has to agree and GC aren't going to). GC will hold players to contracts and that's why it is a two way street - if you sign the contract, you honour the contract. What am I missing?

I know it happens.. but the fact that GC have been so strong with public comments about not trading BH means its harder for them to soften / change the narrative without looking silly. It would be a terrible precedent for them to set. Do you see it that way?

Sadly I think you're right - mostly because for a deal to happen is going to make Gold Coast look very silly given their strong stance. Even if a deal made sense to them rationally today - how do they walk back their comments and save face at the same time?

Yeah was thinking the same. Hope Tahj is coping ok

Don't know a lot about him - but seems he might be decent as a resting ruck but still got a bit to go in terms of ruck craft and endurance (an extra spot on the bench will help that obviously)

No slight on Random Task - I would have thought much the same - but to get for a 4th round pick in the 2027 (compromised) draft, it is an absolute steal!!

??