Your point was very poorly made.

I was fascinated to hear that Bugg kept Travis Boak to 11 touches in 3 quarters this year before he was inexplicably moved off him at 3 quarter time.

Have heard from a reliable source (and I'm sure the poster that earlier claimed to be a mate of Bugg's can confirm) that Bugg isn't interested in coming to a club to be a tagger or a back pocket though. He feels as though he has much more to offer than this, and often enjoyed playing NEAFL and having a license to hunt the ball and kick a goal like he did in his junior days.

Melbourne has offered him 3 years with a vision that he'll be given much more than just shut down roles.

It will be interesting to see how it pans out, but maybe they see him as being able to fill the Bernie Vince-type of role off a wing?

I've explained it for you in my post above.

Should have realized how much of a struggle it would be for some 'Landers to think for themselves.

yes stuie, but why should we go to all the trouble of thinking for ourselves when you can do it all for us?

really? I thought a 3rd rounder may get it done.

Sorry, meant to say wouldn't.

yes stuie, but why should we go to all the trouble of thinking for ourselves when you can do it all for us?

Just speaks crap then writes it off as him being facetious and we have trouble interpreting him, because he's on a higher level than us or something.

Usually starts off his posts with "says the guy who..." And ends them with some kind of reference to irony- which usually isn't ironic at all..

Just speaks crap then writes it off as him being facetious and we have trouble interpreting him, because he's on a higher level than us or something.

Usually starts off his posts with "says the guy who..." And ends them with some kind of reference to irony- which usually isn't ironic at all..

Says the guy who only chimes in when people have stopped talking footy and and started having personal cracks...

Oh, and...

I was fascinated to hear that Bugg kept Travis Boak to 11 touches in 3 quarters this year before he was inexplicably moved off him at 3 quarter time.

Have heard from a reliable source (and I'm sure the poster that earlier claimed to be a mate of Bugg's can confirm) that Bugg isn't interested in coming to a club to be a tagger or a back pocket though. He feels as though he has much more to offer than this, and often enjoyed playing NEAFL and having a license to hunt the ball and kick a goal like he did in his junior days.

Melbourne has offered him 3 years with a vision that he'll be given much more than just shut down roles.

It will be interesting to see how it pans out, but maybe they see him as being able to fill the Bernie Vince-type of role off a wing?

I'd be thinking the same thing. Come into the middle and beat your man and still pick up 20+ touches. We still need a half back flank and I can see him and Salem rotating between wing and half back.

In terms of cost, Bugg is out of contract and hasn't been offered a new one by GWS. Therefore, I think that our third round will get it done. Looks like we might end up with Bugg, Kennedy, and Melksham and still keep pick 6. It's not a big fish, but it's not a bad trade period (assuming that we have a Howe deal as well to go).

Says the guy who only chimes in when people have stopped talking footy and and started having personal cracks...

Oh, and...

Fairly obtuse?

Says the guy who only chimes in when people have stopped talking footy and and started having personal cracks...

Oh, and...

You are incredibly good at trolling, I'll give you that. You make my blood boil!

I don't know if its been said, but I've been told Bugg done deal, 3 years.

I don't know if its been said, but I've been told Bugg done deal, 3 years.

Giving up what? Any clues?

I don't know if its been said, but I've been told Bugg done deal, 3 years.

Hope we are not giving up too much for him, given we are prepared to give him a three year deal we might end up giving GWS more than we should. i'd give pick 43 and 25 for Bugg and Pick 27, fair deal?

Hope we are not giving up too much for him, given we are prepared to give him a three year deal we might end up giving GWS more than we should. i'd give pick 43 and 25 for Bugg and Pick 27, fair deal?

Yeah for us if all he costs is a drop from 25 to 27 and chump change

I don't know if its been said, but I've been told Bugg done deal, 3 years.

At least someone wants to come to our highly desirable club!

Amazed he didn't want to go to the Hawks or Cats!

Giving up what? Any clues?

Nah trade to be worked out, but I've been told he's as good as signed, for 3 years.. Time will tell I guess...

Probably won't even happen.. Though I did get told Melksham was offered 4 years a week before I read/heard it anywhere else..

I just hope any deal with Bugg involves Treloar as steak knives...

At least someone wants to come to our highly desirable club!

Amazed he didn't want to go to the Hawks or Cats!

They only offer 2 year deals for players of Buggs talent.

They only offer 2 year deals for players of Buggs talent.

You know him well then?

Watched plenty of GWS games?

Giving up what? Any clues?

trade, would you trade a player?

You know him well then?

Watched plenty of GWS games?

I think you already know the answer to those questions...

If we had such a player, he wouldn't be playing the same role as Jetta.

We would want that player to beat a bloke in a spot on the ground where he can quickly become involved in an attack.

We wouldn't want this person playing on Betts, Wingard, Walters, and co.

They WILL hurt you if they are playing on someone interested in being heavily involved in rebounding the footy.

Hawthorn and Geelong still have role players down back who 'beat their bloke.'

There is a place for that mentality in good teams.

Either I haven't explained myself properly or you haven't understood me.

If you have the luxury of playing a midfielder in the role of lock down defender that would ideally mean that your midfield and midfield rotations on the bench are all players of quality. Depending on the teams set up you might even have one starting on the HFF and one on each of the back flanks. Your very best mids will start on ball but as you go down through the pecking order they can fill other spots.

If the last spot to select for the starting 18 was back pocket and it was a choice between a lock down defender with great defensive skills but average disposal or a midfielder will equally good defensive skills but far greater disposal you should ideally take the midfielder.

This gives the team great flexibility.

When interviewed a few years ago about Geelongs successful team that won 3 flags, Bomber said we went against the grain of having small/medium defenders and we set about drafting as many skilled midfielders as possible and turning them into multi dimensional players. The premiership teams of Geelong and those of Hawthorn have mids that just play on ball, they have mids that can also go back, mids that go forward and mids that can do all three.

As for your line "they will hurt you if they are playing on someone interested in being heavily involved in rebounding the footy", you have looked at this completely the wrong way. Players like Betts and Wingard will on occasions beat anyone inside the forward 50. But players like Betts and Wingard are also part of the reason the term "one way runners" came about. Their opponents can run off them and help set up play coming out of the back 50 and make them accountable. Great teams with good game plans and structures wouldn't and haven't had the problem that you speak off. When the opposition has the ball everyone becomes a defender.

Edited October 8, 201510 yr by Bombay Airconditioning

Either I haven't explained myself properly or you haven't understood me.

If you have the luxury of playing a midfielder in the role of lock down defender that would ideally mean that your midfield and midfield rotations on the bench are all players of quality. Depending on the teams set up you might even have one starting on the HFF and one on each of the back flanks. Your very best mids will start on ball but as you go down through the pecking order they can fill other spots.

If the last spot to select for the starting 18 was back pocket and it was a choice between a lock down defender with great defensive skills but average disposal or a midfielder will equally good defensive skills but far greater disposal you should ideally take the midfielder.

This gives the team great flexibility.

When interviewed a few years ago about Geelongs successful team that won 3 flags, Bomber said we went against the grain of having small/medium defenders and we set about drafting as many skilled midfielders as possible and turning them into multi dimensional players. The premiership teams of Geelong and those of Hawthorn have mids that just play on ball, they have mids that can also go back, mids that go forward and mids that can do all three.

As for your line "they will hurt you if they are playing on someone interested in being heavily involved in rebounding the footy", you have looked at this completely the wrong way. Players like Betts and Wingard will on occasions beat anyone inside the forward 50. But players like Betts and Wingard are also part of the reason the term "one way runners" came about. Their opponents can run off them and help set up play coming out of the back 50 and make them accountable. Great teams with good game plans and structures wouldn't and haven't had the problem that you speak off. When the opposition has the ball everyone becomes a defender.

So your point is - Jetta is not as good or desirable as a player as good defensively as Jetta but better offensively?

Is that right? Have I understood this ground break?

So your point is - Jetta is not as good or desirable as a player as good defensively as Jetta but better offensively?

Is that right? Have I understood this ground break?

Ground break? It's been happening for years.

Ground break? It's been happening for years.

*Flies over the head*

I am all for this hypothetical player that is a better defender than Jetta taking his spot and providing more run.

All for it.

I am also all for the CHF that is better than Hogan in every way taking his spot...

Bugg for MFC pick 45 (3rd round)... a steal ??

Bugg for MFC pick 45 (3rd round)... a steal ??

In a shallow draft absolutely!