let's say Roos is available and so is Craig, is there a scenario with 8 games remaining, that the side can perform well enough to give Craig the nod over Roos? Or will it go to Roos no matter what we produce in the next 8 weeks? What if something crazy happens and we win 6 games, it is not out of the realm of possibility given what we have seen the last 3 weeks.

let's say Roos is available and so is Craig, is there a scenario with 8 games remaining, that the side can perform well enough to give Craig the nod over Roos? Or will it go to Roos no matter what we produce in the next 8 weeks? What if something crazy happens and we win 6 games, it is not out of the realm of possibility given what we have seen the last 3 weeks.

I think we still go Roos, all craig has really installed that Neeld hadn't was a positive attitude and told them to take the game on, i think with a full pre season we would see more of what either wanted the side to play with and as such Roos being considered the better coach will get the nod.

He is still Director Of Sports Performance

We don't know what he is. Currently is interim coach. There is no Director of Sports Performance.

To Roos or not to Roos, that is the question!

If Roos puts his hand up.... We'd be mad not to give him the job.... Hopefully that means Craig stays on in his old role....

On The Couch tonight, I think Gerard and Mike were simply taking the [censored] with Roos. He's said on various occasions that he's not interested at the moment, so no need to say it again tonight - hence the non-answer. It's great for his brand (& of the TV shows that he is involved with) to keep the rumours going. Unfort, I just don't see him getting involved.

Cant see Roos coaching us. People say well james hird said he didnt wanna do it. Well i believe Roos more then Hird. And it shows with the whole drug scandal. Golden child boy true colours starting to show.

For me it Neil Craig or Mark Williams

Cant see Roos coaching us. People say well james hird said he didnt wanna do it. Well i believe Roos more then Hird. And it shows with the whole drug scandal. Golden child boy true colours starting to show.

For me it Neil Craig or Mark Williams

One difference I think is the involvement of the AFL. Like RDB when he was sent to Sydney in the early 90s to fix the place up culture wise.

The tea leaves in the cuppa I just finished...damn! spilt them just about when they were settling. Oh well, perhaps next time.

I think the fact he touched his face & tugged on his ear 5 times then started breathing heavily and looked to the left once & to the right 3 times definitely means he's still making a decision.

Maybe Roos is waiting until the MFC assistance package is signed off by the AFL before he commits. Is that AFL meeting due to take place in two weeks?

It's a guess, but I imagine Robbo doesn't spout off about appointments at the club unless it is club sanctioned, and to say we are setting our sights on Roos as the best available coach certainly puts our eggs all in one basket.

We wait in hope.

Maybe Roos is waiting until the MFC assistance package is signed off by the AFL before he commits. Is that AFL meeting due to take place in two weeks?

I think the board and GMFO appointments are just as important, maybe moreso.

I think the board and GMFO appointments are just as important, maybe moreso.

Agree! I was just trying to read in to what Mike Sheehan was referring to on OTC when he mentioned Roos signing in two weeks.

Roos will not commit until he has draft concessions confirmed along with board and GMFO appointments. Although things are looking good with ever increasing likelihood, we should not expect a signing until late in the season.

As I have said before the MFC have been in pursuit of Roos longer than is admitted.

Roos will not commit until he has draft concessions confirmed along with board and GMFO appointments. Although things are look good with ever increasing likelihood, we should not expect a signing until late in the season.

As I have said before the MFC have been in pursuit of Roos longer than is admitted.

So, hypothetically, say we do continue to improve and win 3-4 games on the homeward stretch, where would that leave us in relation to concessionary picks relative to the likes of the Doggies / Saints? Mmm. Could there be some AFL sanctioned "list management"? Surely we would never allow that again given what it did to the fabric of our club last time!

So, hypothetically, say we do continue to improve and win 3-4 games on the homeward stretch, where would that leave us in relation to concessionary picks relative to the likes of the Doggies / Saints? Mmm. Could there be some AFL sanctioned "list management"? Surely we would never allow that again given what it did to the fabric of our club last time!

The AFL want to even up the competition. The combination of two new franchises and free agency has significantly stretched the divide between the top clubs and the bottom clubs. This is very unhealthy for the AFL, it significantly weakens the competition. Over the coming years you will see the AFL go to unprecedented lengths to try and close that gap. Over the coming years Melbourne, WB and St.Kilda will all be given significant draft concessions from the AFL to re-even the comp.

So, hypothetically, say we do continue to improve and win 3-4 games on the homeward stretch, where would that leave us in relation to concessionary picks relative to the likes of the Doggies / Saints? Mmm. Could there be some AFL sanctioned "list management"? Surely we would never allow that again given what it did to the fabric of our club last time!

It's hard to value what damage the tanking effect had. Look at Essendon who should be a basket case but with some strong personalities - David Evans, James Hird, Jobe Watson, Bomber Thomson it has galvanised the paying group.

I wouldn't worry much about winning 3-4 more games. Our midfield is still so weak that I think it's the GWS game and that's about it for us. The dogs won't play so insipidly again especially at Etihad and we aren't good enough to beat anyone else.

I think we would be better off with a second round draft pick that indicates to the rest of the comp that a club winning 4 then at most 3 games in 2 years with wins only coming against 2 teams other than expansion sides is a club in need of assistance.

The GMFO is a key appointment as much as the coach. We need someone to stabilise and lead the footy department and to justify spending. We can't spend as much as Hawthorn do without some sort of results. The GMFO and PJ should really appoint the next coach together even if it is just going out and getting Roos.

The AFL want to even up the competition. The combination of two new franchises and free agency has significantly stretched the divide between the top clubs and the bottom clubs. This is very unhealthy for the AFL, it significantly weakens the competition. Over the coming years you will see the AFL go to unprecedented lengths to try and close that gap. Over the coming years Melbourne, WB and St.Kilda will all be given significant draft concessions from the AFL to re-even the comp.

If this is to be the way forward then a construct needs to be created which provides an unambiguous framework for such concessions. Has to in order to seem fair to the receivers as well as the rest of the teams. If its all adhoc it will be seen as far too open to corruption etc.

If for eg its setup where particular circumstances trigger such a requirement ( concession ) then some automatic enactment of a particular style mini draft for the concessioned club(s) might work. Everyone knows where they stand. I do however see a problem that this may well become misused in the very same way that the older auto PP system failed. Clubs may see the reward of 'tanking' as too great to resist, so possibly the auto trigger aspect is its own catch 22.

A possible out of this is that a minidraft where the picks are traded becomes only of as much value as that current climate of tradable players presents. Seasons will vary as to whom is on the market and how well that type of player suits the 'needy' club

I suppose if litmus a was a continued poor result i.e not just one year but systemic failure ( a-la us ) then it might deter a club from an 'aberational' year .

As I have said before the MFC have been in pursuit of Roos longer than is admitted.

I can confirm this by another source who was spot of with a couple of other things, start of the season is what I'm hearing.

If this is to be the way forward then a construct needs to be created which provides an unambiguous framework for such concessions. Has to in order to seem fair to the receivers as well as the rest of the teams. If its all adhoc it will be seen as far too open to corruption etc.

If for eg its setup where particular circumstances trigger such a requirement ( concession ) then some automatic enactment of a particular style mini draft for the concessioned club(s) might work. Everyone knows where they stand. I do however see a problem that this may well become misused in the very same way that the older auto PP system failed. Clubs may see the reward of 'tanking' as too great to resist, so possibly the auto trigger aspect is its own catch 22.

A possible out of this is that a minidraft where the picks are traded becomes only of as much value as that current climate of tradable players presents. Seasons will vary as to whom is on the market and how well that type of player suits the 'needy' club

I suppose if litmus a was a continued poor result i.e not just one year but systemic failure ( a-la us ) then it might deter a club from an 'aberational' year .

I do not see any formal framework, certainly not one made public. This would create the tanking issue again. I expect it to look ad-hoc even though it may not be. I also know that some sort of mini-draft is being considered. The AFL has brought in US experts to consider different options on evening the comp. This is how seriously they are taking it.

If Roos puts his hand up.... We'd be mad not to give him the job.... Hopefully that means Craig stays on in his old role....

Figure you missed the news where PJ basically rang him and offered it to him.

If Jackson turns around and says "listen Roosy, Craigy has really got the boys up and about since we last spoke so thanks anyway, but we're no longer interested" - then I would be blown away.

Roos is P1 and Jackson can see the enormous value that a bloke like Craig brings to the club and added to that he's contracted until the end of next year. In any event, Craig will be at the MFC next year unless there's something more to the Dank saga we're not aware of but I don't reckon there is.

IMO the only reason we will get draft concession/s is because we are the only club without bonafide senior, A grade player/s (excepting maybe GWS and they have heaps on the way, and will be trading for some this year).

If that is the case, then any concession will be conditional on us trading it.

Ed: our last bonafide A grader was Neitz. Been a while now.

Edited July 9, 201312 yr by Mono

IMO the only reason we will get draft concession/s is because we are the only club without bonafide senior, A grade player/s (excepting maybe GWS and they have heaps on the way, and will be trading for some this year).

If that is the case, then any concession will be conditional on us trading it.

Ed: our last bonafide A grader was Neitz. Been a while now.

I'd say Clark has the A grade talent, just has to stay on the field.

I also think our overall performance over the last couple of years will be more of a factor in determining whether we get a PP than a lack of star players, though the issues are obviously related.

Neil Craig is doing a Roger Sterling job as a caretaker coach.

PJ is setting us up off field. Long way to go, but at least this time we will have the best people head hunted.

Anyone else hear Bruce Mathieson on KB's show this morning?

He tee'd off on the Blues beautifully!

We the MFC must get our house in order before they do. We must stand our ground re the MCG.