Red and Blue realist

It kind of felt like the commentators were told to talk up St Kilda today, maybe they thought if they did that they'd be entitled to an easier whack when the wheels fell off? Although in general how bad was BT, didn't know about Tracc's finger, said numerous times that Webster caused the 50 meter penalty which went to the saints (even argued with the others when they pointed out it couldn't have been a teammate the ran through the protected area. Was the guy drunk, or is he just that stupid?

He seemed to cramp up in the goal square in the last, but this was in the hamstrings/lower leg, which is pretty normal for most guys playing their first game for the season. Hopefully that was the reason behind the soreness. With his flexibility and Hoges running wild this season, I think it makes us much much more dangerous going forward, swinging capable guys around who need direct opponents must be a nightmare for oppositions to match up on.

This deserves more recognition, means he's not just running around headless, his impacting the play without needed possessions (the opposite of what many of our players looked like yesterday).

Sometimes the pure membership number doesn't mean a heap, some clubs include 3 game, dog memberships etc. Be interested to see the breakdown of our membership compared to other clubs, naturally I'd think we'd have a higher MCC crossover membership.

Not as simple as just dumping the funds into the bank and getting a 3% return if we're lucky, it'll be about what they use those funds to invest/build so that we either replace the lost revenue or alternatively be able to reduce down costs overall - for instance removing some/all of the leasing we are currently paying (which was around $1.8m last year - but the financial report doesn't break down what that covers).

The more I think about this, the more it seems like a pure business decision. The Age article has been updated to show we sold out of Leighaok for $11 million, noting that we've still got Bentleigh for 3 years then have that asset to deal with (which you'd expect a better return). While having a 'feel good' element about the deal, there's every chance that due to the continual changing nature of the gaming industry and the increase in costs associated, it was just the best time to get out. Generate a return on the sale of the assets, and then use them to invest into other income generating assets (although they haven't said what they are). If those funds are used to help fund a new admin/training facility which might also be used in a commercial sense and we stop having to pay rent for our existing spaces, then this could be the most important move this administration has made.

The article really only mentioned that the funds from the sale of Leighoak will be invested in other areas - there's actually no cash coming in from not renewing the entitlement on the Bentleigh pokies in 2022. From what I understand most/all the debt we have relates to the purchase of the Bentleigh club outright, so they must be comfortable to hold that until they deal with what they do with that venue/land once the pokies cease to operate. I can't see the club holding onto a social club on such a big land holding, so they might look at either selling or a development project at that stage, which should cover the debt and more. I to think there might have been a bit of "assistance" offered by the AFL and Govt's that if we get out of pokies they'll help with home base model.

Really depends on what they could use those funds on? They seem to have a plan in place to replace that revenue, because they've said it won't be to repay debt.

Some more info in the Age article, gaming only makes up 10% of overall revenue, also Jackson said we wouldn't be repaying debt from the sale, as they expect the $5 million debt to naturally be repaid in the next 3-4 years. https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/demons-announce-gaming-industry-exit-20180404-p4z7p7.html

Few people jumping to conclusions, around lost revenue etc. without knowing, what the exact revenue and profits were for each venue, what sale proceeds they expect and what they will use those funds for. So far this administration has been pretty spot on with most of their moves (that's publicly visible) so happy to back them in until further info is provided. Have heard some talk that the venue in Bentleigh would be worth a whole lot more if bulldozed and housing/units built. Maybe they'll enter into some sort of property development opportunity?

Would love to go again DV, team name was DoubleDigitMayhem

Very happy he got another gig, would love it if he got back to being a regular AFL player again.

Great list and talking point, I will say that while I agree a lot of our improvement will come from those yet to reach there potential, part of the optimism has to lie with so of those who have "reached their potential" actually doing so again. I'd argue that in 2017 Jones, Viney and Gawn had interrupted seasons which meant they only rarely reached their potential, so we'll also gain plenty from them. I'd also move TMac to the 'haven't yet reached potential' area, if including him as a forward (or even swing-man), we know what he brings as a defender but I think they've only just started to explore his forward capabilities and with Hogan being fit his forward role would develop even further.

At a guess if we gave pick 64 or whatever or 4th is, then pick 46 will be used to upgrade J Smith, so in the grand scheme it doesn't matter which pick we use

I don't mind that idea, such as giving the Tigers our pick 10 and maybe a 2nd next year and then getting their 1st and also the 1st they've got from Geelong and handing that off, if Adelaide get fixated on two 1sts. At least that's what I'd present to Adelaide as the only way we'll come up with the two 1st, they might panic and think there better off just taking 10 and next years 2nd themselves.

Geelong don't have a first this year, Richmond hold that. Plus Menzel is a free agent. Still don't think we'll give up anything near 2 firsts for Lever, maybe a 1st and 2nd, or 1st and other arrangement.

We needed the experience at the time, so can only see this as a good trade. Yes long term Adelaide have won the trade, but given the unpredictable nature of 2nd round picks, the next year Pat McKenna was taken at pick 23 - he's now on our list and hasn't played a single game yet. Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but we picked up a best and fairest winner who has played over 80 games for us. Think he'll play on next year, but honestly hope he only gets 15 games (max) and he's forced out of the team by younger guys.

The majority of trades get done with picks instead of players, but I can understand why the Crows would throw out the hail-mary trade of Tracc or Oliver. If you look at who's been traded over the last few years in a similar situation, Treloar, TMitchell, O'Meara, Danger and Beams, they've all nearly been done with 1 first rounder and something else (2nd) or 2 firsts but with a something else coming back as well as the player (either pick or decentish player). Most of the suggestions have been pick 10 plus a second this year or next, or next years first plus this years 2nd, or even 2 firsts plus we get Lever and a 2nd or fringe player, I think that'll be the way it plays out. Good on Adelaide for trying to get more, but if they really valued Lever then offer him a decent deal to begin with and he might not have wanted to walk away.

Hard to get a read on that, and I'll be waiting for the "love the place was never going to leave" if he stays or "just wanted to be back closer to family and friends" if he goes. I think his partner might have a lot to do with the decision, but then his younger brother plays with the Crows SANFL team so that might be another consideration. I wonder if he does come, if his brother ends up at Casey?

Adelaide don't really have much of a choice here though, Lever is un-contracted so in theory if he really wanted out he can go via the PSD - he won't - but the salary cap doesn't come into play from Adelaide's point of view, unless he wants to stay. However I agree we need to ensure that getting Lever won't cause the loss of a required player in a year or 2 due to salary cap pressure. We've got Gawn, Tracc, Oliver and Hogan who'll all command very decent coin plus Brayshaw, the Macs etc. who'll also want to be paid reasonably well. Hopefully the club has planned for this and front loaded Jones, Viney, Watts, Hunt and even Hogan now so that if we get Level he's salary just gets absorbed so not to disrupt the team long term.

Very interesting if true, I did think we all of a sudden looked very tired again in the last 3 or 4 games, which we did last year. Could also explain why we suddenly seemed to drop off the drive we had from defense early in the season. I wonder if this was done with the intention of preparation for finals where the games seem to go a lot more man on man? Although we didn't make it, hopefully it might help over the next few years if players are again required to adapt with finals in mind.

I'd see Lever playing the role Frost should have until he became a bit lost in the last half dozen games or so. My backline would be below: Jetta OMac Lever Hunt TMac Hibberd That means TMac stays back, which I think he is better suited too anyway, and if during a game we need to switch things up he can always go forward for a cameo or 2. Lewis, Salem, Jones and maybe Vince (but I don't like him down there) would then rotate through when the others are either having a break or have moved down the ground. Lever and Lewis would be in charge of organsing the backline, with hopefully one of TMac or OMac picking up the skills to do that (alongside Lever) once Lewis is gone. One of the mids to go back to take the kick ins - in no circumstances are TMac or OMac ever to do it again.

Agree completely, I do think Lever would automatically make OMac and Tmac better players, and also make Hibberd even more dangerous. OMac and TMac wouldn't get caught in no-mans land as often as they do if we have a reliable 3rd tall who sticks more-or-less to the back half. We all know both the Macs do have a tendency to run down the field a little, not that that's always bad but doing it with Lever in the team carries so much less risk than say Frost who again can run forward with little regard to who's left behind - makes for exciting play but can also make us too easy to score against on the rebound. Hopefully then OMac and TMac combined can take care of those taller forwards.

I think why people defend him, is that using the logic of needing to come in and dominate from the word go, you'd never have seen Gawn, Hunt, ANB, Pedersen, Hibberd or Jetta ever make it, and that's just from our current list. I acknowledge that he's not there yet, and he may never get to become the player we want him to be, but like so many others I'm not prepared to cast away a guy who coming to us was always going to take time to develop. No one's saying its a fait accompli that he'll make it, just that he has actually shown some signs that he's got a good chance if he continue's developing at the same rate. In fact you raised Hipwood and if you compare their first 10 games their stats are pretty similar, Hipwood had a few more goals but they mainly came from 2 games where he got a couple of cheap over the top ones, Weid has a lot more tackles which shows me he's prepared to be involved in the game even if not yet taking the big marks or kicking the goals you want. Hipwood then came on very nicely this year and that's what I'd hope Weid can start to do next year. If the conversation is still happening this time next year then I'd be worried, but a tall coming to the end of his second season having spent his draft year virtually out of the game should be looked at in the same light as some others who've taken longer to come on.

For years everyone on here banged on about letting players come through Casey in the right way. In fact if you go back to the preseason best 22 thread most said they wanted Pedo to start and let weid develop at Casey. If he had been forced to play every game would be best more developed, of course, but would that be the best for him? His work rate, in particular in the Adelaide and saints games was fantastic for a developing tall, as he gets stronger he'll also be able to put the contested marking he's shown at Casey on show. That's what people are seeing, if you can't that's fine.