Only a bad tradesman blames his tools.

Our team is as good as any.

FB: Nicholson, Garland, Rivers

HB: Watts, Frawley, Grimes

C: Trengove, Jones, Blease

HF: Sylvia, Jurrah, Howe

FF: Davey, Clark, Green

Fol: Jamar, Moloney, Mckenzie

int: Martin, Tapscott, Mcdonald, Pettered, Jetta, Bail, Dunn, Strauss, Sellar, Morton Gysberts, Bennell, Bartram.

This is a pretty talented list. One that should make the finals.

Stop blaming the tools or injuries. Start looking at the real problem.

Are you serious? Do you see a single player on this list that rotates through our midfield who on a regular basis gest 25+ possessions and delivers that ball with skill and nous consistently? Nathan Jones gos all right and we all hope Trengrove has what it takes. After those 2 I'm struggling for names. Morton simply no. Blease will need to take a quantum leap with his fitness, as great as he looks when he does have the ball. Tapscott's an interesting one, but I haven't really seen any signs he'd make a top liner. I've run out of names and please god don't mention Bail or Bennel.

Are you serious? Do you see a single player on this list that rotates through our midfield who on a regular basis gest 25+ possessions and delivers that ball with skill and nous consistently? Nathan Jones gos all right and we all hope Trengrove has what it takes. After those 2 I'm struggling for names. Morton simply no. Blease will need to take a quantum leap with his fitness, as great as he looks when he does have the ball. Tapscott's an interesting one, but I haven't really seen any signs he'd make a top liner. I've run out of names and please god don't mention Bail or Bennel.

But but but they haven't been developed properly. Any of them.

Problem is, we have a very talented list. I dont see a problem with the tools, just how they are being used.

That's because you're not very bright, Tona.

A mental pygmy, if you will.

Are you serious? Do you see a single player on this list that rotates through our midfield who on a regular basis gest 25+ possessions and delivers that ball with skill and nous consistently? Nathan Jones gos all right and we all hope Trengrove has what it takes. After those 2 I'm struggling for names. Morton simply no. Blease will need to take a quantum leap with his fitness, as great as he looks when he does have the ball. Tapscott's an interesting one, but I haven't really seen any signs he'd make a top liner. I've run out of names and please god don't mention Bail or Bennel.

Could not agree more BDP

There are IMO 6 good players on that top 18 and 4 average ones.

The rest are not of a standard that will get us above the bottom six. ( have left out Davey and Green as they are all but gone )

There are 4 average players on the Supplementary list.

Not one Game breaker in the lot.

We have a very long way to go.

Could not agree more BDP

There are IMO 6 good players on that top 18 and 4 average ones.

The rest are not of a standard that will get us above the bottom six. ( have left out Davey and Green as they are all but gone )

There are 4 average players on the Supplementary list.

Not one Game breaker in the lot.

We have a very long way to go.

sobering isnt it !!!

That's because you're not very bright, Tona.

A mental pygmy, if you will.

A pointless insult, but unfortunately it counts in what some seem to see as a race for most posts.

A pointless insult, but unfortunately it counts in what some seem to see as a race for most posts.

Just returning serve Hardnut. I never initiate the insults, but I'll give as good as I get. Particularly if the other guy can't spell.

Just returning serve Hardnut. I never initiate the insults, but I'll give as good as I get. Particularly if the other guy can't spell.

Never is a long time. Insults are subjective in many cases. I don't like poor spelling either, but I dislike poor posts and poor opinions even more.

Never is a long time. Insults are subjective in many cases. I don't like poor spelling either, but I dislike poor posts and poor opinions even more.

My advice then would be to go through the archive of what you've written and delete 95% of it. That should rectify things.

Funny, I haven't had any deleted. I don't object to posts which disagree with my views (and there are plenty of them) but I do not see the point in simply belittling posters and their opinions.

Funny, I haven't had any deleted. I don't object to posts which disagree with my views (and there are plenty of them) but I do not see the point in simply belittling posters and their opinions.

Gee, for a poster named Hardnut you sure aren't very hard.

No wonder you don't like Mark Neeld's style.

Right so it doesn't mater what team our opponent fielded????

FFS this was Port, not Hawthorn.

It is the core of our team. Take the core out of any team (bar perhaps the top 2 or 3) and they will struggle no matter who the opposition is. Simple.

Gee, for a poster named Hardnut you sure aren't very hard.

No wonder you don't like Mark Neeld's style.

I like a successful style and that means never underestimating your opponent - look at the Scott brothers, each in different circumstances.

Outside of pick 40 (or possibly pick 50 this year according to Shifter) one is speculating on a tall underdeveloped player, such as Tom McDonald, a ruckman of the ilk of Sandilands, a player that may be considered too small, such as Blair (rookie), a player that perhaps had some issues, a player with questionable work ethic, one looks at needs, a small fast forward such as Eddie Betts who was a rookie, or (as you say) perhaps a player that lacks talent, but has the right leadership qualities.

I'm not sure I'd go down the pathway you're suggesting. And I certainly don't consider rookies a "negligible investment" - no matter the angle you're presenting. I consider that there are terrific opportunities to take a punt on a talented player in the rookie draft. This is where astute drafting comes into play. It's recognising why a player may be overlooked, but appreciating their upside and where they may fit into AFL footy. Your view is very simplistic.

It is simpler but I don't think simplistic - I don't want more speculative kids.

I would like to get 3 or 4 seasoned bodies from other clubs through FA, or the drafts.

I know what you mean about different pathways - I just feel that, this off season especially, outside of the top 4 or 5 picks in the draft - we should attempt to get some 24-27 year olds onto our list.

I don't think we are balanced at all well and while I admire our young leaders, I would prefer some big arses in there to help Trengove and Grimes.

It is simpler but I don't think simplistic - I don't want more speculative kids.

I would like to get 3 or 4 seasoned bodies from other clubs through FA, or the drafts.

I know what you mean about different pathways - I just feel that, this off season especially, outside of the top 4 or 5 picks in the draft - we should attempt to get some 24-27 year olds onto our list.

I don't think we are balanced at all well and while I admire our young leaders, I would prefer some big arses in there to help Trengove and Grimes.

Agree rpfc, pity we lost a few in that age-group so quickly when they could have been of temporary use to the younger brigade.

I like a successful style and that means never underestimating your opponent - look at the Scott brothers, each in different circumstances.

The Scott Bros. Okay ... what's your point there? Chris guided a champion team to another flag. Good effort but hardly a true indicator of his actual coaching ability. Give him our list and see how he goes.

And Brad ... what has he achieved exactly?

The Scott Bros. Okay ... what's your point there? Chris guided a champion team to another flag. Good effort but hardly a true indicator of his actual coaching ability. Give him our list and see how he goes.

And Brad ... what has he achieved exactly?

Such a predictable response I should have written it for you - do your own homework and you will see neither coach had an easy job to get where they are now.

Such a predictable response I should have written it for you - do your own homework and you will see neither coach had an easy job to get where they are now.

But you haven't answered my question ... what exactly has Brad Scott achieved to date? I'm interested to know given your championing of him to illustrate your agen ... oops, er ahh ... point.

Edited July 23, 201212 yr by Range Rover

Who has the best list.

Melbourne

Doggies

Kangaroos

Blues

Richmond

Brisbane.

They all kinda look the same to me.

Remember, moloney and jamar were the no1 clearance duo in 2011.

Now evaluate the coaches of these teams and see where they sit, who is on the rise, who is on the slide, and who is going nowhere.

Agree rpfc, pity we lost a few in that age-group so quickly when they could have been of temporary use to the younger brigade.

Who were they?

I am talking about blokes from the 2003 draft to the 2005 draft...

They have to be good players. Didn't think I had to add that...

They have to be able to get on field and contribute and be 'the better' players.

Our results from those drafts are: McLean, Sylvia, Johnson, Read, Davey ®, Bate, Dunn, Newton, Warnock ®, Jones, Buckley, Batram, Neville, and Bode ® plus 8 rookies that didn't play a game. 2006 draft was better with Frawley and Garland (with Petterd and Weetra and another rookie that didn't play a game).

Those are lean years to say the least...

Only Sylvia, Davey, Bate, Dunn, Jones, and Batram remain from those three years. And Jones and Batram would be the only ones pulling their weight. It's bad recruitment and development.

Who has the best list.

Melbourne

Doggies

Kangaroos

Blues

Richmond

Brisbane.

They all kinda look the same to me.

Remember, moloney and jamar were the no1 clearance duo in 2011.

Now evaluate the coaches of these teams and see where they sit, who is on the rise, who is on the slide, and who is going nowhere.

I just threw up a little bit.

But, these teams have midfields Mr rpfc!!

They sure do, Billy. They sure do.

Moloney, jones, mckenzie, Sylvia,trengove, Gysberts, tapscott, Howe,

Magner, grimes.

Please compare

Who has the best list.

Melbourne

Doggies

Kangaroos

Blues

Richmond

Brisbane.

They all kinda look the same to me.

Remember, moloney and jamar were the no1 clearance duo in 2011.

Now evaluate the coaches of these teams and see where they sit, who is on the rise, who is on the slide, and who is going nowhere.

This is really easy tonatopia

In decending order

North Melbourne

Carlton

Richmond

Brisbane

W Bulldogs

Melbourne

In the final analysis the score board tells you

Everything else is just waffle

It is simpler but I don't think simplistic - I don't want more speculative kids.

I would like to get 3 or 4 seasoned bodies from other clubs through FA, or the drafts.

I know what you mean about different pathways - I just feel that, this off season especially, outside of the top 4 or 5 picks in the draft - we should attempt to get some 24-27 year olds onto our list.

I don't think we are balanced at all well and while I admire our young leaders, I would prefer some big arses in there to help Trengove and Grimes.

My post was speaking generically about how a club should utilise the rookie draft, while you seem to be talking about this year.

I understand your point, but if a player's talent is as questionable as you're alluding to I wouldn't be going down that path. I understand the benefits of instant gratification by choosing someone with a big arse, but when using the rookie draft one should always have an eye on the future.

You got your Magner and Couch, but I've seen enough to know that they're not the future and they're just plugging holes. Speculate on a player that actually has genuine talent, but for the reasons I mentioned they're available in the rookie draft.

Only Sylvia, Davey, Bate, Dunn, Jones, and Batram remain from those three years. And Jones and Batram would be the only ones pulling their weight. It's bad recruitment and development.

I agree that our recruitment has been poor and on the surface we don't seem to have developed well, but it's difficult to know how to apportion the blame on development. I doubt we'll get a consensus.

I do believe that stars and mature bodies make a team infinitely better and that we don't have any of the former. There's a reason that Cheney and Simon Buckley can get games in top 4 sides and having watched them this year I don't believe they're better footballers than when they were with us. It's easier to play in better teams. And teams are better when they're more mature and they have a few stars.

People underestimate the importance of stars.