I understand somewhat of what your saying hardnut but Geelong have been doing it for a long time, 1999-2003 they were a basket case when a lot of their current playing group were new to the big league. They have been playing that gamestyle for 8 years now whilst we have been at ours for 8 months.

I do agree however that not one magical player will turn us around, I think we are 3 to 4 short of becoming a decent unit. Dangerfield will be expensive and he will be an immediate success along with Viney, but on the other hand maybe targetting two from the Suns and start being proactive and hitting up boys well in advance at GWS who will be out of contract at the end od 2013. On that note very impressed with Toby Green today

Geelong have been continually adapting their game for that 8 years - they don't stand still and let the rest catch them!

Too many times, at many clubs, it has been clear that one good import does not turn the club's ethos around - it is different if the club is already close to success, for example Jolly and Ball at Collingwood, but we are not in that league yet.

Dangerfield is at a club which is achieving new found success under a new coach (one of several who MFC did not even interview if you believe the stories) - I repeat, why would he leave and why would that club let him go, unless there were some very unusual circumstances?

I agree with the idea behind your comment on the Suns and GWS - good thinking.

Makes me think of us doing a Trengove-Dangerfield swap. Trengove back to SA, Dangerfield back to VIC. Could work if they're both homesick. Not saying I want Trengove to leave but...you know, I'd be more happy with Dangerfield in the scintillating form he's in. However players do look worse in a red and blue jumper..could just be an illusion. (Or we can just give Bate, Dunn and Morton for Dangerfield. Michael Newton to come out of retirement as a bonus package We got to the top in 2013, Crows go to the bottom.)

Gaff mark II.

Crows on the way up and if they make finals this year he will re-sign.

I like where your thinking is headed TD.

Dangerfield would be a massive coup for the club. I don't agree with Deelerious above that you have to be winning games to snare the Big Fish. Players have shown they are prepared to move to lower clubs if the financial packages are attractive AND if they can sense the club is serious about assembling a decent footy team.

Exactly how Judd was lured.

I like the humour in your TM RR!

You say you agree with me, (and I agree with your comment about a midfield), but it will not happen overnight - it will take a few years, and I would be wary of using Judd and Carlton as an example!

I see no evidence of Neeld Football working at MFC and IMO it is an out of date Magpie concept - look at the way West Coast, Adelaide, let alone Geelong, play!

We have a list that is predominantly an attacking group - yes, we need to be accountable, but in a new way that extends the successful Geelong model, not one that goes backwards to a failed model - success in modern football lies in innovation, not in copying others.

Whilst I agree that "success in modern football lies in innovation, not in copying others", one thing that will rarely get old in football is the ability to win contested possession. That's Neeld's blueprint.

Just what is Neeld football?

Why do we keep looking for the magical player who will single-handedly return us to dominance? (We have done this for 40 years!)

Time to look at ourselves and ask why we could not even win the two possible games (Brisbane and Richmond) before Round 12.

Time to look at how we trained pre-season and how we train now - where are the skills? Why don't the players know each other well enough to know where they will be on the field without looking? (Geelong can do it.)

Yes, there are players who should go, but at the moment work with what we have got - isn't that what coaching is all about!?

Put simply, our performance so far this year is dismal and there are no excuses - time for everyone to step up!

I don't think we are Hardnut, it's just one player as a start. We need 2 or 3 mature players of quality to balance up our list deficiencies in the 24 - 26 bracket.

I see no evidence of Neeld Football working at MFC and IMO it is an out of date Magpie concept - look at the way West Coast, Adelaide, let alone Geelong, play!

We have a list that is predominantly an attacking group - yes, we need to be accountable, but in a new way that extends the successful Geelong model, not one that goes backwards to a failed model - success in modern football lies in innovation, not in copying others.

All I can say is give Neeld a chance. He's got the biggest job in football bar none, starting with finding out who among his troops is willing to play the game the hard way. "Innovation" comes second fiddle to that for the time being.

Dangerfield is at a club which is achieving new found success under a new coach (one of several who MFC did not even interview if you believe the stories) - I repeat, why would he leave and why would that club let him go, unless there were some very unusual circumstances?

1. Money

2. 5-year deal

3. Neil Craig/Mark Neeld's vision

4. He's Victorian

5. Money

6. Did I mention money?

As for the Crows, I outlined in an earlier post why a package of say a pick 5 plus Sylvia would be attractive for them. If Danger warms to a move to the Dees, they'll have little choice but to talk turkey with us.

Gaff mark II.

Crows on the way up and if they make finals this year he will re-sign.

Gaff is Gaff.

Dangerfield is Dangerfield.

And until the final day of trade week last year, the whole football world assumed Mitch Clark was headed for Freo.

Money isn't everything RR - I believe the successful Brisbane and Geelong playing groups chose to stay together rather than take bigger offers from other clubs (with a notable exception).

Pick 5 and Sylvia!!!

Craig is an intelligent man, but his football vision is limited to the start and finish of a running (or cycling) track. (Also, like Eade, I'm not really sure what his role is - I'm guessing that concept won't last long at any club.)

As much as I love this club, it saddens me when the high profile players with so much talent - are the ones we always try and lure from clubs who were smart enough to recruit them in the first place, and not the gems we find in the draft periods.

Money isn't everything RR - I believe the successful Brisbane and Geelong playing groups chose to stay together rather than take bigger offers from other clubs (with a notable exception).

Pick 5 and Sylvia!!!

Craig is an intelligent man, but his football vision is limited to the start and finish of a running (or cycling) track. (Also, like Eade, I'm not really sure what his role is - I'm guessing that concept won't last long at any club.)

Pretty amusing comment regarding Neil Craig. Whilst he didn't achieve ultimate success at the crows as a coach he had a pretty good record there as a coach & as part of developing an elite performance program during their flag era. He was also the coach that instigated flooding & what many people would regard as the beginning of the current football trend in terms of tactics.

As much as I love this club, it saddens me when the high profile players with so much talent - are the ones we always try and lure from clubs who were smart enough to recruit them in the first place, and not the gems we find in the draft periods.

Like Tom Scully?

All I can say is give Neeld a chance. He's got the biggest job in football bar none, starting with finding out who among his troops is willing to play the game the hard way. "Innovation" comes second fiddle to that for the time being.

1. Money

2. 5-year deal

3. Neil Craig/Mark Neeld's vision

4. He's Victorian

Quote from the ageGeelong looking to Trade for him5. Money

6. Did I mention money?

As for the Crows, I outlined in an earlier post why a package of say a pick 5 plus Sylvia would be attractive for them. If Danger warms to a move to the Dees, they'll have little choice but to talk turkey with us.

Gaff is Gaff.

Dangerfield is Dangerfield.

And until the final day of trade week last year, the whole football world assumed Mitch Clark was headed for Freo.

Like Tom Scully?

Totally different circumstance.

Give the teacher Neeld some time to work with the troubled student and we might see some lifts in grades. He has already dished out one suspension, and I assure you if Sylvia is caught smoking on the oval or graffiting the boys toilets again he will serve a heftier suspension. The point is we don't expell him because he may just become an A grade student. A rambunctious A grader. Maybe.

Col Silvia is the laziest bum on the listUnfortunately every body in the league knows hes' a legend in his own mind Delivers so little except the odd cameoAn incredible waste of talent. He has zero currency

I am convinced col would be a massive hit at Sydney. They eat up these sorts of challenges. Half their list is recycled players, nearly all of whom were worse players than they are now they are in the Sydney 'bubble'

Totally different circumstance.

Culture & $$$$$$$, $$$$$$$$ & Culture... Heads or Tails.

#Edit : too whom it may concern > http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/pp-carlton-blues--chris-judd

Will stay a Crow.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/more-news/patrick-dangerfield-rejects-offers-to-leave-adelaide-crows/story-e6frf9jf-1226362800568

4th in comp for contested balls/clearances. 2nd for hard-ball gets.

Neil Craig deserves more than a little credit for his development.

Give the teacher Neeld some time to work with the troubled student and we might see some lifts in grades. He has already dished out one suspension, and I assure you if Sylvia is caught smoking on the oval or graffiting the boys toilets again he will serve a heftier suspension. The point is we don't expell him because he may just become an A grade student. A rambunctious A grader. Maybe.

I admire your optimism, and used to share it. But now I have come to the realization that the guy is a show pony, a poseur of the highest order. I thought heh was capable of winning a Brownlow, but he would be lucky to win the pizza voucher in the under 12s.

PS: that was of course ref to #12

Today's press suggests, as has been said before, that Dangerfield willbestaying at the Crows. So, scrap that idea guys, PYFO, and do some hard work yourselves.

I admire your optimism, and used to share it. But now I have come to the realization that the guy is a show pony, a poseur of the highest order. I thought heh was capable of winning a Brownlow, but he would be lucky to win the pizza voucher in the under 12s.

Correct. Biggest fraud I have seen in 25 years watching the Demons.

Chook-In-Perth over at 'Ology deserves quoting for this post to Colin Sylvia yesterday ...

"Our club has put (approx) $1.75m in the back pocket of your Adriano Goldschmied jeans in the last 8 years.

We've given you your BMW X5, your Riva dinners, [censored] haircuts and conga line of tarts.

All we ever wanted was the tough as teak Mildura kid who rampaged through the middle and kicked goals from 60.

What have you given us in return??

- 4 pre season club imposed suspensions.

- 4 years of OP that you did [censored] all to fix.

- About 10, maybe 15, games (out of 125!!) approaching something that you are truly capable of."

Nuff said.

So good that this poseur (perfect word there Monoccular) is now being exposed for what he is.

Dangerfield is now off the market. Signed a 3 year deal with Adelaide this morning.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/137036/default.aspx

How about we get Tom McDonald, Blease and our better young ones all locked away on good deals first. The rest comes later.

Dangerfield is now off the market. Signed a 3 year deal with Adelaide this morning.

http://www.afl.com.a...36/default.aspx

Good, now lets get on with growing our own. Draft in 3 quality mids, further development into Jones, Gysberts, Taggert, Grimes, Trengove, Blease, McKenzie and we are on the way.

Will stay a Crow.

http://www.heraldsun...f-1226362800568

4th in comp for contested balls/clearances. 2nd for hard-ball gets.

Neil Craig deserves more than a little credit for his development.

At least he's not gone to the bummers.

Good, now lets get on with growing our own. Draft in 3 quality mids, further development into Jones, Gysberts, Taggert, Grimes, Trengove, Blease, McKenzie and we are on the way.

The problem is we can't grow our own. We haven't for decades. None of those above players will be more than b graders at our club. It kills me to say it, but that's the reality of the situation. We need to trade in proven stars.

Hardnut, on 06 May 2012 - 10:04 PM, said:

Dangerfield is at a club which is achieving new found success under a new coach (one of several who MFC did not even interview if you believe the stories) - I repeat, why would he leave and why would that club let him go, unless there were some very unusual circumstances?

RR Posted 07 May 2012 - 02:36 AM

1. Money

2. 5-year deal

3. Neil Craig/Mark Neeld's vision

4. He's Victorian

5. Money

6. Did I mention money?

PD stayed as expected - money isn't everything!