Just watched Petracca's clip for the first time - very nice overhead and can find the ball but geez - a 5 minute highlight reel and they couldn't find any clips of him hitting a target ?

Going purely on the clips (my big disclaimer) -Brayshaw vs Petracca - do you want Swan getting the ball 40 times or Pendlebury getting it 30 times - I know which one i prefer.

Direct from someone who has worked with Petracca all year at Eastern he has been told that his kicking is the key weakness in his game he needed to improve.

Not sure how it would be done but can someone set up a thread where we all have to nominate our picks 2 and 3 and it is recorded. Then we can't come back and bag the MFC recruiters if certain picks don't work. But then this might totally undermine Demondland and its reason for being? That is to retrospectively bag all and sundry for our continued misfortunes while we have always known the path to true enlightenment.

I'm pretty sure this very thread is exactly what you're looking for...

I'm pretty sure this very thread is exactly what you're looking for...

I am thinking of a thread that is more precise and records votes Without the comment and discussion and the opportunity to be backing 5 or 6 options. This thread is all over the place with plenty of wriggle room for posters to say they may have advocated Player X at one stage but later on they were for player Y etc. and actually I advocated players A,B,C,X,Y and Z but I always preferred player??

Just a thought

Direct from someone who has worked with Petracca all year at Eastern he has been told that his kicking is the key weakness in his game he needed to improve.

hahaha the likely number# 1s key weakness is his kicking...

Oh dear.

hahaha the likely number# 1s key weakness is his kicking...

Oh dear.

seems pick 1's often have flaws !!! Theyre only human

No i'm not personally, but I'm confident our recruting staff will work it out. They're no Barry Prendergasts.

BP didnt select Toumpas.

The Dees haven't got it right for a long time Fingers definitely crossed.

Our pressing need has been mids for ages but at least it is an area that we partially addressed last year with Tyson, Vince, Riley, Mitchie, Salem and Cross and we have already made further moves with Brayshaw locked in at pick #2 and Stretch as F/S. In the same period we have done nothing as regards talls and actually lost Clark for the whole of last year [as well as Hogan missing in action last year]. We are lucky that Pederson stepped up and Gawn and Fitzy showed [some] development. Perhaps Frost may be a replacement for Chip but to discount McCartin/Wright at pick #3 may be foolish [unless Petracca is there]. We are sure to target mids at #40 and #53 as well as the PSD, [unless Oscar McDonald is there and appears better suited to our needs].

We are lucky that Pederson, Gawn and Fitzy showed some development because that has never happened before - players developing....I think we are shocked when it happens because it has so rarely happened over the past 5 seasons.

I haven't dismissed McCartin or Wright - I am suggesting with the lowest inside 50 count in the AFL and the widest discrepancy between inside 50's for and against , that whilst we have increased our midfield stocks we are still a long way short of where we need to be.

If we thumping the ball continually into the forward 50 and it was coming straight out again then I would agree with the need for a tall. Bottom line is with all the players you have mentioned, strengthening our midfield, we are still not getting the ball in there.

I'm not going to "woe is us" no matter who we pick because I also won't get excited no matter who we pick until they start to produce.

I will be absolutely stunned if Tapscott and JT and possibly Evans are not delisted with the last two being rookied.

To fail to use picks 40 and 53 would be unbelievable IMO.

We might not take a DFA or use PSD 2 and so be it, but to fail to use 40 and 53 would be amazing.

I am sure we will be using them, as there is still another list lodgement before the ND.

I will be absolutely stunned if Tapscott and JT and possibly Evans are not delisted with the last two being rookied.

To fail to use picks 40 and 53 would be unbelievable IMO.

We might not take a DFA or use PSD 2 and so be it, but to fail to use 40 and 53 would be amazing.

I am sure we will be using them, as there is still another list lodgement before the ND.

I can see us only using ND40, but I agree that we should be using at least one of ND53/DFA/PSD2.

Ideally, we should use ND40 and ND53 for two promising kids and PSD2 for an out of contract emerging player.

But if the club doesn't see a promising kid at 53 (a promising kid that is much better than one in the rookie draft) or a good enough player at PSD2 then ND40 might be all they want.

The kid taken at ND53 is given an automatic 2 year contract, the kid taken at RD2 is given a one-year contract at a reduced rate. The club may prefer the flexibility of having a few out of contract next year...

Any one reckon Oscar McDonald is a chance to slide to pick 40?

there comes a time ......opined one Neil Young

....and for some on our list its soon to be here, it's that time when the club assesses the likelihood of player X , after being on list for Y years, as to whether there's a real upside in continuing as a Dee. Tappy must be 5 mins to midnight . Evans shouldn't have been that far behind as Red suggests Sometimes it's perseverance with the Devil you know and then there's that line you get to sometimes that says " enough"

I often make reference to the notion we can be a Benevolent Co-op at Melbourne and I say that not in disrespect to any player but simply acknowledging our list in order to improve must have space made for new blood which may have potential as opposed those who seem to have exhausted any.

You invariably dont invite change by being the same.

I can see us only using ND40, but I agree that we should be using at least one of ND53/DFA/PSD2.

Ideally, we should use ND40 and ND53 for two promising kids and PSD2 for an out of contract emerging player.

But if the club doesn't see a promising kid at 53 (a promising kid that is much better than one in the rookie draft) or a good enough player at PSD2 then ND40 might be all they want.

The kid taken at ND53 is given an automatic 2 year contract, the kid taken at RD2 is given a one-year contract at a reduced rate. The club may prefer the flexibility of having a few out of contract next year...

I think given the contracts thread accuracy, there will be plenty out of contract next year.

I refuse to believe there are not players available at 40 and 53 who are better than Tapscott, Evans and a non playing JT.

I cannot believe the club would not use 2 picks in the 3rd round of a ND when it has only 2 picks before them.

I am sure we will see some movement in the next 2 weeks.

I think given the contracts thread accuracy, there will be plenty out of contract next year.

I refuse to believe there are not players available at 40 and 53 who are better than Tapscott, Evans and a non playing JT.

I cannot believe the club would not use 2 picks in the 3rd round of a ND when it has only 2 picks before them.

I am sure we will see some movement in the next 2 weeks.

Could not agree more.

Just look at the results from the last two years, we have poor players by the score.

Replacement is the only way forward.

2015
Trengove, Jamar (UFA), Garland (RFA), McKenzie, Howe, N Jones (RFA), Evans, Gawn, Fitzpatrick, Toumpas, Pedersen, Salem, Kennedy-Harris, Hunt, Cross, Bail, Riley, Harmes ®, King ®

Trengove, Jamar, McKenzie, Evans, Fitzpatrick, Hunt, Cross, Bail and Riley would be a chance to be moved on for a variety of reasons.

But each player has their own story and if Trengove recovers, Jamar is kept for depth, Hunt is given more time, Cross maintains his body, Bail keeps his form, and Riley cements a rotation role, then that leaves only McKenzie, Pedersen, and Fitzpatrick to be moved on...

Could not agree more.

Just look at the results from the last two years, we have poor players by the score.

Replacement is the only way forward.

...or back.

It's not about quantity of changes, it's about quality of changes.

If you lose a B- player and replace him with a C player - your list gets worse. We have had a recent history of doing exactly that.

From 2008 to 2012 we brought in John Meesen and Joel MacDonald, as experienced AFL players - that means all the experience we lost from the Daniher years were replaced by kids - kids that didn't make it. And because we didn't bring in any players with exposed form we not only didn't have any stars of the game from our top picks, we struggled to even find good players through middle range draft picks.

I think given the contracts thread accuracy, there will be plenty out of contract next year.

I refuse to believe there are not players available at 40 and 53 who are better than Tapscott, Evans and a non playing JT.

I cannot believe the club would not use 2 picks in the 3rd round of a ND when it has only 2 picks before them.

I am sure we will see some movement in the next 2 weeks.

Tapscott has been delisted so we have 3 live picks in the draft being 2, 3 and 40 at this stage.

http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/2014-10-31/tapscott-delisted-by-demons

MFC recruiting plan should simply be, do the homework, work out who they want to pick and then pick the other bloke.

I'm pretty sure this is what has actually been happening.

Tapscott has been delisted so we have 3 live picks in the draft being 2, 3 and 40 at this stage.

http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/2014-10-31/tapscott-delisted-by-demons

JT off will give us pick 53. After that, unless we identify a PSD player or DFA, it may end there.

we still need to get rid of a couple more poor performers, pay out their contract and take some fresh or possible recycled players, no value keeping marginal players on the list.

BP didnt select Toumpas.

The Dees haven't got it right for a long time Fingers definitely crossed.

No, but I don't think we had Jason Taylor when he was selected either (I think he started in 2013), Toump was a Neeld pick if you believe what's been said. Can't really say JKH or Salem have been BP-esque selections.

...or back.

It's not about quantity of changes, it's about quality of changes.

If you lose a B- player and replace him with a C player - your list gets worse. We have had a recent history of doing exactly that.

From 2008 to 2012 we brought in John Meesen and Joel MacDonald, as experienced AFL players - that means all the experience we lost from the Daniher years were replaced by kids - kids that didn't make it. And because we didn't bring in any players with exposed form we not only didn't have any stars of the game from our top picks, we struggled to even find good players through middle range draft picks.

If you cast your mind back I have been arguing this along side you for eight long years.

But we clearly know that a lot on our list will never take us forward and we must change over more players.

other wise we will be marooned in the bottom four forever.

Of course they have to be better.

If you cast your mind back I have been arguing this along side you for eight long years.

But we clearly know that a lot on our list will never take us forward and we must change over more players.

other wise we will be marooned in the bottom four forever.

Of course they have to be better.

Yes, but at some point real soon we are going to have to give these blokes time to 'do a Jetta' and pull their collective fingers out.

And my point is more that keeping Evans on a for a year may be more benficial if you don't want to give some kid at ND53 a 2 year contract.

Take a similar talent at RD2 and you can jettison him after a year - I don't like it but I would maximise the use of it.

The difference I think RPFC is that Jetta showed something occasionally just couldnt/wouldnt until the penny dropped.

Not all players in same boat. In the end its about a balance. We'll know soon enough

Why did we give up 23. For Frost and not take him in the PSD?

I've been away, but it seemed odd when I heard it? Surely it'd make sense to keep that pick and use the late ones on Frost?

Obviously there's a good reason which I haven't heard.