mo64

Most of the WA kids are playing senior football in the WAFL. I'd rather read an assessment of them based on how they're currently performing at this level, rather than 1 under 18 game.

The same headline applied to Geelong circa 2006. The article is hardly mind blowing, because each year, every club has to decide on their draft strategy. Drafting a big name player is always fraught with danger, because unless you win a flag, the move is judged as a failure. In McNamee's defence, he probably saw the off-field benefit of signing a Jonathon Brown as a short term fix to our financial woes. BTW, Collingwood's list is actually quite healthy, with a group of talented young kpps and 3 damaging mids in Thomas, Pendlebury and Davis, all of whom haven't reached their peak.

He's just following the game plan!

Spot on DD. It's just like when someone says "how many of our players would get a game at another team". As you say, there's no prototype to a premiership player.

Another fluff article if you ask me. Every team has a blueprint to win a flag, but history shows that there's no set formula. I'd be more encouraged if CC believes that of the 18 players in position, 4 of them will become elite players in the next 5 years. That's what wins a flag, not 13 very good footballers.

The impression I get is that a player's total possessions in the modern game flatter to deceive, and is somewhat irrelevant. Teams rack up close to 400 possessions these days, which averages out to 18 per player. So 25 possessions is about average for a running player.

How the hell did you come to that conclusion?

It's funny how people have bagged our influential ex-players for not getting involved in the club, and when they do, they're bagged for being an "old boys" network. It's great that we're getting passionate Melbourne people back to the club.

Reported on SEN this morning that we will pull out of the new stadium deal. The main reason being that we want to keep our administrative offices at the MCG. We will train at Gosch's paddock and lose our $250,000 deposit.

Our poor on-field performance has been a major contributing factor to our current financial position, so don't feel too sorry for them.

Valid points Gouga. The club needs to articulate the reasons why McNamee was incapable of implementing the new board's direction. If they don't, members and the general football world will see it as another waste of money. Having said that, the position will still attract quality candidates, simply because it's such a challenging role. I still believe that Stynes would have consulted the AFL prior to terminating McNamee's contract, and the AFL must have given their blessing.

I think it's important that the club details exactly why McNamee has been given the flick. In this instance, the stock standard press conference spiel of "it's was a mutual decision" won't wash with me.

I doubt it. Reports are that McNamee could resign as early as today. His reported pay out would $115,000, which is 25% of his salary. I wouldn't be surprised if the AFL had some input into all of this.

Thanx Welchy for the rundown, especially the clarification of our salary cap rorts.

Well obviously it wasn't that easy for the previous CEO, because as freo2008 pointed out, they were $8m in debt. Port Adelaide are also in debt. Just face it Rhino, your emotive rants have little factual basis. As for Freo's questionable culture, what do you make of the fact that we hired their previous coach as our Football Manager?

When Schwab took over as CEO at Freo, they were a financial basket case. I think you'll find that he has turned their financial fortunes around.

The statistical list the I quoted wasn't related to the article regarding power forwards and power midfielders. And Petrie did well to back up against the Hawks on Saturday night after playing against the Pies on Friday night. B)

I'll defend any player with obvious football skills and awareness, because with confidence and opportunity, they can make an impact. (CJ is an example of that this year). That covers nearly everyone on our list. I won't defend players with little or no awareness. In the past, i've slagged off Godfrey, Williams and Nicholson, and of the current list, Daniel Bell fits this criteria. Basically, I don't like try hards.

Very typical of your posting Rhino. Usage of obscure, demeaning words doesn't make you intelligent on a football website. You're debating skills are more suited to Parliament Question Time.

He spent 65% of the time on the ground, and we had 26 less inside 50's, so where we these supposed opportunities that came his way?

As i've repeated ad nauseum, but you fail to comprehend, the high possession game plan doesn't suit our list because we don't have speedy players who can evade a tackle, and carry the ball. At least give our forwards a chance of a contest, with a quick kick into the forward line, with crumbers waiting for the spill. Believe it or not Rhino, you actually have to kick goals to win a game, and that's difficult to do if you don't get the ball into your forward 50. But as long as you're happy with our miserable performances, that's all that matters.

Correct. And where's the logic in him spending only 65% of the time on the ground. :angry:

Bump. Freo game: Possessions - 37 more Clearances - 10 less 1st possessions - 6 less Inside 50's - 26 less As i've stated all year, our ball movement and team structure is garbage.

So when does Rhino get suspended for his incessantly demeaning comments of Adem Yze? Double standards if you ask me. :angry:

Spot on. At least he's prepared to take a tackle rather than give off a wayward handball. I find the criticisms of him similar to those directed at Rhys Palmer. It can't be easy being the no.1 in-and-under midfielder in a sh#t side.