58 minutes ago, rpfc said:

Plenty of water to go under the bridge - I just don’t ignore the tonnage of water that’s already flowed.

Very wise not to ignore the water that Max rafted on to full fitness at this time of year compared with last.

6 minutes ago, Binmans PA said:

We'll see, but Gawndy worked well on KB.

I’d prefer to see Gawn go solo and tear them a new one

ABsolutely love having Grundy alongside Max for so many reasons, makes me feel safe at night, wish we could keep him he's a bit of a gun even if Max is more of a gun I hope they do something to keep him.  I think him and Max sharing the role properly (Grundy main ruck some games) then it will prolong Max's ruck and fitness life and get Grundy into more games, just not sure if he'd be up for it.  

The biggest frustration is that Brodie Grundy seems to have serious difficulties trying to take contested marks.

Hopefully he can continue to work on improving this part of his game.

4 hours ago, Binmans PA said:

So you think we'd go with just Max against Cox and Cameron...?

 

6 hours ago, old55 said:

 

Bit of early crow there boys?

Seems Max is playing fit and well at this time of year compared with this time last year.  I think that's got to do with the ruck minutes he's shared with Brodie throughout the year, ruck minutes we wouldn't have been able to confidently put into a third stringer.  So there's that contribution from Brodie in the bank.

I noticed that Mason Cox came on last night and played with a purpose to put his name in front of the Collingwood selectors for the first final, and we're likely to be their opponent.  Are you completely happy for Max to go solo against Cameron and Cox if that's the way it turns out - particularly with Cox's tendency to try to hurt Max?  What if we lose and face Carlton in week 2 with Pittonet and TDK vs a beaten up Max, again solo?

There's a bit of water to flow under the bridge ...

Did the job against McInerney and Daniher, O'Brien and Thilthorpe, Soldo and Miller and then Goldstein and Xerri.

You guys actually make out like Gawn hasn't made a career out of smashing two ruckman in a game. 

Before Jackson, Gawn was racking up All Australians purely as a single ruckman who was getting double team each week.

Besides, Cox and Cameron are two of the softest ruckman in the game and don't even convince me otherwise. 

On 7/31/2023 at 4:07 PM, Redleg said:

Yes. Last real chance before finals.

Mess with form at your peril - one could only even contemplate resting Max v Swans if we get Hawks tomorrow. 

29 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

 

Did the job against McInerney and Daniher, O'Brien and Thilthorpe, Soldo and Miller and then Goldstein and Xerri.

You guys actually make out like Gawn hasn't made a career out of smashing two ruckman in a game. 

Before Jackson, Gawn was racking up All Australians purely as a single ruckman who was getting double team each week.

Besides, Cox and Cameron are two of the softest ruckman in the game and don't even convince me otherwise. 

Goldstein and Xerri are the only ruck pair in those 4 sets. Daniher, Thilthorpe and Miller are forward/rucks.

Before Jackson?  That was in 2019 - 4 years ago - the whole point is Max is 4 years older now.

Look I get it - if we win the flag you'll be "we did it in spite of carrying Grundy" and if we don't it'll be "because we carried Grundy"

Edited August 19, 20232 yr by old55

37 minutes ago, old55 said:

Goldstein and Xerri are the only ruck pair in those 4 sets. Daniher, Thilthorpe and Miller are forward/rucks.

Before Jackson?  That was in 2019 - 4 years ago - the whole point is Max is 4 years older now.

Look I get it - if we win the flag you'll be "we did it in spite of carrying Grundy" and if we don't it'll be "because we carried Grundy"

It's no coincidence that some of the best footy this year we've played purely when Gawn was playing as a lonesome. 

Come off it.. If we win or lose the flag it will be purely nothing to do with Grundy and based on whole team performance.  Not surprised that you don't understand that but.

11 hours ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Sheesh where do I sign??

Perhaps Grundy, 15 and 24 (instead of 34) for Mclean and 12 is more realistic?

Or maybe I'm just dreaming.

3 hours ago, dazzledavey36 said:

 

Did the job against McInerney and Daniher, O'Brien and Thilthorpe, Soldo and Miller and then Goldstein and Xerri.

You guys actually make out like Gawn hasn't made a career out of smashing two ruckman in a game. 

Before Jackson, Gawn was racking up All Australians purely as a single ruckman who was getting double team each week.

Besides, Cox and Cameron are two of the softest ruckman in the game and don't even convince me otherwise. 

2 hours ago, dazzledavey36 said:

It's no coincidence that some of the best footy this year we've played purely when Gawn was playing as a lonesome. 

Come off it.. If we win or lose the flag it will be purely nothing to do with Grundy and based on whole team performance.  Not surprised that you don't understand that but.

I'm not really arguing that we should be playing Grundy, but I do think there's more to the argument than you're suggesting here.

As has been pointed out, only the North combo is a true dual-ruck combo. The other three have forwards moonlighting as second rucks, with only Daniher any better than van Rooyen.

So yes, whilst Gawn looked amazing in that month, the only game he had to play against two rucks was against a side on a 17-game losing streak.

It's possible, but by no means certain IMO, that we bring Grundy back if we play a side like Collingwood (if they have Cox alongside Cameron), or Carlton (if they continue to use PIttonet and De Koning). 

7 hours ago, titan_uranus said:

I'm not really arguing that we should be playing Grundy, but I do think there's more to the argument than you're suggesting here.

As has been pointed out, only the North combo is a true dual-ruck combo. The other three have forwards moonlighting as second rucks, with only Daniher any better than van Rooyen.

So yes, whilst Gawn looked amazing in that month, the only game he had to play against two rucks was against a side on a 17-game losing streak.

It's possible, but by no means certain IMO, that we bring Grundy back if we play a side like Collingwood (if they have Cox alongside Cameron), or Carlton (if they continue to use PIttonet and De Koning). 

The issue is with bringing Grundy back is the domino effect it has on our forward line when he's down there.

He's a liability down there, and it's not like he's crashing packs or bringing the ball down. His lack of forward IQ and inability to time his leads to create space has a net effect on the rest of our forwards because our system simply doesn't flow on as what it has prior to the Carlton game.

The coaches have now clearly identified this and dropped him once again. If the coaches didn't think Gawn couldn't handle being the sole ruckman then they wouldn't have made the decision themselves. 

 

16 hours ago, rpfc said:

Plenty of water to go under the bridge - I just don’t ignore the tonnage of water that’s already flowed.

Mate ... i get it..

Youre constantly harping on lije some kid who didn't get the choccies..   

We understand this may be a bust....in the greatee scheme of things. Brodie may or may nor be at Melbourne next year. 

Max has certainly benefited from him being here which means we ( Dees ) have benefited.   In fact we may not be in the position we are had he not come aboard.

Had we not 'tried' we probably be a bit stuffed righr now...shades of 22.

So instead of trying to ram your monotonous rant down everyones throats for the upteenth time...  and i just know you've got an " i told you so" waiting in the wings...  why not just stfu on this for the time being.. 

I rate your postings generally.. but ffs ...give itva rest... lets see how it all pans out.

As you say...water still going under the bridge.

Go Dees..and I for 1 ..thanks Grundy.

Cheers

56 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

Mate ... i get it..

Youre constantly harping on lije some kid who didn't get the choccies..   

We understand this may be a bust....in the greatee scheme of things. Brodie may or may nor be at Melbourne next year. 

Max has certainly benefited from him being here which means we ( Dees ) have benefited.   In fact we may not be in the position we are had he not come aboard.

Had we not 'tried' we probably be a bit stuffed righr now...shades of 22.

So instead of trying to ram your monotonous rant down everyones throats for the upteenth time...  and i just know you've got an " i told you so" waiting in the wings...  why not just stfu on this for the time being.. 

I rate your postings generally.. but ffs ...give itva rest... lets see how it all pans out.

As you say...water still going under the bridge.

Go Dees..and I for 1 ..thanks Grundy.

Cheers

I get what you are saying. They are hardly rants, although I can harp.

And I have nuance about this trade and what is next for it - I just effing hate it when people will say something to your face as if it’s a certainty and when it doesn’t happen - they just move on as if they never thought it.

 

2 hours ago, rpfc said:

I get what you are saying. They are hardly rants, although I can harp.

And I have nuance about this trade and what is next for it - I just effing hate it when people will say something to your face as if it’s a certainty and when it doesn’t happen - they just move on as if they never thought it.

 

Look I think there's essentially only one poster who is guilty of that, and they cannot find fault with anything MFC does, so it's best to ignore them.

12 hours ago, Little Goffy said:

Perhaps Grundy, 15 and 24 (instead of 34) for Mclean and 12 is more realistic?

Or maybe I'm just dreaming.

Surely we'd only give up one of 15 or 24, not both. Grundy has more value than McLean I think. 

I see the Gawndry experiment as a partial success. It's clearly not a complete success as neither Gawn nor Grundy adequately performed as forwards. Likewise, it's not a complete failure as Grundy was available for selection every week, played 17 AFL games (solo ruck for 4), rucked very well and all this has delivered Gawn to the finals fit and in form. 

I have no issue with the club being bold and attempting the Gawndry experiment, especially when Goodwin has shown the courage to act when it's not working.

$650K/pa for an AA ruck is good value. Sure, it's a luxury for a back up ruck. However, a second rate ruck/forward would probably cost $450K/pa (if we could acquired one), so it's not a big difference. Moreover, Grundy salary has been a better return on investment than the ~$500K/pa for Harmes, TMac and BBB this year. 

I would like to keep Grundy (especially if there is the possibility of changing to 5 on the bench). Play him off the bench in the ruck to keep Gawn fresh, for specific match ups and as insurance in case of injury (I also like quarantining him from premiership rivals). Droppable for big matches / finals.  

However, I doubt Grundy would be keen on this. He might have had the humility to accept being co-ruck but I doubt he has such lack of ambition to accept playing VFL come finals. If he wants a trade, I would grant it. Would be bad for morale to keep Grundy against his wishes. It's one thing if the player is being given every opportunity to excel, another if they are intended to be under-utilised.  

If we win the premiership this year - even with Grundy sitting in the grandstand - he will have played a role and I'll be grateful. 

 

15 hours ago, old55 said:

Thilthorpe and Miller are forward/rucks.

The only thing Daniher and a ruckman have in common is being over 200cm. He loses about 95% of ruck contests.

6 minutes ago, mauriesy said:

The only thing Daniher and a ruckman have in common is being over 200cm. He loses about 95% of ruck contests.

You clearly didn't watch Danihers last quarter against Freo few weeks back when he smashed Jackson in the ruck and won them the game....

53 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

You clearly didn't watch Danihers last quarter against Freo few weeks back when he smashed Jackson in the ruck and won them the game....

That was the other 5%.

 

 

 

Remind me please... Did we give a second or third round pick for Grundy?

It's beginning to feel like returning something you bought online because when it arrives it's not quite what you expected.

Have no difficulty with the original deal but I do wonder if we really thought through how it would work in practice. My vision of May kicking out with Gawn and Grundy offering options on both sides of the ground and quickly passing off to Hunter or Langdon was way off the mark.

Brody has played his part. It didn't work out. Well of course it did! Maxy is hitting the finals in mint condition. That's what we needed.

4 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

Remind me please... Did we give a second or third round pick for Grundy?

It's beginning to feel like returning something you bought online because when it arrives it's not quite what you expected.

Have no difficulty with the original deal but I do wonder if we really thought through how it would work in practice. My vision of May kicking out with Gawn and Grundy offering options on both sides of the ground and quickly passing off to Hunter or Langdon was way off the mark.

Unfortunately Grundy has done NO wrong, it's Max not being able to let go of that number one ruck spot. The intention was Max would spend time predominately forward and Grundy to ruck. So Max and the club have got Max's ambitions and capabilities all wrong. Blind Freddy could see it wasn't going to work.

20 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

Remind me please... Did we give a second or third round pick for Grundy?

It's beginning to feel like returning something you bought online because when it arrives it's not quite what you expected.

Have no difficulty with the original deal but I do wonder if we really thought through how it would work in practice. My vision of May kicking out with Gawn and Grundy offering options on both sides of the ground and quickly passing off to Hunter or Langdon was way off the mark.

Pick 27, 2nd Round pick.

I'd happily trade him to Geelong in return for Max Holmes (faint whispers he might be on the move).