That's because he's got the best trick in football.

I think the best trick is using it well.

Paul Roos is perfect for our club because he doesn't panic. He isn't in a position where he needs to. He knows that he isn't going to be our next premiership coach and is, instead, trying to instill in this club that requirements that will one day get us there. So much of the club was rotten in the past and now Roos has, generally, changed much of that and we are in a far better position than we were 2,3,4,5 years ago.

Imagine if we had missed out on Roos and gotten an unproven coach who couldn't turn us around? Imagine if we hadn't been able to lure guys like Vince and Cross to the club and had instead merely invested in youth and only won 2-3 games again? I don't think we would be able to survive all of that.

The losses on the weekend hurt now because we KNOW we are capable of better. But this team is still going through the learning phase and thankfully Roos isn't straying from the course he has set us on. By the time Goodwin takes over he will inherit a team and a club that is truly beginning to thrive again in the industry. Roos will have well and truly done his job.

Like this post. A sensible view with perspective. Sure we have weaknesses and need to continue to develop players. However, stability, a sense of direction and maintaining a positive outlook is important. I think the losses are difficult because we have seen glimpses of how good we can be and seen glimpses of future success. I would much prefer that we have Roos than not have him. Time will tell how important these last few years have been, however, for the time being i have confidence that the club and the coaching staff are on the right track.

I think the best trick is using it well.

Gotta get it to use it.

I'm an unashamed McDonald fan.

I've got to confess I left Etihad at half time on Sunday as I was the guest of a Bulldogs supporter who was giving me the shytes with his sanctimonious editorial of the game. Better to miss a half than lose a friend.

On the train on the way home I read the game day thread on DL where McDonald was being derided. I thought to myself "what about the backline players that weren't getting the ball, weren't in the contest and weren't contributing at all". Not much comment on them.

McDonald turns it over at times but the net benefit of him getting the ball far outweigh his turnovers.

We are a poor team because we don't have a lot of natural ball magnets. Getting the ball is the best trick in footy.

And from the AFL site: One percenters: Tom McDonald (139) AFL rank (second): McDonald's concentration and effort is never questioned. Apart from a flat patch in the middle of the season, he has been very good at putting constant pressure on opponents. - See more at: http://www.afl.com.au/news/2015-08-19/team-first-gems#sthash.iHFNZbN7.dpuf

Edited August 19, 201510 yr by Baghdad Bob

To point out the obvious, 'questions do not need to be asked' because unlike 99% of coaching arrangements, this one already has a use-by date that is set in stone. There is no question of 'should we or should we not keep Roos?' he is already going to be replaced b Goodwin in just over a year. Unless you are an absolute moron that is campaigning for him to be replaced now, this whole discussion is moot. Even at the end of 2016 we won't really know the Roos effect, it will be revealed years later.

To point out the obvious, 'questions do not need to be asked' because unlike 99% of coaching arrangements, this one already has a use-by date that is set in stone. There is no question of 'should we or should we not keep Roos?' he is already going to be replaced b Goodwin in just over a year. Unless you are an absolute moron that is campaigning for him to be replaced now, this whole discussion is moot. Even at the end of 2016 we won't really know the Roos effect, it will be revealed years later.

To campaign for his removal is essentially to campaign for the death of the club. The destabilization of the club this would cause would be insurmountable, We knew this (or should have) when he was signed and the plan was put in place. We only had one more chance to get it right, whoever we chose we had to go the long haul with, there is no changing our minds now.

To campaign for his removal is essentially to campaign for the death of the club. The destabilization of the club this would cause would be insurmountable, We knew this (or should have) when he was signed and the plan was put in place. We only had one more chance to get it right, whoever we chose we had to go the long haul with, there is no changing our minds now.

I don't think there is anyone who would actively campaign for his removal. People just need someone to blame over a loss. One week we beat Collingwood and he is praised, the next we get smashed and everything he does is questioned by the usual crew.

Promised myself after the Collingwood win that i would not question Roos again even though i created this thread after St Kilda loss.

For once when are we going to start asking questions from our players? Guys like Garland Dawes Howe Lumumba have been major disappointments but get off scott free.

Promised myself after the Collingwood win that i would not question Roos again even though i created this thread after St Kilda loss.

For once when are we going to start asking questions from our players? Guys like Garland Dawes Howe Lumumba have been major disappointments but get off scott free.

What are you talking about? I'll go with you on Garland, somehow he gets away with it from everyone but me, but the other 3 have been raked over the coals all season long

What are you talking about? I'll go with you on Garland, somehow he gets away with it from everyone but me, but the other 3 have been raked over the coals all season long

The question of the last two though is - should they have been dropped? Howe and Lumumba have hardly set the world alight this year, but you could also argue that we don't really have anything near their quality plying their trade down at Casey.

I still think Roos wants people to earn their place in the side, but until the necessary depth is there then it doesn't leave us with much choice.

The question of the last two though is - should they have been dropped? Howe and Lumumba have hardly set the world alight this year, but you could also argue that we don't really have anything near their quality plying their trade down at Casey.

I still think Roos wants people to earn their place in the side, but until the necessary depth is there then it doesn't leave us with much choice.

I agree that there is very slim pickings at Casey (particularly when you have 6-10 on the injury list the ENTIRE season), but also I think one of the cornerstones of Roos' administration is to bring in older/more experienced players and put them in the 22 so we don't have a bunch of kids out there. To drop these senior non-performers would mean breaking that rule, so he has to stick with it. I can't blame him really for keeping these players in... to not do so would just mean more Stretch, Bail etc and just more heavy losses like last week, which is disasterous for everyone. It is so infuriating that this club simply cannot bring together a group of senior players that consistently perform, for a decade or so we have just been so patchy in this area and given so many games to players who didn't dserve them, because we had no choice.

I agree that there is very slim pickings at Casey (particularly when you have 6-10 on the injury list the ENTIRE season), but also I think one of the cornerstones of Roos' administration is to bring in older/more experienced players and put them in the 22 so we don't have a bunch of kids out there. To drop these senior non-performers would mean breaking that rule, so he has to stick with it. I can't blame him really for keeping these players in... to not do so would just mean more Stretch, Bail etc and just more heavy losses like last week, which is disasterous for everyone. It is so infuriating that this club simply cannot bring together a group of senior players that consistently perform, for a decade or so we have just been so patchy in this area and given so many games to players who didn't dserve them, because we had no choice.

Worst thing the club did was go with the youth policy. Not only did they remove the experienced old heads from the group but they exposed the vulnerable youngsters to thrashings. how things might have been if we held on to the likes of Junior, Yze, Green, Bruce (but he was injured), Robbo, etc etc just for another year or two. We may not have won much more but we would have had a chance to let the youngsters enter more gently.

Worst thing the club did was go with the youth policy. Not only did they remove the experienced old heads from the group but they exposed the vulnerable youngsters to thrashings. how things might have been if we held on to the likes of Junior, Yze, Green, Bruce (but he was injured), Robbo, etc etc just for another year or two. We may not have won much more but we would have had a chance to let the youngsters enter more gently.

There is a rose coloured view right there. Junior is the only one of those we should have kept.

The others were not leaders in any way shape or form and aside from Green were gifted games they didn't deserve at the end. Bruce also chose to leave to go to hawthorn on a 1y deal for less money. What does that say about his great leadership skills and loyalty to the club?

There is a rose coloured view right there. Junior is the only one of those we should have kept.

The others were not leaders in any way shape or form and aside from Green were gifted games they didn't deserve at the end. Bruce also chose to leave to go to hawthorn on a 1y deal for less money. What does that say about his great leadership skills and loyalty to the club?

Or about the administration and culture surrounding the club....?

I never blamed Bruce for leaving. The stench around the club when he left was so great that he was happy to leave for less money. I agree that his leadership skills weren't flash but he has gone on to become a successful assistant coach, so they can't be that bad.

There is a rose coloured view right there. Junior is the only one of those we should have kept.

The others were not leaders in any way shape or form and aside from Green were gifted games they didn't deserve at the end. Bruce also chose to leave to go to hawthorn on a 1y deal for less money. What does that say about his great leadership skills and loyalty to the club?

Never actually said they were great leaders, but they would have lessened the impact of the losses on the young group and shielded them from constant thrashings. That was actually the whole point of my comment, but I guess you knew that right?

Worst thing the club did was go with the youth policy. Not only did they remove the experienced old heads from the group but they exposed the vulnerable youngsters to thrashings. how things might have been if we held on to the likes of Junior, Yze, Green, Bruce (but he was injured), Robbo, etc etc just for another year or two. We may not have won much more but we would have had a chance to let the youngsters enter more gently.

All of the above left at the right time. They were spent. Can't see how retaining them would have made any difference.

The problem was dud recruiting, pure and simple.

All of the above left at the right time. They were spent. Can't see how retaining them would have made any difference.

The problem was dud recruiting, pure and simple.

It's a completely different discussion to 'should Dawes/Lumumba/Howe/Garland be dropped?' anyway

These current players are supposedly in their prime, not their twilight

All of the above left at the right time. They were spent. Can't see how retaining them would have made any difference.

The problem was dud recruiting, pure and simple.

The bigger problem was appalling development, while the recruiting wasn't great it wasn't as bad as it appears. I agree the players above were spent, with the exception of Junior, what they provide is the opportunity for the young ones to develop in the VFL before being exposed to constant thrashings. That is what destroyed many of the young players, along with a distinct lack of leadership at the club, with the exception of a few.

I think Viney is Jones most likely successor

I agree. Jones isn't perfect, but is the best bloke for the job at the moment. He has been for the past 5 years. I think Viney will get it at the right time.

We'll be fine - Roos is going okay. Changing coaches will have no effect. Doing enough on the field to hang onto our young talent has to be our main priority.

We'll be fine - Roos is going okay. Changing coaches will have no effect. Doing enough on the field to hang onto our young talent has to be our main priority.

The positive is that the talent we have has committed to the club - Hogan, Salem, Brayshaw, Petracca, Gawn... they have all signed contract extensions which is a show of faith in the club going forward. If things weren't going well then they would be happy to look elsewhere or not sign the early extension.

We'll be fine - Roos is going okay. Changing coaches will have no effect. Doing enough on the field to hang onto our young talent has to be our main priority.

No one is seriously suggesting changing coaches. The suggestions are that Roos is not above criticism. There are plenty here that says he can do no wrong. He has done some really good things but criticism is warranted about the unpreparedness of the team (getting smashed in the 1st qtr two weeks running for example) and the inconsistency in effort shown. The fact that the players cannot implement a game plan is a major concern as is the fact that the team was consistently beaten by oppositions leaving a spare man in defence.

The consultant has plenty of work to do.

No one is seriously suggesting changing coaches. The suggestions are that Roos is not above criticism. There are plenty here that says he can do no wrong. He has done some really good things but criticism is warranted about the unpreparedness of the team (getting smashed in the 1st qtr two weeks running for example) and the inconsistency in effort shown. The fact that the players cannot implement a game plan is a major concern as is the fact that the team was consistently beaten by oppositions leaving a spare man in defence.

The consultant has plenty of work to do.

Roos isn't above criticism, I agree. I look forward to Goodwin taking more control in 2016. I think Roos will do better work outside of the limelight. Paul Roos is still the best talent spotter in the business, and that is something that we've lacked. Paul Roos record is up there with Derick Hine and Stephen Wells. I think Roos will do his best work for this club, as a manager/recruiter/coaching mentor.

There is a rose coloured view right there. Junior is the only one of those we should have kept.

The others were not leaders in any way shape or form and aside from Green were gifted games they didn't deserve at the end. Bruce also chose to leave to go to hawthorn on a 1y deal for less money. What does that say about his great leadership skills and loyalty to the club?

I reckon Miller could have offered something on field. I agree with the rest other than the depiction of Bruce. He was treated terribly by the list management administration at the time. I was no great fan but he was a talented footballer who would have stayed in better circumstances.

And of course taking the captaincy from Green, throwing him out of the leadership group and appointing Grimes and Trengove was an absolute masterstroke. Not.

Better list management would have seen us use some of the many early picks we had used on experienced players. We completely lost balance in the player list and we are still recovering. Our list management in the last 2 or 3 years under Daniher and Cameron were poor as well. Besides poor picks we didn't turn enough players over.

Roos isn't above criticism, I agree. I look forward to Goodwin taking more control in 2016. I think Roos will do better work outside of the limelight. Paul Roos is still the best talent spotter in the business, and that is something that we've lacked. Paul Roos record is up there with Derick Hine and Stephen Wells. I think Roos will do his best work for this club, as a manager/recruiter/coaching mentor.

Good point King - one thing we seriously lacked when Roos took over was talent on the list. We had far too many duds. Roos' recruiting, along with the rest of the team of course, has been spot on over the last two years. We still have too many players on our list that aren't AFL standard but we've certainly improved in this area.

Paul Roos is perfect for our club because he doesn't panic. He isn't in a position where he needs to. He knows that he isn't going to be our next premiership coach and is, instead, trying to instill in this club that requirements that will one day get us there. So much of the club was rotten in the past and now Roos has, generally, changed much of that and we are in a far better position than we were 2,3,4,5 years ago.

Imagine if we had missed out on Roos and gotten an unproven coach who couldn't turn us around? Imagine if we hadn't been able to lure guys like Vince and Cross to the club and had instead merely invested in youth and only won 2-3 games again? I don't think we would be able to survive all of that.

The losses on the weekend hurt now because we KNOW we are capable of better. But this team is still going through the learning phase and thankfully Roos isn't straying from the course he has set us on. By the time Goodwin takes over he will inherit a team and a club that is truly beginning to thrive again in the industry. Roos will have well and truly done his job.

Wise words.