Lucifers Hero

Sorry hardtack but that is what the mfc website says. For mine, on my (non-automatic) renewal they added a $99 AFLW membership on the basis of my Demon AFLW Foundation Member last year which I thought was a once off 'donation'. I would have preferred the club sent an email to say it would be added to my Redlegs membership renewal or allowed me to opt out, on the on-line renewal process. From what I could see the on-line renewal screen did not allow changes to existing memberships. There is a lesson for the club from your and my experiences: Membership renewal notices should tell members what price or feature changes have occurred. It isn't hard - a standard email to tell all members of the new charges/features, is all it takes. Currently, it is quite difficult to compare membership options and features on the club website. In fact it would help it there was a 'compare' feature on the website. Things for the membership team to think about for next year. It would save some member angst and earn some goodwill if the club communicated changes better and made it easier for people to evaluate their options.

Re the Grand Final Guarantee -- if you want it buy your membership with it included before round 1 because then it goes from $229 to $299 per membership. https://membership.melbournefc.com.au/packages/view/958/Grand-Final-Guarantee There is only a limited number and once you have it you have 1st choice to keep it the following year. As Diamond Jim says, it is now serious money especially when there is more than one family member.

Just putting the current status out there (as we usually do at this time of year on Demonland) and to keep d'landers informed of club related stuff. I agree most of the 6,000 diehards will probably renew. There have been 7,000 additional members join since Roos’ appointment was announced. They will be less resilient than the diehards and us on Demonland. The club really needs them all to renew and renew their usually membership and not downgrade it to a lower level or to a 3 game membership. The fixture has not helped this cause. Not many enticing Home MCG games. As always it is up to the coach and players to deliver - no 'mental weakness' against the lesser clubs, especially in the first part of the year. No more three quarter efforts. I truly hope we beat our prior record of 42,000+ but the current trend doesn't look promising.

No promises from the club for next year ding. In fact, the opposite! In the PJ interview on SEN last week Garry Lyon asked him if making finals was 'not negotiable' next year. Jackson said something like '...nothing is not negotiable...'. So I doubt anyone from the club will use the F word next year. Lots of tippy toeing will happen around the F word.

That would certainly influence some people. A poster reported a while back that the cost to add the Grand Final Guarantee went from $80 in 2016 to $229. That GFG increase would have been quite a shock to people who are used to buying it for $80. Personally, I think that is a rip off by the club as my Redlegs membership which has the GFG built in went up by only a small amount in total. For members who were already disillusioned/disappointed by the clubs performance/decisions that GFG increase (and other price increases) could well have been the straw that broke the camels back and it gave them just another reason to walk away.

The current membership figure is a lowly 16,689. (It picks up MCC memberships and the annual automatic rollovers which occurred on Oct 25). I don’t have the comparable figure for Week 4 of Oct last year. But the figures for week 3 of October in recent years were: 2017: 21,890. 2018 Shortfall at least 5,291 (24%) 2016: 19,026. 2018 Shortfall at least 2,337 2014: 17,625. 2018 Shortfall at least 936 It is reasonable to assume that it is the diehard supporters that pay up 'early'. So it would be alarming to the club that at least 24% of last year’s diehard renewals have not occurred. Equally alarming would be we are under the equivalent 2014 figure (ie after the announcement of Roos as the new coach). If 24% fewer diehard supporters have not renewed, one wonders how many of the new members that took us to 42,000 will also fall by the wayside. We can all guess the reasons for the non-renewals: Round 23 capitulation Missing finals The post round 23 communication vacuum from the club The early finals ticket brochure fiasco. (and maybe for some the handling/departure of a fan favourite) On DL we have done those to death and on here we are quite forgiving and our belief in the club and its management, while questioned at times, is very resilient. But rightly or wrongly those events hurt the club and seem enough for members to start voting with their wallets. DL posters can ridicule them and say they are not 'true supporters' but they have the right to not take out a membership if they are not happy with what the club has shown. PJ and co really have their hands full to get the disenchanted members back. I hope he has some aces up his sleeve because patience seems to have run out. If the trend doesn't reverse it will really hurt financially which we can ill afford with the ordinary fixture we have been given. It will also hurt PJ's attempts to get a front of jumper sponsor ( I believe AHG will not be renewing their sponsorship). We might be lucky to reach 40,000 for 2018. FWIW - I did my bit and signed up last week.

Gee, they take Gunston's award but let Danger keep the B&F Blight medal! Hypocrites!

The Crows claws are out. I think its one thing to play hared ball with the club but it is another thing to run this pejorative campaign against him. Pretty low really. He wasn't going so I guess Adelaide had to explain his absence somehow...best to withdraw the invitation, then. Will be interesting to see where he finishes in their B&F Demoted to 22nd perhaps...

10 + 27 = 2098 which is equivalent to pick 4 (2034 pts). But, 2098 is also equivalent to pick 16 plus pick 17 (2092 pts)! Richmond holds both. Would Richmond trade them tho? They could be persuaded if they want young Parick Naish as father/son and think he won't go top 10. That way they can use pick 10 on a top player and use lesser picks for Naish. I suspect we won't be the only club with a top 10 pick asking that question of Richmond.

Adelaide have themselves to blame. They let a kid, Jack Graham go thru to Richmond's pick 53 in last years draft. He captained the SA under 18' team last year and won the Larke Medal. Last Saturday, in the GF he kicked 3 goals against the Crows and took Sloane out of the game after Qtr time. They have received a lot of stick in SA about that oversight. So if they chose local talent they wouldn't have a 'go home' problem and the GF may have not been such a debacle for them. So Adelaide are smarting over the GF loss, the Jack Graham flak and are now all fire and brimstone towards Lever and Cameron for wanting to leave. I suspect the name Jack Graham will haunt them for a very long time and if they every want him to 'come home' they will pay big time. What goes round, comes round

With Lever's manager joining Colllingwood they are not in the race for Lever. They are the only team reportedly prepared to offer 2 1st round picks. It was probably a rumour to make out there is a bidding war to force our hand. So there isn't much competition out there for the price Adelaide is asking. The ink isn't dry but Adel don't have much bargaining power. And the AFL will step in to make it happen if it has to.

WOW! No way Lever would stay at Crows after that. Not happy campers going into the GF. That mood may have contributed to the reported infighting during the second quarter and their lack of effort. Shame the team didn't play as well as Lever did - they might have a Premiership Cup.

We have had some honest dealings with GCS before so that isn't beyond imaginings. They were in the pick trades that helped us get Weideman and Oliver. That is a nice rumour to spread. Keeps Adelaide on their toes: Crows take 10 and 27 or get zip. Poker anyone...

Fascinating that he said the club has had no feedback from Adelaide on that offer. Not only did they reportedly walk out of the initial meeting, weeks later they have not responded. Very disrespectful and unprofessional. Mahoney said the trade offer stacks up well compared to other players. He specifically mentioned Tom Mitchell, Charlie Dixon, Jaegar O'meara and Jake Carlisle. Adelaide are trying to paint a picture that he is coming back for the money but other clubs have offered more. Very disrespectful to Jake. Last year GCS waited to 9 minutes to trade cut off time to agree to O'meara trade which forced Hawks to make some crazy pick trades which left StK with their 1st 2018 pick etc. Lets just hope it doesn't come to that for us. I would think if it drags out with no resolution the AFL will arbitrate. As an aside SEN reported that when Jake rang his teammates with his decision some senior players reacted poorly and Tex told him in no uncertain terms what he thought. Edit: They also reported that the Crows initial offer to Jake was around $300k and their final offer was around $550K. Somehow they are surprised when he decides to leave come out with 'fake outrage'. They are clearly smarting from their GF loss and are playing a hardball game in the media over Jake.

What a terrible and contemptuous way to negotiate, not. It was a decent opening offer and they just up and leave! Bizzare. Burton sounded like a real dropkick on Trade Radio today. He was asked if other clubs had offered the Crows a similar trade as mfc has. He dodged the question and said something like 'he didn't want to discuss that as it wouldn't be helpful to the negotiations.' It makes me wonder if no other interested club has bettered mfc's offer. Burton had better get his priorities sorted and get back to the negotiating table.

I suspect that comment was not as accidental as it sounded. Thought it a nice counter move to Burton's irreverent comment: "Crows will deal with the 10 Vic clubs...it is irrelevant to us where he wants to go..." Lever just raised the stakes for the Crows - he is probably as good at Poker as he is at football.

He sounds a compassionate and thoughtful young man. He genuinely looked happy when talking of joining the Dees. Will be a terrific asset for us on and off the field. Should also go well with sponsors - quite articulate.

And in the next breath he invites other clubs to bid for him!!!! They are not happy and are really going to play hard ball. Posturing. They are determined to get those two 1st round picks from the Demons!!. Crikey! Now the club will be embroiled in two public stoushes over player trades.

The same Wayne Campbell that captained Richmond 2001 to 2004? Out of interest, how do you know what instructions were given to the teams...

We are not known for playing hardball when it comes to trades. I like that we play fair but many other clubs don't. A bit rich of Adelaide to not pay the price for Gibbs last year. And now dig their heels in when the trade is the other way. Adelaide are stubborn not as bad as Ess stubborn but getting close. With Coll seemingly wanting to offer Adelaide more than us (which I think is just posturing with little intent, if even true) may force our hand to trade more value than we would like. I guess it may come down to whether we have other trades rely on the Lever being done early. If not we can wait and see who blinks first.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-10-02/trade-winds-spoiler-in-dees-lever-swoop Collingwood is poised to be a "spoiler" in the race for the star backman. Adelaide wants two first-round selections for the 21-year-old and the Magpies might be prepared to offer that up earlier than the Demons do". No mention of Lever's preference or discussions with his management. I believe the posters here who have said he will come to the Demons and I can't imagine his management entertaining offers at this late stage. So, Coll are playing games? Maybe force our hand to give Adelaide 'overs' and then we have less trade currency for other moves? Don't trust them at Victoria Park.

Thanks for the info. Wondering how it can only be 6. Goodwin said earlier this year that Roos had allowed him to be involved in and make list management decisions since arriving end of 2014. (In 2016 Roos was well and truly gone by trade/draft time). So how can we only have 6 on the list if a decent part of the list have been selected by the current Football Department including Goodwin...

Crikey, if Hogan is not an 'untradeable' it must be a very, very short list - like about 3 players on it. While I get the principle that any player is tradeable for the right deal, it suggests the club doesn't think too much of our list. And if Hogan went even for top dollar it would be like starting a mini list rebuild again. Scary thought!

Hird is about to present the Norm Smith medal and the AFL are desperately hoping everyone has forgotten the saga and does not boo him. Dank just put the whole thing front and center. Let the booing begin...

I think some convenient reporting is happening to create headlines and stories. From my reading the sequence has been: circa $300k was reportedly Crows opening offer early in 2017 - probably their 'strict formula' for a 3rd year player. Who knows if it increased during early negotiations. He put off talks to see what the CBA looked like. In the meantime other clubs came in, with WB reportedly set to offer $800-850k. CBA done and clubs were given a $2m sal cap windfall to spread around. I recall reading the Crows then offered $600-$650K. CBA done but now Lever decides to wait till the end of the season. Lever made the AA squad after the Crows' reported offer of $600-$650k. At some stage MFC joined in. The figure I saw reported a few weeks ago in The Age was MFC's offer of$750k+. With the AA gong it makes sense the Crows would revisit their offer. So do the Crows need to pay >$900k Warner says MFC have offered? (btw Warner's doesn't have a good track record for accuracy, headlines are more his thing). Conventional wisdom is that players will stay at a club for less than other offers. I guess it depends how much he wants to get back to Vic. Nonetheless, I doubt the Crows will let him go without another try to keep him. Sorry response is a bit lengthy but thought I would use your question to summarise happenings, as per my interpretation of events and reports.