Leaderboard

We will struggle to make the finals this year.

What doesn't seem to be mentioned is that Carlton made the finals three years in a row from 2009 to 2011, only two years after their tank in 2007. In one of those years they were less than a kick away from a preliminary final. So tanking killed our club but helped propel Carlton to within a kick of a prelim? No, the difference was Carlton picked up Judd and had previously drafted some talented players in Murphy, Gibbs, etc, whereas we completely stuffed up our draft selections. Had we nailed those early picks we would currently have a fairly strong team. That's simply what it comes down to. It is also hardly mentioned that in 2010 we were a team on the rise, posting 8.5 wins and producing some great efforts against the top teams. I didn't see any effects of tanking in that team. To me, it was more what happened in 2011 (the split in the footy department) that started our cultural demise and culminated in 186, the knee-jerk and poorly handled sacking of Bailey, the reinstatement of Schwab and the hiring of Neeld. From the outside, as a passionate supporter, this appeared to me to create that 'toxic' culture in the club - not what happened in 2009. Funny then how we recovered from 2009 in 2010 but have not won more than four games in a season since 2011. It just frustrates me when only half the story is covered, eg. Caro failing to mention how Carlton nearly made a prelim on the back of tanking. I think Roos' view that our current predicament is due to tanking is far too simplistic and narrow - if he wants to bring up the past then he should mention the real reasons why we are where we are. For such a fantastic coach and media performer it was a really poor comment.

You know your list is in trouble when Bail is a being talked about as a 'keeper'.

I have heard the following: take it at what you will. - Sharrod Wellingham. Has fallen through with Simmo at WCE and has requested a trade back to Melbourne and we have spoken to his management. - Tyson Goldsack. Has put off all contract talks at Collingwood and that we have spoken to him and are in the box seat to get him. Roosy is a big fan of his. - Nick Malceski. 90% will be a Dee, the only other team who has shown interest is North Melbourne. - Ryan O'Keefe. Not likely to see him as a Dee as the Hawks are into him heavily. - North has shown interest in Dean Kent. Not sure on his contract status? Also don't be suprised if Roosy and co delist/trade up to 11-12 players this season. Frawley is gone to Collingwood btw. Strauss - Delisted McKenzie - Delisted Byrnes - Retired Clark - Retired Frawley - Traded Nicholson - Delisted Evans - Delisted Tapscott - Delisted Blease - Delisted Jones - Delisted Terlich - Delisted Fitzpatrick - Delisted Pretty sure some have contracts but from the sounds of it, Roosy has had enough and will do a mass cull to fix up the culture and our skills. Sunday was an embarrassment. We are going to be huge players in Trade Week/Free Agency. Roosy wants success as soon as possible, so we will probably will have only 2-3 selections in the ND.

I am struggling with this

This is an interesting discussion. The industry spends ever more time and resources searching for certainty in the draft; crunching ever more test data, game day observations, physical tests and phychoanalysis of players in the hope that it can identify who can play and who can't. Yet as we see so far it is still largely a lottery! About all we can say is that the recruits rated as first round picks are on average more likely to be better players than those rated as second round but an elite player could pop up anywhere in the first 20 picks and maybe later. Then there are the other variables about big blokes taking longer to mature vs your stock standard mid who may be peaking at 18 and so on. Has drafting science improved? I am not sure, James Hird went at 76 many years ago, that wouldnt happen again would it? But then Tom Rotcliff was a rookey and is now tearing up the park. It is interesting that the draft order is a major plank in equalisation and is pointed to time and again as a reason other equalisation measures are not required yet there is no certainty that player 1 is going to be x% better than player 2 and so on, only that the odds are the top 10 should produce more good players than the next 10 etc. The major equalisation tool is still a lottery. About the only way I see to increase draft certainty would be to increase the draft age to 20 so all these 18 year old elites get to play 2 years with men in the VFL/SANFL/WAFL. It would boost the standard of those leagues to narrow the jump to AFL and we would maybe learn a lot more about each players potential.

It amazes me that people want to delist Bail. We all know we have a problem moving the ball out of half back. While this is exacerbated by the decision making of our defenders, I reckon the underlying problem is the lack of movement up-field. Often a player will look up and see 2 or 3 opposition players to our 1 up the wing, which of course causes them to hesitate, look inside, look back up the wing, and ultimately make a rushed decision. Rohan Bail is the ONLY player on our list who consistently and effectively makes an option up the field. If all our players had half the desire to do repeat leads that he does we would be an immeasurably better side. Also an article in the HUN (i think?) the other day mentioned he's leading our pressure acts for the year.

I've never suggested something like this before but it surely must be time to shut this one down. Both sides have had ample opportunity to have their say and Fossil's comments above show that there is still very little understanding between the two camps.

If I were Roos. I would be taking 22 players to one finals game each week, even the Grand Final. And would be picking a team to "play against" one of the finals teams and would be saying here is your position, this is your opponent, now watch and learn what they do. I want you to be able to tell me how they beat their opponent, if they did, how they were beaten if they were. Where they ran to, were they effective? What would/could you do better in their positions and in their decision makings.. Because in my opinion we have enough talented footballers, but they are just not smart enough! Thoughts?

Yes dc but not a contest

I thought you'd bite. Yep, CAC stuffed up 2007 and then Prendergast 2008 - 2011. Viney was 2012 and Taylor 2013. I think that's right anyway. I knew Barry and thought he was a clever footy person but he was a disaster although as Goodoil points out he was not dealt the easiest of hands. There's no doubt the Gardner Board dropped the ball after a good start and Stynes/McLardy did the same after clearing the debt. Stynes/McLardy never got the footy dept right. The reality is we've had poor CEO's from about John Anderson on and I must say I'm surprised Schwab didn't do better after his time at Freo. I think history is starting to show the late Dean Bailey in a much better light and had he had good funding and a unified club and an experienced head recruiter he may have been an excellent head coach. All he probably needed was Peter Jackson employed on the same day he was. Onward and upward. I'm just hoping this stumble by Roos is a one off and not a sign of battle fatigue.

I still some flaws but I see a footballer who has definitely improved and is working on his shortcomings. I would be gobsmacked if Bail was moved on. Will Bail be a superstar ? nah . but I think he can be a player who plays his role every week. I think he has had a remarkably consistent this year. What posters fail to realise is that great sides are made up of champions, good footballers and then role players. The likes of Sydney and Hawthorn are not great because of the first five players picked each week - they are great because of the last 5 players picked. ( I look back to when StKilda where challenging under Lyon - their top end was fantastic - their last five players picked would have struggled to get games in other clubs). We unfortunately are missing top end talent but you don't throw out a consistent role player just because he has a limited ceiling. We undoubtedly need much better players than Bail - that doesnt mean there isnt a place for Bail in the team.

I have never understood why we assess these guys at 17 and a half years old anyway. I agree completleywith your suggestion re 20 years old and perhaps waiting may test their real desire to make footy their career and they would be more committed and have longer careers also a benefit

Disagree re Bail - he's a walk up start every week because he runs hard, has pace, tackles, presents, follows up after his work and this year found some extra poise that has resulted in him now being a good kick. In short he plays his role and I can see Bail improving again next year. We'd be silly to delist him.

Saw her get worked up about the topic on Footy Classified. In recent times I've been gradually gaining more respect for Wilson, but then every once in a while she still vomits on the walls with this kind of cheap and pointless sniping based on a personal obsession. Melbourne tanked. Melbourne also, both before and after that, have had the most sustained run of abject failure of any modern club, including even the demoralised, binge drinking, amateur-hour sideshow that was Carlton in the early 2000s. Also tanking in that time were, Carlton (2007, et al)- screwed up their drafting, possibly even worse than we did (amazing!), just don't have the cattle, but also still look occasionally dangerous. Hawthorn (2005) - made top choices with their top picks. Also benefited from lucrative over-value trades. Plus, they already had multiple stars on their list when they tanked... hmm. Collingwood (2005) - The draft picks from their tank year (an amazing sudden drop in form followed by an amazing rise in form... it's.. amazing) West Coast (2009) - less well known, is that West Coast attempted a Priority Pick tank in 2009. Prior to the infamous Melbourne-Richmond game, West Coast had clearly tossed in games against both those opponents, which, tragically, was what made the Richmond-Melbourne game so 'important to lose'. Unluckily for West Coast, they came up against a Knights-coached Essendon just hitting their traditional late season implosion. In an amazing turnaround, the Eagles were so inspired by breaking through to five wins that they then won three of their four remaining games, with the only loss being against Neil Craig's Crowbots as they made a late-season attack on the top-four. But we all know all of this. Why doesn't Wilson? doesn't she even know about footywire.com/afl ? And yes, I am annoyed by Roos' bringing it up. It's a cop-out, an excuse for failure... unless... unless he is quietly making war on a few leftover rotten eggs within the club. That would be interesting.

Cross is four times the player that McKenzie will ever be IMO.

that aint a rumor.

Nah, that's BS. You just don't want to understand what we care about. You care about embarrassing wooden cutlery - my concerns are a bit more evolved...

The more astute the recruiter the better the result but I still use Scully as perfect example. He was touted as a number one draft pick at the age of 16 by everyone - I am not sure I can remember a more certain lock for number one as Scully. Described as a machine - in his early training sessions with us they had to hold him back as he was going too hard. Yes, there was a slight knock on his kicking but it was more than compensated by his apparent ability to get to so many contests and impact them. Many may want to suggest that his heart wasnt in at the Dees but he has hardly set the world on fire at GWS. He may still come good but the bottom line is that 4 years on - his junior form has absolutely not translated at AFL level. The most outstanding part of Scully's non performance is apparently the biggest tick for him was his attitude and will to succeed. This was absent with us and just as absent with GWS There are many examples of highly touted juniors who just have not gone on at AFL level and conversely there are many that had average wraps on them that have excelled in the big time. What really miffs me is many posters who don't want to understand that there is sometimes no correlation between between TAC form and AFL form. Is Martin a better footballer than Scully at this stage and possibly for his career - absolutely no doubt. Anyone suggesting that this outcome was known at the time of drafting and we should have drafted Martin is kidding themselves. Even the whole Toumpas vs Wines debate has me scratching my head. For the whole of the final year it was reported by all TAC watchers that Toumpas was between picks 2-4 and Wines was around the 5 plus mark. Toumpas was higher rated at the time. There is no evidence to the contrary. Is Wines a better footballer here and now than Toumpas - definitely. Will Wines be better over his career - who knows but guessing - probably. But at the time of drafting Toumpas was rated higher. So in hindsight we should have taken Wines but at the time the selection was correct ( as opposed to Cook and Strauss who were taken way too early). To those who say - I always rated Wines higher than Toumpas I say congratulations - get a job as a recruiter because you know better than all the other current recruiters.

Wellingham reminds me of a Sylvia 2.0. All the skills in the world, but arrogance, lazyness and attitude gets in the way.

Watch Meth Coasts last 3 games vs Brisbane - very poor match and they looked very slow in ball movement and leg speed vs Richmond - poor all night and very slow all around the ground vs Adelaide certainly looked like one of the fastest teams going around It's funny but when things aren't going your way you look really slow but when you play well move the ball quick run and carry you look a lot faster. Trengove of 2010/11 never looked slow even though he never looked like he had blistering pace

Aside from their footballing abilities the other key attributes they both possess are a determination to be the best they can and to help the MFC out of this fricking mire.

Toumpas and Trengove will be very good players. Neither were remotely controversial draft picks at the time - both were exceptionally highly rated. They should not been exited Neeld-style in some knee jerk way. To the contrary, they should be seen as part of our future, as I expect they are.

Who is we?He was highly rated from all the usual noise makers. Teach him how to run properly and you have a player from what I have seen. And Toumpas and Trengove have close to zero trade value. Some of you would decimate this list (even more) with your Neeld-like trade outs of players just to get rid of them.

Grimes is heart and soul MFC. You don't trade players like him without negative consequences. Surely people have learnt from the Junior debacle by now.

Ahhh you are right ! "Due to the hiring of the guru of bootstudders (I ain't no dud or spud when it comes to a stud) not only Jack Watts show more intensity but he will also keep his feet in more than 1 in 10 contests he gets to."

No one will get a priority pick whilst the reasons given for deciding are subjective and based on future crystal balling. "The MFC will not be given a Priority Pick - with Paul Roos going into his second season with the club, we expect to see further improvement from all parts of the playing group having already seen much better defensive efforts. Jesse Hogan will be a big bonus for the club and........and..... and... we expect him to kick 100 goals plus next year. Jack Watts will have a breakout season and find the intensity of Chris Dawes. Jordan McKenzie will become the goalsneak the MFC hoped he would become. Dan Nicholson's kicking skills are on the rise and we expect a big contribution as an Ablettesque midfielder. It has also come to our attention after reading Demonland that Jeremy Cameron, Dylan Shiel, Patrick Dangerfield and Nick Malcescki are all on their way to the club and despite being the biggest spud god ever put breath into Chip Frawley has re-signed with the club for 4 years at $2.59 per season. We will therefore not give the MFC a priority pick - after a close vote it was also decided not to remove picks from the club even though a very persuasive argument was put forward to the commission that the Demons were a shoe-in for the 2015 flag"

The well known football gossip columnist Caroline Wilson has yet again pursued her obsession with the MFC tanking issue in a piece in the Fairfax press Real Footy today. The article; Roos and Demons still coming to grips with sins of the past, attributes Melbourne's current woes to the alleged tanking incident. Will she ever let go? While a certain amount of doggedness is an admirable trait in a journalist, continually dragging up the same old mantra becomes tedious. If the issue was unresolved and of some real importance such as Watergate or the Dreyfus Affair - fair enough but the AFL is no Dreyfus who suffered terribly at the hands of the French military and government because of his religion and Caro is certainly no Emile Zola a talented writer crusading to right an injustice. By comparison Caro is a hack journalist attempting to rack up a very small issue that has now been resolved. The matter itself was arguable, and even if it could be shown that any team tanked it could only have benefited because of some idiotic rules that the AFL introduced the spotlight was exclusively on Melbourne while the actions of other clubs were ignored. And the article does not stand any rigorous scrutiny, for any number of reasons Few players are still playing from the time when the transgressions are supposed to have occurred and some of those Dunn, Frawley and of course Nathan Jones are among our best players While Caro makes a passing reference to Carlton as a further of the futility of tanking she ignores the other more successful clubs who may have been involved but of course are conveniently ignored Most importantly there are any number of factors that have led to Melbourne's present situation, shocking success rate in terms of winning games over along period, bad administration, pathetic coaching, awful list management, incompetent draft selection, inept player development, paltry financial management and a small supporter base come to mind. At best the tanking issue is a small subset of these rather larger factors In fact you might argue that if it were not for the tanking issue we would not have obtained the services of Jackson or Roos. They are the key to our future. While I have some sympathy for someone who having largely broke the tanking saga wanting keep it going as a nice little earner Caro draws a long bow by linking it to the quite reasonable comments made by Roos after the game. Caro, the goose has laid its last golden egg, the matter has now been done and dusted and the caravan moves on. Try to do the same!

I wish i shared your optimism. Instead I think this needs to be developed over summer - as another layer of the gameplan

It was one of the weakest moment in our club's history when Jim and Don left Bailey on his own and waited until he was in the bathroom before they went home. An absolutely disgraceful show of sportsmanship from the boys club. At least PJ had the class to sit next to Neeld and explain the decision. And yes, you can have views like this and still love Jim Stynes for what he did for the club.

Based on Brad Miller's review of Dom Barry's game on Garlett on the weekend, I would love to see him given another chance to impress at the top level... Dom Barry: Dom had 19 disposals, two tackles, zero missed tackles and zero fumbles. He had the job on Jeff Garlett and played all over the ground, starting on the half-back line. Dom also played a little bit on the wing, inside mid and back-pocket, as the Blues moved Garlett around to try and get an advantage. Playing on a known AFL player, we were really pleased with Dom’s effort, and his ability to limit Garlett’s influence on the game. The only time Garlett looked dangerous was when Dom had minor concentration errors around traffic and stoppages. One resulted in a shot on goal, but for the majority of the day, Dom beat Garlett in any position they played. A great aspect of Dom’s game this week, as well as playing on and beating a good player, was his ability to win his share of the ball, which has been the area lacking in previous weeks. He had it 20-odd times and rarely makes an error by foot. He was also really clean at ground level and gave the ball to a teammate in a better position. http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/2014-08-05/vfl-player-review-round-17

As frustrating as the loss was on Sunday, only a sheer lunatic can't see we have dramatically improved. We are still well off the pace but we have definitely eaten into that gap considerably this year. We were so far back it wasn't funny under Neeld.

Garland is UFA at the end of 2015. Lets not have another Frawley year in 2015. Resign him now or put him up for trade this year. Get something while the opportunity exists.

People have short memories in regards to Wellingham. When we were trying to chase him along with Dawes he refused to meet with us same deal as Luke Ball did back in 2010. They can go and get stuffed Most overated player in the competition.

In a professional sport, doesn't it make sense that people responsible for the management of high performance teams want metrics to measure their teams on? This isn't 'Americanisation' of the sport - whatever the hell that means - it's just bog standard performance reporting in a professional environment. I agree that it's complicated and sometimes far too hard for the layman to make head or tail of all the information, but that's surely all part of the fun? If not, there's always the option of just tuning out. I certainly don't agree that the data is all worthless just because I don't always understand it, which the OP seems to be suggesting.

Just read Mark Robinson's Article in the HUN. Hmmmm now let me get this right. Essendon has 2 court cases running concurrently. One to fight the the allegations of wrong doing from ASADA because the club believes they did nothing wrong and the investigation was illegal and should never have happened. The other stating that Robinson (their employee) deserved to be dimissed on the back of the allegations that they insist are false. They are arguing that Robinison deserves to be dismissed when his direct supervisor who oversaw his activity at the club and received at least one letter from the club doctor warning him of serious issues, who also accepted punishment for serious AFL offences over the same allegations for which Robinson was dissmissed remains employed and is vigorously defended by the same employer. ????????????????????????????????????? Speachless. This will be settled out of court IMO.

Alot of supporters have short term vision about Trengove. He was an absolute jet in 2011 and had injury riddled 2012 and 2013's. I think he will be our 3rd or second best midfielder once he gets continuity in his game. Salem will be a gun. I think the way Toumpas's development is going, highlights the fact that he can be a really good AFL player, played some really solid VFL and actually wasnt horrible when in the senior side this year.

We've been watching different games. He's a beautiful kick.

I havent read any of this thread past the OP and the article it links to. All I have to say is who the hell cares what some troll writes about us, her primary goal is to stir up interest, and with 5 pages of posts here you are just giving her what she wants -a reaction.

Oversimplifying Roos' comments in my view. The culture of losing has settled upon this club. Sunday wasn't an aberration. Dog performances have become a trademark with the odd quarter here and there bucking the trend, and a couple of quarters sometimes being enough to snag the odd win. When the culture is a losing one, you can't just overlook a period whereby losing games became a greater focus than winning them. It is surely part of the equation (of which there are several parts) that has led to the club being in the position it is in now. Roos is getting it out in the open. Acknowledge it happened. Acknowledge it has had an impact. Move past it. If he's still making tanking references and talking about mental scarring next year, that's a different matter. But right now he's a premiership coach in his first year at the club, calling it how he sees it.

I think there is some truth to that, although to hear Roos say there are players who are not listening even lends itself to the idea of recruiting more experience at the top end to show the younger fellas what it's all about. It's one thing to tell them, but to have others to demonstrate every day at training and on game day is something else altogether. As I said before, the recruitment of a mature age player would need to be a strategic - if there is no one out there who Roos thinks would be beneficial to the list then I have no doubt he won't recruit them. But if someone comes up for the right price who can bring something valuable to our list while still contributing to a good level (eg. Malceski) then I also have no doubt that Roos will go hard to recruit them. Edit - And you only need to read the article on how hard Cross has worked to come back from his injury and the example that sets and you realise that having a guy with that experience and work ethic on our list can only be a good thing. If the opportunity to get another player like Cross comes along then I would hope the club has no hesitation in taking them.

You can spin it anyway you like Jack but it wasn't the Gardner Board that allowed Schwab to build his empire with $1.8 million in admin salaries that Jackson has been able to shed - annually. Imagine what even part of that money could have achieved over his period of management. It wasn't the Gardner Board that was so flush with money that they lent Schwab money for his own use from MFC coffers whilst underfunding the footy department. It wasn't on Gardner's Board that we squandered so many draft picks and completely failed to rebuild where so many others had. The reality is we were in a poor place when Stynes replaced Gardner and with all the opportunity in the world and more money than Gardner ever had we are just a rabble after 7 years. Stynes, Schwab, Connolly and McLardy missed a golden opportunity to build our club and in fact it's a moot point that they achieved anything positive at all. Along with Richmond we are the only club to fail to rebuild given the opportunity we had. Synes can blame Gardner, Gardner can blame Szondy, Szondy can blame Gutnick and so it goes on. The further back it goes the less relevant it becomes. I think you are one of the very very few that believe any significant part of our current situation sits with an administration which was replaced 7 years ago.

Oh Saty please: Melbourne: Maric, Morton, Strauss, Blease, Scully, Trengove, Gysberts, Tapscott, Cook, Toumpas, Watts. All top 20 picks (Maric 21) and not a B+ player amongst them. And 5 of them are top 5. Spin it any way you like, they are just awful numbers. My point Scoop is he handled it poorly. Just because we know how bad it was doesn't mean Roos has to throw petrol on the fire with his comments. "We had a shocking day today etc etc etc...... but it was not typical of the year". That's what he should have said. Because that's right. Roos should have been calming the waters not igniting them. I think it was a terrible performance by him. I also think his continual reference to "from where we've come from" is unnecessary and overused. His "with no disrespect to those that went before me" just continually highlights how poorly those blokes did. Don't get me wrong, I still fully support him but like the players, he had a shocker on Sunday.

Some really good points BB but one thing I disagree with is with respect to Roos' post match press conference. He didn't say the players were the worst he'd seen. He said the skill execution on the day was the worst he'd seen. There is a big difference. And in all honesty what else was he supposed to say? No one at Etihad Stadium on Sunday would have walked away thinking anything other than what they had witnessed was absolutely abysmal in terms of basic skill execution. All he did was state the obvious. Even Lepptisch intimated that the performance of the players was diabolical. He said the following: "At three-quarter time I said 'this is the worst game I think I've ever seen'". What actually annoyed me more were his comments on AFL360 that 'you can't set high standards while trying to lose at the same time'. For such a polished media performer, one of the best I've seen from a coaching perspective, this was a really poor piece of commentary in my opinion. Not only is it disrespectful to the club that employs you to allege that they deliberately tried to lose matches (regardless of whether or not this happened), but to offer it up as an excuse for what was one of the worst displays of skill execution by an AFL team just sends the wrong message IMO. All it does is draw attention back on the 'tanking' saga and results in people like Caro exaggerating the effect it had. It gives an 'out' to the players when there shouldn't be an out. McKenzie didn't miss from 10 metres out because of what happened in 2009. Jack Watts didn't choose not to go hard at the footy because of 2009. Jamar didn't miss from three metres out because of 2009. Dawes didn't miss a two metre handball because of 2009. As clint said above recruiting is the main reason we are where we are. Culture is critical, no doubt, and the 'tanking' saga may have had an effect on culture, but its effect on the players' skill execution in a match five years later would be negligible. I am fine with Roos saying post-match that the skills were horrible, because they were. It was an obvious call. But leave it there. I don't really like using 'tanking' as an excuse when it would have had very little bearing on what happened on Sunday.

Funny that our culture was so destroyed by tanking that we won 17.5 games between R1 2010 and 186 with almost the exact same list that was up to their neck in the tanking. If we'd sacked Schwab at the same time as Bailey for a total clean sweep and not botched our coaching choice for 2012 nobody would be talking about 2009 now. This article is simplistic bollocks.

Speaking of 30+ recruits, Malceski to Melbourne seems to be gaining traction.

Spoke to Salem's brother the other day. Asked him if he still barracks for Essendon, he said the whole family are Dees supporters now.

Jordie's was a high pressure kick?? No, a high pressure kick was Salem's set shot goal that won us the Essendon match with 19 seconds on the clock. There's a kid who can put his mind in the right headspace to win games... just treat it as a standard training kick. It's all mental.

Dawes is a great second or third forward. He competes his ass off. Those doubting him are fools.

Imagine playing kick-to-kick with Tommy Mac growing up