2 hours ago, Wiseblood said:

You're obsessed with 'Footscray'.  Maybe you should support them instead.

 

Now, your just being reactionary.

 

6 minutes ago, The Stigga said:

Now, your just being reactionary.

 

That's just what a Footscray supporter would say Package lover

OP is spot on. I'm sick of posters saying we're young, like it's a foregone conclusion that we'll make big strides in years to come. Some of the young players are just not good enough at the moment, and may never make it. Posters over hype our youngsters, just as they did with Gysberts, Morton, Blease and Tapscott after their early appearances.

The same posters say that playing O.Mac in the seniors is good for his development. You know what, I'd rather have the best team capable of winning the game. And that doesn't include O. Mac, Garland or Hunt.

Message to coaching panel, at least pick a team capable of implementing your ridiculous zone defence. Opposition coaches with half a brain must lick their lips. Win the contested ball, and we'll smash Melbourne on the way back.

Just now, mo64 said:

OP is spot on. I'm sick of posters saying we're young, like it's a foregone conclusion that we'll make big strides in years to come. Some of the young players are just not good enough at the moment, and may never make it. Posters over hype our youngsters, just as they did with Gysberts, Morton, Blease and Tapscott after their early appearances.

The same posters say that playing O.Mac in the seniors is good for his development. You know what, I'd rather have the best team capable of winning the game. And that doesn't include O. Mac, Garland or Hunt.

Message to coaching panel, at least pick a team capable of implementing your ridiculous zone defence. Opposition coaches with half a brain must lick their lips. Win the contested ball, and we'll smash Melbourne on the way back.

I don't think that's what many here are arguing, more that we are a young side and therefore performances like today will happen, whether we like it or not.

I bet you enjoyed the game today though big fella.  Nothing like a super chance to be negative.  You roll with it almost as well as Buddy glided across the SCG on Friday night.

1 minute ago, Wiseblood said:

I don't think that's what many here are arguing, more that we are a young side and therefore performances like today will happen, whether we like it or not.

I bet you enjoyed the game today though big fella.  Nothing like a super chance to be negative.  You roll with it almost as well as Buddy glided across the SCG on Friday night.

Like one of the other posters said, we haven't played well since the Richmond game. Whilst most on here were doing cartwheels, I got no pleasure from our wins against GC or Brisbane. This result was expected, as were the losses to the Saints and the Dogs. I don't eulogise Roos like most.

I'll stop being negative when we have a coaching panel and team that can consistently play finals. Sadly, we are lacking on both fronts.

 

8 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

  Nothing like a super chance to be negative. 

How's being positive working for ya over the last 10 years buddy?

Just now, Fork 'em said:

 

How's being positive working for ya over the last 10 years buddy?

It's been super, buddy.

Can tell by yer profile pic.

 

30 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

It's been super, buddy.

Sacre bleu,the negativity astounds me. We were always going to lose this game after a 6 day break. The boys are still learning the game. I agree we've got massive problems down back, problems only time, experience and wise recruitng will fix.

The bottom line is that basket cases don't get fixed in 3 years, there's a lot of weeding, supplementing and experiments to go through. The d's are on the right track, fine tuning required but that doesn't come overnight. Witness Clarkson, Thompson, Matthews at Brisbane etc etc etc

We'll beat Hawthorn.

Pfft .... The positivity that astounds me.

37 minutes ago, Fork 'em said:

How's being positive working for ya over the last 10 years buddy?

Wait...so positivity is to blame for us being poor?
Or are you arguing that we need to be more negative in order to get better?

I always find these arguments really counterintuitive. The 'We need to be harder on the club' argument.
The only way you can actually do that is to not show up or buy a membership - which oddly is the exact opposite of what will help us become successful.

To put it another way.
Today:

10 players under 50 games
6 under 20 games 

Most long term players say it takes 60-80 games before you believe you belong. That's more than 50% of our team.

 

21 minutes ago, The heart beats true said:

 

To put it another way.
Today:

10 players under 50 games
6 under 20 games 

Most long term players say it takes 60-80 games before you believe you belong. That's more than 50% of our team.

 

And has been for 10 years.

37 minutes ago, The heart beats true said:

Wait...so positivity is to blame for us being poor?
Or are you arguing that we need to be more negative in order to get better?

I always find these arguments really counterintuitive. The 'We need to be harder on the club' argument.
The only way you can actually do that is to not show up or buy a membership - which oddly is the exact opposite of what will help us become successful.

To put it another way.
Today:

10 players under 50 games
6 under 20 games 

Most long term players say it takes 60-80 games before you believe you belong. That's more than 50% of our team.

 

Those stats mean nothing if the players in question turn out to be C or D graders. You would have been equally bullish 7 years ago when the likes of Garland, Grimes, Scully, Trengove, Tapscott, Blease and Gysberts were running around. Things transpire in football, and rarely is it a case of a group of players improving with experience, and the team collectively getting better over several years.

Even after 15-20 games, you can tell whether a player has the qualities to become an A-grader, B-grader or an average footballer. Of the 10 players who have played under 50 games, the only ones who'd I'd guarantee to be A or B graders are Hogan, Petracca and Gawn. What is scary is that all 3 have suffered major injuries at a young age. That's where things transpire in football.

3 hours ago, The heart beats true said:

Wow. We got beaten by a team that needed to beat us and got the job done. We didn't play well and that was dissaponting. All of those things I can handle.

What I can't handle is the sooky, weak as [censored] attitude of supposed supporters taking shots at other supporters and players because we don't win every game with a team of 20 year olds.

We will be up and down. Sometimes that will be difficult to stomach - but are we moving in the right direction as a club and as a team? Yes! 

Sometimes I have to reset my browser to make sure I'm on a Melbourne Football Club supporters forum.

Go Dees!

There is no doubt we are improving but some of many of these supporters haven seen a premiership for 20....30....40.. and yes fifty years

IMo some of them deserve a medal for supporting the club at times

Yes there are a few cheap shots but on the whole we are a bloody loyal bunch who I think deserve better than what the team served up today.

Yes I said deserve because it is the supporters who pay the memberships, go to games and pay for cable tv subscriptions

Perhaps many supporters have a right to pay out on the club now and then. We are always happy to praise them when the win. 

Go dees

12 minutes ago, mo64 said:

Those stats mean nothing if the players in question turn out to be C or D graders. You would have been equally bullish 7 years ago when the likes of Garland, Grimes, Scully, Trengove, Tapscott, Blease and Gysberts were running around. Things transpire in football, and rarely is it a case of a group of players improving with experience, and the team collectively getting better over several years.

Even after 15-20 games, you can tell whether a player has the qualities to become an A-grader, B-grader or an average footballer. Of the 10 players who have played under 50 games, the only ones who'd I'd guarantee to be A or B graders are Hogan, Petracca and Gawn. What is scary is that all 3 have suffered major injuries at a young age. That's where things transpire in football.

So the reason to be pessimistic is that we've only got 1 key forward, 1 midfielder and 1 ruckman that will be an A grader?

You could build a team around that. I'd argue we are.

Lost again at selection.

Here are the rules:

- Know every position, and every position's role. (enter Craig Jennings)

- pick players that are 100% right to fulfil their role

- sit back and watch us win.

 

Continually losing it at the selection table. Roos has 10+ games left of his tenure. So money rights, but so many chances left to right his wrongs.

5 hours ago, Rusty Nails said:

Agree. Ppl in the press talking about us building a premiership list is just laughable.

 

Watts/Kent/Jeffy (to a lessor degree) all ineffective both in attack and defensively (i50 pressure acts) today. A few reasonable tackles from Kent up the field but that was about it.

 

Dawes for Watts, Frost (or any half decent tall for Garland pls), Trenners for Tyson and someone who can finish up forward for Kent. Maybe there isn't a replacement at this stage. ANB and Newton ughh.... again do we have anyone available? As much as i liked Newton's game last week he was awful.

 

The anti-Watts prejudice is what is laughable.

Easily in our top 5 today.

3 hours ago, mo64 said:

OP is spot on. I'm sick of posters saying we're young, like it's a foregone conclusion that we'll make big strides in years to come. Some of the young players are just not good enough at the moment, and may never make it. Posters over hype our youngsters, just as they did with Gysberts, Morton, Blease and Tapscott after their early appearances.

The same posters say that playing O.Mac in the seniors is good for his development. You know what, I'd rather have the best team capable of winning the game. And that doesn't include O. Mac, Garland or Hunt.

Message to coaching panel, at least pick a team capable of implementing your ridiculous zone defence. Opposition coaches with half a brain must lick their lips. Win the contested ball, and we'll smash Melbourne on the way back.

Best, most real post I've read in ages 

5 hours ago, Forest Demon said:

I am as frustrated as anyone but that is possibly the dumbest post I have read on here.

He was one of our best today.

hook, line & sinker 

6 hours ago, mo64 said:

Like one of the other posters said, we haven't played well since the Richmond game. Whilst most on here were doing cartwheels, I got no pleasure from our wins against GC or Brisbane. This result was expected, as were the losses to the Saints and the Dogs. I don't eulogise Roos like most.

I'll stop being negative when we have a coaching panel and team that can consistently play finals. Sadly, we are lacking on both fronts.

Mo64 sometimes I feel like I'm reading my own posts when I read yours. One of the handful on here that understands you don't have to warp reality to be a strong supporter of the club. I love the club but won't call blue red. 

People, including the Media seem to be going down the same path as in 2010 , suddenly pencilling in premierships just because we get a few rising star nominations and can score quickly. It stinks of groundhog day.

 

5 hours ago, Franky_31 said:

We could be better if we didnt bomb it from 45-75 out in hope. This happens even with a free kick or a mark. Kent Jones Tyson just dont even try, they bomb.

I cant remember when I saw someone hit up Watts or Hogan on a lead more than twice a game.

If Hogan is double tagged, he should be dragging 2 defenders to the "other side" opening up the fat side. Maybe he just hangs in close.

I dont know why other teams seem to be able to hit up forwards yet our entries are fraught with sh!t kicks.

That's footy nous and team orientation that he possibly hasn't got yet (assuming he's being coached in it). He seems still to be the young 'I-can-do-it-all' type (with some justification, mind!) His lookaway handball in the last, which was turned over and led to a goal, highlighted this for me.

I mentioned in a post a couple of weeks ago that we are still yet to beat a team this year that we didn't also beat last year. We've been fortunate to draw a bunch of teams we match up well against early in the season. Admittedly we have looked far sexier this year, but we are still what feels like a perpetually long way off and the "young team" defence remains a convenient escape clause.

I have some high hopes for the young crop we have coming through but the same could be said of the group we watched under Bailey. We have been hearing the young inexperienced team excuse for the best part of a decade. "Just wait till players x, y and z have played 50 games, then we'll be a good side". As logical as that may be, it ignores the fact that the reason OUR team is still so inexperienced is because so few of our promising x, y and z players have actually carved out meaningful careers.

As I said, there are signs that this time might be different, but our improvement this year hasn't been quite as drastic as many believe and nothing is a foregone conclusion. There are some real tests coming up and if we can beat a couple of teams of the calibre of Hawthorn, Sydney, Adelaide or even teams like the Saints and Port, then maybe we can all start drinking the cool-ade. But let's not trick ourselves that beating up on teams like Brisbane and GCS means we've finally turned a corner.

Reality is we have the least exp team in the afl... 30 games vs 47 Port + finals exp ...

Some the posts here are ridiculous!

 

5 hours ago, Fork 'em said:

Jones is a one trick pony.
Closes his eyes and kicks it as far as he can ..... Anywhere.
 

The ghost of Brent Moloney still haunts us.