Not sure if anyone saw this on Sunday, but Wallace analysed our list with shifter Sheahan, where we stand now and what we need going forward.

The key points made by Wallace and the panel are as follows:

The positives:

Clear direction on where we are going.

Set up key defenders for the future

Potential star players are age 19-22 (peak 2013-14)

Some quality X factor small forwards

Then analysed some recent draft choices:

Strauss - Melbourne tried to address the need for better kickers (as they did with Tapscott last year).

Strauss was highlighted as they see this as a key weakness at the Dees, our backline lacks some A grade kicks !!

Blease - real problems getting over his leg injury. The question is can he get back to his form at the under 18 champs, as he was great at breaking the lines. highlighted as someone to look out for.

Rucks

Highlighted Gawn first. both he and Fitzpatrick are long term but Spencer is the one really 'ready to go' as the next ruckman. Didn't seem overly excited by that.

Will Watts be enough for talls up forward? (question posed by Hutchy)

Wallace sees Watts as the high half forward so will need probably one more big bodied forward.

What do the need for 2010 draft?

Either 1. a big key forward or 2. a kicker off half back.

If we are pick 14 (currently we are 11th which is pick 14) then they would go for...

Dyson Heppell - strong over head, tallish left footer - he did look good on the highlights (bit like Schoenmakers at Hawthorn)

Anyway, nothing too insightful from Wallace, but got me thinking if that big key forward isn't there at our picks in the next draft, then we would be better off getting a good kick off half back.

The Watts thing bothers me a little. Just because he's playing as a high half forward now, as a skinny kid, doesn't mean he'll be stuck there his whole career.

Doesn't really scratch the surface, IMO. Just offers a shoot-from-the-hip diagnosis. The idea that he thinks we have good small forwards is another example of this.

The Watts thing bothers me a little. Just because he's playing as a high half forward now, as a skinny kid, doesn't mean he'll be stuck there his whole career.

Doesn't really scratch the surface, IMO. Just offers a shoot-from-the-hip diagnosis. The idea that he thinks we have good small forwards is another example of this.

Hmmn, I agree Dappa, I thought the same thing when i watched it. I was a little disappointed with what he had to say, thought he'd be more insightful.

It was interesting what he said re the age bracket, as they mature together, (around 2014) but the thoughts on the defence esp',,,, I think we'll need to replace Rivers & Warnock around the end of 2012ish.

I think we'll have Frawley, Garland, & poss' McNamara, & will need one more tall defender as I believe will be the CHB. Unless Morton grows into that Posi.

The other obvious need is that pack busting key forward who can chase.

Don't right off Martin just yet.

The idea that he thinks we have good small forwards is another example of this.

It depends whether he considers Bennell, Petterd, Bail and Aussie as small forwards. If he does, then I think we've got at least 2 certain future players (how good they'll become is anyone's guess, although Bennell has the skills to become elite).

I'm more worried about our lack of good small defenders. I know Garland and Frawley can and do play small if required, but I still think we need to find a small defender who can totally shut down assholes like Milne and Co without compromising our tall defense. Bartram is doing a good job, but he definitely hurts us on the counter-attack.

Ideally I'd love to see Strauss take over this role, but I question whether he'll ever be good enough defensively.

As for tall forwards, IMHO the number of "talls" is just that, a number. There is no set formula, and we've seen sides win a flag with one or no KPFs (West Coast) before. It's far more important to have enough avenues to goal and plenty of midfielders who can kick goals (this is where Sylvia is potential gold), because sometimes too many tall forwards is like having 3 arms, great in theory, but not really practical.

For me, Watts and Jurrah are the sort of dangerous forward combination that can kill teams, and if we can find a second ruckman who can successfully be rested in the goal square (read: not PJ), then I think we'll have a good enough attack going forward. Besides, our biggest issue is not our forwardline, it's our midfield and the ability to get the ball inside 50. Our conversation rate is actually pretty good, but no forward, no matter how good he is, can do much if the ball is not coming their way. Franklin would kick 9 goals a season if he played for us.

Oh and why the hell do I care what Terry "list destroyer" Wallace has to say?

The Watts thing bothers me a little. Just because he's playing as a high half forward now, as a skinny kid, doesn't mean he'll be stuck there his whole career.

Doesn't really scratch the surface, IMO. Just offers a shoot-from-the-hip diagnosis. The idea that he thinks we have good small forwards is another example of this.

Agree that it wasn't really insightful but don't think it was so much shooting from the hip. They identified Bennell, Jetta and you can add in Wonna and Maric to that list of small forwards. add in Jurrah and you would expect one or two to make it.

Can you say none of the 4 I mentioned won't make it ?

Could Melbourne make an offer to out of contract Jack Riewoldt? Or chase Stanley from the Saints? Stanley would almost be guaranteed a start at full-forward.

Any other young big men worth having a crack at? Jesse White (Swans), Cornilius (Lions), Paul Stewart (Port),

OR try Garland forward.

Allows Warnock, Cheney or McNamara down back.

Terry Wallace getting paid to analyze club lists? Now I've seen it all...

He destroyed two lists in his time.

Just highlighted some obvious points here, I think.

There's no way in hell Riewoldt will leave Punt road. Stanley might be the man to chase.

Terry Wallace getting paid to analyze club lists? Now I've seen it all...

He destroyed two lists in his time.

Just highlighted some obvious points here, I think.

There's no way in hell Riewoldt will leave Punt road. Stanley might be the man to chase.

Shows what you know.

In spite of Plough's shortcomings as a coach, he is regarded by many in the industry as one of the BEST at analysing opposition lists and future trends in the game.

He's not far off with his analysis either.

Those wanting more... well, there's not really more to be said, without desperately crystal ball-gazing.

In my opinion, going by what I've seen at the champs, if we go for a

big forward Tom Lynch would be our best bet.

If we go for the HBF with footskills I'd aim for Ben Jacobs.

My dream pick would be Jack Darling to put up forward with Tapscott to terrorize defenders for years

to come, but we have Simon Buckley's chance of getting him.

Could Melbourne make an offer to out of contract Jack Riewoldt?

Riewoldt said in a press conference on Tuesday that he is contracted until the end of 2011, and wanted to remain a Tiger for life.

I'm more worried about our lack of good small defenders.

Yup. Agree with the rest of the paragraph too. We have an ok starting 6 in defence Frawley and Garland and one of Rivers and Warnock cover talls. Grimes and the ultra defensive Bartram cover smalls. But then what? Oh, and should someone get hurt we have nothing in the cupboard. I think it's why we end up seeing Bruce and particularly Green and Davey drift back there, where they CAN play but don't belong. Either that or we crowbar in average players like Joel MacDonald. Suffice to say you'd rather we had something like our small forward situation where a number of guys are competing for that running back role, which is SO important in the modern running game.

As for tall forwards, IMHO the number of "talls" is just that, a number. There is no set formula, and we've seen sides win a flag with one or no KPFs (West Coast) before.

Yup. I was thinking this the other day. One more tall forward option. Maybe a swing man who can go forward OR back depending on what is needed a la Lake. Green is perfect for this. I think a starting set of targets like Watts, Jurrah and Petterd is ideal. Any more on the day and we'd be too heavy down that end. We also need more in development. More on small forwards later.

if we can find a second ruckman who can successfully be rested in the goal square (read: not PJ),

That's just silly. Jamar was absolutely woeful in his poorer years. He'd take one or two pack marks and miss. PJ is a different sort of player, but just insisting that he NOT be the guy to play forward smacks of prejudice. If he plays there and does ok for 30 minutes a game, then why not him? Maybe it's enough that he plays up the ground a bit more. Whatever gets Watts deep with Jurrah out of the square is worth it IMO. Didn't work so bad on the weekend.

Oh and why the hell do I care what Terry "list destroyer" Wallace has to say?

I was wondering the same thing. Got us up and about though, albeit on a tangent.

Agree that it wasn't really insightful but don't think it was so much shooting from the hip. They identified Bennell, Jetta and you can add in Wonna and Maric to that list of small forwards. add in Jurrah and you would expect one or two to make it.

Can you say none of the 4 I mentioned won't make it ?

And here's the rub. I think I may have mis-spoke. I guess it's not that he's wrong... some of those guys could make it. But I think if you look at 2010 in the small forwards category, it has been a failure. I don't think it's a certainty we have quality X-Factor down there at all. In fact many have frustrated. Petterd was awesome, but got hurt. Also he's been playing a lead-up role. Not really crumbing all that much. Jetta frustrates the hell out of me. Wonna is in trouble in my opinion. Maric hasn't got a game despite all the injuries. Bennell seems the most credentialed in terms of skill, but even he has had issues and been in and out of the side/heard footsteps. Jurrah isn't really a small is he? I guess you could argue he plays like one, but I think a 192+cm player has to be called a tall, especially given he provides the leads, contests and marks that cause spillages.

I would put Petterd at the top of that pile (I exclude Jurrah), though I'm not sure he plays a crumbing forward role. The rest haven't made it yet IMO. I would say our KP forward crisis, ruck crisis and rebounding defender crisis are more pressing, but just having lots of small forwards isn't enough. They have to be earning their place, and I'm not as positive on them as most. I reckon the long list of names in there belies the fact we have problems in that area.

Shows what you know.

In spite of Plough's shortcomings as a coach, he is regarded by many in the industry as one of the BEST at analysing opposition lists and future trends in the game.

He's not far off with his analysis either.

Those wanting more... well, there's not really more to be said, without desperately crystal ball-gazing.

In my opinion, going by what I've seen at the champs, if we go for a

big forward Tom Lynch would be our best bet.

If we go for the HBF with footskills I'd aim for Ben Jacobs.

My dream pick would be Jack Darling to put up forward with Tapscott to terrorize defenders for years

to come, but we have Simon Buckley's chance of getting him.

There is a chance that Darling could go at 14.. I think he will not go in the top 10.

How could he not have mentioned our young midfield as one of the positives? With Scully, Trengove, Gysberts, Grimes, Blease, Tapscott etc. we have a potential A-grade midfield all around the same age. Couldn't believe he focused on small forwards and didn't even mention that

OR try Garland forward.

Allows Warnock, Cheney or McNamara down back.

Great idea remove a major backman from his role where he is strongest to one where he is an unknown to allow players who cant crack a regular game under their own ability to be gifted a game. Love the charity idea. Can we move Scully from the midfield to the back pocket or the bench so we can play Daniel Bell in the centre?

Terry Wallace getting paid to analyze club lists? Now I've seen it all...

He destroyed two lists in his time.

The sense of irony is overwhelming.

Just highlighted some obvious points here, I think.

There's no way in hell Riewoldt will leave Punt road.

Richmond will offer him a truckload to stay. I cant see him leaving and neither will the Tigers board.

Shows what you know.

In spite of Plough's shortcomings as a coach, he is regarded by many in the industry as one of the BEST at analysing opposition lists and future trends in the game.

No it shows what you dont know.

Wallace is regarded as FAIL throughout the football industry who bled one side's list and walked out on them and then set about over 5 years to destroy the Richmond's list with some of the dumbest recruiting and drafting decisions you could imagine. Wallace completely misread where the game was going and Richmond are still working through the debacle. His W/L record would show that he is indeed unable to effectively exploit weaknesses in oppositions.

Its easy to sit back and ping other side's lists in the press. Its no wonder that he has tried to share the seat with Sheehan. He cant get a serious gig in the AFL in any club in any serious football role. He is finished in the AFL and has burnt so many relationship with his self serving actions it no wonder Sheehan used him. He would have been damn cheap too.

He's not far off with his analysis either.

Those wanting more... well, there's not really more to be said, without desperately crystal ball-gazing.

Wow. Its hard to put an opposing view to Wallace. Wallace really didnt say anything of consequence. What's new.

Jamar was absolutely woeful in his poorer years. He'd take one or two pack marks and miss. PJ is a different sort of player, but just insisting that he NOT be the guy to play forward smacks of prejudice. If he plays there and does ok for 30 minutes a game, then why not him? Maybe it's enough that he plays up the ground a bit more. Whatever gets Watts deep with Jurrah out of the square is worth it IMO. Didn't work so bad on the weekend.

Jamar could at least take one or two pack marks. Records reflect Jamar to be a very good kick for goal.

http://stats.rleague.com/afl/stats/players/M/Mark_Jamar.html

I agree PJ is a different sort of player. He cant mark above his shoulders, is poor body on body and despite a nice kicking style is nothing to write home about on the conversion. MFC have flirted with PJ up forward a number times over the years and his shortcomings kill him as an effective KP up forward.

http://stats.rleague.com/afl/stats/players/P/Paul_Johnson0.html

At best with his skill sets PJ can compete with Bennell Wonna and Maric for the small forward role. And they have him covered there.

No it shows what you dont know.

Wallace is regarded as FAIL throughout the football industry who bled one side's list and walked out on them and then set about over 5 years to destroy the Richmond's list with some of the dumbest recruiting and drafting decisions you could imagine. Wallace completely misread where the game was going and Richmond are still working through the debacle. His W/L record would show that he is indeed unable to effectively exploit weaknesses in oppositions.

Its easy to sit back and ping other side's lists in the press. Its no wonder that he has tried to share the seat with Sheehan. He cant get a serious gig in the AFL in any club in any serious football role. He is finished in the AFL and has burnt so many relationship with his self serving actions it no wonder Sheehan used him. He would have been damn cheap too.

Rhino, I'm just going by what Ive been personally told by those who actually work in the AFL.

That is supposedly his strength as a coach. If you've heard his analysis on the radio he doesn't do a bad job and rates our list very highly for the future.

(fwiw he puts us slightly behind Richmond in terms of development, which I agree with.)

I didn't see his segment on Futurestars, so I'm just going by what others have said in this post, but maybe he is being pragmatic and not counting his chickens.

In any case, that show is not really the vehicle for an in-depth analysis; they only want to hype up a few kids.

He may have failed at Richmond, but that can be attributed to poor management (as coach) and in many cases poor recruitment (and from memory Miller was in charge of that - ugh)

By all means, use this thread to stick the boot into Terry if you want, but he was made an AFL coach for some reason, not because he was completely bereft of any relevant skill.

You are being overly simplistic in your assessment.

The Watts thing bothers me a little. Just because he's playing as a high half forward now, as a skinny kid, doesn't mean he'll be stuck there his whole career.

Doesn't really scratch the surface, IMO. Just offers a shoot-from-the-hip diagnosis. The idea that he thinks we have good small forwards is another example of this.

i think watts will play as a floater,mainly high forward with a license to go anywhere.he is young i see a time wher u could throw him in the middle.i watched an old essendon game few nights back and the similarities between hird and watts astounded me9(at similar ages).im calling it now watts is the next james hird

I don't think it's a certainty we have quality X-Factor down there at all. In fact many have frustrated. Petterd was awesome, but got hurt. Also he's been playing a lead-up role. Not really crumbing all that much. Jetta frustrates the hell out of me. Wonna is in trouble in my opinion. Maric hasn't got a game despite all the injuries. Bennell seems the most credentialed in terms of skill, but even he has had issues and been in and out of the side/heard footsteps.

I reckon most of our small forwards are likely enough. Until we have a big target that creates enough crumbs for the little fellas, or start delivering the ball in to the forward 50 to their advantage i reckon its hard to judge. Guys like Bennel & Jetta show enough good signs IMO - they tackle and chase and generally dont waste their touches to often.

i agree Wona may struggle after all of the injury set backs, but he can take a decent grab for his size and his set shot is decent enough to persist for another year.

All these guys have a bit of X-factor about them; infact i think the "X-factor" tag suggests unpredictability, and with that often comes inconsistancy!

He may have failed at Richmond, but that can be attributed to poor management (as coach) and in many cases poor recruitment (and from memory Miller was in charge of that - ugh)

By all means, use this thread to stick the boot into Terry if you want, but he was made an AFL coach for some reason, not because he was completely bereft of any relevant skill.

You are being overly simplistic in your assessment.

The players he sought at Richmond were the same players he sought at Footscray. Undersized, running and outside players with little regard for tall KPPs especially at the Club. He and Miller were thick as theives and Miller was instrumental in getting Wallace to Richmond.

His record as a coach speaks for itself. He was a poor one. He left one club in appalling circumstances and was rightly overlooked by Sydney who chose Roos. He then stuffed it and proved he was not a coaches boot lace.

Its says much of the stupidity of the Richmond hierachy that gave Wallace a 5 year contract given the circumstances at WB.

Wallace isn't stupid and has been and does look out for himself at every opportunity. I just think there are better commentator and analysts out there. And Tezza provides no basis to be assessed highly in any category other than on what he has done in the AFL.

Terry Wallace getting paid to analyze club lists? Now I've seen it all...

He destroyed two lists in his time.

Just highlighted some obvious points here, I think.

There's no way in hell Riewoldt will leave Punt road. Stanley might be the man to chase.

Well said. I was so waiting for Wallace to claim he's hard work was the reason for the Tigers winning four in a row. I guess even he has not got that much hide.

As a player Wallace was a courageous inside midfileder with an uncanny ability to come out of a pack with the football (hence his nickname of Plough)

Unfortunatley he couldnt kick a football out of sight in a dark room

Wallace IMO does not have the runs on the board to be considered a good football coach

Has a poor record on player development which is why he failed to deliver as a senior coach

Is considered by many as a good gameday coach

As a kid Wallace supported Melbourne

It went downhill from there

Jamar could at least take one or two pack marks. Records reflect Jamar to be a very good kick for goal.

http://stats.rleague.com/afl/stats/players/M/Mark_Jamar.html

Rhino, I'm just going by what Ive been personally told by those who actually work in the AFL.

That is supposedly his strength as a coach. If you've heard his analysis on the radio he doesn't do a bad job and rates our list very highly for the future.

(fwiw he puts us slightly behind Richmond in terms of development, which I agree with.)

I didn't see his segment on Futurestars, so I'm just going by what others have said in this post, but maybe he is being pragmatic and not counting his chickens.

In any case, that show is not really the vehicle for an in-depth analysis; they only want to hype up a few kids.

He may have failed at Richmond, but that can be attributed to poor management (as coach) and in many cases poor recruitment (and from memory Miller was in charge of that - ugh)

By all means, use this thread to stick the boot into Terry if you want, but he was made an AFL coach for some reason, not because he was completely bereft of any relevant skill.

You are being overly simplistic in your assessment.

tell me how Wallace destroyed two list, he took the dogs from wooded spooners to missing a GF by one kick , and buy the way labba point was a goal, they should have made the 1997 GF, miller was the one how put richmond's list together, too many people have short memories, Wallace failed at the tigers, but he was good at the dogs,he took them from the bottom,and almost took them to the top.Then it's premiership window, came too a end, it happens to all lists. i think rhino Richards has his own view of history, that's changed from the real history,if you could please point out how he destroyed the dogs, please use real history and not a made up one out of your head. rhino has done it before and he is always right and if you dont agree with him then,you know

Jamar could at least take one or two pack marks. Records reflect Jamar to be a very good kick for goal.

I don't rate those stats. Once he gained the level of fitness he has, and gained some confidence in his place in the side, I think we have seen him kick straighter. Before that, I saw him flub some VERY easy ones. PJ is no different. Actually... he IS different. Give a player with that kicking action some time to get some confidence, and you'd see a similar, probably better conversion rate. As for getting the ball... That's another matter. Jamar certainly has him covered there.

I agree PJ is a different sort of player. He cant mark above his shoulders, is poor body on body and despite a nice kicking style is nothing to write home about on the conversion. MFC have flirted with PJ up forward a number times over the years and his shortcomings kill him as an effective KP up forward.

Flirted is the operative word. He's never enjoyed the gametime there like Jamar has. The only times are the Sydney game where he did his shoulder, and from memory, I think a Carrara game where he looked pretty damn good.

At best with his skill sets PJ can compete with Bennell Wonna and Maric for the small forward role. And they have him covered there.

I've always rated him as ok in defence in the few times I've seen him there. Not that it matters. The club isn't interested in him resting there (and rightly so, tall defenders are the one thing we don't need). You've been uncharacteristically soft on PJ here. Why so? Is it just his good game last weekend? Or are we starting to see the fault in getting stuck into players, making sweeping statements about their future?

I don't rate those stats. Once he gained the level of fitness he has, and gained some confidence in his place in the side, I think we have seen him kick straighter. Before that, I saw him flub some VERY easy ones. PJ is no different. Actually... he IS different. Give a player with that kicking action some time to get some confidence, and you'd see a similar, probably better conversion rate. As for getting the ball... That's another matter. Jamar certainly has him covered there.

No doubt you dont rate those stats. They tell a story you dont like. The conversation rates are measured over there respective careers. Jamar 8 years, PJ six years.

The evidence suggest that Jamar has been consistently accurate over his career.

http://stats.rleague.com/afl/stats/players/M/Mark_Jamar.html

Your issue of flubbing is nitpicking to say the least and irrelevant to the point that Jamar has been consistently accurate over the course of his career.

Flirted is the operative word. He's never enjoyed the gametime there like Jamar has. The only times are the Sydney game where he did his shoulder, and from memory, I think a Carrara game where he looked pretty damn good.

Garbage. Jamar has played second fiddle to Jeff White for so long early in his career that he got no game time at all. The only game where Jamar has had considerable game time forward is Carlton last year where he kicked 5. PJ has had number of opportunities and has shown no capacity for the role as he cant play body on body and is a poor mark.

I've always rated him as ok in defence in the few times I've seen him there. Not that it matters. The club isn't interested in him resting there (and rightly so, tall defenders are the one thing we don't need). You've been uncharacteristically soft on PJ here. Why so? Is it just his good game last weekend? Or are we starting to see the fault in getting stuck into players, making sweeping statements about their future?

No he is poor up back. Panics under pressure and releases the ball on poor options. Both Fraser and McIntosh showed up how unaccountable is his last year by drifting into the F50 and marking and scoring totally unopposed. There is good reason he is never down back. At best, his game was serviceable and what you should expect week in week out as a minimum not once every 70 games or so. I just did not think you would be crowing on one mediocre game given all the evidence before you (that you work so hard to avoid). My views on PJ have not changed since last 2007. They have been confirmed. He should be gone at year end. The only thing that might save him is the paucity of other 2nd string ruck options. And thats not a testament to the player.

tell me how Wallace destroyed two list, he took the dogs from wooded spooners to missing a GF by one kick , and buy the way labba point was a goal, they should have made the 1997 GF, miller was the one how put richmond's list together, too many people have short memories, Wallace failed at the tigers, but he was good at the dogs,he took them from the bottom,and almost took them to the top.Then it's premiership window, came too a end, it happens to all lists. i think rhino Richards has his own view of history, that's changed from the real history,if you could please point out how he destroyed the dogs, please use real history and not a made up one out of your head. rhino has done it before and he is always right and if you dont agree with him then,you know

Have a look at this - it was posted on a Richmond fansite by a guy named Damian Street on July 30 2004 - before Wallace's appointment at Richmond was confirmed. We have a prophet in our midst:

I really don't like Wallace. Some are saying he is allready signed to Richmond and is waiting to see what is happening with the board.

Wallace inherited a team which had been in the finals in 94 and 95. 96 was the Year of the Dogs where he replaced Joyce. He then lead them to 3rd, 3rd, 6th, 8th, 10th, 13th. They got worse and worse every year. His winning record 54% is EXACTLY the same as Peter Schwabs' going into this

season.

He progessively dismantled the team. As his ball-winners (Libba, Dimma, Romero, Powell) left he didn't replace them. He kept getting more and more light-bodied recievers, including trading Montogmery for Eagleton. Why would you go for Eagleton when you allready have Smith, Johnson, Cameron etc.? He has left the Dogs in a terrible position with only Scott West to win the hard ball. After the 2 preliminary final losses the writing was on the wall that his team of wingmen could not win finals matches but he went more and more down that path.

The fact that Roos was able to takeover from Eade and get the Swans back in the finals is a complement to the good shape Eade left the club in. The fact that Rohde has no midfield and no key position players and can't get the Dogs to even sneak 10 wins a year is testament to the condition that

Wallace left the Dogs in.

His record with key position players was terrible. His run-run-run, chip it around, carry the ball, share the ball, flood flood flood game plan made playing forward impossable. He would not know a key position player (or forward) if one jumped up and bit him. This is the guy who recruited Simon Minton-Connell, James Cook, Steven Pitt, Paul Hudson, Kinglsey Hunter, Trent Bartlett, Daniel Bandy, Aaron James, Nicky Winmar and Andrew Wills.

His idea of key defenders is the likes of Simon Cox, Ben Harrison and Craig Ellis ... mixed in with Steve Kretiuk and Mathew Croft. If he hadn't been 'given' Darcy, Wynd and Grant he'd have been stuffed.

Other than the players he inherited Darcy, West, Grant, Johnson, Smith, Wynd and Cameron it is difficult to think of anyone other than Brown who has really done much. Robert Murphy offers a bit but he only played 9 games under Wallace.

He has almost no track record of developing players. A terrible record with forwards. No idea of what a key position player is. He is about the worst player trader there has ever been. He insists on having complete say on list management and upsets his players. When he quit the Dogs, the players said they wanted him out and they didn't want him to coach the last game on the year.

Terry Wallace self-publicist and media darling? Certainly. Terry Wallace coaching innovater with a clear plan? Yep. Terry Wallace good coach who could help a club if given a 2nd chance? Perhaps. Terry Wallace master-coach who can turn a club around, get the best out of under-performing players and solve a teams problems? Give me a break.