mo64

Members
  • Content count

    2,878
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

mo64 last won the day on September 5 2016

mo64 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,978 Excellent

About mo64

  • Rank
    Master Demon

Contact Methods

  • ICQ
    0

Recent Profile Visitors

4,152 profile views
  1. Based on his non-selection, I'd be staggered if Spencer's still on our list next year. The FD think that we're better off being non-competitive in the hitouts, than having an immobile unskilled ruckman like Spencer. It makes no sense to perservere with him.
  2. Aside from Mac brothers and Frost, who are all playing, which other key defender is injured. And don't say Garland, because even if he was fit, we'd be looking to pension him off at seasons end. Smith is more of a half back, who could play on a 3rd tall.
  3. Hulett looks like a suburban footballer. Could dominate a game due to his superior phsical prowess, but as you say, I don't see anything in his game that translates to AFL level. Another Leigh Williams in my opinion.
  4. He was pretty outspoken about the recent staff cuts by The Age, so he may have dug his own grave. It's a shame that his moronic counterpart at The Hun didn't suffer the same fate. As a journo, I'd take Connolly over Slobbo any day of the week.
  5. If the club is currently targeting opposition players to recruit, they'd be doing the sums as to what cap space is required. They'd have a fair idea as to which players are in the firing line.
  6. I'm surprised O Mac isn't in the team, with all his 1%s and TOG.
  7. Sorry HB, but if anyone believed that Danger was going to any other club than Geelong, they need their head read. Every year, the club would have a wishlist of potential recruits. I wouldn't be surprised if some board member or coterie member gets wind of the list, and tries to bignote themselves by passing on the info as being definitive. GNF may be getting that info 2nd, 3rd or 4th hand.
  8. Something in me finds it uncomfortable when a former player comments on a sacked coach, regardless of whether it's positive or negative. The players had the chance to redress things at the time. And Brad needs to understand that there's more to being a head coach than tactical nous.
  9. No he wouldn't. Pedersen playing as an old fashioned follower is more effective than having Fitzpatrick on the field.
  10. It's a cop out to put those bad losses (Freo, Hawthorn, Richmond, North) down to missing Gawn and Hogan. We lost similar games to Essendon and Carlton last year with Gawn and Hogan playing. And does that mean that every season we have an injury to a key player, we just write it off as bad luck? We've got a talented list, but still haven't got a winning mentality. Until we start stringing wins together, I'll never be satisfied.
  11. I assume you're relating this to the negative criticisms of O Mac. In Frawley's case, in his first 3 seasons at the club, we won a total of 12 games. that's hard going for a young key defender. It's fair to say that every player was copping a whacking, including Nathan Jones. Frawley was an All Australian in his 4th year. I just don't see that level of improvement in O Mac.
  12. I think you're spot on Fat Tony. It's easier for the opposition to apply pressure on the ball handler, or intercept our short corridor kicks, when they are fresh. But I also think that our backline isn't strong in one-on-one contests. We can defend ok when our mids push back, but would need to know the limitations of our backline, and don't underestimate the opposition forwards. In the 2nd half against GC, our strategy was to have 10 players behind the ball after a goal was kicked. Two players would rush into the square an our mids would run forward if we won the clearance. It worked well against a team that seemed to give up.
  13. The point you make about positive risks is a good one. Last week it was identified that the better players in the comp had the most turnovers. One reason is because they get the ball in pressure situations more often, but they also make the most risk/reward decisions. So people who bring up stat lines such as turnovers / DE% and 1%s, are either lazy or don't understand the game. When I look at individual errors, my starting point is what I expect of an AFL player as opposed to a park footballer. If an AFL player hasn't got the football smarts or skill level to execute something that a park footballer could, that stands out for me. Some of us get accused of being naysayers, and I'm one, but that's because we see the same players making park football errors. We then get accused of having whipping boys. A case in point for me was Garland. For ages myself and STMJ kept banging on about what him being a liability. My biggest criticism of him was the he prevented quick ball movement with his penchant to slowly go back after taking a mark from short kick. These things don't show up in the stats sheet. My current "whipping boy" is O Mac because he continues to make park football errors. A recent example was against the Crows when he couldn't man the mark properly, and allowed Tex Walker to stroll past him and have a ping for goal. Again, it doesn't show up on any stats sheet, but it was cringeworthy. And if Jack Watts continues to try and take chest marks and get intercepted as a result, he'll become a "whipping boy" once again.
  14. Jones, Garlett, Melksham, Hannan and Oliver had 0 one percenters. Another meaningless stat.
  15. There are so many things wrong with your logic. For starters, if a quality player who addresses a need becomes available, you make a play for him, regardless of where you are on the ladder. And $700k is not exorbitant. Secondly, you want to use that 1st round pick on a classy outside mid. Do the names Morton and Toumpas spring to mind? How they translate from junior to AFL ranks for outside mids, is the hardest to assess. Take a proven commodity in May. If you think that Lewis is almost done, he has another 2 years on a contract which wouldn't be much less than $700k. And finally, your offer of $250k for Jack Leslie isn't much over the minimum wage.