How they wish they had picked Franklin instead of Tambling.

Every time Franklin gets the ball and Tambling does not!

Every time Franklin gets the ball and Tambling does not!

Franklin is a helluva pick 5 was it? If only we had a down year in 2005 and followed the odds and evens pattern........was it the 2005 NAB draft he was drafted?

Franklin is a helluva pick 5 was it? If only we had a down year in 2005 and followed the odds and evens pattern........was it the 2005 NAB draft he was drafted?

2004.

The top 7 in 2004 really give the Top 7 2003 are run for their money.

2004 2003

Deledio Cooney

Roughhead Walker

Griffen Sylvia

Tambling Ray

Franklin McLean

Williams Bradley

Lewis Tenace

I would have gone top 8 but Adelaide took Meesen at No 8 in 2004 *COUGH*

Franklin was always viewed as good talent but was sense as a loose cannon off the ground. He could still go pear shaped off the ground. If he had a more mature disposition, he would have gone higher/earlier in the draft.

They talk about and focus on the simple winning and losing situation and ladder positions. They are more focussed on footy scores.

I will put it simply......

1. Kids prefer to go to the footy and support and be interested in a team that is winning rather than losing.

Oh revered one.. these are your words arent they ??? What is there to misunderstand about what you are saying ??

I dont need to put words in your mouth or miscontrue...you are adept at it all by yourself !!

So again..your wisdom is kids are all about winning. Many of us diasgree.

So again..your wisdom is kids are all about winning. Many of us diasgree.

Its pity you are not disagreeing with me as I did not say that and my quoted comments dont infer that at all. But thanks for confirming what I thought was the problem with your misrepresentation. Clearly not a one off

2004.

The top 7 in 2004 really give the Top 7 2003 are run for their money.

2004 2003

Deledio Cooney

Roughhead Walker

Griffen Sylvia

Tambling Ray

Franklin McLean

Williams Bradley

Lewis Tenace

I would have gone top 8 but Adelaide took Meesen at No 8 in 2004 *COUGH*

Franklin was always viewed as good talent but was sense as a loose cannon off the ground. He could still go pear shaped off the ground. If he had a more mature disposition, he would have gone higher/earlier in the draft.

2004 stands head and shoulders above 2003 draft IMO. Thanks for the answer too. Cooney and McLean are the best of the 7 picks IMO out of 2003.

Its pity you are not disagreeing with me as I did not say that and my quoted comments dont infer that at all. But thanks for confirming what I thought was the problem with your misrepresentation. Clearly not a one off

Its not my misrepreseantation. Im simply restating YOUR OWN WORDS.. So please tell me how that can be.

You have a nice knack of grandiosing until someone happens to have a different view. Different views are fine. It is after all what make for discussion. However im sure Im not the only one to notice you are happy to duck and weave when it suits you..

Why..do yo not agree with , again ..you own words. They were hardly out of context..as I left them complete.

And I am disagreeing with you..but again you ability to grasp some of the simpler nuances is lost..Not to some of us though.

Now so we all understand exactly what you mean ( in case you dont ) . Your stance is that kids will inexorably be guided in ther followings by winnng as opposed to losing ? My stance is there are far more issues and that a keen alliance can be formed by association with people ( players ) that transcends the simple win/lose outlook.

Its not my misrepreseantation. Im simply restating YOUR OWN WORDS.. So please tell me how that can be.

No when you stated that "your wisdom is kids are all about winning" that is not my point. I stated kids prefer and you quoted that but sought to misstate that. Unbelievable.

Now so we all understand exactly what you mean ( in case you dont ) . Your stance is that kids will inexorably be guided in ther followings by winnng as opposed to losing ? My stance is there are far more issues and that a keen alliance can be formed by association with people ( players ) that transcends the simple win/lose outlook.

Again its just a preference not an absolute. So give it up. I agree there are more issues. But the keen alliance you glorify takes considerable time to develop for young people when its outside their close family unit. And I dont see that level being achieved with league players specially on the basis of cameo contact that there is at the moment at local junior clubs and Auskick clinic. Its just not as prevalent as the impact of the preference for supporting a winning side.

And when you speak of "we" and "us" you are only represent yourself or are you hearing voices again?

Are you kids still at it?

Its blow for blow.....

Bubs and Rhino.... get a room

Again its just a preference not an absolute.

My final position on this....you seem to enjoy the interchangability to suit your own views come preference and absolutes.

You continue with concept ( as example ) of cameos ..and thats never been the profered view..only yours.

Its somewhat redundant sayng things will take time..what doesnt.

Again..well just have to disagree

I think a lot of what has been said is pretty redundant.

If the only thing that attracts kids is winning, then tell the MFC to win....

We should really be coming up with ideas of how to get kids more involved with the club, and how to get them to enjoy the experience of barracking for the club.