_{Watts is a basketballer playing footy. But then again, so is Pendlebury and Tippet. I can guarantee you that JW was the type of player that played up fouls, physical contact and took a dive to get a call. Pendlebury wasn't that type, he was solid, played hard, kept his feet and crashed the boards. Unfortunately, it's hard to change your 'style' of play. It's ingrained early on, just ike your personality. As a CHF (or any KP player), JW doesn't have that aggression. Watch his contests at the ball. He'll take the soft option every time. If he's in front he'll play for a push in the back. If he's caught behind , he'll play for the free for being held out (he did this Saturday and gort a ridiculous free for it) but if he gets a nice high ball set up for him and a guy happens to be under it, he'll attack the ball.}

_{These things will not change.}

Therein might lie the problem - if he can't be coached or get some mongrel injected into him, it might be time to look to other options. Personalities can change once that white line is crossed.

Personalities can change once that white line is crossed.

Agreed. But the personalities that are exhibited on either side of that line rarely can.

I look at successful teams and I see our major problem is that we have been seriously let down by our senior players for many years. The great teams have a strong base of hardened players 24 years old plus that show the way to the youngsters. These youngsters are allowed to thrive and develop in an enviroment where the seniors have set the tone. West Coast youth were great last year but the likes of Cox, glass and Kerr (to a lesser extent) led the way in their recovery. We talk about Darling being a gun but he was third tall behind Lynch,Kennedy and Cox resting forward.

The drafting of Clark was important as he is one step closer to helping us fill the void of senior type players.

I look at successful teams and I see our major problem is that we have been seriously let down by our senior players for many years. The great teams have a strong base of hardened players 24 years old plus that show the way to the youngsters. These youngsters are allowed to thrive and develop in an enviroment where the seniors have set the tone. West Coast youth were great last year but the likes of Cox, glass and Kerr (to a lesser extent) led the way in their recovery. We talk about Darling being a gun but he was third tall behind Lynch,Kennedy and Cox resting forward.

The drafting of Clark was important as he is one step closer to helping us fill the void of senior type players.

One down 5 to go.

The great teams have a strong base of hardened players 24 years old plus that show the way to the youngsters. These youngsters are allowed to thrive and develop in an enviroment where the seniors have set the tone. West Coast youth were great last year but the likes of Cox, glass and Kerr (to a lesser extent) led the way in their recovery.

That's very true and is no doubt our biggest issue. My Brother was at a large birthday lunch yesterday and had a long chat to a retired 200+ game multiple premiership player. In fact the family is football royalty. Of all our experienced players, or ones that have been around a while, this past player only rates one player at Melbourne and that's Frawley. He's not talking about our youth, or developing players, but the players that have been on our list for some time. Clearly many posters here won't agree with him, but I don't this he's terribly wide of the mark. He really rates Frawley though.

I don't think I'll pass on his views about Watts.

I don't think I'll pass on his views about Watts.

what? in case they sound dergoratory? not sure anyone will blink an eyelid who has been reading demonland.

i agree with him though, Frawley is our best player at present.

I have an unraced 2yo he seems OK as well. He has four legs a tail and can run.

The problem is he doesn't try hard enough. Either that or he is just not good enough.

I haven't named him yet. Any Suggestions?

what? in case they sound dergoratory? not sure anyone will blink an eyelid who has been reading demonland.

Watts the point ? You want to read more stuff about him ?

I have an unraced 2yo he seems OK as well. He has four legs a tail and can run.

The problem is he doesn't try hard enough. Either that or he is just not good enough.

I haven't named him yet. Any Suggestions?

Oh mate I have 4 beauties but I am not going there

Not enough courage.

I agree with him though, Frawley is our best player at present.

Its not necessarily about the being the best. I consider Frawley our senior who has "got the stuff". I rate Jones just behind him. ( there is a distinction between being the best and "got the stuff" and therein lies why I rate Jones - think Ling of Geelong). Talent ( Colin Sylvia) will only take you so far.

All this talk of development gives me the irrits.

You don't develop stars , they walk into your club with that quality.

You can make them fitter and stronger but that is all.

You can develop a player to hold his spot on the field , but you will not turn an average player into a star with development.

Look at Reiwoldt and Kosi for eg.

Both big marking players , both drafted to the same club at the same time .

Both "developed similarly.

1 star and 1 dead set dud.

Being a star is between the ears .

Those waiting for our list to miraculously turn into stars with "Development" are kidding themselves.

Its not necessarily about the being the best. I consider Frawley our senior who has "got the stuff". I rate Jones just behind him. ( there is a distinction between being the best and "got the stuff" and therein lies why I rate Jones - think Ling of Geelong). Talent ( Colin Sylvia) will only take you so far.

getting sick of the sylvia rubbish on this site. Firstly his 'talent' since he started was actually skills of an outside player, he has slowly built on his weakness which was contested footy. He has built on this to survive as we weren't getting the ball to him enough, but to me this so called 'huge talent' could not kick non preferred, did not do the one percenters and did not have great skills in close.

These he has worked on, and improved better than most. get him on an even playing field and I believe he will perform well.

All this talk of development gives me the irrits.

You don't develop stars , they walk into your club with that quality.

You can make them fitter and stronger but that is all.

You can develop a player to hold his spot on the field , but you will not turn an average player into a star with development.

Look at Reiwoldt and Kosi for eg.

Both big marking players , both drafted to the same club at the same time .

Both "developed similarly.

1 star and 1 dead set dud.

Being a star is between the ears .

Those waiting for our list to miraculously turn into stars with "Development" are kidding themselves.

So I can only assume that means you are absolutely infuriated with our recruiting staff of the past from however many years. We have no stars. Are the recruiters entirely to blame?

I would say it's a combination of poor recruiting, poor coaching, poor role models/team leaders, soft culture.

That is what Melbourne was and mostly still is as a club.

We will always hear the optimists on demonland go on and on and on about how this/that young player will develop into a star and it's so sad.

The club is as far behind as it was when Bailey took over. Talking on field specifically here. Players, coaches, game plan, leaders, standards.

Just out of interest, is there anyone who thinks that we lost to Hawthorn on the weekend because of 'inexperience'?

All this talk of development gives me the irrits. You don't develop stars , they walk into your club with that quality. You can make them fitter and stronger but that is all. You can develop a player to hold his spot on the field , but you will not turn an average player into a star with development. Look at Reiwoldt and Kosi for eg. Both big marking players , both drafted to the same club at the same time . Both "developed similarly. 1 star and 1 dead set dud. Being a star is between the ears . Those waiting for our list to miraculously turn into stars with "Development" are kidding themselves.

I reject that.

Dane Swan didn't walk into Collingwood as effective as he is.

He, and they, worked hard and improved his skills, and gave him a role that suited him.

I think the lack of professionalism at the MFC over the years has kept some players from their optimum, and in that instance we were stopping a star player from possibly prospering.

If we had the coin, a stand alone VFA side would be a step in the right direction.

Our leaders need to change the way they play. They need to become selfless. They need to block, tackle, pressure, smother, make second efforts, all the 'one percenters'.

They need to do these things more and worry about them more than accumulating possessions or kicking goals.

I'm sure we will continue to draft players who are already of this mindset also.

As soon as this kind of play and attitude is instilled it will obviously rub off on young draftees that come to our club.

We need a bigger emphasis on drafting players with above average kicking skills. It's an absolute joke how disgusting our kicking skills are sometimes.

Our list still needs big changes made.

Neeld is the man to take us there.

I reject that.

Dane Swan didn't walk into Collingwood as effective as he is.

He, and they, worked hard and improved his skills, and gave him a role that suited him.

I think the lack of professionalism at the MFC over the years has kept some players from their optimum, and in that instance we were stopping a star player from possibly prospering.

Nail on head.

If we had the coin, a stand alone VFA side would be a step in the right direction.

VFL? You are correct if that's the case.

We would have full control of the way the club plays and developing our younger players in specific positions and roles.

But it costs a lot.

So I can only assume that means you are absolutely infuriated with our recruiting staff of the past from however many years. We have no stars. Are the recruiters entirely to blame?

I have been infuriated with our recruiting for 20 years.

I've watched big bodied aggressive clubs smash us most of my life.

I think the pennys finally dropped with Neeld as coach but our much of our list and top draft picks are comprised of skinny outside players that Bailey/Prendergast selected.

Again we were beaten up by a big bodied aggresive club on the weekend.

I reject that.

Dane Swan didn't walk into Collingwood as effective as he is.

He, and they, worked hard and improved his skills, and gave him a role that suited him.

I think the lack of professionalism at the MFC over the years has kept some players from their optimum, and in that instance we were stopping a star player from possibly prospering.

Swan would always have been confident in his ability IMO.

Sure they made him fitter so he can plod around the ground 1 paced for the whole game .

The role they gave him which suited is gun midfielder , not "run with" player .

He has the skill to read the play , be where the ball is going and confidence that he can get it and deliver it.

You can't teach that stuff.

Entirely agree with the lack of professionalism tho'.

Also the lack of true leadership and desire to be a truly powerful club.

I think during Danihers era for eg. the list was just downright lazy.

Nail on head.

Agree. Matthew Boyd is another.

But it costs a lot.

I spoke with an acquaintance on the weekend who went to the same school as Jimmy Bartel in Geelong. Early days 2003-05, Bomba Thompson and co were that hard on him at training and during games. They could see potential but Jimmy was taking time. They were on his back time and again so much so, he very nearly considered a move to another club. But they wanted him to keep working and developing him.

One of many examples of the time, effort, resources* and why $ is important in developing new recruits to star status.

So I can only assume that means you are absolutely infuriated with our recruiting staff of the past from however many years. We have no stars. Are the recruiters entirely to blame?

I would say it's a combination of poor recruiting, poor coaching, poor role models/team leaders, soft culture.

That is what Melbourne was and mostly still is as a club.

We will always hear the optimists on demonland go on and on and on about how this/that young player will develop into a star and it's so sad.

The club is as far behind as it was when Bailey took over. Talking on field specifically here. Players, coaches, game plan, leaders, standards.

Just out of interest, is there anyone who thinks that we lost to Hawthorn on the weekend because of 'inexperience'?

Recruiting>We have plenty of stars recruited at high picks which were established by the industry not just MelbFC

Coaching> we have a new coach with a different approach to development

Role Models> our club champions and new coaches are well known to players and community

Soft culture>Softness need not be a synonym for defeat, it is a necessary part of emotive mix. Lack of hardness is being adressed. Both need to be applied at appropriate times.

It is good to have expectations for all players to give them something to strive for, its the best /only way to get improvement Star is a relative term

I still havent seen enough of the new team playres structures etc to make a definitive analysis of where we are relative to Bailey

I thought Neeld acknowledged that we were inexperienced by refering to the experience of Hawks So I agree!

here are our 11 most senior players.

Bartram Debut 2006 Leadership Group 2012

Bate 2006 N/A

Davey 2004 Demoted

Dunn 2006 N/A

Green 2000 Demoted

Jamar 2003 2012

Macdonald 2004 N/A

Moloney 2003 Demoted

Rivers 2003 Demoted

Sylvia 2004 N/A

Jones 2006 2010?

as you can see there aren't too many hodges, mitchells or lewis' in that group

I reject that.

Dane Swan didn't walk into Collingwood as effective as he is.

He, and they, worked hard and improved his skills, and gave him a role that suited him.

I think the lack of professionalism at the MFC over the years has kept some players from their optimum, and in that instance we were stopping a star player from possibly prospering.

Dean Cox didn't walk into West Coast a "star" either. Best Ruckman of the modern era was a rookie.

Brendon Goddard didn't walk into St Kilda a "star" either. Nearly won them a grand-final. He took time.

the list can go on & on.

Think you have to accept "development" in the modern game is massive, it takes time & money. Heaps of money.

You can't pick your way to a flag - You must develop your way to a flag. Top draft picks guarantee NOTHING, they only marginally improve your probabilities.

Brendon Goddard didn't walk into St Kilda a "star" either. Nearly won them a grand-final. He took time.

It could be argued that he did.......

getting sick of the sylvia rubbish on this site. Firstly his 'talent' since he started was actually skills of an outside player, he has slowly built on his weakness which was contested footy.

.

Really ? I dont think we are talking about the same Sylvia.

This from draft day

MELBOURNE

3 - Colin Sylvia (Bendigo Pioneers) 18, 184cms, 85kgs

Midfielder known for his tackling, kicking, overhead marking and work ethic.

The club says

"We're very happy with (Colin Sylvia and Brock McLean). They can come into our team and strengthen our midfield. They're both tough, inside midfielders, two talented midfielders who can be strong leaders at our club in the near future."

Neale Daniher, senior coach

He was recruited in the same draft with Brock as we needed inside contested grunt. He was tackling machine in the TAC. He certainly was not recruited as an outside footballer and his strength in TAC was his contested football.

My disappointment with Colin is he probably the biggest talent on our list but has yet to consistently produce. Please tell me - are you happy so far with Colins "work ethic" ?

Edit - I am not sure if the interview/article was at the beginning of last year but Colin wasnt all that happy with Colin's work ethic to date either