Leaderboard

Darling looks like he'll be a very good player but remember he was playing as 4th tall behind Kennedy, Lynch, Naitanui/Cox and therefore on the 4th tall defender. Inking him in as "the pea" is "a reach". We've been looking for a long target for quite a while (Hale) and hopefully in Clark we've met that need. Clark, Watts, Jurrah, Howe, Sylvia, Davey that's a pretty formidable forward 6, and we have McDonald, Cook, Williams, Sheahan, Petterd, Green and Dunn also on the list. I'm not missing Jack Darling. If I could go back to that draft with the benefit of hindsight I'd be looking for a midfielder, not another forward.

Obviously this is just a snapshot of Collingwood training compared with ours, but I think it highlights a difficulty we will have throughout this year. Certainly against the better sides, and possibly early on in the year against the mid-lower sides. I'll use StKilda under Ross Lyon as an example. I remember very clearly that Lyon's first year in charge of the Saints started off very slowly. I can't remember where they finished, but I'm fairly sure they took a step backwards after some decent years leading up to his appointment. His game plan took a while to catch on with the playing group. That was with a team that was already performing at a good level. Our team has been pathetic for years. We have no out and out stars. We have a new coach and a number of kids still learning the game who have to learn a completely new game plan. We may be doing everything right on the track and be heading in the right direction, but my concern is that come round 10, we could be going alright but still be 2-8 just based on the fact that we haven't perfected our new gameplan. Collingwood are now just a classy unit who have been well trained and matured together. Their training (albeit one session noted by one supporter) can easily be dedicated to refining an already proven formula. We, on the other hand, are still teaching new tricks to VERY raw little boys in an AFL sense. We're a long way behind the best teams still. To suggest we are finals contenders in our first year with a new coach after being perennial underperformers is, I think, a bit optimistic, Don't get me wrong, I would love to see it, I'm just not getting my hopes up.

I think some of Lucas Cook's detractors are being overly and unfairly critical of him and Barry Prendergast for drafting him ahead of Jack Darling. Firstly, they are two different types and although both are forwards they fit different requirements at their respective clubs. As Old55 pointed out above, Darling was usually the third or fourth tall in the Eagles' attack. He had the mature body, was ready to go as a player rarely pitted against the opposition's best defenders and he prospered as a result. Rightly or wrongly, Darling was not considered an appropriate top 20 selection by many clubs. Not just Melbourne, but most of the other AFL clubs had the opportunity to take him. Cook was always going to take longer to develop but in his under 18 year, he was All Australian CHF. The club knew he wouldn't be a ready made player. He impressed in his brief time on the ground in the first NAB games in February, and while he wasn't outstanding at Casey, he did show promise in the first half of the season including the day he kicked four goals at CHF against Collingwood VFL. He was patchy in other games but there were enough brief cameos from him to suggest that he had the skills to develop into an important player for the club when he matures and develops physically to his capacity. Late in the season, after a couple of poor games, he was dropped to the reserves and subsequently we learned that he had undergone hip surgery. I don't believe the club has ever divulged whether there was a direct connection between the drop off in form and the injury, but my guess is that there was one. We don't even know the nature of the injury and, given that he was reported on a couple of occasions in pre season training as showing signs of distress, I wonder how long he carried the ailment before it was diagnosed and on the flip side, how much his recovery has been held back because of the problem. In any event, one doesn't know whether the hip issue (whatever it is/was) was evident when the draft took place and I don't believe the fact we took him should be taken as a black mark against BP's recruiting record. As for the player, he's the type you need to allow a few year's development before you know exactly how good he's going to be.

Bonkers, I think it is important to recognise what Jim has done, what he has failed to do and what he has not done at all. It is a myth that Jim has saved the club. Saving the club is a massive operation that has demanded many things and is not done yet. jim effectively demolished the debt with member/supporter help. He did not improve our facilities, change our list, develop Casey etc etc. All essential ingredients. Jim's done none of them. Not one. The one thing he did do was preside in an essential way over the debt demolishion. Jim hads not put the club ahead of himself. He has put himself at the head of the club. I'm not being smart - that is his position. Hundreds of members paid their money to save the club. jim did not do it by himself. He is necessary but not sufficient. It takes no balls to come in to a hopeless situation because no one will blame you if you fail. No-one at all. It is a free swing. Did he inspire and unite - hell yes! Was he essential - yes! Is he responsible for [censored]-ups -hell yes. Has the board appeared disengaged or paralyzed behind him - yes. Are things better now - well, they look it, don't they. My hope is that Jim's figurehead position is being maintained while his responsbilities have been redistributed within the board somehow. Best of both worlds. as for the afl, well, they can go and pleasure themselves out of the sight of delicate eyes. And Deemonstrative, the "low moral fibre" thing is bizarre. Genuinely. I'm saying that governance is a concern and Jim's ability to discharge his responsibilities are an issue and you think that is 'low'? Ignoring it to make yourself feel good -now that is 'low' - it risks much in order to avoid pesonal discomfort. As in, it's the bottom of the barrel of moral reasoning. Nice work if you can get it.

It's a good point but there is a key difference in that we have a much younger group who have not been drilled with the same game plan for years (like Saints). It's often more difficult for the older players to change the habits/training of years than it is for a young player to lean new processes. Green's first instinct when we lose control of the ball is always to "man up" where Bailey's GP was to "protect space". Green wasn't being disobedient but merely acting instinctively. It will be interesting to see.

No, I simply think we need one of Strauss' type, more than one of Zaka's type. And I think Strauss will be a good players for us. Even though Zaka came away with a B&F it's still relative. It's not like winning a B&F at Geelong or Collingwood.

I don't think Darling will be a star, or rather, I don't think he'll be what most here are talking him up to be. He played for a very well structured side last year and had an ample supply from a top 4 quality midfield. And if you tuned into any Casey games early last year, you'd know Cook's well worth persisting with and is an extremely exciting prospect.

Nate! Is his name Nate? You sound like he's your best pal and can speak for him. Give it a rest WYL.

??? That's all you've got? In your perception, opposition analyst is a step down from head of recruiting, and from that you've jumped to the conclusions that (i) he must have been pushed and (ii) it was because he chose Darling over Cook. If he wants to get (back) into coaching, the position at Carlton is a big step forward. Taking Nathan Buckley as an example, you'd have to say that it was above being an assistant coach, and perfect preparation for being head coach. As for the rest, surely you're not suggesting that because a subject has a few posters on an internet forum, the professionals in the Football Department are going to be taking note and acting accordingly? Is there any evidence anywhere (except in fertile minds) that anyone in the FD could give two hoots about Darling and whether we drafted him or not? For all you know, Neeld and co. could be over the moon that we have the AA under-18 CHF waiting in the wings as a long-term prospect.

To all those who are questioning why Sellar is being named I suggest that you read the 16 January training thread and the discussion between AOB and rpfc. IIRC in the Matt Burgan article on the draft he wrote that the coaches and recruiters spoke at length about taking 'a particular recycled player' to fill a role with pick 54. Neeld asked if he was ready to go round 1 and the answer was yes. Putting 2 and 2 together and hopefully not getting 5, they're talking about using Sellar as a gorilla keeper.

Thank Christ for that.

Costly. And Clark like trades are very rare. It won't begin in earnest. But it may be explored if the right pick(s) can seal a deal.

Jim Stynes has done a great job, but what is this ... a religion?

You make some very good points and I think this debate cries out for its own separate thread and with the use of discretion in the way the debate is conducted rather than here where there is an element of muckraking and bravado from posters with various agendas for and against the individuals involved. FWIW, I think it's fair to say that a dying man is still capable of making good and bad decisions and that whilst Jimmy didn't handle the football director post well, leading us to the disaster of late July, it was he who asked for and persuaded Garry to step in and that was a good decision for which most of us are now thankful. The decision has now been apparently made that Greg Healy is to come on board as Football Director with Neil Craig reporting to the board on football matters. Time will tell if that eventuates and whether it works out well for the club. In the meantime, and with thanks to Garry, Don McLardy, Cameron Schab and others, Jimmy can go back to being the chairman in a low key way and concentrate on his health issues at the same time. Most (good) club chairman are usually pretty anonymous in what they do and it's only a few of the more vocal ones that we ever get to hear from. Good clubs act together in the way a good team should. It's not just about one man and I reckon 99% of the football public wouldn't know the name of the chairman of Geelong or most of the other clubs. Give me an ill Jimmy with a supportive board, administration and functioning football department over an allegedly healthy in mind and body Jeff Kennett any time.