I somehow don't think a position in the MFC leadership group will make much of a difference when Hawthorn come knocking on Frawley's door with a fat offer.

If that was a concern they would've made Frawley sole captain.

I agree, everyone's talking up the Saints as front runner but I was thinking of Hawthorn myself. We can match the dollars but not the chance of immediate success.

I would have taken Trenners out of the LG . Let him concentrate on his game without added pressure. Let him mature and then put him the the LG after he has reached Kpis

I agree, everyone's talking up the Saints as front runner but I was thinking of Hawthorn myself. We can match the dollars but not the chance of immediate success.

Hawthorn and Gold Coast, possibly even GWS. The saints have just invested in 2 KPD in Bruce and Delaney and whilst they aren't as good as Frawley it's hard to justify after 1 year of getting them to go after a KPD just because his uncle played for the club. The vice captaincy probably wont keep Frawley but some wins will go a long way. Even near the bottom a club on the rise is still a very positive thing.

Congrats to Jonesy - top bloke and A GRADE midfielder.

That is a hell of a leadership group, we'll make finals if those lads all have a good year.

I feel that's a fair comment. Four of them are genuine near-a-graders IMO and the other two still very young with a heap of promise.. add Vince, Dawes, Watts, Howe, TMac and the kids Toumpas, Viney, Hogan and Tyson - that's 15 pretty solid players.

I agree, everyone's talking up the Saints as front runner but I was thinking of Hawthorn myself. We can match the dollars but not the chance of immediate success.

unless of course we go charging up the ladder this year

Was Jordie McKenzie in the LG in 2013?

And does the new LG mean an imminent change in the banner?

Was Jordie McKenzie in the LG in 2013?

And does the new LG mean an imminent change in the banner?

why would it? all 6 of them are in it!

You can disagree with the process that Neeld put in place but he shouldn't take ownership for something he clearly articulated that he didn't own. He said that the whole system was vote driven. I took Neeld at face value that it was equal voting amongst the players and all coaching staff that selected the captains. Just didn't agree with that process. I prefer the Roos approach as discussed above.

Don't worry nutbean Neeld didn't take ownership of anything while he was at the club.

I couldnt help but wonder about the connection between Neeld and Dawes. Probably he was sticking up for Neeld when the rest of the players were sick and tired of one of the worst coaches in the history of the game. He may have been the only player on the list that wanted Neeld to stay. As Neeld exited he may have been left a little on the outer.....just a thought.

Anyway, the thing with Dawes is, if that was so, I see him as proffessional enough to move on from that and Roos a good enough coach to help to do so,

Happy with the choice of captains, happy with the leadership group and happy with the number of guys in the leadership group.

I love that none of these guys are speculative, they're all experienced and solidly embedded in our best 22 (Trenners unfortunately being the exception) and all quality individuals.

There's a lot to be excited about at the club right now.

Solid, totally happy with the arrangement.

Happy with the choice of captains, happy with the leadership group and happy with the number of guys in the leadership group.

I love that none of these guys are speculative, they're all experienced and solidly embedded in our best 22 (Trenners unfortunately being the exception) and all quality individuals.

There's a lot to be excited about at the club right now.

I do agree with you, I just find it baffling that Trengove hasn't became an elite player.

Of all out draftees in the past decade, I'd say Jack Trengove was the most impressive as a junior, I'd of bet my left nut that he'd develop into an elite player.

Looks so far from it the past couple of years, let's hope Roosy can help Trengove become a better player.

Not sure what makes anyone think Trengove isn't entrenched in the 22.

Ignorance?

Not sure what makes anyone think Trengove isn't entrenched in the 22.

Ignorance?

It's just an overreaction to his poor form, no need for names.

There's a definite NDH quality to that LG. I'm hoping that means that, even when we lose, there'll be no more games when we lose by completely dropping our bundles for a quarter.

I like it. Trenners wasn't hung out to dry for 2012-13. He will be a future leader, just not the captain right now.
The leadership group has about the right number of people in it. All of them are blokes who have been around the club for a while. The captains have been around the joint for about 6-7 years.
As much as Dawes and Byrnes might know about successful cultures, I think them being moved into the leadership group after one year wasn't the best decision. It sent a message to the blokes who were established that they weren't perceived as leaders and they needed outside leadership foisted on them (I realize the same might be said of Mitch Clark). That would have been disheartening. Some may disagree with me but I believe the way you are treated is usually the way you will act. If your higher ups treat you like losers, then you will act like losers. I got the feeling that the importing of 'leadership culture', while no fault of the blokes who came to the club, had that effect on our group.

Was heading into work this morning and who should I see skateboarding along Swan ST in Richmond but our very own Co-Captain Nate Jones. Was headed towards AAMI park. Gave me the thumbs up when I shouted Go Jonesy!

He looked so young even with all the cartoons..sometimes youforget how young these guys are and he could have been mistaken for any other young fella skateboarding down the street....

I like it. Trenners wasn't hung out to dry for 2012-13. He will be a future leader, just not the captain right now.

The leadership group has about the right number of people in it. All of them are blokes who have been around the club for a while. The captains have been around the joint for about 6-7 years.

As much as Dawes and Byrnes might know about successful cultures, I think them being moved into the leadership group after one year wasn't the best decision. It sent a message to the blokes who were established that they weren't perceived as leaders and they needed outside leadership foisted on them (I realize the same might be said of Mitch Clark). That would have been disheartening. Some may disagree with me but I believe the way you are treated is usually the way you will act. If your higher ups treat you like losers, then you will act like losers. I got the feeling that the importing of 'leadership culture', while no fault of the blokes who came to the club, had that effect on our group.

It is my understanding that the LG was voted by the players. I happen to completely agree with that. The choice of captain is aside from that and shouldn't be wholly up to the players, but the LG is the group that leads them - they should be represented as they wish.

They wished Byrnes and Dawes last year in a larger LG, they haven't this year in a contracted 6-man LG. I feel it is that simple.

I don't really see the arrival and empowerment (from the players themselves) of Byrnes and Dawes as harmful to the mindset of the players already at the club. Who should have been ahead of them in the LG? Whose toes did they step on?

The players were mentally shot before Byrnes and Dawes arrived I am afraid to say. If 186 in 2011 was breaking the players, 2012 broke them, I don't think the subsequent arrival of Dawes and Byrnes made a negative difference to the playing groups mindset at all.

Everybody should listen to the presser, the LG was cut down to 6, if it was like last year, would assume Dawes and McKenzie would be in it, they obviously were just 'beaten' in the votes by the other 4

I agree, everyone's talking up the Saints as front runner but I was thinking of Hawthorn myself. We can match the dollars but not the chance of immediate success.

12 months is a long time in footy

Whos to say that at the end of the season the Hawks wont have missed the Finals and be old and fading, while we will be rising under Roos?

It is my understanding that the LG was voted by the players. I happen to completely agree with that. The choice of captain is aside from that and shouldn't be wholly up to the players, but the LG is the group that leads them - they should be represented as they wish.

They wished Byrnes and Dawes last year in a larger LG, they haven't this year in a contracted 6-man LG. I feel it is that simple.

I don't really see the arrival and empowerment (from the players themselves) of Byrnes and Dawes as harmful to the mindset of the players already at the club. Who should have been ahead of them in the LG? Whose toes did they step on?

The players were mentally shot before Byrnes and Dawes arrived I am afraid to say. If 186 in 2011 was breaking the players, 2012 broke them, I don't think the subsequent arrival of Dawes and Byrnes made a negative difference to the playing groups mindset at all.

They were in the LG but when push came to shove, they weren't included in a more streamlined version of said group.

Maybe I am drawing too long a bow but I do remember reading an article about how blokes in the Melbourne backline were positively giddy with excitement upon hearing that Tom Gillies was coming to the club and that they could learn about 'how the defenders at Geelong played'. That group contains probably our best player, the runner up in our B&F and one of our better younger players (if only he could learn to kick!) and they felt that a bloke who had been delisted after nine or so games was the font of all wisdom? Showed a bit where there minds were at and what was drilled into them.

Outside experience is one thing but we need to develop our own leaders.

They were in the LG but when push came to shove, they weren't included in a more streamlined version of said group.

Maybe I am drawing too long a bow but I do remember reading an article about how blokes in the Melbourne backline were positively giddy with excitement upon hearing that Tom Gillies was coming to the club and that they could learn about 'how the defenders at Geelong played'. That group contains probably our best player, the runner up in our B&F and one of our better younger players (if only he could learn to kick!) and they felt that a bloke who had been delisted after nine or so games was the font of all wisdom? Showed a bit where there minds were at and what was drilled into them.

Outside experience is one thing but we need to develop our own leaders.

Probably only showed the spin coming out of the club at the time and nothing more. The spinners are gone thankfully.

I like it. Trenners wasn't hung out to dry for 2012-13. He will be a future leader, just not the captain right now.

The leadership group has about the right number of people in it. All of them are blokes who have been around the club for a while. The captains have been around the joint for about 6-7 years.

As much as Dawes and Byrnes might know about successful cultures, I think them being moved into the leadership group after one year wasn't the best decision. It sent a message to the blokes who were established that they weren't perceived as leaders and they needed outside leadership foisted on them (I realize the same might be said of Mitch Clark). That would have been disheartening. Some may disagree with me but I believe the way you are treated is usually the way you will act. If your higher ups treat you like losers, then you will act like losers. I got the feeling that the importing of 'leadership culture', while no fault of the blokes who came to the club, had that effect on our group.

What it smacks of to me is a man who understands culture. His treatment of Trenners and the appointment of the rest of the leadership group shows understanding and respect to the Culture that existed before he came. He has added in his own tweaks in a way that respects what was there before. Unlike his predecessor who came in and smashed the entire place and completely disrespected players who deserved much better. He made it all about himself and what was going to happen after he arrived instead of fixing and enhancing what was already there. Roosy with his experience and reputation could have come in and done that and possibly got away with it for a while but the fact he hasn't just fills me with even more confidence that the man knows football clubs and how to build culture. And without culture you have nothing. As his predecessor and all of us found out.

I don't recall anyone being giddy at the prospect of Gillies.

But if that were true, I imagine its an insight into a mindset that precipitated failure.

The mindset of "we don't have the knowledge" as opposed to maybe "we aren't working hard enough."