pantaloons

I agree. If we're trying to weed out the duds with poor disposal from our list, there is no way we should be going after the player with the worst footskills in the league. Even if he is marginally better than our two backups, he's not close to being a number one ruckman, which is what we need to focus our attention on given that White has only two or three years left. Fair enough question though, condemned.

There seems to have been a significant downturn in the optimism of fans on getting Chris Judd in the last few hours. We actually don't know any more than we did four hours ago. We haven't heard anthing from Judd or Connors, just a few rumours on the internet and the non-specific ramblings of a journalist. Sheahan may know something we don't, but it seems that we're all so desperate for an answer that we'll wait outside Sheahan's little groundhog hole for any sign of a clue as to where Judd is going. The rumours certainly don't sound promising, but at this stage we have no concrete evidence. I'll wait until I hear from the man himself until I start laying booby traps at the Lexus Centre.

Hmm, that is true, Jaded. In which case, I'd prefer him to slip to Richmond in the PSD, unless we can trade pick 4 for Pendlebury, Cloke, Brown and Reid.

I remember hearing that too, but I certainly haven't heard that it's been put in place yet. Something for the future I'd suggest.

I would see Judd nominating only Collingwood as a preference to be tantamount to screwing West Coast. I can't see that happening. I'm just basing my opinions on what I've read on Demonland and have taken in from the media, but as a guess I'd say he'll nominate Collingwood and Melbourne. Once he's taken those preferences to West Coast, regardless of how strong his preference is that the Filth are his top choice, I know who West Coast will be looking to get the deal done. The only way I can see Collingwood getting Judd is if he puts the Eagles in a pickle and nominates only Collingwood. The Pies simply don't have enough at the moment to secure Judd. The top 4 picks are owned by clubs still in the running to secure Judd (assuming Richmond could snare him in the PSD). They won't be trading those picks to help the enemy get the deal done unless they profit incredibly, of which there is next to no chance. Collingwood also have a history of being stubborn in trade week and overstating the value of their own, which would also be a huge stumbling block.

3. Hannabal 2. Fan 1. old55 Apologies to about a dozen posters.

I agree Pates. I would only trade Johnstone if it gets us Judd. Even then I'll be disappointed to see him go.

Not that betting odds mena much in the scheme of things, but given that Darwin Sportsbet only took a portion of one Melbourne supporter's $26,000 according to the paper this morning, our odds would be shorter still had he taken the lot.

Oh so true. Carlton fans are in for a rude shock if they think that happy meal will get the job done. What a joke. I wouldn't rule out Carlton bending on the number 1 pick though if Judd nominates them as one of his preferences. Surely Melbourne and Collingwood will be his two choices, which would leave us in very handy stead.

If Carlton think they can get Chris Judd without having to give up two of either pick 1, pick 3 and Brendan Fevola then they are wasting everyone's time. The longer this progresses, the more excited I become.

Off the top of my head, I'm guessing 1997.

Actually, I think the best case scenario for Melbourne is if Judd nominates Melbourne and Collingwood as his two preferences to West Coast. West Coast would presumably rather deal with Melbourne anyway, but we've got plenty more to offer in a trade than Collingwood.

We can speculate all we like about where Chris Judd will end up being traded to. Let me introduce you to the Judd-O-Meter, the surefire gizmo to enlighten us as to Judd's future home. Each of the four competing clubs are given a rating in a number of areas Judd has or may have listed as a preference for choosing his team. Here we go: Carlton: List: 3/10 Training facilities: 5/10 Money in salary cap: 10/10 MCG games: 8/22 Crowd size: 4/10 Off-field board and financial stability: 7/10 Opportunities for endorsements outside of football: 9/10 Club's ability to satisfy West Coast's trade demands: 9/10 Lack of media attention: 3/10 Previous suport of club: 0/10 Total: 58 points (3rd) Collingwood: List: 7/10 Training facilities: 10/10 Money in salary cap: 7/10 MCG games: 15/22 Crowd size: 10/10 Off-field board and financial stability: 10/10 Opportunities for endorsements outside of football: 9/10 Club's ability to satisfy West Coast's trade demands: 2/10 Lack of media attenion: 1/10 Previous suport of club: 0/10 Total: 71 points (2nd) Essendon: List: 3/10 Training facilities: 8/10 Money in salary cap: 7/10 MCG games: 8/22 Crowd size: 8/10 Off-field board and financial stability: 5/10 Opportunities for endorsements outside of football: 7/10 Club's ability to satisfy West Coast's trade demands: 4/10 Lack of media attention: 3/10 Previous suport of club: 0/10 Total: 53 points (4th) Melbourne: List: 7/10 Training facilities: 5/10 (0 in 2008, 10 from 2009 onwards) Money in salary cap: 8/10 MCG games: 13/22 Crowd size: 3/10 Off-field board and financial stability: 4/10 Opportunities for endorsements outside of football: 8/10 Club's ability to satisfy West Coast's trade demands: 9/10 Lack of media attention: 9/10 Previous suport of club: 10/10 Total: 76 points (1st) So there you have it, folks. Put those troubled minds at rest, forget about worrying about whether or not Chris Judd is currently effectively being seduced to join Melbourne by Garry and co. The Judd-O-Meter has spoken, and the days of Mebourne as an irrelevant and forgettable club are over. Expect to see Judd mooning the Lexus Centre in a Melbourne guernsey on Tuesday morning's edition of the Hun.

Fortunately for Melbourne, our sell to Judd is not solely dependent on his boyhood love of the Demons. We tick all the boxes, given that our new facilities will be up and going in 12 months. I don't believe his former support of the Dees is completely irrelevant at all though. Hopefully Garry and company can push the right buttons in their meeting, and awaken the lost Demon within. I still cling to the belief that this is what will push Melbourne over the line if we are to get Judd.

If Judd doesn't come to melbourne, pick 4 has to stay. Rarely would you consider trading pick 4. Judd is an exceptional circumstance though.

Not that Judd wanting money is an issue, but if it was, he could throw a cool million on himself going to Melbourne at $8 and then sign with the Demons! He could then play on a lower salary in order for the Demons to be able to keep more quality players, hence giving him greater opportunity to play in a flag. Problem solved.

Well if that's the case, and Redleg's mail is correct, I'd be happy negotiating for a house with the West Coast Eagles. It should cost me about $36. If West Coast are that desperate for uncoordinated and useless talls, they could just pull one out of the crowd.

Robbo on the Bulldogs: "They are a great club and, if you were going to play for another club, they would be a place you would like to go." Since when has one premiership in a club's 83 seasons in a competition been an indicator of greatness? Comical statement. Robbo should bite his tongue, swallow his pride and sign a two-year deal before he gets sent to some club he doesn't want to go to. If he's playing well enough in two years time, which I think he probably will be, he'll get a contract extension. We can't just trade him for some of the slop being bandied about on here though. If you trade someone like Robbo, a proven goalkicker, matchwinner and membership-seller, it has to be as a part of a deal that is going to significantly better the club. Unless we're going to get Chris Judd or a top 10 pick in any deal involving Robbo, I'd kiss the idea goodbye.

Next to Nick Sautner.

I was interested in a stat that Steve Quartermain pulled out tonight, that the Kangas' 106 point loss last week was the fifth largest in finals history. Coupled with the 125 point loss to Essendon in the 2000 QF and the 118 point slapping we gave them in 1987, that gives them three 100+ point losses in the last 20 years, and three of the worst five finals performances. Having said that, I find that more a remarkable anomaly. I do think that generally the Kangaroos have shown an ability to pull results out of their backsides when stacked against the odds. I find their list to be ranging from extremely ordinary to putrid and yet they have made the top 4 this season. Admittedly, never in my lifetime have I seen seven teams make the finals who would be so thoroughly unworthy of the premiership as there have been this year, but it's still a fine effort. Excuses are not tolerated at Arden Street.

I'd rather not trade Davey, given that his pace is an asset that is lacking in the side generally, and he's one forward who actually chases. He has some serious limitations that frustrate me though, such as the inability to lay an effective tackle courtesy of his 36kg frame, struggles mightily to take an overhead or contested mark, and he doesn't kick enough goals. I'd trade him for the right offer though. As for McGregor, give the man a hair comb and move on. We already have his fortuitously non-identical twin running around in number 7. I realise he hasn't spent his enire career in the forwardline, but after 136 games and only 92 goals, he's shown a complete inability to have a serious impact on AFL football despite having a glorious midfield with the likes of Ricciuto, McLeod, Edwards and Thompson ramming the ball inside 50 for years. No thanks.

Thanks to Ward and Godfrey for their efforts over a number of years for the club. I hadn't seen a whole lot of Neaves, but its disappointing that he didn't become the ruckman some of us hoped he could be. Given that we had 41 players on the list this year, we need to chop one more player than we put onto the list this offseason. Thus far, we've now cut 6 names off the roster which, barring trades, would give us five selections at the draft(s). There are two or three blokes who can count themselves very lucky if they survive the delistings. If those three senior delistings today represent the end of the culling for this off-season, then there will be quite a few blokes sent packing at the end of 2008.

At the end of the day, you trade for the benefit of the list though. While watching Woey run around in a Pies jumper for a couple of years was painful, and we helped fund his Collingwood wage, we now have Daniel Bell. Bell will hopefully be on Melbourne's list for another eight or so years. In hindsight, the trade was fantastic for Melbourne.

You're correct in essence that the 4 v 5 game wasn't a dead rubber, but it was comatose! Teams were playing for wriggle room as we never saw both 1 and 2 seeds lose. The system is very fair: * Teams 1 and 2 deservingly get two home finals guaranteed and a double chance * Teams 3 and 4 get a double chance and a home final * Teams 5 and 6 get a home final and play a weaker team in the first week * Teams 7 and 8 play a weaker team in week 1 than they used to under the old system. Finishing that low, they don't deserve a home final. Sydney didn't deserve a home final. If they won more games, they would have got one. Interesting thoughts, deanox. I hate the old system though, for the reasons I've stated, and I think the current one is as fair as we can get without becoming too scientific.

West Coast have earnt their home final this week because they finished ahead of Collingwood, are yet to play their home final this series, while Colingwood have.