A lot of our problems last season were that we could not stop other teams getting a run on against us, they would win most of the stoppages or we would just turn it over. I feel that a stronger team will be able to counter that and with an inprovement in our skills we will do a lot better. A lot to look forward to

Interesting and quite a valid theory DD.

Geelong is definitely the right team to try an emulate. I want to see Davey in a forward pocket playing a similar role to when he first started.

HF: Chapman/Green Hawkins/Howe Menzel/Watts

FF: Stokes/Davey Pods/Clark Johnson/Jurrah

Spencer... surely not...he is useless. Saw him in the street the other day and admit that he has stacked on muscle, but does not excuse the fact he can't kick and his tap work is pretty much useless. I wouldn't have thought u need that many talls in the one side.

Similar things used to be said about Jamar.

Time will tell!

Interesting and quite a valid theory DD.

Geelong is definitely the right team to try an emulate. I want to see Davey in a forward pocket playing a similar role to when he first started.

HF: Chapman/Green Hawkins/Howe Menzel/Watts

FF: Stokes/Davey Pods/Clark Johnson/Jurrah

I'm not sure where you get those comparisons Juice! Watts is more a CHF than Howe, Green/Chapman? Perhaps replace Green with Tapscott and play Tappy as a high forward pocket with Green and Clark out of the square (Chapman was named in the forward pocket for the GF). I think there is a lot of similarity between Howe and Stevie J, and our HF line of Howe Watts Jurrah has far better structure to it.

My take on all this is that Neeld has recruited big mature guys to create genuine competition on our list. Not all of them will play together. But this will help create the"hardness" the coach wants, at least we do no at this stage the new coach is a man of his word.

The MFC could seriously suprise in 2012. January will tell quite a bit.

Great Call

You can only simulate a match type feel at training if you're training/palying against bigger blokes, not developing kids

Great Call

You can only simulate a match type feel at training if you're training/palying against bigger blokes, not developing kids

100% agreement on this one.

over the last 3 years we dropped experienced/ hard bodies for kids almost exclusively.

Net result in 2011 we had a lot of skinny kids running round who could not cut it at senior level.

Our balance of experince vs youth was way out of line

Lol, height isn't everything. Where are the small forwards?

Your "big hard team" has Morton in it. Really? Yet Tapscott doesn't make the grade... and no McKenzie.

You don't pick a team from the stats sheet. You want a "hard" team you make players earn their spots by displaying hardness. Skills help too, like others have said some players need to earn their stripes before automatic selection. Talk about discriminating against the little guy lol

Can just as readily pick a 22 on number of games played and get a pretty decent result:

B: Bartram Frawley Garland

HB: Macdonald Rivers Bennell

C: Trengove Sylvia Jones

R: Jamar McKenzie Moloney

HF: Jurrah Watts Petterd

F: Green Clark Davey

I: Martin Bate Morton Dunn

Easier said than done, though.

And my major issue is not with giving a 22 year old with 21 games experience the 2nd tall position, nor is it the movement of a established backman into a more attacking position, it is with the movement of Rivers into the role that Garland played.

I don't think he can do it.

Rivers is a great loose man, but Garland was not that.

So there some logic missing here:

Sellar takes Rivers' role on the hulking 2nd forwards or resting ruckman.

Garland moves onto a HBF/wing position.

Rivers moves into Garlands' role on agile CHFs and lead up forwards (with some time spent on smaller types)?

He can't do that.

So get Davis or McDonald to do that or keep Garland in that postion.

I don't like a tall back trio of Frawley, Rivers and Garland for two reasons - it's undersized and Frawley is forced into the key defensive role which severely limits his attacking attributes. What I want to see is a replacement for Frawley as key negating defender. I can't have Rivers in this role, he was exploited against Collingwood by Cloke and/or Dawes - whoever he picked up went to the goal square - Neeld would have this front of mind. That's where I saw McDonald developing last year but there's significant development required and he appears to be training with the forwards. This is where I imagine Neeld sees Sellar come in to take the lock-down key defensive role and free Frawley to take a more attacking role a la Scarlett/Fletcher, together with Rivers depending on the match-up, The problem may indeed be that Rivers doesn't have a role in the back 6 but he's a smart player and warrants an opportunity to find a match-up. Frawley is very versatile with his match-up and can assist Rivers find a suitable match. Harley, Gilham, Maxwell and Milburn have played important roles in premiership defences despite their limitations, This frees Garland to play a much more attacking role a la Heath Shaw/Harry O'Brien.

I'm seeing a back 6:

Talls: Sellar, Frawley, Rivers

Smalls: Garland, Strauss/Tapscott, Bartram/Bennell

This frees Grimes to the midfield.

Can just as readily pick a 22 on number of games played and get a pretty decent result:

B: Bartram Frawley Garland

HB: Macdonald Rivers Bennell

C: Trengove Sylvia Jones

R: Jamar McKenzie Moloney

HF: Jurrah Watts Petterd

F: Green Clark Davey

I: Martin Bate Morton Dunn

Hang on a sec. O55

Apart from clark I reckon this side was on the Park last season.

So i wouldn't call that a decent result.

I just hope we haven't put all the eggs in one basket. Sure size is important. You have to win contested ball if you want to win a grand final, but you need speed and skills to go with it.

The Bailey philosophy was simply to get the most skillful players in and build their size up from then on. Really it wasn't too bad an idea for a list devoid of talent. In skinny drafts this year I see why Neeld has gone for the opposite. There wasn't a lot of talent on offer so why not go for some that can make an impact and get the list up to standard. His development philosophy is that you become a great team by first become a good team who do all the basic things like contested ball.

What I'd really like to see is a balance where we recruit the best ball winners with skills. That way you get a guy like Fyfe who is skinny as a rake but wins the ball and you can build him up. Or someone like Chris Yarran who isn't fit or strong but is fast and can win the ball and use his skills. Next year with better draft picks in a better draft I think Neeld will clean out the list a bit more because he'll know who he can trust. Then I hope he picks a balance of players, not 3 Jack Viney's!.

Yeah I agree with the master there, it is important to get big bodies around the contest but you do need players that are skillful. Having a whole team of big sized bodies running around who aren't able to hit targets isn't going to help our team win games. Sure we won't lose by 100+ points, but it does not necessarily mean we're going to win games.

Taggert sounds like he has a big body and reports say he has a kick suited to the afl... hopefully this is right and he is not only big but skillful. Although you can't teach players how to be hard, they can be pushed to become more physical. It's very difficult to teach players how to become more skillful... I think that's just more natural talent, something it seems like our list is lacking alot.

McKenzie left out = fail = hand back your membership = leave the country

Interesting to see all of the discussion RE the backline.

i lean to RPFC's way of thinking. Why on gods earth would we move Garlo from the backline, when he is forming a formidable backline combo with Chip. If anyone is vunerable it is Rivers, as Tommy McDonald is showing a bit in preseason, and Sellar is obviously another option.

But as a general rule, everyone needs to step back and stop looking at the new fellas weight and height stats, and start looking at the way they train and play. People need to remember that Sellar couldnt get a game at the crows.

Also dont discount smaller bodies gettign a run under Neeld's game plan. Dale Thomas, Sidebottom and Beams, pendlebury etc arent big blokes.

Jetta ,Bennell and Evans will get a run or better .

I don't like a tall back trio of Frawley, Rivers and Garland for two reasons - it's undersized and Frawley is forced into the key defensive role which severely limits his attacking attributes. What I want to see is a replacement for Frawley as key negating defender. I can't have Rivers in this role, he was exploited against Collingwood by Cloke and/or Dawes - whoever he picked up went to the goal square - Neeld would have this front of mind. That's where I saw McDonald developing last year but there's significant development required and he appears to be training with the forwards. This is where I imagine Neeld sees Sellar come in to take the lock-down key defensive role and free Frawley to take a more attacking role a la Scarlett/Fletcher, together with Rivers depending on the match-up, The problem may indeed be that Rivers doesn't have a role in the back 6 but he's a smart player and warrants an opportunity to find a match-up. Frawley is very versatile with his match-up and can assist Rivers find a suitable match. Harley, Gilham, Maxwell and Milburn have played important roles in premiership defences despite their limitations, This frees Garland to play a much more attacking role a la Heath Shaw/Harry O'Brien.

I'm seeing a back 6:

Talls: Sellar, Frawley, Rivers

Smalls: Garland, Strauss/Tapscott, Bartram/Bennell

This frees Grimes to the midfield.

It would be great to have Frawley as the 2nd defender.

But that is alot to ask Sellar or McDonald to make that happen.

There may be a few teams where I can see Frawley taking the second forward, but when push comes to shove I know who we would want doing the pushing and shoving.

CAN WE STOP ALL THE TALK AND JUST GET THE SEASON STARTED??????!!!!!!!!!

I'M SO EXCITED - BRING IT ON!*

*Past preseasons which ended in shithouse seasons are not indicative of future seasons, or even of the future of this preseason.

My take on all this is that Neeld has recruited big mature guys to create genuine competition on our list. Not all of them will play together. But this will help create the"hardness" the coach wants, at least we do no at this stage the new coach is a man of his word.

The MFC could seriously suprise in 2012. January will tell quite a bit.

I'm not sure why you say this. I don't think January tells us anything. Until we play another team in a game that matters, I don't think we'll know much at all.

I'm not sure why you say this. I don't think January tells us anything. Until we play another team in a game that matters, I don't think we'll know much at all.

Agree IMO we know little until June.

By that time we may be able to judge if any significant changes have taken place.

When I saw the OP I wondered whether they had been in to the change rooms.