Well ... a fascinating final ladder but what a pity they couldn't play a grand final on the G next week!

Fremantle 3 - - 242 168  144.0 12    
Melbourne 3 - - 274 219 125.1 12    
Collingwood 3 - - 323 305 105.9 12    
Adelaide 2  1 - 324 201 161.2 8    
GWS Giants 2 1 - 289 247 117.0 8
Sydney 2 1 - 232 223 104.0 8
West Coast 2 1 - 261 253 103.2 8    
Hawthorn Hawks 2 1 - 211 216 97.7 8    
Geelong Cats 1 2 - 305 238 128.2 4
Western Bulldogs 1 2 - 269 252 106.7 4  Port Adelaide 1 2 - 229 221 103.62 4    
Gold Coast 1 2 - 204 207 98.6 4
North Melbourne 1 2 - 274 283 96.8 4    
Richmond 1 2 - 179 216 82.9 4    
Essendon 1 2 - 172 304 56.6 4    
St Kilda - 2 1 156 224 69.6 0*
Brisbane Lions - 2 - 126 190 66.3 0*
Carlton - 3 - 136 239 56.9  0    

* Abandoned match 6/3/16 unofficially called a draw.  

It was good to see Jamar performing creditably against NicNat.

Even better to see EFC -- even with their 130 rotations -- struggling badly. Their older players aren't looking like much chop. I think we know what this season is going to be like for them.

Really have to laugh at the AFL. NAB Challenge 3rd round interchanges are restricted to 90. Today's interchanges WCE 85 VS ESS 133.

OH&S necessary for the Essendon dad's army.

1 hour ago, daisycutter said:

near the end of 3rd Q and essendrugs have over 100 interchanges. how does that work?

Maybe Essendon only counted the "good" rotations ... and then lost the records from the first half.

equal 5th for points for, and only 5 teams conceded less points than we did (not including the two teams that only played two games).

13 hours ago, daisycutter said:

near the end of 3rd Q and essendrugs have over 100 interchanges. how does that work?

It was 39 degrees in Perth so the 'heat' rules were put into effect, one of those being unlimited rotations.

What I love about the Dons, besides the anticipation on them getting multiple 100 point beltings this year, is Goddard. How he left the Saints for finals footy... Bbbaaahhhhh hahahahahha.

I'm somewhat skeptical of the Bombers' selection of their top up players.

I don't know what could have been done to make Essendon competitive once the CAS ruling banning their 12 players came down but I suspect that they might have done better than to take 10 players, many of who had already been pensioned off for retirement. Of course, this was helped by the AFL's generosity in its concessions for the "lost" players.

I am sure that there are enough players around in their early twenties who recently missed out on the AFL drafts and on VFL or other state league lists who might have been fitter and more highly motivated than top up players looking to add to their superannuation funds. Some more balance of those players might have been a better way to go.

10 minutes ago, Whispering_Jack said:

I'm somewhat skeptical of the Bombers' selection of their top up players.

I don't know what could have been done to make Essendon competitive once the CAS ruling banning their 12 players came down but I suspect that they might have done better than to take 10 players, many of who had already been pensioned off for retirement. Of course, this was helped by the AFL's generosity in its concessions for the "lost" players.

I am sure that there are enough players around in their early twenties who recently missed out on the AFL drafts and on VFL or other state league lists who might have been fitter and more highly motivated than top up players looking to add to their superannuation funds. Some more balance of those players might have been a better way to go.

I think they've done the right thing.  Reality is whatever they did they'd get flogged most weeks and be uncompetitive.  Taking 10 players of a young age who weren't good enough to be on any AFL list would have meant that there young players including rookies would have played most weeks and been flogged.  We saw what that did to us.

Better to bring in some veterans where it doesn't matter if they get flogged and let the young players develop naturally.  I think that will serve them better in the long term.

A long cold winter is coming for Drugendon....

21 minutes ago, Baghdad Bob said:

I think they've done the right thing.  Reality is whatever they did they'd get flogged most weeks and be uncompetitive.  Taking 10 players of a young age who weren't good enough to be on any AFL list would have meant that there young players including rookies would have played most weeks and been flogged.  We saw what that did to us.

Better to bring in some veterans where it doesn't matter if they get flogged and let the young players develop naturally.  I think that will serve them better in the long term.

Whether they're doing the right or wrong thing, only time and results will tell. But a problem with their current strategy is, the top ups will disappear next year, and they won't get back all the 12, leaving holes in their list  to be filled by? Better to start filling those holes now than to mark time for another year.

It's going to be a brutal time for them. As we, Richmond and Carlton have shown, once you're down the bottom it can be very very hard to climb up again. And being a one-time superpower of the game doesn't give you an automatic leg-up.

Essendon ....damned if they did, damned if they didn't.

My only concern......is they're damned !!

Big standout for me has been the tackling and hardness, and it's evident that it's something that has been adressed by drafting and recruiting.

The three senior listed guys brought in that played yesterday are seriously hard units. Oliver 6 tackles, Kennedy 5 (and that attack on the footy that set up the Clarry snap from 40) and Bugg had 3 but I thought they stood out as not taking a backward step, Bugg getting into Rievwoldt's face and winning a free kick I thoroughly enjoyed.

Edited March 14, 20169 yr by goodytwoshoes

1 hour ago, Whispering_Jack said:

I'm somewhat skeptical of the Bombers' selection of their top up players.

I don't know what could have been done to make Essendon competitive once the CAS ruling banning their 12 players came down but I suspect that they might have done better than to take 10 players, many of who had already been pensioned off for retirement. Of course, this was helped by the AFL's generosity in its concessions for the "lost" players.

I am sure that there are enough players around in their early twenties who recently missed out on the AFL drafts and on VFL or other state league lists who might have been fitter and more highly motivated than top up players looking to add to their superannuation funds. Some more balance of those players might have been a better way to go.

I could be wrong but I think the top ups had to come from players who had played for an AFL team in the last 2 years.

That's not to say that there weren't better and younger choices. And your conclusion Some more balance of those players might have been a better way to go is right on the money.

Like beelzebub I'm very happy to see them wallow at the bottom of the ladder for a very long time. 

I think players had to be on a list in last 2 years. Needn't have played a game ( 1sts).. but be on a list.  As WJ  possibly suggests, much room for lateral selection.

Personally, I don't care. Grind'em 

2 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

I think players had to be on a list in last 2 years. Needn't have played a game ( 1sts).. but be on a list.  As WJ  possibly suggests, much room for lateral selection.

Personally, I don't care. Grind'em 

Pop Corn & Choc Tops

hopefully most of the 12 Angry Men remaining will walk to as we all predicted long before any journalist bought it up...

4 hours ago, Baghdad Bob said:

I think they've done the right thing.  Reality is whatever they did they'd get flogged most weeks and be uncompetitive.  Taking 10 players of a young age who weren't good enough to be on any AFL list would have meant that there young players including rookies would have played most weeks and been flogged.  We saw what that did to us.

Better to bring in some veterans where it doesn't matter if they get flogged and let the young players develop naturally.  I think that will serve them better in the long term.

But I wasn't suggesting no veterans or no no younger players, but rather a good mix. A few 19-22 year olds who might just missed out on being drafted last year would in my view, have added something extra for a club looking at competing in a lost year.

3 hours ago, Whispering_Jack said:

I'm somewhat skeptical of the Bombers' selection of their top up players.

I don't know what could have been done to make Essendon competitive once the CAS ruling banning their 12 players came down but I suspect that they might have done better than to take 10 players, many of who had already been pensioned off for retirement. Of course, this was helped by the AFL's generosity in its concessions for the "lost" players.

I am sure that there are enough players around in their early twenties who recently missed out on the AFL drafts and on VFL or other state league lists who might have been fitter and more highly motivated than top up players looking to add to their superannuation funds. Some more balance of those players might have been a better way to go.

jack, i think the afl limited them to only picking players who had been on afl lists in the last 3(?) years. obviously an attempt to avoid repercussions if they played inexperienced players who got badly hurt - duty of care stuff

2 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

jack, i think the afl limited them to only picking players who had been on afl lists in the last 3(?) years. obviously an attempt to avoid repercussions if they played inexperienced players who got badly hurt - duty of care stuff

2 years i think dc

Lots of teams in the rebuilding phase use young players - doesn't mean their clubs aren't exercising a proper duty of care. 

We have had 3 years and 15000 threads on the drug cheats.

NO  MORE!

More anger management medication needed.

19 hours ago, bing181 said:

Jamar with 2 goals, Don's equal top scorer. 

Says something about where they are. Long season ahead, but I wonder which team they'll beat.

I think they are a chance to beat Carlton.

4 hours ago, Barney Rubble said:

We have had 3 years and 15000 threads on the drug cheats.

NO  MORE!

More anger management medication needed.

OK but if you take any anger management medication, I suggest you first check that it's not on the WADA banned list.