Brett Lovett on the Footy Show was nervous.

Watts was fine.

Sounds an honest appraisal, especially the helplessness of the previous years. It would make the current feeling all the better. Probably better than languishing around 12th-14th forever.

GO DEES.

Pity it can't be Maxwell - I would love to see that. Otherwise, I would like him to do it to Mr Alias Harry O'Brien.

I don't really know a lot about George Stone -- could he ever be considered / willing to be a senior coach in his own right?

As far as I can gather talking to people, no he has never considered it, nobody has heard of him being interviewed, think he is happy being a 'teacher' rather than the principal, if he was interested, and with his resume, he would have been snapped up as a senior coach ages ago. When we beat Carlton when Watts' entered the rooms the first thing he did was give Stone a big hug

As far as I can gather talking to people, no he has never considered it, nobody has heard of him being interviewed, think he is happy being a 'teacher' rather than the principal, if he was interested, and with his resume, he would have been snapped up as a senior coach ages ago. When we beat Carlton when Watts' entered the rooms the first thing he did was give Stone a big hug

I reckon Georgies mouth would be watering at the prospect of developing Tyson, Viney, Toumpas, Trengove, Kent, Salem, N.Jones, M.Jones and Wattsy, plenty of talent to mould.

we should boycott that effing show they threw us under the bus big time with dhead McLean, did massive damage to the club

we should boycott that effing show they threw us under the bus big time with dhead McLean, did massive damage to the club

C & B move on, QB game, going to give good account of ourselves hopefully

I reckon Wattsy will improve relative to the team, he seems to be right on the edge of becoming an A grade player now, his best he is a match winner, but he has down weeks, but I just get the feeling he is making some serious gains at the minute, I can see him finishing his career as a very good player, and being the bloke to stand up and win us a big final

I think yr being a bit generous - I would say he's on the edge of being a solid, regular B grader.

Long way to go before he's an A grader.

His best he gets alot of the ball, uses it well, Marks well and kicks goals but I don't think he has ever been at his best for a full game

His best he gets alot of the ball, uses it well, Marks well and kicks goals but I don't think he has ever been at his best for a full game

He has. We just listen to the nonsense that spouts from everywhere when he gives his "2nd gear efforts" every third game.

yeah you could tell he didn't want to say anything which could be taken the wrong way, so he gave very neutral answers. He's had a fair few tough years with the media... They showed the footage again of his first moments on the ground being gang tacked by 4 of the filth. Credit to him he actually got up straight away and went and got the footy

yeah you could tell he didn't want to say anything which could be taken the wrong way, so he gave very neutral answers. He's had a fair few tough years with the media... They showed the footage again of his first moments on the ground being gang tacked by 4 of the filth. Credit to him he actually got up straight away and went and got the footy

It was funny watching that footage again, I'd always remembered it as a monstering on a par with a Scott brother thumping an Irish amateur , however it wasn't as bad as I had remembered it and as Jack said, he reckoned he'd stood up ok in the tackle, and I agree. I'm really hoping he gets four goals.

Two things I took from that interview

1) Jack spoke well and answered questions honestly and thoughtfully. He did much better than some on here have given him credit for. His name is always going to associated with QB, through no fault of his own, and it would be fantastic for him if he was an important player in a Melbourne victory on Monday

2) Gerard Healey is a self important knobhead of the highest order. Was wishing Jack would reach over and snot him

Curry & Beer (in response to your post about boycotting - apologies, my quote feature isn't working)...

The longer this season goes on, the more I'm starting to appreciate that dikhead McLean actually said what he said. It allowed for a very ruthless investigation in to our club, which cost people their jobs, as well as confirming in a public forum that we urgently needed to get our shite together.

I'm starting to treat the $500k cost as an expensive consultant fee, rather than a fine for being found not guilt.

If CS spent $80k on a review new desk, I think spending half a mill on someone from the AFL forcing us to make change has been worth its price.

We are a better club for it.

Curry & Beer (in response to your post about boycotting - apologies, my quote feature isn't working)...

The longer this season goes on, the more I'm starting to appreciate that dikhead McLean actually said what he said. It allowed for a very ruthless investigation in to our club, which cost people their jobs, as well as confirming in a public forum that we urgently needed to get our shite together.

I'm starting to treat the $500k cost as an expensive consultant fee, rather than a fine for being found not guilt.

If CS spent $80k on a review new desk, I think spending half a mill on someone from the AFL forcing us to make change has been worth its price.

We are a better club for it.

I think the terrible culture, boneheaded appointments, and massive onfield losses got the old guard out of the club.

Not that sham of an investigation.

We are a better club for the appointment of Bartlett, Jackson, Roos and his coaching staff; but this happened after that investigation was completed and we were found 'Not Guilty', fined half a mil, and the reigns of the club were maintained in the hands of those you claim were removed by the investigation.

I agree that the animosity toward OTC and McLean should dissipate but I am not about to applaud the nonsense we had to deal with, nor give it any plaudits for some positive changes that we have seen since.

Curry & Beer (in response to your post about boycotting - apologies, my quote feature isn't working)...

The longer this season goes on, the more I'm starting to appreciate that dikhead McLean actually said what he said. It allowed for a very ruthless investigation in to our club, which cost people their jobs, as well as confirming in a public forum that we urgently needed to get our shite together.

I'm starting to treat the $500k cost as an expensive consultant fee, rather than a fine for being found not guilt.

If CS spent $80k on a review new desk, I think spending half a mill on someone from the AFL forcing us to make change has been worth its price.

We are a better club for it.

don't mind that perspective

Curry & Beer (in response to your post about boycotting - apologies, my quote feature isn't working)...

The longer this season goes on, the more I'm starting to appreciate that dikhead McLean actually said what he said. It allowed for a very ruthless investigation in to our club, which cost people their jobs, as well as confirming in a public forum that we urgently needed to get our shite together.

I'm starting to treat the $500k cost as an expensive consultant fee, rather than a fine for being found not guilt.

If CS spent $80k on a review new desk, I think spending half a mill on someone from the AFL forcing us to make change has been worth its price.

We are a better club for it.

That's an extremely twisted, and in my view wrong, way of looking at it.

The fine was $500k but you've missed out other costs. Would you be saying the same thing if it cost $1m? What about our reputation?

In addition, what do you mean "to get our shite together"? The incident happened 2 years before, do you mean we were still tanking? Do you mean getting a new coach? - we already had one. What changes occurred after the investigation? Connolly stayed.

The AFL didn't make any changes. They only 'stepped' in after Neeld, not the tanking fiasco.

It was a farse of an investigation based on that Brock said what he said because he couldn't sit there, in front of the cameras and the public, and say "I left for the money".

If tanking was such a concern why did he go to Carlton after the Kreuzer up in 2007.

We did tank and we copped the fine and flack. MAde us grow up as a club and reminded us that integrity and culture are a valuable commodity, hard to create and easy to lose.

That others teams did it and weren't penalised is irrelevant to us.

They will suffer as a result of not having learnt that lesson, its not our concern.

Not that sham of an investigation.

We are a better club for the appointment of Bartlett, Jackson, Roos and his coaching staff; but this happened after that investigation was completed and we were found 'Not Guilty',

I'm surprised you're not joining the dots. You did with the Hogan deal.

I remember Roos saying "the media focus on Watts is much greater than the MFC focus on Watts, he's just one of 22". Hence my opinion that Jack shouldn't have done the interview. It's not that he did it badly because he didn't - it was just bland, but while he's moving from fair player to good player he should just concentrate on that and not do media IMO. Chris Dawes would have been a much better interviewee as he's very well spoken and could have talked about both Collingwood and MFC, done comparisons including MM v PR. It would have been more interesting and stood us in a better light.

TBH player interviews are usually pretty bland whereas when coaches are interviewed they can say more.

I'm surprised you're not joining the dots. You did with the Hogan deal.

I remember Roos saying "the media focus on Watts is much greater than the MFC focus on Watts, he's just one of 22". Hence my opinion that Jack shouldn't have done the interview. It's not that he did it badly because he didn't - it was just bland, but while he's moving from fair player to good player he should just concentrate on that and not do media IMO. Chris Dawes would have been a much better interviewee as he's very well spoken and could have talked about both Collingwood and MFC, done comparisons including MM v PR. It would have been more interesting and stood us in a better light.

TBH player interviews are usually pretty bland whereas when coaches are interviewed they can say more.

One assumes the club will have put Watts up for the interview or if not certainly approved it. .

I'm surprised you're not joining the dots. You did with the Hogan deal.

I remember Roos saying "the media focus on Watts is much greater than the MFC focus on Watts, he's just one of 22". Hence my opinion that Jack shouldn't have done the interview. It's not that he did it badly because he didn't - it was just bland, but while he's moving from fair player to good player he should just concentrate on that and not do media IMO. Chris Dawes would have been a much better interviewee as he's very well spoken and could have talked about both Collingwood and MFC, done comparisons including MM v PR. It would have been more interesting and stood us in a better light.

TBH player interviews are usually pretty bland whereas when coaches are interviewed they can say more.

Don't the club have an obligation to put players forth for interviews? As much as I'd love it if Dawes did fulfilled our media responsibilities all on his own, I think the odd dull Watts interview is just something we have to accept. And I'd much rather he was interviewed while things are rosy, rather than when we're being flogged and he is under a ridiculous amount of scrutiny.

Don't the club have an obligation to put players forth for interviews? As much as I'd love it if Dawes did fulfilled our media responsibilities all on his own, I think the odd dull Watts interview is just something we have to accept. And I'd much rather he was interviewed while things are rosy, rather than when we're being flogged and he is under a ridiculous amount of scrutiny.

Watts is completely overexposed I reckon. Jones, Dawes, Frawley, Cross or others could have done it. Watts did an interview with Mike Sheahan last year, he's been on the Footy Show and he's been the subject of newpaper articles as well as other media focus. I'm thinking enough is enough.

I don't think it's a biggie, I just think it was a mistake.

Edited June 4, 201411 yr by Baghdad Bob

That's an extremely twisted, and in my view wrong, way of looking at it.

The fine was $500k but you've missed out other costs. Would you be saying the same thing if it cost $1m? What about our reputation?

In addition, what do you mean "to get our shite together"? The incident happened 2 years before, do you mean we were still tanking? Do you mean getting a new coach? - we already had one. What changes occurred after the investigation? Connolly stayed.

The AFL didn't make any changes. They only 'stepped' in after Neeld, not the tanking fiasco.

It was a farse of an investigation based on that Brock said what he said because he couldn't sit there, in front of the cameras and the public, and say "I left for the money".

If tanking was such a concern why did he go to Carlton after the Kreuzer up in 2007.

I think it has to be recognised that we may well be out of business had the AFL not stepped in and FORCED us to get our S together, they way they did this was by engineering the PJ-Roos appointments. It was a pretty extraordinary ting for them to do really. I wonder if billy2803 is correct in saying that if we hadn't gone through the tanking saga we wouldn't have hit the absolute rock bottom that we did, and maybe those extraordinary actions by the AFL would never have occurred. I have certainly learnty in life that bad things happen (you lose your job, a woman leaves you, whatever) and it sucks like hell but sometimes, years down the track you realise that it was something you needed to happen and worked out best for you.

still doesn't excuse the actions of OTC and McLean, there used to be a time when the footy world (media, former players etc) would act as a unit and support each other, for the gneral good of the game, not apply the blowtorch like those p-icks did

I'm surprised you're not joining the dots. You did with the Hogan deal.

The AFL stepped in because of the state of the club - and I would argue that the recent Tanking investigation is a part of that. But it is a rich tapestry of nonsense that led to Jackson being parachuted in not just that longwinded and, in my view, misguided investigation

With the killer blow being the insipid start to 2013 onfield.

I'm surprised you're not joining the dots. You did with the Hogan deal.

I remember Roos saying "the media focus on Watts is much greater than the MFC focus on Watts, he's just one of 22". Hence my opinion that Jack shouldn't have done the interview. It's not that he did it badly because he didn't - it was just bland, but while he's moving from fair player to good player he should just concentrate on that and not do media IMO. Chris Dawes would have been a much better interviewee as he's very well spoken and could have talked about both Collingwood and MFC, done comparisons including MM v PR. It would have been more interesting and stood us in a better light.

TBH player interviews are usually pretty bland whereas when coaches are interviewed they can say more.

Not all coaches are particularly interesting. I find Nathan Buckley and Chris Scott to be two of the best I've ever heard. Paul Roos is good, but not as good. Mick Malthouse is basically an unintelligible bully - but when he was working in the media between his Collingwood and Carlton jobs he was actually quite good.

Football teams are part of the entertainment business.

We're looking for 75,000 to come to the MCG on Monday...

So we roll out our celebrities in Dawes and Watts, who have an association with that game or team to help do it.

Good businesses do try to market their products.