Leaderboard

Yeh, but if we build a giant badger...

Mooney retiring, Pods turning 30, Hawkins questionable and Brown always injured, even if they didn't want another forward how could they overlook Darling? My natural tendency is to support those who give their all for the club and those who've been around long enough will remember that I was strong supporter of Neale Daniher, gave Dean Bailey the benefit of any doubts, same for Tom Scully, got behind Craig Cameron and now support Barry Prendergast. It's a path with pot-holes as the Scully experience shows. I don't think we'll know what Barry Prendergast's legacy was until late in this decade - to suggest that he screwed up taking Cook over Darling is premature.

Cale has started putting on weight over his slim frame only after he stopped growing. Like Jack Watts did. Jack is younger but Cale may have stopped growing only a year or so back. How tall is Cale Morton now?. His profile says 192 and 87Kg. I reckon he may be taller than that and heavier. He has just turned 22. Cam Bruce (for example) is 190 and 86, so he will be a fair bit bigger than that. Im sure some will turn on Brucey but he has a 13 year AFL history so IMO it isnt a big issue.

Mitch Brown has so many injuries he's probably in the "Cook" catagory - unknown. Vardy showed a lot of promise I agree. Still Mooney is gone, Pod is old and Hawkins still unproven after a number of years despite a good finals series. Hawkins is a good example of a tall who other than FS would have been taken top 10 who has taken ages to progress. The discussion here seems to be "take Darling as he's good and he's "now". I believe Cook was probably taken for the type of footballer he will be (most likely different to Darling) and the fact BP believed he would be better than Darling in the longer run. If this is in fact right I support it. Our premiership window will be from 2015 onward and we need to be as good as we can be then. If we suffer a bit now then that's ok by me as long as we are maximizing our chances to win a flag with this list.

If we picked Darling, there is no way we would have picked Howe who is roughly the same size. Imagine trying to fit Howe, Jurrah, Pettard, Clarke, Watts into the forward line as well as Darling! For everyone who thinks Darling had such an amazing year, please click on the below link. http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/ft_player_compare?tid1=19&pid1=3471&tid2=12&pid2=3478&type=A&fid1=S&fid2=S Now. Think how well Darling would have played in our forward line while we were getting limited supply into the forward line. Think about how much better Howe would be if he played in West Coast's forward line all year. We have a massive win. There is no way we would have taken both.

There's no such 'right'. We're talking absolutes again. Jim can stay in the chair as long as the positives of his presidency outweigh any negatives. No one ought to have a divine right to a job regardless of how well or badly they are doing it.

I've read a few of your posts in this thread regarding Geelong's recent recruiting, but each time for some reason you overlook Mitch Brown. At the beginning of last season Brown was a 20 year old promising 195cm key forward prospect. He's had a number of very good performances at VFL level and indeed was a first round draft pick. Like most young talls he's presently trying to build a body, but he managed to debut as a tall forward last year in a premiership season. Not bad. Throw in Vardy, who's also a promising ruck/key forward and their stocks in this department aren't nearly as bare as you assert. Well, not to me anyway.

Even if we want to use the compo picks, we wont have to use them on Viney as they are exempt from Father son picks. So if we have for example pick 9(comp), pick 12(normal), pick 13(comp). A rival club nominate to pick Viney up with pick 8. We would not have to use pick 9. We could use pick 12. That's my understanding. And I highly doubt that we would finish low enough for someone not to force our hand with Viney. We will use our first round pick on him. Anyone who thinks we will get Viney with a 2nd round pick is delusional.

You can say that again Smithy. At last year's Foundation Dinner, I put in a bid for Aussie's jumper and won it. Shortly afterwards, he did his ankle on comeback at Casey and didn't play another game in the red and blue. I sponsor Big Maxy and the day after I send the payment to the club, he does an ACL (sorry Max). I was a bit worried about these extraordinary powers of mine until last week when I took out a player sponsorship at GWS for Tom Scully.

Shooting Bambi is exactly the reason why Stynes should stay. He's the face of the club, and without his 'aura' we'd lose some support, and forcing him out would create huge negative press. As is usual with a dilemma, you need to sieze one of the horns. At the moment I'd still take the 'motivational horn' ... keeping Stynes on for his public presence, his ability to galvanise support and raise funds, even the ability he has to engender empathy for the club. It's far more valuable than shunting him off to overcome any deficiencies in board management due to his health problems. The rest of the board needs to work around the 'management horn' and do a good job, which I think they currently are after Lyon's intervention.

Yes, the underlying story here is the inherent weakness in the whole youth development/premiership window recruiting methodology and how it is driven by the unchallenged self-interest of those pushing it, rather than the actual needs of the football club. Fortunately, we now appear to have a man at the helm who is prepared to shun this approach and actually put his cojones on the line. We won't win a premiership any other way.

I think i read somewhere Cale hired a personal trainer on top of his training with the club. If thats true he obviously is improving his off field application and is trying to turn things around. If anyone has a breakout year, i hope its Cale. He has massive talent.

Valentine's Day, a very enjoyable movie with a football theme is screening on ABC 1 at 11pm tomorrow - 29th January. Worth a watch.

Lutz , I'm not going to change my mind on this one . I've been involved with sporting clubs my entire life and I still am in a small way ( more of a consultancy thing ) I've served on many committee's and have seen many times how someone can be covered periodically . Big or small , most sporting clubs work in a similar way in my opinion . When somebody goes down you stick together as a team and lift a notch . Loyalty can't be measured but has to be adhered to . Otherwise things fall apart . Now , the above paragraph is not meant to come across as me "big noting" or suchlike as I'm sure many people on this site have served on Committees or Boards . It's there to partly explain my point of view on the subject matter ( Jimmy ) . Cheers again !

I think our match day coaching in the past has been too rigid, when something wasn't working we stuck with the same plan and got the same result, it didn't work. I see Frawley as the cornerstone of our defence however that doesn't mean he shouldn't be moved forward on match day from time if we need to generate some momentum. Even the full back of the century was known to move forward occasionally and to great effect.

Don't get me wrong i'm no Cale fanboy but for whats it's worth I really think that he cops too much bad press on these forums. On Friday he was in the 1st group of runners and finished toward the top of the group in the first session and 2nd or third in the final session behind Tommy MacDonald. I hadn't been to a session this year and was expecting to see him dragging his arse around the field in a "LACONIC" fashion. However I was quite impressed with his application and willingness to push and hurt himself. I still have hope that Neeld will find the switch and turn the boy into a useful footballer. By the by MacDonald is a running machine and given his size offers enormous upside.

Exactly. I just loved Sehwag justifying being pounded by Australia (could have been 3 innings defeats) by saying that India beat Australia 2-0 in India 18 months ago. Wow. Two tight tests (India won by 1 wicket after a huge 9th wicket partnership, and needed to chase over 200 in the other Test) that they won at home 18 months ago, versus 4-0 with three absolute drubbings. "We are driving back the infidels!!"

There are many words I could use to describe young Jack, but 'laconic" isn't one of them. Is this the most confused word in the English language ?

Geelong did not announce a new sponsor Geelong announced a new captain. The benefit of exposure is about your relationship with the new sponsor not the captaincy. You have actually hit the nail on the head with your second point, a sponsorship announcement on its own is not exciting where as couple it with a captaincy announcement and your sponsors coverage to the greater community is widely increased. It goes from a small article all about your company that is read by few to a large article that is read by many that mentions your company. It goes from no mention on the news to your company and logo being broadcast on likely the leading sports news story on all TV networks. You obviously have been involved in some sponsorships and I do not disagree with your views as to the varying objectives of a sponsorship and the importance of the long term investment made. However you do not seem to grasp the impact of timing of an announcement to maximise your audience and the benefit of that to a sponsor. The simplest way I can look at it is if you owned a company who signed a sponsorship deal with MFC on Monday. Would your preference be to announce it immediately or wait 2 weeks and announce it at the same time as our captaincy? What would have greater benefit to you? What would be the impact of waiting?

I'll bite. Firstly, why are we suddenly talking about "top 12 picks" here? The original RobbieF post was about "first round selections". Where, it's very hard to see how there's a "high proportion" of tall skinny kids, when the only two that were cited were Morton and Cook - out of how many ... 8 or so? In the 2009 draft alone we had 3 first round picks, all the "very very good midfielders" that we're supposed to have overlooked. And how did we overlook Hurley? We took Watts, and by our next pick that year, Hurley was well gone. Are you suggesting we should have taken Hurley instead of Watts? In any case, the next pick we took after Watts (or Hurley if you prefer) was Blease, not exactly a "tall skinny kid". Finally, I didn't know that there were regulations on the use of the "Like" button. I'll try to avoid clicking it for "pedestrian" posts from now on.

So now you've changed your argument? It's like arguing with WYL... Either way, it holds little merit.

That ANYONE would suggest that Jim Stynes step aside as President of the MFC is beyond belief and shows a lack of understanding when it comes to the reality of the situation the MFC was in when Jim put his hand up to take on the President's role - which, like all board positions, is voluntary. The Club was in such dire financial straits that if Jim hadn't stepped up and put together a new board the Melbourne Football Club would not have existed for much longer. The previous board had 'fudged' the figures for too long, and their creative accounting had promoted a false impression of the Club's financial position. Jim has earned the right to stay in the President's chair for as long as he wants it. Likewise, Don McLardy, who has supported Jim through his health problems, and taken on much of the President's workload. Congratulations and heartfelt thanks to both of them for what they have achieved.

Jack and Maurie, on reflection I think that you are right. Having Jim removed would look bad and have potentially very negative consequences that we can ill-afford. That is why I wrote earlier that Jim should pick a replacement and resign. If not resign, then the board need to functionally by-pass him. That assumes that they can actually function. Macca, what are we disagreeing on? I'm not trying to be clever, I genuinely don't know. Do you think that jim and the board should be questioned (like any board by the memebrs of the club)? Are they doing a good job? If you can't tell if they do badly, when do you know that they are doing well?

Lutz, I think RobbieF's point is quite clear. It may not ultimately turn out to be correct, but he's hardly being selective with his data. We have actually spent a high proportion of our top 12 picks in recent years on tall, skinny kids. For instance, we overlooked the bigger bodies of Hurley and Darling, and took talented, arguably undersized, tall players instead. We also overlooked plenty of very, very good midfielders with those selections. What I think weakens an argument is when a poster is so clearly partial, and potentially so emotionally aligned to an argument, that they appear unable to see, even acknowledge, different perspectives. This thread is literally littered with you and bing181 ticking the 'like this' button every time another poster puts forward any argument, no matter how pedestrian, against the view that RobbieF has just advanced. To my mind, that approach lessens credibility, as it suggests that poster is losing objectivity. There is no doubt that the club needed to rebuild its list and that we needed talls. There is also absolutely no doubt that certain talls take time. Everyone knows this. But IMO there is no doubt that this club needs to be competitive in 2012, having had a rather inglorious rebuild that's now entering its fifth year. And our recruiting needs to reflect this. Despite many thinking here (a couple of years ago) that we could be a top 4-6 side in 2012 and then entering our premiership window in 2013, the reality is this IMO - absent the recruitment of Mark Neeld and his change in recruiting strategy, we would still have a list that lacks the physicality and on field presence to get us there. Thank God we managed to land Clark. We've clearly had a lot of good picks in recent years, but that doesn't mean we've selected the right players, or even the right balance of players. And that is what some of us are trying to discuss here. Personally, I think Watts will make it and will turn out to be a great pick. I still also have high hopes for Morton, but there have been some worrying signs in recent years. Misson could be the key here.

Have you run out of red cordial?

Who has proof that Cale is not pushing himself? I have been to three training sessions and have seen no reason whatsoever that justifies him being targetted over anyone else. Not being built like Frawley is no reason as he obviously does not have a frame that is going to bulk. I do not expect Cale to be a superstar but again the constant criticism of him over the pre-season is a joke.

I'm not sure how anything is misperceived in this Macca. I think that Jim's functioning is so grossly comprmised that he cannot do his job; there are periods where areas under his direct observation were out of control; the board have been ineffective (again, my view) under his leadership and him remaining president builds in a dysfunctional state into a board of limited ability (on performance to date). Most others see the same problems and are happy that they (board and pres) continue because Jim is a good bloke. OK, perhaps a very, very good bloke. This argument is not hard to understand. Unless he has effectively (functionally) been replaced and our board has grown a set we are vulnerable to exactly the same sort of nonsense as last year. You see that as ok - indeed you think that because Jim is a good bloke he should get to see what he wants done, in whatever way it suits, regardless of any consequences and without examination. Put simply, you have faith - nearly unconditional support. Bob's point was that unconditional support has bad outcomes when you push it to real-worl extremes. 'Unconditional' IS the position of many, if not the majority of posters on this thread. You believe. I don't. I value the club and my team much more than I care about Jim. I'll question him and whoever/whatever else I see fit to question. That differentiates me from you and most supporters I guess. So boards are hard to judge. So are governments, councils, judicial processes, PTA"s etc etc. I'm sure you manage there.

I am not casting judgement either way. I was only talking about 'unconditional support'. Not specifically to you (as I understand what you mean) but there are many who are viewing any discussion on the issue as being blasphemous. I'm not saying we should get rid of him, or keep him, but people can (and should) ask the question. I certainly agree with your point that boards are hard to judge. Especially from afar. Which is why I tend not to get involved in that sort of stuff,

my moneys on Moloney being Captain. He had an off field indiscretion but through his actions on and off the field following that issue, Moloney displayed that he understod that behaviour was not to be tolerated and then backed it up with a B&F performance. His response to that situation spoke volumes to his character i believe. I think that over shadows his night out and Neeld would see that. Lets not get too hung up with this off field stuff. The real good captains are the ones that can lead by voice and by example. I think Moloney is the guy on the ground and in the rooms that will get in teh ears of the team or an individual. Forget the media fluff, its leadership in the trenches the club really needs now. Moloney is Neelds kind of guy

No worries Steve.

Maybe they are jusy waiting for the tennis to finish Deelirious. But then when that finishes, we have a small window until the Terra Australis Great Southern Land Mountain Bike Epic being held between Feb 5 - Feb 11 which will draw the attention of AFL followers all around Australia. As soon as that's finished we have a couple of days until Valentine's Day, so perhaps we could have a campaign where Neeld and Craig are out for a candle-lit dinner and are being waited on by staff of <<insert new sponsor>>. If we miss that massive marketing opportunity, we will be right in the middle of the Sustainable Living Festival at Federation Square, so we will have to wait for that to conclude, which is actually the 26th Feb, the day after our 1st NAB Cup round. It appears to me that for the next 6-8 weeks, there is no "right time" to announce this new sponsor, so all pre-purchased jumpers will not be sent until such announcement. Am I being sarcastic? Abso-bloody-lutely. People still think that the announcement of the new Melbourne sponsor is going to be the biggest news in the AFL and should have is own week of celebration. FFS people, there is 22k-odd members who will be interested, and however many other people that barrack for Melbourne. Outside that, noone gives a toss. If we have one signed up, put it on our website. Regardless of what other events are on, we will get just as much coverage in the media. FWIW, if any other team announces a sponsor, as a diehard opposition supporter, I will often not use that company out of spite. I've never owned a Ford car, never flown Emirates, have gone off eating Mars Bars and flying to Tasmania. Perhaps it's as simple as not being able to get someone to pay what we are asking.

For this to happen Sellar would have to come in and be a better pure defender than Frawley right off the bat, McDonald would have to come in and do what Sellar was earmarked to do (whatver you believe that to be) right off the bat, and Neeld would have to be hit in the head - right off the middle of the bat. Not going to happen. (Although Freak's post did unsettle me...)

I don't think funny is the word. I reckon there's more pleasure in watching Chippa mark and rebound off the backline, have a few bounces and slot one from 50m+ on the odd occasion.

one of the most ridiculous things I've heard ...no offence! We have short memories. It wasn't long ago that we were starved of a decent KP defender. Now we finally get a great one and we want to move him forward? Frawley is our best defender by a country mile and moving him forward would be a terrible move. Frawley isn't even noted for his accurate kicking, something that is a must, to be a successful forward, barring a couple of exceptions

Its funny how Cook all of a sudden hasnt been playing Casey seniors, which he did for the majority of the year, and cant mark after one training session. His hands are like vice grips. Also its not a new 5 year plan, its the one started in 07 and which will start paying dividends in 2012 and beyond.

5 years ago we had a trainwreck of a list and lacked bankable talent. Where was that talent to come....from the draft and where possible trading away surplus players (eg McLean and TJ). History has shown the folly of trying to rebuild a list around experienced rejects from other teams. The issue of the blooding the youth was always going to be tough given the evolution of the 2007 senior players off.our list and the dearth of capable senior leadership players. I am glad we did not do what Carlton and Brisbane did for some of our cast offs. All we have done is add Clark to the list to complement the youth. We had been in the market in past years for a senior marking player (eg Hale) but missed. Please dont try and claim somehow the light came on when Neeld joined.The process for Clark was already underway during 2011.

Those who ask for Jimmy to stand down read above. IMO those who arent believers in Jimmy under estimate his abilities and show a very low moral fibre. Even business has a heart. All i see is a Pres who has shown remarkable insight to get a very astute football brain in Garry Lyon and talented Mr McLardy to step up as he had more important issues in the last 6 months. I see this as excellent leadership. Its very understandable that a man who is fighting for life to lean on 2 men he respects and trust. He asked these 2 men trusting they were up to the task. I will also add its a legal grey area to sack an ill person. Especially when he has added value to the club getting astute ppl to take up responsibilities. Even Steve Jobs was given to his very near end to play a role in one of the biggest companies world wide. He chose when to walk away. If Apple can do it so can the MFC. Sincere thanks Garry, Don, Jimmy Craig and the board for the changes you have made possible and have made over the last 3 years. We are at minimum on equal grounds with the AFL powerful clubs, or hopefully ahead. This is dependant on the the structural changes and personal recruited (on and off the field). No need to dream, start believing! Special thanks to Jimmy