32 minutes ago, binman said:

One of the interesting thing about the Dog's list is it highlights key forwards are no longer anywhere near as important in terms of driving success as they used to be. They just aren't that influential.

And similarly it highlights the risk of loading up on key forwards in the draft.

Also, elite mids can’t win games on their own.

Bont and Ed Richards are the #1 & #2 rated players in the game and they still can’t make finals. They even have an AA HBF that everyone would kill for.

I think the dogs prove how hard it is to win a flag. Their forward line and mids should well and truly eclipse their defensive deficiencies but yet, here we are.

Edited Friday at 00:522 days by BW511

20 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

Please educate us all to the conditions surrounding this alledged occasion .

For all we know it was self defence...

But hey swing that judge/jury gavel by all means

.

If self defence - it would still be toxic masculinity - just perpetuated by the 6... 😇

so if true, then the entire circumstance was TM.

(didn't think it needed to be continued in the thread).

hope all is well with you - love your posting!

alas you can't receive private messages....

but, who gives a [censored] if someone can throw punches in a scene reminiscent from a Chuck Norris film, where one combatant at a time steps in... does that make them a better fit for coaching, or teaching? or leading? Maybe he could have defused the situation, and with 6 people, that is something that I would consider heroic.

Edited Friday at 00:572 days by Engorged Onion

2 minutes ago, Engorged Onion said:

.

If self defence - it would still be toxic masculinity - just perpetuated by the 6... 😇

so if true, then the entire circumstance was TM.

(didn't think it needed to be continued in the thread).

hope all is well with you - love your posting!

alas you can't receive private messages....

4 minutes ago, Engorged Onion said:

.

If self defence - it would still be toxic masculinity - just perpetuated by the 6... 😇

so if true, then the entire circumstance was TM.

(didn't think it needed to be continued in the thread).

hope all is well with you - love your posting!

alas you can't receive private messages....

but, who gives a [censored] if someone can throw punches in a scene reminiscent from a Chuck Norris film, where one combatant at a time steps in... does that make them a better fit for coaching, or teaching? or leading? Maybe he could have defused the situation, and with 6 people, that is something that I would consider heroic.

11 minutes ago, KozzyCan said:

Not uncommon for clubs to operate like this. Before they appointed Voss, Carlton asked Ross Lyon to go through the same thing but he said no because he basically thought, you either want me or you don't. In this case, Buckley would be happy to go through the process.

The big difference between Bucks and Ross the Boss is that even if Buckley thought that he didn't need to go through the process like a pleb he would be classy enough not to make it known.

12 hours ago, Deez21 said:

The leeks at Melbourne have very much dried

Only getting contact now from a family member. Other board members don’t speak when around anymore

My contact at the dogs however has said there is a 5 year deal on offer for Bevo to sign if he wants and Dogs will not stand in his way and fight for him like they did earlier in the year

Interesting choice for Bevo, better list at dogs but is his job secure after not making finals

Sorry and respectfully but I know that is not accurate. Zero chance.

1 hour ago, BW511 said:

Bont and Ed Richards are the #1 & #2 rated players in the game and they still can’t make finals. They even have an AA HBF that everyone would kill for.

I think the dogs prove how hard it is to win a flag. Their forward line and mids should well and truly eclipse their defensive deficiencies but yet, here we are.

The Dogs and Carlton underscore to me how incredibly important the non-stars are in any team. And how weird it is that "role-player" is often used as a gentle perjorative.

40 minutes ago, Norm Smith's Curse said:

Sorry and respectfully but I know that is not accurate. Zero chance.

And I know it is

On 26/08/2025 at 16:41, whatwhat say what said:

name me a player who has got better by foot at the dees in the last few years

I never thought I’d say this but TMac is now much more reliable by foot. A mixture of not buying of more than he can chew, and improved skill. Early in his career he was…um… a worry!

34 minutes ago, The Taciturn Demon said:

The Dogs and Carlton underscore to me how incredibly important the non-stars are in any team. And how weird it is that "role-player" is often used as a gentle perjorative.

Doesn't this in a fashion highlight the idea that its a "champion" team...and not a team of champions that will reign triumphant ??

It's as much about methods as it is the players. Chess is a possible analogy. Exactly the same players... but two different, if only marginally, maestros.

Some Generals know how to use their legions to greater advantage. A balanced team, working as a team is the ideal

2 hours ago, binman said:

One of the interesting thing about the Dog's list is it highlights key forwards are no longer anywhere near as important in terms of driving success as they used to be. They just aren't that influential.

And similarly it highlights the risk of loading up on key forwards in the draft.

They can't defend though. That's the bigger problem.

2 hours ago, BW511 said:

Also, elite mids can’t win games on their own.

Bont and Ed Richards are the #1 & #2 rated players in the game and they still can’t make finals. They even have an AA HBF that everyone would kill for.

I think the dogs prove how hard it is to win a flag. Their forward line and mids should well and truly eclipse their defensive deficiencies but yet, here we are.

The keys to flags have always been the same: defence, defence and defence.

1 minute ago, Adam The God said:

They can't defend though. That's the bigger problem.

100% agree.

But that makes my point.

Why can't they defend? Partly it's because of their system.

But the biggest factor is they don't have elite defenders. And why don't they have elite defenders?

Because they have spent their draft capital on forwards.

And that has meant forwards take up too much of their salary cap, impacting their ability to trade in elite defenders.

Ironically their best defender this season has been Lobb who.was traded in as a forward.

Compare and contrast to the dees decision to trade out Watts (yes that was for cultural reasons but nonetheless he was a forward, andcl was replaced by a much cheaper option in Fritter) and Hogan (yes he wanted out but we also didn't put up a fight) and prioritise trading in elite defenders in Lever and May, a strategy that won us a flag

"Dees CEO Paul Guerra says candidates must have 7-8+ years of industry experience."

Seems an oddly unnecessary stipulation!

6 minutes ago, Demonland said:

The six coaches:

Nathan Buckley;

Bathan Nuckley;

Collingwood’s 2018 GF coach;

The 2002 Norm Smith Medallist;

One of the three 2003 Brownlow Medallists; and

That bloke from On the Couch

3 minutes ago, Bitter but optimistic said:

"Dees CEO Paul Guerra says candidates must have 7-8+ years of industry experience."

Seems an oddly unnecessary stipulation!

Certainly an inbuilt irony.....

That said It would probably be a distinct advantage to have been part of a team'sbrains trust long enough to be able to discern chaff from wheat as well as being cognisant of those who can and those who can't play. I'm happy for that to be a metric. Experience matters.

5 minutes ago, demoncat said:

The six coaches:

Nathan Buckley;

Bathan Nuckley;

Collingwood’s 2018 GF coach;

The 2002 Norm Smith Medallist;

One of the three 2003 Brownlow Medallists; and

That bloke from On the Couch

Was half expecting Nicky Buckley !! 🤔🤣🤣🤣

8 minutes ago, Bitter but optimistic said:

"Dees CEO Paul Guerra says candidates must have 7-8+ years of industry experience."

Seems an oddly unnecessary stipulation!

Not really

It means we want someone who has had a lot of experience and gone thru a cycle of game styles and changes within the AFL environment

It doesn’t mean they need to have been a senior coach or senior assistant for 7-8 years but being involved at AFL club level in some capacity.

9 minutes ago, Bitter but optimistic said:

"Dees CEO Paul Guerra says candidates must have 7-8+ years of industry experience."

Seems an oddly unnecessary stipulation!

Thought exactly the same thing, Unky Bitts.

It was the CEO’s polite way of saying thanks but no thanks to @picket fence

"7-8 years experience".

That gives me 'nam flashbacks to my post-uni job hunting days.

"We are looking for a graduate with 40 years experience to be our unpaid intern for six months."

1 hour ago, frankie_d said:

Early in his career he was…um… a worry!

Let's be honest: he was disastrous.

He's improved significantly, although I think it's almost all to do with decision making. I think his technique remains pretty awful.

1 hour ago, beelzebub said:

Doesn't this in a fashion highlight the idea that its a "champion" team...and not a team of champions that will reign triumphant ??

Definitely.

2016 Dogs is a good example. Injuries left right and centre, but those who came in kept doing a more-than-adequate job. Over and over again.

You could mount an argument they had only one champion and even he wasn't at the peak of his powers.

just pointing out that we have a shortlist and the contents havent leaked to tom morris.

42 minutes ago, Jaded No More said:

Not really

It means we want someone who has had a lot of experience and gone thru a cycle of game styles and changes within the AFL environment

It doesn’t mean they need to have been a senior coach or senior assistant for 7-8 years but being involved at AFL club level in some capacity.

I would have thought that to have any credibility as an applicant one would have been in the industry for well beyond that time constraint. Therefore the unnecessary nature of the stipulation.