There is one thing that Mr. Roos and company got right.

Clark.

There is one thing that Mr. Roos and company got right.

Clark.

2015 games - 8 goals - 14

Well we are changing coaches, next year Goodwin will pretty much co-coach.

We have a in place transition plan. Which isn't the same as sacking coaches (which is what i was referring to).

What we can't do is "sack" Roos. Or replace him quickly. Let them transition naturally as planned.

We have a in place transition plan. Which isn't the same as sacking coaches (which is what i was referring to).

What we can't do is "sack" Roos. Or replace him quickly. Let them transition naturally as planned.

Emphasis on the fact that we finally have a plan in place.

For christ sake we picked up Lumumba for Mitch Clark so I wouldn't say it was a poor pick up and IMO he is playing as he did at Collingwood, but you did hit the nail on the head he has less capable players around him

Pennant I said "he was a poor pick up for the price". His price was Clark and his price is also what we are paying him. In a sense he can be compared to Varcoe who IMO has given Collingwood much more than Lumumba has given us. Geelong punted Clark's ability to play and if that punt had come off Clark would have offered Geelong more than Lumumba has offered us. Clark is not yet done but I acknowledge that he is likely to be a bust.

Lumumba would not have come cheaply. He finished 4th in Collingwoods B&F last year behind Pendlebury, Sidebottom and Beams. His contracted amount may not matter this year but in future years when we need salary cap room to lure other players we will have spent some of it on Lumumba. Not a good result. So I'd still maintain that he is a poor pick up for the price.

In terms of performance he'd be lucky to find a spot in my best starting 22, but I acknowledge many would have him in. Dunn, Garland, Salem, Jetta, McDonald, Cross, Grimes and Howe have greater or equal claim to a spot in the back 6 for mine. I've not seen him impose himself on games when we are faltering, I've not seen the courageous act to inspire, I've not seen the piece of inspirational play to instil confidence beyond his goal against the Suns in the first match. His possession rate has fallen by 20% since last year while his tackles have gone up. If this is what he produced at Collingwood last year I don't think he'd have finished 4th in their B&F. If the reason for his decline is caused by having less capable players around him then the footy department got his recruitment wrong. We needed someone who could lift those around him not someone who relied on those around him.

If you truly believe he's playing now as he did at Collingwood I reckon you'd have been pretty disappointed with the pick up. Whilst his trade value was Clark it begs the question as to what else Geelong might have been willing to give up rather than the round robin for Lumumba or what other deals were possible. I don't know. Perhaps this was the best we could do but in my opinion he has been bitterly disappointing.

There is one thing that Mr. Roos and company got right.

Clark.

Brayshaw?

Pennant I said "he was a poor pick up for the price". His price was Clark and his price is also what we are paying him. In a sense he can be compared to Varcoe who IMO has given Collingwood much more than Lumumba has given us. Geelong punted Clark's ability to play and if that punt had come off Clark would have offered Geelong more than Lumumba has offered us. Clark is not yet done but I acknowledge that he is likely to be a bust.

Lumumba would not have come cheaply. He finished 4th in Collingwoods B&F last year behind Pendlebury, Sidebottom and Beams. His contracted amount may not matter this year but in future years when we need salary cap room to lure other players we will have spent some of it on Lumumba. Not a good result. So I'd still maintain that he is a poor pick up for the price.

In terms of performance he'd be lucky to find a spot in my best starting 22, but I acknowledge many would have him in. Dunn, Garland, Salem, Jetta, McDonald, Cross, Grimes and Howe have greater or equal claim to a spot in the back 6 for mine. I've not seen him impose himself on games when we are faltering, I've not seen the courageous act to inspire, I've not seen the piece of inspirational play to instil confidence beyond his goal against the Suns in the first match. His possession rate has fallen by 20% since last year while his tackles have gone up. If this is what he produced at Collingwood last year I don't think he'd have finished 4th in their B&F. If the reason for his decline is caused by having less capable players around him then the footy department got his recruitment wrong. We needed someone who could lift those around him not someone who relied on those around him.

If you truly believe he's playing now as he did at Collingwood I reckon you'd have been pretty disappointed with the pick up. Whilst his trade value was Clark it begs the question as to what else Geelong might have been willing to give up rather than the round robin for Lumumba or what other deals were possible. I don't know. Perhaps this was the best we could do but in my opinion he has been bitterly disappointing.

If I am honest he is playing as he did at Collingwood

I actualy don't rate him as a player, never have, disposal has always been suspect and runs around like a headless chook into corners a lot

He is average, but is under the microscope more in a poorer side

But I think Clark for Lumumba is a win

I do not think we would have been foolish enough to pay him heavily at the back end of his contract

If I am honest he is playing as he did at Collingwood

I actualy don't rate him as a player, never have, disposal has always been suspect and runs around like a headless chook into corners a lot

He is average, but is under the microscope more in a poorer side

But I think Clark for Lumumba is a win

I do not think we would have been foolish enough to pay him heavily at the back end of his contract

i prefer crazy horse

Brayshaw?

Sylvia?

But I think Clark for Lumumba is a win

OK, so we agree Lumumba isn't much of a player. I didn't look at him as critically at Collingwood as I do at Melbourne but put weight in his 4th in the B&F because I really rate Buckley and so just assume he played better for them last year. But that is moot.

I also agree Lumumba for Clark is a win, but it's a useless win IMO because Lumumba offers so little. I wonder what else was on offer. I reckon we really overrated Lumumba and I'll be interested to see where he finishes in the B&F this year.

I just didn't realize how timid he is.

Edit: In fact I wonder if Lumumba for Clark is a win. If Clark was still on MFC list (and injured) I'd have more hope of some meaningful contribution in the future from Clark than Lumumba.

Edited July 30, 20159 yr by Baghdad Bob

Clark retired and was never going to be on our list this year.

It was Lumumba or nothing. I know what I prefer.

Edited July 30, 20159 yr by Lamashtu

There is one thing that Mr. Roos and company got right.

Clark.

I know the last 3 weeks were putrid but they have got a lot right since arriving

Takes a lot of time to fix THE WORST list in AFL history

And thats exactly what was inherited.. the worst list in the history of the game. If you can name a worse one Ill be shocked

Edited July 30, 20159 yr by hogans_heroes

I know the last 3 weeks were putrid but they have got a lot right since arriving

Takes a lot of time to fix THE WORST list in AFL history

And thats exactly what was inherited.. the worst list in the history of the game. If you can name a worse one Ill be shocked

h_h I was not saying it was the only thing he got right so the sentence could have been constructed better.

Leaving that aside I agree with your comment above100%

I'm not convinced that the result on Sunday means that we've necessarily slipped behind St. Kilda or that they are going to be ahead of us as a club in two years.

Judging by the Saints' best players from the game:-

I'll back us against them any day of the week in 2017.

Your not the only one WJ

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/melbourne-demons-better-placed-for-future-title-run-than-st-kilda-saints-20150725-gikghj.html

Your not the only one WJ

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/melbourne-demons-better-placed-for-future-title-run-than-st-kilda-saints-20150725-gikghj.html

The problem is that he can only come up with Hogan, Brayshaw, Viney, Petracca, Salem, McDonald and Tyson. It's a solid key at each end plus 5 great midfielders, so it's certainly a start. However, not all of them will go on to have great careers for various reasons (fizzle out, injury, leave the club). We are still many players short of the type of squad we currently see at Hawthorn, which is what you need to go all the way.

edit: He didn't mention Gawn, who deserves one

Edited July 30, 20159 yr by Curry & Beer

The problem is that he can only come up with Hogan, Brayshaw, Viney, Petracca, Salem, McDonald and Tyson. It's a solid key at each end plus 5 great midfielders, so it's certainly a start. However, not all of them will go on to have great careers for various reasons (fizzle out, injury, leave the club). We are still many players short of the type of squad we currently see at Hawthorn, which is what you need to go all the way.

edit: He didn't mention Gawn, who deserves one

I agree C and B but I will be happy when we just have a good side that plays in finals.

You can worry about the big prize it will be beyond my time.

The problem is that he can only come up with Hogan, Brayshaw, Viney, Petracca, Salem, McDonald and Tyson. It's a solid key at each end plus 5 great midfielders,: He didn't mention Gawn, who deserves one

Gawn would be the one that worries me most - and you could understand why he was not mentioned both in terms of consistency and potential problems with his knees, but from an MFC point of view his last month has been encouraging.

We're all hoping that Kent, ANB, Stretch, Harmes, Frost, JKH, O, Mac can be up there as well, but it is still more about potential rather than exposed form at this stage.

Personally I don't think it's about how many names you have in the hat to choose from it's about how good your best 6 are compared to the oppositions. and in that respect I think with the exception of Petracca who hasn't played (but we hope will be every bit as good if not better than Brayshaw) and Tyson (who despite his injury is a steady performer for me rather than an elite contributor) you could imagine that the other five might well become multiple AA if they continue to develop. Chances are if they're making the AA team in the same year Melbourne won't be sitting in the bottom four anymore.

St Kilda play Port in Adelaide this weekend without Riewoldt. They haven't won this year without him. We beat Geelong in Geelong without Hogan... just saying.

St Kilda play Port in Adelaide this weekend without Riewoldt. They haven't won this year without him. We beat Geelong in Geelong without Hogan... just saying.

Of course they waited til after our game to rest Riewoldt lol

Well they were always going to beat us, harder beating port away.

I would have done the same. We obliged by playing tmac forward. Can't see port not playing their best on him if he played.

Well they were always going to beat us, harder beating port away.

I would have done the same. We obliged by playing tmac forward. Can't see port not playing their best on him if he played.

Not sure they'd have beaten us without Roo. Would have been a lot closer and could have gone either way. He took important marks and set up a few goals that pushed them away.

Sorry, that's what I meant, with Roo in and our awesomeness at full, they win.

Roo in v Port is still 50/50

I think some Dees fans have forgotten how bad we were when Roos took over.

You're kidding yourself if you think that Riewoldt wasn't the difference between a St Kilda or Melbourne win last weekend. Wouldn't have mattered how bad we were.

Will be interesting to see how McCartin goes without Roo to take the best defender.