On 17/07/2014 at 01:06, Django said:

Just took a well deserved break at work to listen to Roosy. Here's a light summary of what I heard and my interpretations:

-It sounds as though Roos is the perfect blend of nurturing but hard. He spoke about the players confidence with KB, about how the early days down there were really about chatting to the players as a mate, doing weights with them and so on to gauge their self esteem and confidence levels. Since then he's been building them with each player and spoke about how over the preseason and next year he'll apply more pressure to them.

-KB asked about a mark for the season. Roosy explained how they didn't have KPI's in terms of wins (heard this before) but that they were aiming to be competitive, which has definitely been achieved. Mentioned that he was a bit disappointed that we'd dropped off since about round 15 but consistency before that was great.

-KB met Watts and Jones at a function recently, was extremely impressed with the way they represented the club.

-KB mentioned the J. Cameron rumor and this was an interesting one. What was said will probably be interpreted differently by each person but I think Roosy aptly avoided the question. He went into a discussion about people are constantly talking to players management (etc) but his definitive statement seemed to be 'I'm not aware of any contact, direct or indirect'. My sentiment after hearing this is that we have been in contact with him.

-KB asked about Frawley. Roosy basically just said that he 'doesn't know' and said that Chip himself 'doesn't know'. He did go on to discuss free agency and the system in the NRL, more so about players continuing to play for a club after signing with another. His final statement here was along the lines of 'player should be invested in the club 100%, if not may as well leave'. I thought this was interesting.

-Spoke about the 3rd year at the Demons. Said he hasn't thought about it too much, which sounded genuine. If provided with a deadline for a decision he said he'd sit down with the family and discuss it but at this point I believe personally that a third year is a given.

- He then went on to discuss Cameron Ling vs Malthouse (lost interest a bit) and the aesthetics of the game these days. His opinion was along the lines of - talent spread thinly due to so many teams, players that definitely wouldn't have got a game twenty years ago are playing these days.

Hope that helps!

Thanks for the summary!

The bold point is interesting.

I was speaking to one of the players at the preseason function and asked him about the biggest difference between 2013 and 14 coaching set ups and he said the current really "Get around us" and that while the training was tough, the vibe was a lot more relaxed than before.

I also remember roosy working the room with the sponsors and such, but every time he passed wattsy he would squeeze his Jack's shoulders and keep moving. This must have happened 5+ times. It was probably just Roos sharing a bit of banter with his boys, but I felt it was almost way of pumping up Wattsy. Maybe he felt that after years of scrutiny and pressure by everyone, Jack needed a bit of love.

  On 17/07/2014 at 02:24, T-34 said:

Interesting point however the demographics of that 5 million increase may not lend itself to playing footy.

Perhaps the current thinking of many immigrants would see AFL as a third or fourth choice sport behind soccer or basketball in particular.

A change in this may take a generation or two.

Why would the 'current thinking' be any different than it was 20 years ago? The AFL is arguably even more dominant now than it was then.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-03-05/afl-crowds-worlds-fourthbiggest

"WITH an average crowd of 32,163 in 2013, the AFL ranked fourth in world sport for attendances per match, according to the League's annual report."

"AFL Chief Executive Officer Andrew Demetriou has announced that 2013 AFL club membership had reached 756,717 members nationally – the highest recorded figure in the game’s history and a 6.94 per cent increase on last year’s total."

http://sportsbusinessinsider.com.au/news/category/financial-and-governance/afl-announce-highest-membership-numbers-in-games-history/

FCS that is 750,000 paid up members and 290,000 people who rock up to a game every weekend!

and what's the bottom line on that? "THE AFL achieved record revenue of $446 million and more than doubled its net profit in 2013 despite the shadow cast over last season by the drawn-out Essendon supplements saga."

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-03-04/afls-446m-record

This type of thing makes my blood boil. They talk about 'staying competitive with other codes' and blah blah, using it as justification for inequitable fixturing, rules-fiddling that ruins the game for its loyal supporters and number of other greed-based phenomena that plague the modern game. There is no reason for GWS and GC to even exist apart from pure unadulterated greed at the expense of the enjoyment of the sport by its long-term supporters. Disgusting.

  On 17/07/2014 at 02:24, T-34 said:

Interesting point however the demographics of that 5 million increase may not lend itself to playing footy.

Perhaps the current thinking of many immigrants would see AFL as a third or fourth choice sport behind soccer or basketball in particular.

A change in this may take a generation or two.

but this is also offset by the increase in overseas players.

http://www.sen.com.au/display-article-2013/Roos-not-feeling-pressure-on-decision/70810

Interview on link Roos and KB

  On 17/07/2014 at 02:40, Curry & Beer said:

Why would the 'current thinking' be any different than it was 20 years ago? The AFL is arguably even more dominant now than it was then.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-03-05/afl-crowds-worlds-fourthbiggest

"WITH an average crowd of 32,163 in 2013, the AFL ranked fourth in world sport for attendances per match, according to the League's annual report."

"AFL Chief Executive Officer Andrew Demetriou has announced that 2013 AFL club membership had reached 756,717 members nationally – the highest recorded figure in the game’s history and a 6.94 per cent increase on last year’s total."

http://sportsbusinessinsider.com.au/news/category/financial-and-governance/afl-announce-highest-membership-numbers-in-games-history/

FCS that is 750,000 paid up members and 290,000 people who rock up to a game every weekend!

and what's the bottom line on that? "THE AFL achieved record revenue of $446 million and more than doubled its net profit in 2013 despite the shadow cast over last season by the drawn-out Essendon supplements saga."

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-03-04/afls-446m-record

This type of thing makes my blood boil. They talk about 'staying competitive with other codes' and blah blah, using it as justification for inequitable fixturing, rules-fiddling that ruins the game for its loyal supporters and number of other greed-based phenomena that plague the modern game. There is no reason for GWS and GC to even exist apart from pure unadulterated greed at the expense of the enjoyment of the sport by its long-term supporters. Disgusting.

I believe that if you were an AFL supporter on the Gold Coast you'd feel a little differently about it, though I think you're right in thinking the principle drive behind the creation of the two clubs was expanding on revenue avenues, which requires more supporters and more area of influence.

I find the part about Jeremy Cameron interesting, Roosy has not denied the club has made contact, just says he has no idea about it, which I find strange,

if a club was going to make what would presumably be a multi million dollar pitch to a player to join the club I would have thought the Senior coach would have a huge amount of say in it.

I'm not really sure how it works with the recruiting staff if they are just given a brief of what attributes the club needs and they go and get the best players around to fill those roles, but I would have thought no player was coming through the doors unless Roosy wanted them

  On 17/07/2014 at 03:47, Mike Nolan said:

I find the part about Jeremy Cameron interesting, Roosy has not denied the club has made contact, just says he has no idea about it, which I find strange,

if a club was going to make what would presumably be a multi million dollar pitch to a player to join the club I would have thought the Senior coach would have a huge amount of say in it.

I'm not really sure how it works with the recruiting staff if they are just given a brief of what attributes the club needs and they go and get the best players around to fill those roles, but I would have thought no player was coming through the doors unless Roosy wanted them

Of course he'd have a big part in it - to be brutally honest, the only real attraction of a player coming to the MFC at this stage aside from money is being under the coaching of Paul Roos.

But he's not going to come out on radio about how he's been heavily involved in chatting to Cameron. He'll say something along the lines of 'I'm not really aware of any contact' (which is what he said), which is basically diverting the question.

We'd be crazy to be not pursuing any contact with Cameron.

  On 17/07/2014 at 03:55, Django said:

Of course he'd have a big part in it - to be brutally honest, the only real attraction of a player coming to the MFC at this stage aside from money is being under the coaching of Paul Roos.

But he's not going to come out on radio about how he's been heavily involved in chatting to Cameron. He'll say something along the lines of 'I'm not really aware of any contact' (which is what he said), which is basically diverting the question.

We'd be crazy to be not pursuing any contact with Cameron.

I agree 100% with you, I think money, Roosy and playing on the G are the three big draw cards we have,

it was just a strange way to deflect the question in my opinion, I would have expected something along the lines of " we're talking to a whole lot of players and considering a whole lot of options, if it's indicated the Jeremy may be gettable then i'm sure we will sit down and have a coffee and see where he is at "

to say he has absolutely no idea kind of seemed like he was a little bit caught out, I find it hard to believe he wouldn't have a list on his desk of every player we are chatting too and how likely they are to come to the MFC

I guess the question is what does it gain the MFC by admitting we're trying to poach their most valuable player? I would've thought it was rare for a senior coach to admit who their draft targets are due to rival clubs stealing their thunder.

Maybe Free Agency works differently, seeing as Geelong have openly stated their interest in Frawley?

  On 17/07/2014 at 04:02, Lamashtu said:

I guess the question is what does it gain the MFC by admitting we're trying to poach their most valuable player? I would've thought it was rare for a senior coach to admit who their draft targets are due to rival clubs stealing their thunder.

Maybe Free Agency works differently, seeing as Geelong have openly stated their interest in Frawley?

The difference from my point of view is Chip is a free agent, all 18 clubs know he is fair game, there is a chance some clubs don't think they can realistically get Cameron, because of not having the trade assets, or the money to attract him or whatever the reason may be,

a dream off season would be to land Cameron and a couple of good midfielders

Cameron, Shiel and Mitchell would be a great outcome for the club

  On 17/07/2014 at 01:05, AzzKikA said:

Sometimes i find Roos really hard to listen too, i just start zoning out, lucky he isn't my coach!

He's the media's darling because he plays a straight arrow and treats people with respect.

The opposite is Malthouse. Who would you prefer?

But I agree. I can't sit through all of his press conferences, but mainly because he just says what anyone that has been watching this team over the past three years already knows.

If GWS were crazy enough to trade Cameron and Shiel for picks 3 and 4, it would be a massive steal for us.

  On 17/07/2014 at 04:11, Lamashtu said:

If GWS were crazy enough to trade Cameron and Shiel for picks 3 and 4, it would be a massive steal for us.

  On 17/07/2014 at 04:11, Lamashtu said:

If GWS were crazy enough to trade Cameron and Shiel for picks 3 and 4, it would be a massive steal for us.

They need another 2-3 strong drafts, just like Melbourne. It wouldn't be all that surprising tbh. They could trade-on those picks for experience that they can't get via free agency.

  On 17/07/2014 at 04:11, Lamashtu said:

If GWS were crazy enough to trade Cameron and Shiel for picks 3 and 4, it would be a massive steal for us.

I wouldn't rule it out, they may want something on top of that, 3, 4 and Blease for those too?

the thing is they're trying to widen the age gap of their list, and I think they have accepted that the nature of the path they are taking will see them lose players due to homesickness and so on

Losing Cameron would be very difficult for them, but it's handy they have Boyd, Tommlinson and Patton waiting in the wings

  On 17/07/2014 at 04:01, Mike Nolan said:

I agree 100% with you, I think money, Roosy and playing on the G are the three big draw cards we have,

it was just a strange way to deflect the question in my opinion, I would have expected something along the lines of " we're talking to a whole lot of players and considering a whole lot of options, if it's indicated the Jeremy may be gettable then i'm sure we will sit down and have a coffee and see where he is at "

to say he has absolutely no idea kind of seemed like he was a little bit caught out, I find it hard to believe he wouldn't have a list on his desk of every player we are chatting too and how likely they are to come to the MFC

Money, I agree. However, I can't see the Roos factor having any influence (except for those with only a year or so to go before they retire) until Roos makes a longer term commitment to the club. And while we might think playing on the G is the best place to play I doubt any player would take it into consideration when thinking about which club to play with.

Another factor which may be relevant is the confidence a player has that the club is heading in the right direction. If they think Melbourne's trajectory is upwards they might be attracted. However, if we look like flatlining or, heaven forbid, going backwards, we become a less attractive proposition.

  On 17/07/2014 at 04:23, Satyriconhome said:

Unless it is from a condescending [censored], which in Lamashtu's case it was.....so therefore my opinion was his opinion was wrong......therefore 'differing' opinions

  On 17/07/2014 at 04:46, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Money, I agree. However, I can't see the Roos factor having any influence (except for those with only a year or so to go before they retire) until Roos makes a longer term commitment to the club. And while we might think playing on the G is the best place to play I doubt any player would take it into consideration when thinking about which club to play with.

Another factor which may be relevant is the confidence a player has that the club is heading in the right direction. If they think Melbourne's trajectory is upwards they might be attracted. However, if we look like flatlining or, heaven forbid, going backwards, we become a less attractive proposition.

Yeah I agree, I think that was a huge issue last year, I reckon people now see Mfc as having a pretty good young list and some good direction, the fact we have a great coach and get to play on the MCG every other week are small bonuses,

I think with Jeremy Cameron in particular is that the Giants are in a fairly similar position in terms of development, we probably have a few more senior players, I reckon we could well follow the dogs path and improve significantly next year, especially if we add Cameron and a couple of decent mids, and the natural progression of our players, as well as Hogan, Trengove and Cross coming back into the mix

  On 17/07/2014 at 05:07, Lamashtu said:

Gee....a victory on a Footy Forum......wow....lift your desk without using your hands?

I suggest you grow up and answer my question, have you now listened to the interview and are willing to say your were wrong in your initial assertion about Frawley?

  On 17/07/2014 at 05:34, Satyriconhome said:

Gee....a victory on a Footy Forum......wow....lift your desk without using your hands?

I suggest you grow up and answer my question, have you now listened to the interview and are willing to say your were wrong in your initial assertion about Frawley?

To be fair it's a subjective topic as to how we perceive Roos' comments regarding Frawley. Lamashtu doesn't have to agree with you or I.

Unless you are Goebbels and this is Germany circa 1943, which is how I sometimes think you act.

  On 17/07/2014 at 05:34, Satyriconhome said:

Gee....a victory on a Footy Forum......wow....lift your desk without using your hands?

I suggest you grow up and answer my question, have you now listened to the interview and are willing to say your were wrong in your initial assertion about Frawley?

And you were wrong about Mark Neeld.

Sh!t happens. Its a forum board everyone is entitled to a opinion as you always rant on about.

  On 17/07/2014 at 02:40, Curry & Beer said:

Why would the 'current thinking' be any different than it was 20 years ago? The AFL is arguably even more dominant now than it was then.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-03-05/afl-crowds-worlds-fourthbiggest

"WITH an average crowd of 32,163 in 2013, the AFL ranked fourth in world sport for attendances per match, according to the League's annual report."

"AFL Chief Executive Officer Andrew Demetriou has announced that 2013 AFL club membership had reached 756,717 members nationally – the highest recorded figure in the game’s history and a 6.94 per cent increase on last year’s total."

http://sportsbusinessinsider.com.au/news/category/financial-and-governance/afl-announce-highest-membership-numbers-in-games-history/

FCS that is 750,000 paid up members and 290,000 people who rock up to a game every weekend!

and what's the bottom line on that? "THE AFL achieved record revenue of $446 million and more than doubled its net profit in 2013 despite the shadow cast over last season by the drawn-out Essendon supplements saga."

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-03-04/afls-446m-record

This type of thing makes my blood boil. They talk about 'staying competitive with other codes' and blah blah, using it as justification for inequitable fixturing, rules-fiddling that ruins the game for its loyal supporters and number of other greed-based phenomena that plague the modern game. There is no reason for GWS and GC to even exist apart from pure unadulterated greed at the expense of the enjoyment of the sport by its long-term supporters. Disgusting.

Ease down buddy.

My point is that sports such as soccer and basketball are known sports to many African and Asian immigrants who will be more naturally drawn to these.

Their kids however could be a different kettle of fish.

The rest of your rant I actually agree with.

  On 17/07/2014 at 04:46, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Money, I agree. However, I can't see the Roos factor having any influence (except for those with only a year or so to go before they retire) until Roos makes a longer term commitment to the club. And while we might think playing on the G is the best place to play I doubt any player would take it into consideration when thinking about which club to play with.

Another factor which may be relevant is the confidence a player has that the club is heading in the right direction. If they think Melbourne's trajectory is upwards they might be attracted. However, if we look like flatlining or, heaven forbid, going backwards, we become a less attractive proposition.

Leaving the 'backwoods' of GWS, and moving to the 'centre of the AFL universe' would also be attractive to many young kids.

  On 17/07/2014 at 06:08, Deeoldfart said:

Leaving the 'backwoods' of GWS, and moving to the 'centre of the AFL universe' would also be attractive to many young kids.

Leaving the 'backwoods' of GWS, and moving ANYWHERE would also be attractive to many young kids.

  On 17/07/2014 at 04:12, praha said:

They need another 2-3 strong drafts, just like Melbourne. It wouldn't be all that surprising tbh. They could trade-on those picks for experience that they can't get via free agency.

I would have thought GWS would need more established players, not high draft picks.

  On 17/07/2014 at 06:15, Clint Bizkit said:

I would have thought GWS would need more established players, not high draft picks.

Can always on-trade picks 3 and 4 to get some great senior players from other clubs though. About 4 teams are in the process of major rebuilds this draft period and will be desperate for high draft picks. Could net themselves some established senior players from Carlton, Richmond, Saints or even Brisbane.