View Full Version : Melbourne & Judd - Hypocrits
Here we have a team that is crying poor re finances yet they come out and state that they are going after Judd with everything they have.
It is generally expected that if Judd moves it will be for approx $1m per year. How can a club that is complaining about its finances and facilities justify that kind of expenditure on one player?
It also highlights the thinking of the Melbourne admin, ie chasing short term fixes and not prepared to do the hard yards whether it be financial or playing stock.
Consider this, at the moment 3 Vic clubs occupy top 4 spots on the ladder. All of them have been in financial trouble to the point where they were worried about their futures. The re-build in each case has come from taking a long term view re finances, coaches and getting young players. Does Melbourne pay any attention or do they just whinge like former spoilt rich kids who blew their inheritence and expect others to make it up for them?
It is time the rest of the AFL told Melbourne to sort themselves out or die.
Demonheart
4 Jun 2007, 10:00
If Judd became available every single club would have a shot at getting him, and if they failed they'll succeed in driving his price up to place salary cap pressure on whomever is successfull in getting him.
Also, they'd be paying the same amount of salary cap whether they get Judd or not, if they get him then others will have to go to fit him in, so how is getting the best player in the comp considered to be bad? When we smash your lot next weekend take note of our young players.
and this is the whole point of the arguement... is it fair if only the rich clubs are able to go after judd?
and that article took what was said out of context... gardiner said if judd became available that we would be prepared to trade a first round draft pick for him... name one club in the comp that wouldn't be prepared to do the same...
You do realise that a salary cap exists in the AFL? If they get Judd they will have to sacrifice something whether it be high paying players or significant cuts to other players salarys. It's not like they're gonna be spending a large amount more, all they're saying is: "We think he's worth that much in the cap."
Oh look two Dee posters, must have had a win for a change.
Yep the cap will ensure that they spend all their funds on one player and end up with a crap list (again). Short term thinking, don't they remember Templeton and Moore?
Just sums Melbourne up, always going for the hail mary and never being prepared to do the truly hard yards that are required to re-build a club. All they do is whinge about what others have.
Geddy Lee
4 Jun 2007, 10:48
We're going to get belted on Monday.
You sure are. :)
strategy
4 Jun 2007, 10:59
As i have said before ,, Judd and Pavlich are staying so is Riewoldt
DeeHughMan
4 Jun 2007, 11:01
Judd could help the dees out prob more than any other club.
Melbourne have had a lot of good players over they years but no out an out star of the comp since Robert Flower. A Star is what they need.
He would drag a lazy 10,000 extra dees supporters to each game. The dees have the supporters but they are fickle they will turn up just to watch Judd.
Melbourne have the room in the cap.
but what would be an equal trade. a first round pick plus say Travis johnstone. West coast supporters may say no. but if Judd says i want to go then that would be a fair trade. personally i doubt it will happen but you never know
Brock Machine
4 Jun 2007, 11:03
Just sums Melbourne up, always going for the hail mary and never being prepared to do the truly hard yards that are required to re-build a club.
Like trading Woewoeful to pick up Bell?
Hmmm wonder if a new Landrover, and a holiday Chalet at Mt Buller will be in the deal ;)
Like trading Woewoeful to pick up Bell?
Hmmm highest average crowds, highest Vic membership, record sponsorship, best facilities, guarentee of 15 games a year at the G, millions in the bank, an expanding portfolio of pubs and Eddie.
Oh by the way, we are in the top 4.
1999, broke and down the bottom. I would say that is a pretty big turn-around.
Here we have a team that is crying poor re finances yet they come out and state that they are going after Judd with everything they have.
It is generally expected that if Judd moves it will be for approx $1m per year. How can a club that is complaining about its finances and facilities justify that kind of expenditure on one player?
It also highlights the thinking of the Melbourne admin, ie chasing short term fixes and not prepared to do the hard yards whether it be financial or playing stock.
Consider this, at the moment 3 Vic clubs occupy top 4 spots on the ladder. All of them have been in financial trouble to the point where they were worried about their futures. The re-build in each case has come from taking a long term view re finances, coaches and getting young players. Does Melbourne pay any attention or do they just whinge like former spoilt rich kids who blew their inheritence and expect others to make it up for them?
It is time the rest of the AFL told Melbourne to sort themselves out or die.
Are you stupid?? Yes!
Each club has a salary cap and you HAVE TO SPEND IT (at least 95%) you moron. The clubs have no choice it is the rules you dumb faarf.
Mervyn Beasley
4 Jun 2007, 12:25
Any player, no matter how good, that demands 1 mill a year will lose respect.
Any club that pays it is stupid.
Not doing a compare Judd and Hodge thing here, but Hodge has just signed for around half a mill a year.
Judd is better than Hodge, but not twice as good.
Hodge knew he could have got more, but he also knew that whatever else he took was what his team mates would not get. This attitude is to be respected.
There's a salary cap in place. Clubs under AFL rules must use at least 90 odd percent of the cap every season. So they're going to be paying that money anyway even if they don't get Judd.
demonfan9
4 Jun 2007, 12:46
Yep the cap will ensure that they spend all their funds on one player and end up with a crap list (again). Short term thinking, don't they remember Templeton and Moore?
Yeah because the salary cap was around back then. :rolleyes: If we go after Judd, we will have to sacrifice something in the salary cap. How is that concept too hard for you to understand?
Just sums Melbourne up, always going for the hail mary and never being prepared to do the truly hard yards that are required to re-build a club. All they do is whinge about what others have.
Gee you are a ****wit morgoth. We know you don't like Melbourne, but if you are going to bag us, at least be accurate. When have we ever tried to do that in the modern era (with salary cap and draft picks around)? Don't give me the bullshit about Templeton and Moore, that was a different era back then.
Hmmm highest average crowds, highest Vic membership, record sponsorship, best facilities, guarentee of 15 games a year at the G, millions in the bank, an expanding portfolio of pubs and Eddie.
Oh by the way, we are in the top 4.
1999, broke and down the bottom. I would say that is a pretty big turn-around.
Who said this was about Collingwood? Brock Machine said that we traded away Shane Woewodin and drafted Daniel Bell (who beat the living snot out of Scott Welsh yesterday), as an example of us not looking for short-term fixes.
I know you have an agenda against Melbourne, every second post you've made for the past five years has been about us. I don't care if you don't like the club, think we don't operate correctly or professionally or whatever, but at least get it right.
Demonheart
4 Jun 2007, 13:11
Oh look two Dee posters, must have had a win for a change.
Yep the cap will ensure that they spend all their funds on one player and end up with a crap list (again). Short term thinking, don't they remember Templeton and Moore?
Just sums Melbourne up, always going for the hail mary and never being prepared to do the truly hard yards that are required to re-build a club. All they do is whinge about what others have.
Troll :rolleyes:
You're the only person whinging here therefore you are the real hypocrite
Demonheart
4 Jun 2007, 15:09
Bay13 is where this f#ck knuckle belongs.
Felcher :thumbsd:
The Flash
4 Jun 2007, 16:32
Here we have a team that is crying poor re finances yet they come out and state that they are going after Judd with everything they have.
It is generally expected that if Judd moves it will be for approx $1m per year. How can a club that is complaining about its finances and facilities justify that kind of expenditure on one player?
It also highlights the thinking of the Melbourne admin, ie chasing short term fixes and not prepared to do the hard yards whether it be financial or playing stock.
Consider this, at the moment 3 Vic clubs occupy top 4 spots on the ladder. All of them have been in financial trouble to the point where they were worried about their futures. The re-build in each case has come from taking a long term view re finances, coaches and getting young players. Does Melbourne pay any attention or do they just whinge like former spoilt rich kids who blew their inheritence and expect others to make it up for them?
It is time the rest of the AFL told Melbourne to sort themselves out or die.
Ahhh, poor pies supporters who shoot off there mouth without even knowing the facts.
5 years ago we were 7 million in debt, the board didnt give a shit about us and we had terrible training facilities.
By the end of this year we are expected to be debt free, profitable, and have our brand new facilities ready next year. We have the personal now that has changed our off field situation around to the point that we can start looking at, in the very near future, getting the advantages that the pies have, ie-going overseas for training purposes.
So read a few things first you stupid scum pie!!!!
Glorious couch life
4 Jun 2007, 17:43
Hmmm highest average crowds, highest Vic membership, record sponsorship, best facilities, guarentee of 15 games a year at the G, millions in the bank, an expanding portfolio of pubs and Eddie.
Oh by the way, we are in the top 4.
1999, broke and down the bottom. I would say that is a pretty big turn-around.
And two premierships in the last million years. Or something. The game we all love is Aussie Rules FOOTBALL, not monopoly. And it definately shouldn't become the Premier League (and don't even think of comparing yourself to Man U, Arsenal etc - they win stuff). If you are gonna bag Melbourne (and I say go right ahead - bunch of snobby, downhill skiers), do it on their merits as a football team eh?
stickman11
4 Jun 2007, 19:23
Here we have a team that is crying poor re finances yet they come out and state that they are going after Judd with everything they have.
It is generally expected that if Judd moves it will be for approx $1m per year. How can a club that is complaining about its finances and facilities justify that kind of expenditure on one player?
It also highlights the thinking of the Melbourne admin, ie chasing short term fixes and not prepared to do the hard yards whether it be financial or playing stock.
Consider this, at the moment 3 Vic clubs occupy top 4 spots on the ladder. All of them have been in financial trouble to the point where they were worried about their futures. The re-build in each case has come from taking a long term view re finances, coaches and getting young players. Does Melbourne pay any attention or do they just whinge like former spoilt rich kids who blew their inheritence and expect others to make it up for them?
It is time the rest of the AFL told Melbourne to sort themselves out or die.
Judd would bring supporters in meaning more money... that is how business works. You need drawcards... anyway, there are a number of well-paid senior players ready for the chop. It is all about priorities.
Hmmm highest average crowds, highest Vic membership, record sponsorship, best facilities, guarentee of 15 games a year at the G, millions in the bank, an expanding portfolio of pubs and Eddie.
Oh by the way, we are in the top 4.
1999, broke and down the bottom. I would say that is a pretty big turn-around.
hang on...so your point is that because you happen to support this team (and probably just by some pre-determined cause, like your family always went for them) that is financially successful, it means you know what's in melbourne's best interests?
And two premierships in the last million years. Or something. The game we all love is Aussie Rules FOOTBALL, not monopoly. And it definately shouldn't become the Premier League (and don't even think of comparing yourself to Man U, Arsenal etc - they win stuff). If you are gonna bag Melbourne (and I say go right ahead - bunch of snobby, downhill skiers), do it on their merits as a football team eh?
I actually really like both...
Oh look two Dee posters, must have had a win for a change.
Yep the cap will ensure that they spend all their funds on one player and end up with a crap list (again). Short term thinking, don't they remember Templeton and Moore?
Just sums Melbourne up, always going for the hail mary and never being prepared to do the truly hard yards that are required to re-build a club. All they do is whinge about what others have.
What a stupid thing to say :rolleyes:
Please crawl back into your hole
Thank you
I actually really like both...Ditto.
thefamilyguy
7 Jun 2007, 14:16
I actually really like both...
Ditto.
Same... I always go the little doggy.
WOOF WOOF
In breaking monopoly news, they just released an australian version of monopoly using australian place names.
Guess where got the shitty cheap kent road spot??? The gold coast.
hahahahahah... irony.
I heard ( not sure if its true ) that there are no places in sydney either, cause no1 voted for them.
I love monopoly. When i finish primary school i want to be a professional monopoly player
Hmmm wonder if a new Landrover, and a holiday Chalet at Mt Buller will be in the deal ;)
Hell, that's apart of their ****ing membership package.
They have like 50000 Members you realise :thumbsu:
dutchy12
7 Jun 2007, 15:07
What a boring troll.
Come up with something new. This type of stuff has been done to death mate and guess what the MFC is still here and way closer to a premiship than your mob
nbarnes81
7 Jun 2007, 15:45
I heard somewhere that Chris Judd barracked for Melbourne growing up. I wonder if this would influence his decision.
Angry Dragon
7 Jun 2007, 16:50
I heard somewhere that Chris Judd barracked for Melbourne growing up. I wonder if this would influence his decision.
It'd have to factor into his decision making if the Dees are going to match what every other club are going to offer.
Can't blame them for going after him. The fact that their finances aren't at the level of Collingwood, West Coast etc shouldn't preclude them from spending within their salary cap. If they are expected to spend less than the more financial clubs, then doesn't that negate the reason for the cap in the first place?
Angry Dragon
7 Jun 2007, 16:52
Oh great, this got moved to Bay 13 while I was replying.
Blah blah blah duuur durrr. There.