When you look at the previous premiers this decade all have had great spines. What do people think of our spine? Is it good enough? If not now, in the future?

good topic demoneddy

i think we need a FB... obviously! ???

CHB could be an issue also (maybe martin??)

Centre is fine with your brocks, bartrams, jones etc

CHF in morton fills out and conitnues to grow....

FF juice newton

CHEW ON THAT FELLOW DEMON LANDERS

CHB could be an issue also (maybe martin??)

CHF in morton fills out and conitnues to grow....

FF juice newton

CHEW ON THAT FELLOW DEMON LANDERS

So we have no FB, our CHB and CHF have been at the club about five minutes and are still in diapers and our FF has played less than ten games...

I remember seeing an article about 5 years ago that hailed the arrival of Miller and Rivers as the demons' new CHF and CHB duo...

Now look at us. Rivers plays as our third tall and is brilliant... but most don't consider him a true CHB... And Miller... Well... the less said the better...

Our Spine is a HUGE concern. We've got tall players on the way out in Neitz, Holland, White etc etc... And while we have a dearth of players that have the physical characteristics, not one of them has yet shown they have what it takes to be premiership KPP... Miller, Meesen, Jamar, PJ, Dunn, Carroll, Frawley... either they're too young for us to tell, or they're just gap filler.

I have faith in Bate, who will play in a LOT of places. I like Dunn but question his KP credentials. Newton is a gem, but he's got a long way to go just yet. Rivers is a star, but as I said, what position does he play?

Long story short, our midfield is maturing nicely... Our tall players are going to get the blame for our lack of premierships for the next 5 years.

When you look at the previous premiers this decade all have had great spines. What do people think of our spine? Is it good enough? If not now, in the future?

Lynch

Hansen

Judd

Hunter

Glass

Glass and Judd a superstars but other than it is an ordinary spine.

I really think melbourne will take a long long time before we get a good spine. Many people wont agree with me here but we need a full back who is capable of shutting down all forwards, has good disposal, good pace, good vision and can read the play exceptionally well. That is not Carroll and i cant see any other players in the near future replacing him. I think with the new additions at the club, frawley is destined to play FB which i agree with. This will take at least 2 years tho

CHB we have addressed with perhaps Martin however this will take time again as KP take a long time to learn. Rivers will hopefully play as a spare man back and at times loose with no opponant. Possibly like a chad cournes type of player.

The midfield is ok with the emmergance of Brock, Jones, Pettard etc but there is always room to improve. Depth is something melbourne have not had for many years. One player becomes injured and we put in someone like Ferguson, Miller etc. THis already spells disaster.

CHF is missing a dominating player who can influance play and set up goals. I still believe Dunn is the best person for this position. I like him in the midfield howver CHF is in more need of a player. We have a number of midfielders running in the midfield but apart from dunn and miller there arnt any.

FF in the future is interesesting. I would love for Newton to dominate here but his speed may let him down in his career. I would prefer to see him play forward pocket.

So i think we need a FB, CHB, CHF and FF

The midfield is ok with the emmergance of Brock, Jones, Pettard etc but there is always room to improve. Depth is something melbourne have not had for many years. One player becomes injured and we put in someone like Ferguson, Miller etc. THis already spells disaster.

we are going to see A LOT of miller this year with bailey in charge i think and whether this is a good or bad thing, time will tell, but he will not becoming through the reserves i dont think...

back to the forum, i think depth will come with time...we have a lot of players who are yet to take the next step and i think with an array of developmental coaches including bailey who emphasises the importance of development as a senior coach, melbourne will develop its depth in years to come..

on to our future spine, i see

FRAWLEY at full back

MORTON at CHB...i dont know why, but even though the footage i have seen has him kicking long goals and pack marks in the forward line, i think he would make a great old fashioned CHB

We have millions of developing followers and centre players atm

BATE at CHF...love him to bits

JUICE at FF...he just needs to widen a lot more

also, with the likes of Martin, Spencer, Zomer and McNamara pushing through the ranks, i think we are looking pretty determined!!

Lynch

Hansen

Judd

Hunter

Glass

Glass and Judd a superstars but other than it is an ordinary spine.

With the exception of Hunter (who I believe is severely overrated), I would take that spine any day. Hansen is a super footballer when right, and I'd almost (almost!) give away a first round pick for him. And Lynch has improved out of sight over the past year. Remember he carved us up this year. He kicked 5.6 or something against us didn't he??

As for our spine, I believe that Rivers can hold his own at CHB. I think athleticism is more important than upper body strength in this position these days. Besides he has always performed well against some of the bigger CHFs anyway (e.g. Lucus).

I'm still not convinced that Bate is a CHF. I'd like DB to start Miller at CHF from round 1 - give him 6 weeks in the position and just tell him to play footy the way he wants to play: hard and aggressive.

In Round 1, 2008 I believe our spine should look like this:

Carroll

Rivers

McLean

Miller

Neitz

By 2009, hopefully Frawley can take over the reins of full-back and Juice Newton can take over at full-forward from the outgoing skipper.

miller should be played at fullback during all NAB cup games, good to see how he goes with a supossed fresh start

im still one for PJ playing as a back... more than likely a CHB but then i might just be crazy. That or everyone has forgotten he is on the list and is mobile enough and i'd say have the skills by foot to be able to do something other than ruck. Being lead to the footy might just be what the doctor ordered.

im still one for PJ playing as a back... more than likely a CHB but then i might just be crazy. That or everyone has forgotten he is on the list and is mobile enough and i'd say have the skills by foot to be able to do something other than ruck. Being lead to the footy might just be what the doctor ordered.

I'm with you. I love PJ. Even though he really hasn;t busted through in any games yet (except for that brilliant but tragically cut short 37 minutes against Sydney... sigh.

I've spruiked him before as a kind of 'heavy utility', which I like because it would mean he has his own new kind of position!

Certainly he would make the transition from ruck to defender better than Nicholson - PJ is faster, taller, smarter, more skilled and better looking to boot.

Yep. I'm right behind PJ, and pending a closer look at Meesen he's my number 2 behind White. Remember when he outran Acker on the wing this year?

im still one for PJ playing as a back... more than likely a CHB but then i might just be crazy. That or everyone has forgotten he is on the list and is mobile enough and i'd say have the skills by foot to be able to do something other than ruck. Being lead to the footy might just be what the doctor ordered.

We should've known the answer to that but the previous coaching staff played ball and set us back 6 months.

Round 16 or whenever we lost that game to Richmond, we should've trialed PJ, White in the backline.

Donuts in the ruck and leave him there 100% of the game, Ferguson forward.

Nothing to lose and everything to gain (including that extra draft pick).

Should we trial it in the preseason or go with status quo. Carroll, Holland/Frawley, Rivers.

My votes the former.

We should've known the answer to that but the previous coaching staff played ball and set us back 6 months.

Round 16 or whenever we lost that game to Richmond, we should've trialed PJ, White in the backline.

Donuts in the ruck and leave him there 100% of the game, Ferguson forward.

Nothing to lose and everything to gain (including that extra draft pick).

Should we trial it in the preseason or go with status quo. Carroll, Holland/Frawley, Rivers.

My votes the former.

Rubbish.

All the answers to those questions were well known to coaching staff.

White has had time playing a kick behind the ball and as a player who does not play body on body he's useless down back.

PJ has done little to suggest he can mix it with capable ruckman at the centre bounces and has little to offer up back.

What ever Ferg could give us an AFL footballer was down back. He had no capability as a forward.

The bulk of our list is under 24 and the focus of our future is there. We might start with the spine Paddo speaks of but I would suggest that unless Carroll and Miller really turn it on that they are warming the bench for others.

The bulk of our list is under 24 and the focus of our future is there. We might start with the spine Paddo speaks of but I would suggest that unless Carroll and Miller really turn it on that they are warming the bench for others.

Correct Rhino- I think although our spine is not quite yet right, it is defntely improving and the future players are only just coming through.

In the modern game, I don't agree that premiership sides are built around a 'great' spine. Sure, you need good players in the key positions, but the Geelong, WCE, Sydney and Port pemiership sides hardly had great spines.

A quality midfield, including a dominant ruck division, is the most essential ingredient for a successful side.

It'll be interesting to see how the West Coast go without Cousins and Judd. Then you can judge how 'great' their spine is.

I'm not so sure about that. Geelong had - Scarlett, Egan (or harley - take your pick) Bartel, Abett, Mooney. SYDNEY - Barry, Roberts-Thompson, Goodes, Hall, O'loughlin. PORT - Wakelin, Cornes, Burgoyne, Tredrea, Thurstans. WCE - Glass, Hunter, Judd, Hansen, Lynch.

I admit that each of those spine has a weak point - but let's be honest, they are strong spines. Add to that the spines of Brisbane 2001-2003 and Essendon 2000 and there is a pattern of all these premiers.

Nobody has mentioned Ben Holland.

I still don't know why he was retained. If he plays he takes Frawley/Garland/Martin/Warnock's spot. If he doesn't play he is a waste of money.

Why?

Nobody has mentioned Ben Holland.

I still don't know why he was retained. If he plays he takes Frawley/Garland/Martin/Warnock's spot. If he doesn't play he is a waste of money.

Why?

To play on Rocca, Gehrig, Lynch.

Also he was just as good in the last handful of games in 2007 than he has ever been in his career.

A versatile role player, great clubman, and worth another go around.

Nobody has mentioned Ben Holland.

I still don't know why he was retained. If he plays he takes Frawley/Garland/Martin/Warnock's spot. If he doesn't play he is a waste of money.

Why?

At this point neither Garland or Warnock are banging on the door for a spot in the team. Martin is a rookie so I cant see how Holland holds him back? Unless there is an injury that results in the promotion of a rookie and Martin is ready for the step up, Martin is 2 years away from possibly playing AFL. Holland would have retired by then.

Frawley is still green and learning the caper. If he demands a spot ahead of Holland then he gets it.

Holland is a serviceable player who can pinch hit at both ends of the ground and can take a contested pack mark. Within an organised defence he works well with other players and provides an honest foil for a key forward. IMO he should be left 1 on 1 with an opponent as his lack of mobility will crucify him.

I am not so worried about gorilla forwards as there seem to be fewer around and many of those are close to retirement or are past their best. Rocca, Richo, Tredrea and Gehrig come to mind.

Holland has been serviceable to MFC over the course of his 4 years to date with MFC. I would like Garland and Frawley to come up this year. The Club has high hopes on those two. Martin is a possibility in the future. Warnock should count himself lucky to still be on the list and he either comes through and makes it at AFL level or he's gone. And it wont be Holland's fault as they play different defensive roles.

At this point neither Garland or Warnock are banging on the door for a spot in the team. Martin is a rookie so I cant see how Holland holds him back? Unless there is an injury that results in the promotion of a rookie and Martin is ready for the step up, Martin is 2 years away from possibly playing AFL. Holland would have retired by then.

Martin's on the senior list.

Martin's on the senior list.

Thanks Nasher. Ignore the rookie bit. If he is closer than 2 years away from being capable of playing AFL then we are doing well. By that time Holland would have retired.

Damn the AFL for running the PSD and rookie draft on the same day!!! :angry: B)

Thanks Nasher. Ignore the rookie bit. If he is closer than 2 years away from being capable of playing AFL then we are doing well. By that time Holland would have retired.

Damn the AFL for running the PSD and rookie draft on the same day!!! :angry: B)

hehe

Your point is still valid though. I'd be surprised if Martin was ready within the next two years, senior list or not.

At this point neither Garland or Warnock are banging on the door for a spot in the team.

I agree. But it is only December!

I totally agree with your comments about Holland. Yes he has given great service to the club but that wasn't enough to save Bizzell, Brown, Fergerson Godfrey, Pickett or Ward. Those players were correctly moved on becuase we need to develop our list. Why was the same rational not applied to Holland?

He is a 31 year old who will plug a few holes next year and I think it is a forgone conclusion he won't be on the list in 2009.

So my point is why was Holland not treated like the others? Nobody has put him in their spine so far. What does that say about DB's decision to keep him?

I agree. But it is only December!

I totally agree with your comments about Holland. Yes he has given great service to the club but that wasn't enough to save Bizzell, Brown, Fergerson Godfrey, Pickett or Ward. Those players were correctly moved on becuase we need to develop our list. Why was the same rational not applied to Holland?

He is a 31 year old who will plug a few holes next year and I think it is a forgone conclusion he won't be on the list in 2009.

So my point is why was Holland not treated like the others? Nobody has put him in their spine so far. What does that say about DB's decision to keep him?

By your list, neither Garland and Frawley are established AFL players. Martin is a punt and Warnock could not crack a game last year despite the injuries. He is doubtful for AFL. So there is a 1 to 2 year time gap that Holland can fill while these player come on. None of the others you mentioned who have gone could have done that and were rightly moved on.

Holland was selected for an impact now not in the future. The fact that no one has selected him highlights that the average supporter knows less than the DB! B)