Remove this Banner Ad

Rumour Bluemour Discussion XLI

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Reader mode
#BUMP from February


Re: 'Alleged' rumours resurfacing ...


The Old Dark Navy's said:
Folks, this is the way things are here.

Posters are responsible for what they post. Moderators can not attest to the accuracy or otherwise of any rumour posted.

Moderators will intervene for a couple of reasons.

1. If a thread is threatening to be derailed because of a post.

2. If invested parties request the removal of material.

None of this draws a conclusion as to the accuracy or otherwise of the original post.

There is no need to further speculate. What will be will be.
Click to expand...


Also, you need to remember that this thread like all parts of this forum is bound by the rules of poster conduct. If you want to express skepticism towards a rumour that's fine, but having a crack at posters who are contributors to this forum is simply not on and will be acted upon.

Simply put, don't be a dick.

Thanks all!
 
Lots of clubs would be happy giving Mots a 2 year deal. Even if he is useless next year, someone would take him via trade. No risk there to us.

I get not wanting non locked best 22 players on multi year deals for flexibility. But you need to balance that with offering good enough deals to keep the players you want to keep. Also, in most cases the downside is very low. For all the carry on about Binns contract, the consequence is we pay out 1 year on a very low contract.
 
marcmurphy3 said:
Agreed. A 2 year extension for an 18 year old showing as much promise as Binns was is pretty standard. At that stage it would have been tough to fathom him being off an afl list entirely 3 years into his career.
Click to expand...
Problem with our list management though is we identified VFL possessions as “promise” and maybe needed to look at disposal quality or hurt factor along with pace as a priority given the way our list looked in regards to these areas and the way the game was changing.
 
Last edited:
marcmurphy3 said:
Lots of clubs would be happy giving Mots a 2 year deal. Even if he is useless next year, someone would take him via trade. No risk there to us.

I get not wanting non locked best 22 players on multi year deals for flexibility. But you need to balance that with offering good enough deals to keep the players you want to keep. Also, in most cases the downside is very low. For all the carry on about Binns contract, the consequence is we pay out 1 year on a very low contract.
Click to expand...
Could not disagree with this more. He was allegedly put up as trade bait this off season and nobody came to the table.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

WalshistheGOAT said:
Could not disagree with this more. He was allegedly put up as trade bait this off season and nobody came to the table.
Click to expand...
Not true. There were several clubs interested in him including Port Adelaide. Was reported. The hold up to him re-signing, wasnt about us wanting him gone, it was contract terms. We always wanted to keep him at the right price.

Im sure if we got a good offer we would have considered it but he was never trade bait or we wouldn't have signed him just prior to trade period.
 
marcmurphy3 said:
Not true. There were several clubs interested in him including Port Adelaide. Was reported. The hold up to him re-signing, wasnt about us wanting him gone, it was contract terms. We always wanted to keep him at the right price.

Im sure if we got a good offer we would have considered it but he was never trade bait or we wouldn't have signed him just prior to trade period.
Click to expand...
What’s not true?

Port pulled their interest unfortunately. Who else was lining up for his services..? A. = nought
2yrs was overkill for a seriously limited AFL player and further strange list management.
 
The Bighouse said:
What’s not true?

Port pulled their interest unfortunately. Who else was lining up for his services..? A. = nought
2yrs was overkill for a seriously limited AFL player and further strange list management.
Click to expand...
No reports of Port pulling their interest. They even went for Durdin. A similar player who has shown less and isn't the son of an ex-player. Im sure they would have preferred motlop if they had the choice.
 
L New
  • Index
    • Soapy V said:
    I want to see Motlop fully fit and in a functioning forward line. I see a lot of AFL qualities on him and also like him having stints in middle. Reads ball well and can use itI really believe that if we can establish standards and a good game style he will improve a lot
    Click to expand...
    needs to slim down, has got pace when moving and can hit a pack well but is caught time after time coming at the ball from a stop.

    i'd have been happy to see him go but gotta support the players in the jumper
     
  • New
  • Index
    • branedotorg said:
    needs to slim down, has got pace when moving and can hit a pack well but is caught time after time coming at the ball from a stop.

    i'd have been happy to see him go but gotta support the players in the jumper
    Click to expand...
    That is the most frustrating part, and happens too regularly to overlook as a massive downside to his game. Not sure if it can be addressed.
     
    marcmurphy3 said:
    Not true. There were several clubs interested in him including Port Adelaide. Was reported. The hold up to him re-signing, wasnt about us wanting him gone, it was contract terms. We always wanted to keep him at the right price.

    Im sure if we got a good offer we would have considered it but he was never trade bait or we wouldn't have signed him just prior to trade period.
    Click to expand...
    Port pulled their 'interest' in him very early on. Well before we re-signed him.

    Honestly Motlop would be close to the worst small forward in every team in the comp except us in 2025. He's shown some natural talent on ball but up forward he's been a liability for the better part of the last 2 years.
     

    Remove this Banner Ad

    branedotorg said:
    needs to slim down, has got pace when moving and can hit a pack well but is caught time after time coming at the ball from a stop.

    i'd have been happy to see him go but gotta support the players in the jumper
    Click to expand...
    Mots does get tackled a lot but unlike other players, doesn't seem to have the awareness around him to dish it off. Time and time again he just hugs the ball in waiting for the umpire to call ball up.
    Its a biggie if you can draw opposition players in to tackle you then handball out to a teammate in the clear.
     
    I just think that it's unlikely that Elijah is at any other club.

    If he is in a good place right now, then a new club will throw all that out and potentially risk a return to his issues.
     
    bradfisher14 said:
    Biggest factor here is whether or not he nominates for the draft. I assume he will, but there's a chance that he doesn't.
    Click to expand...
    He will 100% nominate. If another club is willing to give him a shot he'd be negligent not too. Hes not going to hang around for our "maybe a train on" opportunity if hes got more certainty elsewhere. Even if he wants to pay the club back hes got to take care of himself.

    Although hawks could just sign him as a dfa if they want him, or have traded a late pick for him during trade period. They dont need to draft him. It'd be worse for them actually as he'd be guaranteed a 2 year contract. So I dont buy that rumor.
     

    🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

    The Bighouse said:
    Motlop is the same as Binnsy IMO, absolutely no need for 2yrs and could have even made way for list numbers. Will struggle to play 1’s if all fit, like Fogarty, but JM will be on contract for another year. Both playing more midfield in the VFL.

    Interest from SA was dropped (likely because of Durd’s availability and preference as a player).
    Click to expand...
    I coukd see Mots not getting a great deal of game time and requesting a trade eoy, so the 2 years ensures we recoup something from him should it play out that way, can't be on big coin either so not to worrying
     
    marcmurphy3 said:
    He will 100% nominate. If another club is willing to give him a shot he'd be negligent not too. Hes not going to hang around for our "maybe a train on" opportunity if hes got more certainty elsewhere. Even if he wants to pay the club back hes got to take care of himself.

    Although hawks could just sign him as a dfa if they want him, or have traded a late pick for him during trade period. They dont need to draft him. It'd be worse for them actually as he'd be guaranteed a 2 year contract. So I dont buy that rumor.
    Click to expand...
    Depends if Hawthorn feel they can manage him and believe he has really turned the corner - absolute bargain

    From an EH financial perspective it woudl be absolutely the right thing to do as it guarnatees him two years

    Would speak negatively to his character however
     
    ctwenty1 said:
    Depends if Hawthorn feel they can manage him and believe he has really turned the corner - absolute bargain

    From an EH financial perspective it woudl be absolutely the right thing to do as it guarnatees him two years

    Would speak negatively to his character however
    Click to expand...
    I dont think it would speak negatively to his character at all. We are the ones who delisted him. Hes got every right to pursue every avenue to continue his career.
     
    The Bighouse said:
    Port def pulled any interest before JM re-signed.
    A lot of assumptions there

    View attachment 2465054
    Click to expand...

    I think they just shifted to Durdin who was keen to get home.

    Motlop is what he is, but he is an AFL player. Was tracking very well before the niggling injuries. Happy with a 2 year deal to see what he’s got.
     
    marcmurphy3 said:
    I dont think it would speak negatively to his character at all. We are the ones who delisted him. Hes got every right to pursue every avenue to continue his career.
    Click to expand...
    I thought he wanted to repay the club?

    I would expect we have been in constant comms with him on expectation and likley future paths ect which presumably he would'be bought in on
     
    ctwenty1 said:
    I thought he wanted to repay the club?

    I would expect we have been in constant comms with him on expectation and likley future paths ect which presumably he would'be bought in on
    Click to expand...
    Wouldn't he have to nominate anyway to be eligible for being picked up later?

    And he has every right to take any opportunity which comes his way.

    We made our choices based on what we felt was best for us and he can make his based on what's best for him.

    This may all come to nothing of course.
     
    Reader mode

    Remove this Banner Ad

    Rumour Bluemour Discussion XLI

    🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

    Back
    Top