I reckon TIm Harrington has had a sensational period.

He needed one.

As forced sellers, #4 would have likely been the best deal GWS could have got for Hogan.

Port received two second round picks for Chaplin and Pearce, so we would have likely got another pick at around #50 had we take Byrnes later on.

And as for Martin, I like him as a ruckman. He is not a witches hat around the ground like Jamar is and IMO hit outs are the most overrated statistic in the game. As for his demand from other clubs, it needs to be remembered that no club rated Ivan Maric last year either.

As forced sellers, #4 would have likely been the best deal GWS could have got for Hogan.

Port received two second round picks for Chaplin and Pearce, so we would have likely got another pick at around #50 had we take Byrnes later on.

And as for Martin, I like him as a ruckman. He is not a witches hat around the ground like Jamar is and IMO hit outs are the most overrated statistic in the game. As for his demand from other clubs, it needs to be remembered that no club rated Ivan Maric last year either.

Good point about GWS being a forced seller. They had to get rid of Hogan and we were best placed to give them a good pick.

As forced sellers, #4 would have likely been the best deal GWS could have got for Hogan.

Port received two second round picks for Chaplin and Pearce, so we would have likely got another pick at around #50 had we take Byrnes later on.

And as for Martin, I like him as a ruckman. He is not a witches hat around the ground like Jamar is and IMO hit outs are the most overrated statistic in the game. As for his demand from other clubs, it needs to be remembered that no club rated Ivan Maric last year either.

You don't want Jack Viney, that's the bottom line of your analysis.

You don't want Jack Viney, that's the bottom line of your analysis.

Or you could read that I wanted #3, #4, #14 and Viney.

I like what the club did this trade period. They recruited so they could play with a type of STRUCTURE Neeld wants us to play with, competitively in 2013.

If you want players to play a certain type of game, with a certain kind of method, there's not much point if the type of players you have just cant do it. No one really learns anything losing by 60- 90 points each week. Neeld has set us up to play a type of game , that we will refine, but that will set the blueprint for the young players to adapt to NOW.

I disagree with the thinking around here that all the players sacked weren't trying, or weren't disciplined etc. I'll miss some of them. I just think they were the wrong TYPE of players to play his game. Wrong shape, wrong playing attributes i.e speed, height, build for the positions he wanted them filling.

On top of which he inherited a [censored] load of bad feeling in the playing group both post Bailey and the recognition that the club had underspent of the FD with big consequences. Consequences that were made obvious on Neeld, Craig and Missions arrival.

He wants to be an AFL coach LONG TERM. So, he's got a list he wants, or that is a lot closer to what he wants, than when he came. He's the coach...for now I back his vision. At least he has one!

I also think Neelds relationship with the players will be a lot different this year when he knows he wants to keep them. We're going to find out a lot more about his system this year than last....and, love him or hate him, you have to admit he's been brave and put his arse as firmly on the line as anyone could. I for one am impressed with kahunas.

Or you could read that I wanted #3, #4, #14 and Viney.

But we ensured that.

You got what you wanted.

We could have easily renegged on getting Hogan in the MD - it was not a fait accompli.

We did the deal so you could watch a dominant FF run around for a decade.

Or you could read that I wanted #3, #4, #14 and Viney.

You wanted to take a massive risk - whereas Harrington delivered a premium outcome.

You might have got what you wanted, but equally you might have got 3, 4, 14, 27 and No Viney OR Viney, 4, 14, 27

I'm extremely happy with the way it panned out.

It was 3, 14, 27 and 48 for Hogan, Dawes, Viney and Barry in the end.

I reckon we just threw out the bath water and there were turds floating in it.

Settle down, you are talking about boys who were part of our club.

^^^ agree. I just wish the media could see it this way.

Some of them do. Andy Maher on SEN this morning said we had done a good job and Neeld was stamping a team that he wanted, rather than what was forced on him. Michael Gleeson in the Age today said the same.

That shows that not all of the media are [censored] all of the time.

What had me rolling my eyes last week was Damian Barrett who said in relation to Melbourne's trade and FA period "I just don't get it" and then proceeded to mark us an E. If you don't get it Dammo how can you mark it?

Bit like having your Art Teacher mark your Physics Exam.

Instead of giving Melbourne an E he should have given himself an uppercut.

His hysteria over Jesse Hogan picks we traded without even mentioning Barry as a gain also smelt like a guy running an agenda.

What had me rolling my eyes last week was Damian Barrett who said in relation to Melbourne's trade and FA period "I just don't get it" and then proceeded to mark us an F. If you don't get it Dammo how can you mark it?

Bit like having your Art Teacher mark your Physics Exam.

Instead of giving Melbourne an F he should have given himself an uppercut.

We can only hope that sometime next year, or the year after that ,we have cause to remind him of that mark.... and loudly underline his total lack of insight. We bide our time and wait!

Or you could read that I wanted #3, #4, #14 and Viney.

But we did get that. 3 (Hogan), 4 (to be used), 14/45 (Dawes/Barry), 27 (Viney).

Don't see what's wrong with this???

Settle down, you are talking about boys who were part of our club.

I apologise - it was overstepping the mark.

I rarely fume but have this period but perception and reality have been bent all out of shape.

Let me rephrase - We threw out bathwater that promised a luxurious, satisfying bubble bath but in the end didnt deliver any bubbles at all ?

What had me rolling my eyes last week was Damian Barrett who said in relation to Melbourne's trade and FA period "I just don't get it" and then proceeded to mark us an E. If you don't get it Dammo how can you mark it?

Bit like having your Art Teacher mark your Physics Exam.

Instead of giving Melbourne an E he should have given himself an uppercut.

His hysteria over Jesse Hogan picks we traded without even mentioning Barry as a gain also smelt like a guy running an agenda.

Great calls, agree 100% with your logic. I'm a big fan of what we've done, and I really hope it works out next year because it will give me no end of satisfaction to call barret up and laugh at him.

I apologise - it was overstepping the mark.

I rarely fume but have this period but perception and reality have been bent all out of shape.

Let me rephrase - We threw out bathwater that promised a luxurious, satisfying bubble bath but in the end didnt deliver any bubbles at all ?

i know how you feel, the frustration just gets the better of you.

I have said it on here before and I don't wan't to sound like a nag, but I just get so upset when I think of what BP has left us. His high end choices have just been diabolical and are a major reason why we are chopping so many players. It just seems to me that he refused to go safe, to prove how smart he was and it has backfired heavily.

i know how you feel, the frustration just gets the better of you.

I have said it on here before and I don't wan't to sound like a nag, but I just get so upset when I think of what BP has left us. His high end choices have just been diabolical and are a major reason why we are chopping so many players. It just seems to me that he refused to go safe, to prove how smart he was and it has backfired heavily.

And then he left....

I just can't understand why there were more on here that had a clue than he did.

You don't want Jack Viney,

You don't want Jack Viney, Jack Viney wants you.

.. or am I in the wrong thread?

He needed one.

BH

Can you remove that picture please.

I don't have a clue what you're writing.

The blood just rushes to parts of my body that I'm not used to.

Are you suggesting that its last owner lacked vigour? Was that the problem?

not necessarily, but wearing the jumper back to front, doesn't do the number justice? They were his shoulder blades poking out, weren't they.

Dr. Smith on SEN is again spitting bile on the club like Denham...

who?

i know how you feel, the frustration just gets the better of you.

I have said it on here before and I don't wan't to sound like a nag, but I just get so upset when I think of what BP has left us. His high end choices have just been diabolical and are a major reason why we are chopping so many players. It just seems to me that he refused to go safe, to prove how smart he was and it has backfired heavily.

The recruiting failures are more than 4 years old. Try 10 years. at the least. And the footy dept & the culture issues of the club go back mostly 20 years.

BP made mistakes as did CaC before him, but the real damage has been done by our Boards & Administrators of over the last 20 odd years. Hire the wrong people and wrong things happen.

Then money issues occur, then onfield failings happen, & then its real bad news.

And then he left....

I just can't understand why there were more on here that had a clue than he did.

Maybe he was told by the football dept to recruit a certain type of player......and he did......lot of hate for him but I reckon it's not ALL his fault....Just Saying....

The Dawes deal was fair in terms of draft picks but is risky given his form last year was hopeless. The four-year big money deal means that he must deliver more than a decoy role for Clark and he needs to kick 40 goals per year for the trade to be a success.

Looking at the stats from last years goal kickers I can only find 1 Second KPF who kicked over 40 goals, which was Roughhead for the Hawks, and I think we can safely say he was getting a lot better delivery than Dawes will next year. I think 25-35 goals would be a good return, anything over that is a bonus. His role is to crash packs, make a contest, provide a chop out for Clark by taking a defender and to kick goals. Saying unless he kicks 40 goals he has failed is ridiculous!

The recruiting failures are more than 4 years old. Try 10 years. at the least. And the footy dept & the culture issues of the club go back mostly 20 years.

BP made mistakes as did CaC before him, but the real damage has been done by our Boards & Administrators of over the last 20 odd years. Hire the wrong people and wrong things happen.

Then money issues occur, then onfield failings happen, & then its real bad news.

Great post.