Dees to meet AFL Commission today - the latest from Caro.

[pm24 451]

Connolly's contract was signed sealed and delivered long before Jackson got there. When his suspension was reported it was stated at the time that he had two years remaining on his contact and would be back at the club for season 2014 and 2015.

Connolly was protected by his great mate Schwab and knew he'd be alright as long as he was there. The piece that appeared in the Herald Sun was nothing more than Connolly trying to pump up his own tyres and remind everyone that he still has a contract with the club. Reading between the lines I would say he can see which way the wind is blowing now that Peter Jackson is in charge, I can't imagine PJ letting him anywhere near the place tbh, contract or not and I think Connolly probably knows this.

Thanks for clarifying this. It's good to know.

As some have already said, it's amazing what Schwab got away with. I wonder how we'd be placed if we removed Schwab after 186 instead of Bailey....

[Gorgoroth 13,188]

Just said on Gold Fm that McLardy was about to announce he was stepping down.

Will be interesting to see what happens.

[What 18,810]

Just said on Gold Fm that McLardy was about to announce he was stepping down.

Will be interesting to see what happens.

Well there you go.

Interesting times ahead indeed.

[Gorgoroth 13,188]

They had a quick grab with PJ saying he did not want to comment on that as Don will speak later.

[Sir Why You Little 37,341]

I can guarantee that the great Clubman takes his 2yr pay when he's sacked, it's amazing how CS has conducted business, bloody disgraceful.

Do we have to pay out a "Future" contract, as Conolly has fulfilled none of it...?

Does anyone know the legality of this

[What 18,810]

Thanks for clarifying this. It's good to know.

As some have already said, it's amazing what Schwab got away with. I wonder how we'd be placed if we removed Schwab after 186 instead of Bailey....

We sacked the wrong guy that day.

Schwab is a disgrace and if there is a way for the MFC to sue him for damaging the brand and destroying the opes of 35, 000 members then i hope they do.

[mjt 640]

Do we have to pay out a "Future" contract, as Conolly has fulfilled none of it...?

Does anyone know the legality of this

I wouldn't be to confident if CS was involved .

[Geddy Lee 582]

Well everybody, if the AFL itself can't get us playing league-standard footy in the next few years then it will confirm what we all suspect:

Norm Smith is indeed still haunting us.

[jimbo1982 102]

Today truly is the first step back for us. We need to do large scale renovations on many areas of this club. Not all as there might be some talent still lurking around and it would be foolhardy to throw them away. To do this we need money. It will also show how capable PJ is. It will take one hell of a performance to convince headquarters that we are worthy of this. As I have said before, if you look at this on cold hard statistics and logic then the answer to our funding requests should quite frankly be no. We went from zero debt, healthy-ish playing list, good facilities and growing membership at the end of 2010 to what we are today. And why did this come about? Due to petty squabbles between an admin who had never won anything and a coaching department who, while having their own faults, were being undermined by said admin and rather than front the board, buddied up to the playing group.

Let's just hope the ball starts rolling today. I can't take any more horrible surprises.

What he said!!

[Sir Why You Little 37,341]

I wouldn't be to confident if CS was involved .

It is just outrageous that this can occur....I have no problem with CC signing the deal, but once CS was termininated which should have been done in 2011 then all these future contracts should be null & void.

[PJ_12345 1,098]

It's top 20 picks we've had an abundance of over the last 10 years for appalling results.

I quoted top 10 picks because that's what the article was talking about. The number of top 20 picks in the National Draft from 2002 to 2012 are as follows: (ranked)

1. Melbourne = 18
2. Bulldogs = 16
3. Richmond 16
4. GWS = 16
5. Essendon = 15
6. Feo = 13
7. Port = 13
8. Brisbane = 13
9. Carlton = 12
10. West Coast = 12
11. North = 11
12. Hawthorn = 11
13. Collingwood = 11
14. Adelaide = 8
15. Geelong = 8
16. GCS = 8
17. Sydney 7
18. St Kilda = 6

Of note: St Kilda came off the back of several top 20 picks the three years before

Not really an abundance... more yes. But an abundance is a bit of a hyperbole.

I haven't taken into considerations the average games played by the clubs & their picks but it can be assumed ours would be on the lower end, but at first glance it is not too bad - just not skilled.

All clubs make mistakes:

Richmond chose Tambling over Franklin and Jordan Lewis in 2004, Hawthorn had two top 6 draft picks between 2005-2006 whom only played 18 games total, and we join the Top 20 pick players whom never played a single game club from 2002 to 2011 (excluding this years draft obviously) with Cook - other members include North (1), Collingwood (1) and Sydney (2).

Be careful with blanket statements.

[Dr. Gonzo 24,457]

But that is where Culture comes from.

ie Norm Smith jim Cardwell

If you get a chance to listen to Mooney on 360 last night have a listen - he was quite adamant the culture comes from within the playing group. The coach, President, CEO etc set the environment for a good culture to prosper but without the leadership and buy-in of the players it would amount to nothing. Hall agreed with him.

[Craig Drinker 179]

Listening to PJ's statement to the press on AFL website and reading between the lines ,I think Mark Neeld's days as coach of the MFC are numbered.

[Dr. Gonzo 24,457]

I quoted top 10 picks because that's what the article was talking about. The number of top 20 picks in the National Draft from 2002 to 2012 are as follows: (ranked)

• Melbourne = 18
• Bulldogs = 16
• Richmond 16
• GWS = 16
• Essendon = 15
• Feo = 13
• Port = 13
• Brisbane = 13
• Carlton = 12
• West Coast = 12
• Hawthorn = 11
• Collingwood = 11
• Geelong = 8
• Giants = 8
• Sydney 7
• St Kilda = 6

Of note: St Kilda came off the back of several top 20 picks the three years before

Not really an abundance... more yes. But an abundance is a bit of a hyperbole.

I haven't taken into considerations the average games played by the clubs & their picks but it can be assumed ours would be on the lower end, but at first glance it is not too bad - just not skilled.

All clubs make mistakes:

Richmond chose Tambling over Franklin and Jordan Lewis in 2004, Hawthorn had two top 6 draft picks between 2005-2006 whom only played 18 games total, and we join the Top 20 pick players whom never played a single game club from 2002 to 2011 (excluding this years draft obviously) with Cook - other members include North (1), Collingwood (1) and Sydney (2).

What are the stats from 2008-2012?

[Sir Why You Little 37,341]

If you get a chance to listen to Mooney on 360 last night have a listen - he was quite adamant the culture comes from within the playing group. The coach, President, CEO etc set the environment for a good culture to prosper but without the leadership and buy-in of the players it would amount to nothing. Hall agreed with him.

I agree the playing group must GROW the culture yes, But Norm Smith & Jim Cardwell planted all the seeds for our 10 years of Domination

as did John Kennedy for Hawthorn in the Early 60's

[Wells 11 5,476]

We sacked the wrong guy that day.

Schwab is a disgrace and if there is a way for the MFC to sue him for damaging the brand and destroying the opes of 35, 000 members then i hope they do.

here's a "what if" scenario... What if they had sacked schwab on the monday after 186 and told Bailey he had until the end of the year. We played Carlton next who had called us " bruise free" in the previous encounter, and we still were an outside chance of playing finals. What if the paleysr had regrouped hard and we'd won that day and went into the final 5 rounds at 9/9.

Truth is we did still need to pour millions into the FD and bring in a slew of new fitness coaches etc etc. But how different things may be now if that had come to pass.

[titan_uranus 25,209]

I quoted top 10 picks because that's what the article was talking about. The number of top 20 picks in the National Draft from 2002 to 2012 are as follows: (ranked)

1. Melbourne = 18
2. Bulldogs = 16
3. Richmond 16
4. GWS = 16
5. Essendon = 15
6. Feo = 13
7. Port = 13
8. Brisbane = 13
9. Carlton = 12
10. West Coast = 12
11. Hawthorn = 11
12. Collingwood = 11
13. Geelong = 8
14. Giants = 8
15. Sydney 7
16. St Kilda = 6

Of note: St Kilda came off the back of several top 20 picks the three years before

Not really an abundance... more yes. But an abundance is a bit of a hyperbole.

I haven't taken into considerations the average games played by the clubs & their picks but it can be assumed ours would be on the lower end, but at first glance it is not too bad - just not skilled.

All clubs make mistakes:

Richmond chose Tambling over Franklin and Jordan Lewis in 2004, Hawthorn had two top 6 draft picks between 2005-2006 whom only played 18 games total, and we join the Top 20 pick players whom never played a single game club from 2002 to 2011 (excluding this years draft obviously) with Cook - other members include North (1), Collingwood (1) and Sydney (2).

Be careful with blanket statements.

No Adelaide, North Melbourne or Gold Coast? GWS is in there twice too.

What the stats do show, though, is that those who wish to jump to the 'we've drafted so poorly' statement would do well to reflect on the facts. Yes, our drafting could clearly have been better. But the more relevant discussion should be around what we did with the talent that walked through the door.

[mauriesy 7,429]

Yes, our drafting could clearly have been better. But the more relevant discussion should be around what we did with the talent that walked through the door.

'Talent' is only one parameter that makes a footballer. So is what the club does with the talent.

But other important parameters are courage, fearlessness, motivation, application, fitness, attitude to training, integrity, and maybe that elusive 'x-factor'.

Players with these aptitudes virtually coach themselves (see Hannebery or Joel Selwood for example). Quite clearly we haven't picked many in this category.

I'm appalled at how many vanilla draft picks have walked in the door from the top 20.

[DemonOX 8,837]

Listening to PJ's statement to the press on AFL website and reading between the lines ,I think Mark Neeld's days as coach of the MFC are numbered.

Thank god

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

I'd say it says more about the fantastic cultures they have at their clubs, and their ability to develop players, rather than just the coaching and recruiting.

Also, don't forget that Geelong had a couple of very nice father son selections which helped them along the way: Ablett Jr (pick 40), Nathan Ablett (pick 48) Hawkins (pick 41), Scarlett (pick 45), Mark Blake (pick 38). They also traded in some key players like Harley and Ottens.

Also, if you look over some of the drafts, they have not always hit the money with their first round picks. They have also had some big misses. They've grabbed some good one's late or in the 2nd round onwards like Hunt, Stokes, Stevie J. We've also got some nice later picks like Howe, Gawn, McDonald. I think Culture is the key for Sydney and Geelong.

Edit: expanded comments

exactly, and obviously the fact that you haven't had many high draft picks over a long period of time inherently means that you have been at least moderately successful on the field over that period of time. This means you have been winning, making money, retaining a consistent list, stability etc. Winning begets more winning

[pm24 451]

It's the old recruitment v development argument. Does anyone doubt that Watts would be a better footballer than he currently is if he was drafted into a team other than Melbourne?

Listening to PJ's statement to the press on AFL website and reading between the lines ,I think Mark Neeld's days as coach of the MFC are numbered.

Which statement was that exactly? Do you mean the one where he reiterated the position that was established a couple weeks ago regarding the whole football department continuing to be assessed?? That indicates nothing to me. It just says that they are going to continue along the path they are on with restructuring the football department and continually assessing all the roles and performance of people in the football department.

To me it is all part of the restructuring of any organisation.

[PJ_12345 1,098]

What are the stats from 2008-2012?

From 2008 - 2012, the Top 20 picks in order are:

1. GWS = 16
2. Melbourne = 9
3. Gold Coast = 8
4. Freo = 7
5. Port = 7
6. Richmond = 6
7. Essendon = 5
8. North = 5
9. Bulldogs= 5
10. Brisbane = 5
11. West Coast = 5
12. Carlton = 4
13. Collingwood = 4
14. Geelong = 4
15. Adelaide = 3
16. Sydney = 3
17. Hawthorn = 2
18. St Kilda = 1

This is very interesting:

From 2010 to 2012, we had 2 top 10 pick... compared to GWS with 11, Gold Coast with 5, Brisbane with 3, Richmond, Port, Bulldogs, Essendon with 2, West Coast with 1 and the rest with 0.

From 2010 to 2012, we had a 3 top 20 picks... compared to GWS with 16, Gold Coast with 8, Brisbane and Freo with 4, Richmond, Essendon, Port, North, Collingwood and Bulldogs with 3, Carlton and Geelong with 2, West Coast, Adelaide and Hawthorn with 1 and Sydney and St Kilda with 0.

[PJ_12345 1,098]

No Adelaide, North Melbourne or Gold Coast? GWS is in there twice too.

What the stats do show, though, is that those who wish to jump to the 'we've drafted so poorly' statement would do well to reflect on the facts. Yes, our drafting could clearly have been better. But the more relevant discussion should be around what we did with the talent that walked through the door.

Sorry forgot to put them in there, I've now edited it.

True re what we did with the talent - people were just asking about the picks

[Satyriconhome 10,880]

If you get a chance to listen to Mooney on 360 last night have a listen - he was quite adamant the culture comes from within the playing group. The coach, President, CEO etc set the environment for a good culture to prosper but without the leadership and buy-in of the players it would amount to nothing. Hall agreed with him.

Dr Gonzo, sit down, I actually agree with you, been trying to point this out for a while, except I don't call it culture, it is just the team to a man being all on the same page, exceptions not accepted........

[titan_uranus 25,209]

Sorry forgot to put them in there, I've now edited it.

True re what we did with the talent - people were just asking about the picks

Thanks for the stats. Wasn't having a go at you, I was having a go at those who continually say that we're where we are mainly because we picked the wrong players.