5 minutes ago, adonski said:

Most of the kids we've drafted will have better careers than Gus Brayshaw

Thats an odd call. Was this in response to something? I probably missed it.

I would hope none of them will have to retire at 28 and have their careers cut short of 6-8 years. Gus would have been a 250-300 game premiership player and I believe our next captain.

Not sure what you're defining as 'career'. I'm not as certain as you are but I do hope these kids can get to Gus' level and above. I also hope that some of these kids can play with the heart and guts Gus did every time he went out onto the field.

5 minutes ago, Petal said:

Thats an odd call. Was this in response to something? I probably missed it.

I would hope none of them will have to retire at 28 and have their careers cut short of 6-8 years. Gus would have been a 250-300 game premiership player and I believe our next captain.

Not sure what you're defining as 'career'. I'm not as certain as you are but I do hope these kids can get to Gus' level and above. I also hope that some of these kids can play with the heart and guts Gus did every time he went out onto the field.

I thought it was strange too. Very blunt and slightly uncalled for.

7 hours ago, At Least I Saw a Flag said:

But there are losses ... and there are losses. And this falls into the latter category.

A loss is a loss.

But for me this goes the heart of it. If you start putting caveats and conditions on the type of losses you'll accept, you're not actually prepared to accept losses.

For a team under a new coach, with a largely new game plan and significant personnel changes, losses like Saturday’s are exactly the kind you tend to see. For sides in this kind of transition, inconsistency is part of the process: beating stronger teams while slipping against those below you in the table, following big wins with disappointing defeats, momentum swings where you lose big time after being ahead at half-time etc. etc.. It all comes with the territory. (Plenty of research out there on this if anyone's interested.)

People talk about roller coasters and our season in this context. Roller coasters actually soar and plunge between real extremes, they don’t just trundle along with the occasional dip and bump.

19 hours ago, titan_uranus said:

You are so unbelievably sanctimonious, but you're also hypocritical.

So we're all supposed to expect losses, however bad, to however bad of an opponent, and we're all supposed to expect inconsistency, no matter how wildly good or bad it is.

And yet your first post on this postgame thread was:

"Doesn't augur well"? I thought we were supposed to expect inconsistency?

And then saying you "hate to say it" but Essendon's kids looked better than ours? The same kids who looked awful when they were 0-4, whilst ours helped us beat Gold Coast (plus St Kilda and Carlton)?

You're so quick to insult anyone who is disappointed by the result and yet after one bad game from our kids, and one good game from some of Essendon's, you're now arguing that their kids are better than ours?

It's a bit pathetic really.

45 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

Lindsay just isn't a backman, I presume he is in defence for his disposal skills and these aren't quite there yet either.

Lindsay should be removed from defence and put on the wing or at Casey.

There is nothing about him that screams defender and his effort (or lack thereof) that lead to Durham’s goal in the second quarter shows exactly that.

His debut against GWS last year was excellent and I’m pretty sure he played on the wing that day.

Interesting to see Essendon's Jacob Farrow take the Rising Star nod this week. 22 disposals and 12 marks.

Was taken one pick before Xavier Taylor, just behind Robey.

5 hours ago, GS_1905 said:

the one thing we have going is that pundits in the media (ex players and coaches and the like) seem to have wraps on our youth.... so they obviously see something there that we obviously dont.

We all see something in him too. But there are also a few tendencies that we wouldn't want to develop much further

6 hours ago, bing181 said:

A loss is a loss.

But for me this goes the heart of it. If you start putting caveats and conditions on the type of losses you'll accept, you're not actually prepared to accept losses.

With the utmost respect, I think that’s a bit of a binary trap. There’s a fundamental distinction between being 'prepared' for an unfavourable outcome and being indifferent to the qualitative manner in which it occurs. To suggest that any critique of a performance constitutes a 'caveat' on acceptance is to dismiss the very nature of elite sports.

Sport isn’t merely a spreadsheet of wins and losses; it’s a performance of intent and an execution of systems. One can be perfectly composed in the face of a defeat—accepting the four points are gone—while still identifying a performance that falls below the threshold of professional expectation. If we view every loss as identical, we lose the ability to distinguish between a team that is building toward something and a team that is experiencing a systemic collapse.

Requiring a baseline of effort and tactical discipline isn't about 'conditional' acceptance; it’s about maintaining a standard. To conflate the two is to ignore the indicators that actually determine a club's long-term trajectory.

8 hours ago, At Least I Saw a Flag said:

With the utmost respect, I think that’s a bit of a binary trap. There’s a fundamental distinction between being 'prepared' for an unfavourable outcome and being indifferent to the qualitative manner in which it occurs. To suggest that any critique of a performance constitutes a 'caveat' on acceptance is to dismiss the very nature of elite sports.

Sport isn’t merely a spreadsheet of wins and losses; it’s a performance of intent and an execution of systems. One can be perfectly composed in the face of a defeat—accepting the four points are gone—while still identifying a performance that falls below the threshold of professional expectation. If we view every loss as identical, we lose the ability to distinguish between a team that is building toward something and a team that is experiencing a systemic collapse.

Requiring a baseline of effort and tactical discipline isn't about 'conditional' acceptance; it’s about maintaining a standard. To conflate the two is to ignore the indicators that actually determine a club's long-term trajectory.

Post of the round.

Summed up perfectly. Doesn't look to excuse the game just frame a perspective.

Kudos

12 hours ago, bing181 said:

Interesting to see Essendon's Jacob Farrow take the Rising Star nod this week. 22 disposals and 12 marks.

Was taken one pick before Xavier Taylor, just behind Robey.

It is interesting. We were always at the mercy of who Essendon didn't pick. Obviously Robey was always going to Essendon as next best mid they desperately needed. But based off all the pre draft talk and I get the sense that Melbourne would have preferred Farrow over Taylor. I think Farrow has the physicality, agility and skills to develop into a really good midfielder (has been likened to Hayden Young). But as we saw on the weekend and in all his junior videos is also very solid as a rebounding backman as well where he's played most of his footy so far. I think he has a higher ceiling then Taylor perhaps.

As always would love to be wrong in my estimations and I do think Taylor has the compeditiveness and X factor with his speed to be a damaging player one day at AFL level. I'd love to see him get some games in soon. Out backline could do with a boost.

Edited 7 hours ago7 hr by Petal

9 minutes ago, Petal said:

It is interesting. We were always at the mercy of who Essendon didn't pick. Obviously Robey was always going to Essendon as next best mid they desperately needed. But based off all the pre draft talk and I get the sense that Melbourne would have preferred Farrow over Taylor. I think Farrow has the physicality, agility and skills to develop into a really good midfielder (has been likened to Hayden Young). But as we saw on the weekend and in all his junior videos is also very solid as a rebounding backman as well where he's played most of his footy so far. I think he has a higher ceiling then Taylor perhaps.

Disagree, I think we’ve (and rightly so) been spooked by Jackson going home. Id be shocked if we select any more WA talent in the first round for a while, it’s hard for the fanbase to stomach developing these kids and seeing them boot just after a couple years. I think it probably played a hand in us overlooking Dan Curtin in the 23’ draft too. Mcvee another example. it seems pretty tough to get those guys settled in Melbourne. We’ll see what happens with Farrow, I was more fond of Taylor in the draft anyway

On 12/04/2026 at 23:35, Bring-Back-Powell said:

Gresham, Wright, McKay.

All underperforming blokes that have been bagged pillar to post. Then come yesterday they all play the games of their lives. An absolute microcosm and symbolic of Essendon’s dominance over us in Gather Round.

It’s a pity that Melbourne supporters pay good money over and over again in Adelaide to witness an inevitable bottom 3 worst performance of the given year. And quite frankly our recent efforts at Adelaide Oval have been appalling.

Put the game in the bin. Address the issues and move on.

On 12/04/2026 at 23:35, Bring-Back-Powell said:

Gresham, Wright, McKay.

All underperforming blokes that have been bagged pillar to post. Then come yesterday they all play the games of their lives. An absolute microcosm and symbolic of Essendon’s dominance over us in Gather Round.

It’s a pity that Melbourne supporters pay good money over and over again in Adelaide to witness an inevitable bottom 3 worst performance of the given year. And quite frankly our recent efforts at Adelaide Oval have been appalling.

Put the game in the bin. Address the issues and move on.

Yeah ....good post.

we have shown some very good form this year bar that game.

it's wired we keep losing there to a bottom feeder team.

we killed it there on 2031. but now seem jinxed.

Maybe we need to titrate our arrival time or training at times after big games.

And the match prior was fairly taxing ....both were.

But we liked like Casey.

it was awful.

Hopefully it's onwards and upwards.

Thanks.

20 minutes ago, Petal said:

It is interesting. We were always at the mercy of who Essendon didn't pick. Obviously Robey was always going to Essendon as next best mid they desperately needed. But based off all the pre draft talk and I get the sense that Melbourne would have preferred Farrow over Taylor. I think Farrow has the physicality, agility and skills to develop into a really good midfielder (has been likened to Hayden Young). But as we saw on the weekend and in all his junior videos is also very solid as a rebounding backman as well where he's played most of his footy so far. I think he has a higher ceiling then Taylor perhaps.

As always would love to be wrong in my estimations and I do think Taylor has the compeditiveness and X factor with his speed to be a damaging player one day at AFL level. I'd love to see him get some games in soon. Out backline could do with a boost.

I actually thought it was the other way round - i.e. that while we were keen on Farrow, we would snap up one of Robey or Taylor if they fell

I think there was also some draft content from the club where JT spoke about being wrapped that Taylor fell to us

FWIW I was stoked that the Dons didn’t pick Taylor - I reckon he has a massive ceiling as a hybrid defender who can turn defence into offence, and could be a massive steal given he fell to what was pick 11

Edited 6 hours ago6 hr by demoncat

Hopefully we'll take a valuable lesson out of this game and apply it to the Richmond game. That particular opposition will likely be coming off an 11 game losing streak themselves.

That Anzac Eve game is an absolute must win game with Brisbane, Sydney, Hawthorn and the Dogs (@ Marvel) coming up to the end of May.

On 11/04/2026 at 16:10, dees189227 said:

The bad thing is, we play them again this season

Could be a good thing. To prove that we had a really off day.

20 hours ago, bing181 said:

For a team under a new coach, with a largely new game plan and significant personnel changes, losses like Saturday’s are exactly the kind you tend to see. For sides in this kind of transition, inconsistency is part of the process: beating stronger teams while slipping against those below you in the table, following big wins with disappointing defeats, momentum swings where you lose big time after being ahead at half-time etc. etc.. It all comes with the territory. (Plenty of research out there on this if anyone's interested.)

People talk about roller coasters and our season in this context. Roller coasters actually soar and plunge between real extremes, they don’t just trundle along with the occasional dip and bump.

I agree 100 % . These sort of days are going to happen to a developing team. We will have great days as well as bad days. The future is bright when we get more games into our young kids.

4 hours ago, Greg Schneider said:

Disagree, I think we’ve (and rightly so) been spooked by Jackson going home. Id be shocked if we select any more WA talent in the first round for a while, it’s hard for the fanbase to stomach developing these kids and seeing them boot just after a couple years. I think it probably played a hand in us overlooking Dan Curtin in the 23’ draft too. Mcvee another example. it seems pretty tough to get those guys settled in Melbourne. We’ll see what happens with Farrow, I was more fond of Taylor in the draft anyway

Kozzie and Rivers say hi

And BTW it didn't stop Petracca leaving...

6 hours ago, beelzebub said:

Post of the round.

Summed up perfectly. Doesn't look to excuse the game just frame a perspective.

Kudos

And in framing that perspective, surely with a new coach, we need a time frame.

It was a certainty that we were going to lose this one. Let’s take zero learnings from it and move on.

1 hour ago, jnrmac said:

Kozzie and Rivers say hi

And BTW it didn't stop Petracca leaving...

Yeh never once been a concern with Kozzy has it …