You must the only one to miss that the game has changed more in the past 3 years than in the previous 10 years. Coaches, analysts and long term current players are all saying and continually commenting on it. The increased emphasis on ball possession, speed and mobility and impact running is paramount which had changed the game substantially.

Again, the game hasn't changed.

The way that some teams choose to play it has changed.

I don't see the change in the way teams are playing as an evolution, but rather a trend or fashion. The way that Hawthorn of '08 played is different to that of Brisbane of '01, but I don't necessarily see it as any better.

Again, the game hasn't changed.

The way that some teams choose to play it has changed.

I don't see the change in the way teams are playing as an evolution, but rather a trend or fashion. The way that Hawthorn of '08 played is different to that of Brisbane of '01, but I don't necessarily see it as any better.

The game has changed for two key reasons:

Firstly, the rules have been changed by the AFL to affect the way the game is played and they which have had a dramatic effect on the way coaches strategise the play and the sort of players that will succeed going forward. Centre bounce, kicking in, holding the ball rule changes have altered the way it is played.

And secondly, the strategies do reflect an evolution of thinking Coaches combatting other coaches and also trying to irk out every inch of benefit from the laws of the game. Pagans Paddock and playing long down the corridor was tempered by the advent of flooding. Flooding was broken by game plans that emphasised stretching the defending or flooding team to create open space in the F50 and so on.

An evolution does not necessarily lead to an improvement in watching the game for all people. In fact in some aspects the game are worse. (eg high marking has taken a back seat) In some aspects the game is better. (generally the fitness and ball skills of the players has improved immeasurably, AFL treatment of of off the ball incidents).

Well, here we go..

This is the season to begin the demon era of hope..

Agter carefully watching as much training as I can, and including what I saw on saturday, I have finally comep up with my best 22, thats, Best 22, not my round 1 team, 2 quite differant things..

It has been a truly excellent pre-season for the boys in red & blue, the best ive ever seen in the last 10-12 years..

SO 2009 I feel will bring alot of excitement, with some Hot patches, with also the to be expected bad patches.

But overall, I see a bright future as im sure we all do, infact, I cant ever remember a time I have been so excited about a playing group as I am right now.

Positives:

* We are the youngest side in the competition by some way.

* We have the least exp. side by some way (games played)

* Our disposal has improved remarkably, I cant believe how much it has come along as compared with last year

* The club is finally in good hands

* We finally have a home, (Casey) many underestimate hte im portance this has, its HUGE!

* Coaching/game plan: Our team is in excellent hands, many around the AFL traps have been saying that our coaching staff is perhaps the most prepared around the league, a number of people commenting on how they love our new gameplan and the fact that our squad is really responding, and taking shape to the game plan.

* STAR potential: For the 1st time I can remember, we finally have some kids who could be geniune stars in the AFl, Cale Morton has a really star factor, who I think by the end of the year, could be rated as the best under 20 prospect around. One AFL coach has said last week that he has the look and potential to be a geniune superstar. Colin Garland is another who coulkd have jaws dropping, along with Mclean & Davey, we finally have some real geniune chances for greatness.

Then there is A bloke named Jack who awaits, but PLEASE, be PATIENT!

Here is my best 22 (sure to be scrutinized and torn apart

B: Garland Warnock Whelan

HB: Buckley Rivers Mcdonald©

C: Davey Green Morton

HF: Bate Miller Bruce

F: Wonaemirri Robertson Sylvia

R: Johnson Mclean Jones

INT: Grimes Moloney Maric Martin

EMERG: Valenti Petterd Wheatley

NEXT 5: Jamar Bartram Jetta Watts Dunn

The good news it, its very hard!!

ALways a good sign!

The forward line is without doubt the weakness, But Watts will pop in for a few glimpses and bynext year be a permanent fixture. Bate will play a much more prominent role, and be the real CHF target with Miller around the 30-40m mark and Robbo Deep. Sylvia will also be important in the roaming in & out role.

Bruce I expect to play alot more up forward in a pinch hitter role.

Jetta will be the bolter IMO from this years draftees.

Morton to really break out, Maric & grimes to really cement spots.

The other issue is the back up ruckman. Martin mnay fill in a little, if the match ups down back allow. Meeson definately has the potential, but needs to be more aggressive and create more contests, Spencer is one to watch. Jamar will play his part, but hopefully someone can cement the job.

Wheatley will play the year, by by years end no longer be in best 22 calculations with the development of Petterd, Maric, Grimes and CO.

Garland, Mclean & Davey potential AA if things go very well!

In summary, 2009 is going to be a ride, overall, an exciting one!

GO DEES!

Pity we do not have a Sponsorship to pay for all this optimism!! I predict a rather scary Ride..

So Mo, I will ask for the 43rd time.... what game plan would suit a young inexperienced, slow, one paced midfield with poor hand and foot skills?

It's pointless arguing with you because I don't believe that our list is full of players with poor hand and foot skills. Secondly, at round 1 last season, we we far from being an inexperienced team. That's just an excuse that you use to defend Bailey.

Last season's list was made up of players who had played in 3 consecutive finals from 2004-2006. Our list lacks superstars, but was not as bad as how we performed. Players rarely lose their disposal skills, but they do lose confidence, and become indecisive. Why were the Bulldogs so appaling in 2007, and made the top 4 in 2008 with the same players?

So while you are at it, why don't you have the guts to name all those players with poor hand and foot skills on our list. I'd like to see how many of those players were on our 2007 list that you said was capable of winning the flag.

Last season's list was made up of players who had played in 3 consecutive finals from 2005-2007.

You mean 2004-2006 and I'd say the list was vastly different.

What a load of rubbish.

The game hasn't changed. A few rules have changed and the way some teams choose to play has changed. That's now up there with "he bleeds red and blue" and "a Ryan O'Keefe type player".

This idea that Rivers now all o the sudden won't know what to do is just wrong. He may take a few weeks to adjust but if he can remain fit Rivers will be as good as ever.

He won the Rising Star in 2004 for a reason and when fit and firing would be one of the best five defenders in the competition.

Agreed, Rivers was a natural footballer when he came onto the scene, and he will never lose that. He pleayed on instinct and judgement, something that can't be taught. He won the rising star becuase he constantly beat his man at the contest as well as leaving his direct opponent to help out a team and set up countless counter attacks, again acting solely on instinct and smarts.

You must the only one to miss that the game has changed more in the past 3 years than in the previous 10 years. Coaches, analysts and long term current players are all saying and continually commenting on it. The increased emphasis on ball possession, speed and mobility and impact running is paramount which had changed the game substantially.

That's now up there with "The world is square" etc.

However, I agree with about the "he bleeds red and blue" line. Whenever that is used it generally a turgid bit of waffle at best.

Agree and disagree! Yes the game has changed but it has only gone in swings and roundabouts. No-one has employed the Pagan Paddock since the roos of the late 90's, simply because no-one has had a Wayne Carey in their side (who IMO is the best footballer I've ever seen). Then the invincible Bombers and Lions won flags with sheer midfield strength and tough forwards. I don't think that the '07 Geelong and Hawthorn '08's really differed too much from that same concept. Yes there was talk about this rolling zone, but the '08 flag was due more to midfield potency, grunt and goal kicking prevelance than anything else. The only blight was in the 2004-2006 era where ugly football became the fashion, but we have since transitioned back to busting, direct football prevalling more often than not. Whilst there are more possesions nowadays, this is really only isolated to Geelong ATM, but if you refer to my comment earlier about Rivers using his natural instinct to set-up counter attacks and plays he will find this no trouble.

In summary Rivers is close to being our number 1 player when going, the fact that he's not going does diminish his star somewhat, however he is still a walk up start into our 22 and probably 12 other clubs. And when firing, he would be the player our opponents would be most watchful of, becuase he not only takes out his opponent he also nulifies other forwards around him and brings his team mates into the game. Only a handful of defenders can do that.

You mean 2004-2006 and I'd say the list was vastly different.

You're right 2004-2006, but most of the players who played finals in 2006 were still on our list in 2008.

It's pointless arguing with you because I don't believe that our list is full of players with poor hand and foot skills. Secondly, at round 1 last season, we we far from being an inexperienced team. That's just an excuse that you use to defend Bailey.

It is pointless because you are continually exposed my myself and other posters as having much content and facts as a Museum of Creationism. Your persistence in make revisionist statements about the side reflects a damning naivety of the facts, a need to pose an argument regardless of the truth or something more puerile. I dont have to defend anyone at MFC. You have already tried in the past to erroneously paint me as an ND hater. You got found out for that as well too.

Last season's list was made up of players who had played in 3 consecutive finals from 2004-2006. Our list lacks superstars, but was not as bad as how we performed. Players rarely lose their disposal skills, but they do lose confidence, and become indecisive. Why were the Bulldogs so appaling in 2007, and made the top 4 in 2008 with the same players?

The following players who were with MFC in your "glory years" have either retired, been chronically injured, been traded or their form has deteriorated to a point that they are no longer AFL standard or a combination of both during the past two years...

Neitz (Captain), Yze (VC), White, McLean, Rivers, Robbo, TJ, Moloney, Whelan, Carroll, Pickett, Brown. In addition the following senior players have been released from service....Godfrey, Bizzell and Ward. There may well be others whom I cannot recall.

Nevertheless, the change in the playing personnel has been massive and has left us with a core of inexperienced footballers and a number of more senior players who many on recent performances are just average footballers with questionable skills to take us further up the ladder.

You're right 2004-2006, but most of the players who played finals in 2006 were still on our list in 2008.

Many of those footballers who did play in the 2006 through age, retirement, injury or form or both could not make an on field contribution to MFC.

Neitz, White, Yze, Carroll, McLean, Rivers, Robbo, TJ, Pickett, Ward........

Damn the truth!

He won the Rising Star in 2004 for a reason and when fit and firing would be one of the best five defenders in the competition.

I agree. Just hope he gets fit again and gets a few games under his belt, then he should be right.

It's pointless arguing with you because I don't believe that our list is full of players with poor hand and foot skills. Secondly, at round 1 last season, we we far from being an inexperienced team. That's just an excuse that you use to defend Bailey.

Well, there was Weetra.

Agree and disagree! Yes the game has changed but it has only gone in swings and roundabouts. No-one has employed the Pagan Paddock since the roos of the late 90's, simply because no-one has had a Wayne Carey in their side (who IMO is the best footballer I've ever seen). Then the invincible Bombers and Lions won flags with sheer midfield strength and tough forwards. I don't think that the '07 Geelong and Hawthorn '08's really differed too much from that same concept. Yes there was talk about this rolling zone, but the '08 flag was due more to midfield potency, grunt and goal kicking prevelance than anything else. The only blight was in the 2004-2006 era where ugly football became the fashion, but we have since transitioned back to busting, direct football prevalling more often than not. Whilst there are more possesions nowadays, this is really only isolated to Geelong ATM, but if you refer to my comment earlier about Rivers using his natural instinct to set-up counter attacks and plays he will find this no trouble.

Game strategies evolve and the successful get copied, modified and countered. For every successful strategy, in time a successful counter strategy will be determined to nullify, block or overcome it.

Within this period of time there are constant rule changes designed to change the flow and speed of the game. Strategies will also have to be adapted and developed to cope with that.

I agree that some of the strategies (eg Swans flooding and containment) were awful spectacles. The AFL is sensitive to anything they believe undermines the game as a spectacle particularly in regard TV ratings and contracts.

Possession football is critical to all successful and challenging sides at the moment. Teams are more focussed on decision making under pressure and not turning over the ball. Greater emphasis is being made on the use of the ball by foot and hand and the application of greater pressure on the ball carrier when you dont have it.

In summary Rivers is close to being our number 1 player when going, the fact that he's not going does diminish his star somewhat, however he is still a walk up start into our 22 and probably 12 other clubs. And when firing, he would be the player our opponents would be most watchful of, becuase he not only takes out his opponent he also nulifies other forwards around him and brings his team mates into the game. Only a handful of defenders can do that.

In 2006, I would have agree that given where MFC were contesting finals and our scarcity of defenders, Rivers was critical to our structure. Regardless of the game, Rivers has missed 2 years of football which is alot for any top sportsman. He still has to prove himself match fit going forward. However, the tempo and pace of the game has changed significantly in 2 years.

Rivers reliance on judgement and instinct covered somewhat a lack of pace that he had. In addition, I dont think he is strong body on body player. At times he was exposed. Given the increased pace of the game, players lacking pace are going to more exposed. While MFC supporters revere some happy memories of Rivers zoning off, opposition teams are going to exploit his lack of pace. The latitude he enjoyed in his early years is not prevalent in today's game. Given the options we have in defence now, Rivers like any other player will have to prove himself as much as any other player. I hope he returns as a worthy contributor and ultimately a leading player at MFC. But its not a given at this point.

Agreed. This Luke Hodge role is becoming very important. Green will be a fantastic in this role as he showed last year. He is fantastic at reading the play, is a great mark, has much courage and is a magnificent kick to boot.

I reckon by round 22, Strauss might find himself in the QB role.

For a forward line recognised as the weakness, Brad Green would at least add some semblence of danger to it.

By Round 22, I picture this

B: Strauss, Frawley, Garland

HB: Petterd, Martin, Rivers

C: Morton, McLean, Davey

HF: Bate, Miller, Bruce

F: Woenamirri, Watts, Green

R: Johnson, McDonald, Dunn

B: Moloney, Maric, Jones, Jamar

Emergencies: Grimes, Sylvia, Jetta, Whelan

Bailey is assembling a team with great foot skills. Watch out Buckley, Jones, Moloney, Bartram

I love them all so I hope there is some serious improvement in hitting targets in 09

this is my best 22:

B: Whelan Warnock Martin

HB: Garalnd Rivers Buckley

C: Morton McLean Davey

HF: Bruce Miller Green

FF: Woneamirri Robertson Maric

F: Johnson Moloney Valenti

I: Slyvia McDonald Jones Jamar

too many "unluckies/emergencies" to list

eg) wheatley, all the newcomers, grimes, petterd

I don't doubt a fit Rivers ability to adapt to the modern game (or at least the more modern game than what he last played).

Like Prympke and other posters have alluded too, he has that natural ability to read the play and make good judgments which is so important. Even in his few games last year I could tell the team and his fellow defenders benefited from having his cool head and leadership down back.

Rivers will always be an important cog, whether he'll still be a star? Hopefully he gets a decent crack at this year and we find out.

All this talk of Rivers makes me wonder how or defence will set up this year. With 5 genuine tall options (if you include Frawley who has improved significantly according to all reports). I've always admired Geelong's defence as all players are tall but flexible:

Backs: Harley, Scarlett, Hunt

Half backs: Mackie, Egan/Milburn, Wojcinski

All of those are over 190cm except Wojcinski who is the only real running option. However Mackie and Milburn especially run off there men and are damaging up the ground. Harley is the quarter back who leaves his man to help out his teamates. Egan and Scarlett are genuine stoppers.

I think we have the opportunity to emulate that defence:

Backs: Rivers, Warnock, Frawley

Half backs: Garland, Martin, Whelan

Rivers can play the quarter back role. Martin and Warnock are the genuine stoppers and Frawley and Garland are the tall 'flanky' types that can leave there men and cause some damage up the ground.

This would leave players like Buckley, Grimes and Petterd to rotate through the midfield.

Many of those footballers who did play in the 2006 through age, retirement, injury or form or both could not make an on field contribution to MFC.

Neitz, White, Yze, Carroll, McLean, Rivers, Robbo, TJ, Pickett, Ward........

Damn the truth!

As usual, you've missed the point. Daniher in 2007, and then Bailey in 2008, changed our gameplan with a list that was playing highly competitive football without challenging for a flag between 2004-2006, to playing a brand of football that made us statistically the worst performed side since Fitzroy in their final year.

At the start of last season, you amongst others shouted me down for suggesting that being competitive was more important to the MFC than trying to push for a flag by overhauling our entire list. The players that Daniher/Cameron drafted/recruited in the preceding 5 years were based around a gameplan to counter the dominance of Essendon/Brisbane. The likes of McLean, Jones, Sylvia, Moloney, who were all basically 1st round picks, are not suited to a run and carry gameplan.

Look what being uncompetitive in the last 2 years has brought us. Multi-million dollar losses, no major sponsor, and in all likelihood, another muli-million dollar loss this season.

My 22 for Round 1 at this stage (sure to change).

FB: Whelan Martin Warnock

HB: Garland Rivers Petterd

C: Morton McDonald Green

HF: Sylvia Bate Bruce

FF: Wonaeamirri Miller Davey

Foll: Johnson McLean Jones

Int: Jamar Buckley Strauss Dunn

As usual, you've missed the point. Daniher in 2007, and then Bailey in 2008, changed our gameplan with a list that was playing highly competitive football without challenging for a flag between 2004-2006, to playing a brand of football that made us statistically the worst performed side since Fitzroy in their final year.

I am not sure why you keep banging on about "the list" when I have clearly established to you that our best 22 from 2006 or before was completely decimated. And that fall off had nothing to do with game style.

Our record in your glory years with most of those players at their fittest would suggest that at best the game plan could get us no further than 1st week in September and that against a number of better sides we were routinely torn apart

At the start of last season, you amongst others shouted me down for suggesting that being competitive was more important to the MFC than trying to push for a flag by overhauling our entire list. The players that Daniher/Cameron drafted/recruited in the preceding 5 years were based around a gameplan to counter the dominance of Essendon/Brisbane. The likes of McLean, Jones, Sylvia, Moloney, who were all basically 1st round picks, are not suited to a run and carry gameplan.

As you have been told.... After the train wreck of 2007 where it was clear many of our senior players had deteriorated dramatically fitness and form wise there was no alternative. 2008 only confirmed it. Those senior players had to be transitioned out. We had and we have a huge hole in their list. McLean Jones and Co were recruited because of their football skills not because they were pigeoned holed into a defunct game plan. And if you are telling that they cant play to a standard that every other Club can play then they are not good enough for AFL. I dont believe that for a minute as I think McLean is a key player for us and Jones and Sylvia could be useful. I am not so sure about Beamer.

So what game plan would suit a number of limited one pace footballers with questionable decision making and disposal skills?

Look what being uncompetitive in the last 2 years has brought us. Multi-million dollar losses, no major sponsor, and in all likelihood, another muli-million dollar loss this season.

If you had an iota of understanding you would have realised that these losses are a culmination of a number of issues that pre date the two years where you seemed to have blacked out on.

So what was the alternative list management approach that you would have taken that would have sustained the "success" of your glory years? What was your solution Mo?