deanox

here is the problem though - you made that all up. you have no knowledge, or statistically evidence to suggest that 5000, or 2500 or 1000 or 10 members will sign up. you guess at 2500 and decide that sounds right. similarly the $20 you selected is simply a guess, wat you believe is a good middle sort of number. the club most likely considered the idea, then said well we know the uptake on this is around 2% of the members, (which is 600 out of interest), yep well thats not going to be worth our while, BECAUSE to gets this many we need to push hard which will isolate a certain percentage of people. it also means of the 2% a certain number will spend less on merchandise etc, a certain percent wont renew their membership next year and they'll lose them from the donation list and a 100 other factors. this is a good idea. there can be 100's of good ideas. but you cant run with them all, you need to pick the best few that fit your strategy and use those together.

i should have said 'your old team' to make it clearer

it wasnt the usual answer to such a statement however.

with all due respect, because i think its a great idea and its good that you are offering to help with both money and ideas, but i agree with the marketing manager. 5000 people is 1/6 of our members. it is probably around 1/4 of our adult members. the club would have a pretty good idea where it can get money from and where it wont. it also would have a pretty good idea for the amount of uptake on this type of scheme. a similar scheme has been around for a while with the 'demon incentive plan' where you pledge $x for every mfc win. there were options included that gave straight donations, and options that allowed for direct debits regardless of the number of wins. if the uptake on these schemes was poor, there is no reason to suggest why suddenly 5000 members would jump on board a new slightly different scheme. and if you hadnt heard of this scheme it just goes to show the difficulty in selling these schemes to people, without directly calling and harassing them for their money. good ideas, but if the club thinks about it and dismisses it, support their decision and think up some more ideas. especially if the marketing manager has taken the time to call you and discuss it with you.

i like yze_magic. alot. in fact sometimes he comes to my house and brings over his dartboard set (complete with cameron bruce face cut out). normally he has to leave about 9 though, otherwise his mum gets pretty angry and comes and gets him. but it was funny because 'incorrect' had nothing to do with what he had said. yeah i think you should do it again. it is an interesting exercise, obviously very limited. in fact it is interest that in this modern age we can run this sort of poll so easily but back in football eras gone by this would have been most useful, because players dont play in set positions as much anymore. it is much more likely that a player is a forward pocket/mid which means he can get the most vote overall but not enough in either categories. maybe your poll could be 'talls' and 'smalls' but that predetermines the numbers of height instead of predetermines positions. is there a maximum number you can list in one of these polls? perhaps when the team is posted there should be a vote on 'should any player be left out, and if so, who should be brought in' dual question poll and obviously there must be a 'no' option in these questions......

funniest post of the week. i love that you just dismissed him and kept going. i cant stop laughing. dunn should have been included here. for the same reason as bruce, and because you left him out of the midfielders. or was that mclean? he should be on this list tho. he is clearly in our best 22.

Spencer, McNamara, Cheney, Weetra, Zomer and Meesen are the only ones on that list that dont seem to be either currently getting games or part of the future (ie petterd and grimes). thats a really promising sign.

he is an ex fitzroy supporter is he not? fitzroys last finals appearances (all 3 of them) were in 86, the year i was born...

in all honesty azzkika, if we made the finals you wouldnt no what to do with yourself....how many years have you been a mfc supporter? did you ever see your team play finals? they only played 3 finals in my lifetime, (and they were all in the same year!)

rhys palmers so soft he was scared to play us this week

first up, something i have noticed other teams do quite well, or at least attempt to do, if block and break the tags of their no.1 midfielders. the carlton players look after judd, geelong look after ablett, and opposition players do it to dunn. there is no guarantee that it works but it is something that should be done in my opinion.we dont seem to do much of that, and i would like to see whoever is in there with jones, both senior players who should know to do it, and younger players who arent quite as effective as jones at getting the ball, should be cutting in between, blocking etc the taggers. out of interest, why not pull jumpers and give the taggers some back, stop them following their man? they barely pay free kicks against taggers for jumper tugging, so there is no reason why they should get them either. with regard to jones getting more possessions, i dont think its that anyone wants him to get more cheap possessions, its that he needs to get more of the ball around the ground when not at a stoppage. he is great at getting to the bottom of packs, but he doesnt link up as much, or find himself in space. i realise he is an in and under player, not a wingman but it would be nice to see him getting a few more around the ground. what he has shown the ability to do is drop into the forward line and kick a goal or two, and i think this should be the main focus of his game. try and hurt the opposition on the scoreboard. by drifting forward and kicking a goal or two, you create a mismatch with the tagger, can score goals, and muck around with opposition match ups.

look at his brothers. he will bulk up. he will probably never be a david neitz, but there is no reason he wont fill out enough to hold a KP spot. what it really depends on is how we (and he) develop him. do we put him in the gym and bulk him right up and develop him into a KP player (when he starts putting on the muscle) or do we keep him lithe and use him as a runner (he can still do strength work, but you do it in different ways for different results).

well looking at the sandy team, neither bell nor martin have been named on the sandy team/bench, so that indicates they will play for the dees. that leaves: James McDonald, Michael Newton, Shane Valenti, Jeff White and Adem Yze on our bench, of which only 2 can play. yze is named on the ground for sandy while the other four are on the bench. based on that i am going to say that the final bench will read: bell, martin, newton and valenti/mcdonald, with my hunch that mcdonald wont be made to fly to perth. another point that BBB made in the sandy thread is that bartram and morton have also been named on the bench for sandy even though they are named on the ground for the mfc. could indicate that bartram could be swapped for junior.

for you two, and for everyone else wo still believes this misconception, you need to go back and read the player reviews. He got 17 1%ers INCLUDING 12 tackles. So thats 5 other 1%ers. It's still good, but dont claim it as something its not. you're kidding aren't you? both shots he had at goal he had at least 1 free man standing on his own waving his arms in front of goal waiting for the pass, while yze just put his head down and kicked for a low percentage goal. at times like that you need to do the team thing, not try to win it on your own... did yze turn down bigger money, or did he use the 'offer' to jack up his price at the mfc, getting himself on lots of money before playing 3 years worth of soft, unaccountable footy, where he refused to do the team thing while his skills slowly declined? woopdedo. a new coach comes in and makes a hard stand. he says we are building this club around youth. there are only a few basic requirements of you. do the team thing at all times. work equally as hard when you dont have the ball, and work equally as hard when we're in defence. play for the team, not for yourself. the coach says 'there are no favourites here anymore. you will all be judged on form, on the way you follow those rules, and on what you can bring to the club over the next 5 years.' he then proceeds to pick a team that includes all the players with the right attitude, regardless of talent. a young player decides he 'doesn't like the culture because he has to work for a spot now'. well get f***ed and play for another team if you are that selfish and soft.

yeah good point, which means it'll be bell or valenti (more likely valenti) and you wouldnt think either. really wouldnt surprise me if mcdonald came back via sandy. he was named on the bench not in the team. i wonder if he is named for sandy. also cant wait to see were grimes is playing...but wont be dissapointed if he's in the magoos again.

http://www.dockerland.com/message-board/do...s-out/view.html my favourite part of the site. there is a post a few down (by jason) that goes like this... it is laughable considering the dockers are the only team ever (that i can remember) who have been given compensation draft picks...

i think the problem with doing that is that it indicates he wont play again, and therefore can argue that the injury ended his career. we need to keep selecting him so that at the end of it all, it was his choice not to play, not ours to sack him. i wonder what would happen if he was selected for the mfc this week? would he put his hand up, pull on the red socks? maybe we could do that, get him to warm up, then pull a late change on him...

sounds ike you're a postman, reading other peoples mail lol good job though, hopefully the club takes these ideas on board.

i think you'll be right with that. wouldnt surprise me if bartram got a rest. bell deserves another week, none of the other smalls will be dropped. white wont come in unless another ruckman is dropped. perhaps he could replace stef martin, but i could only se that as a step backwards for everyone involved. i dnt see where yze fits in at this stage. if he is going forward he could only replace newton off that list and i dont think he will. h could replace bell or valenti but i dont think they are on the cards either.

i wish i had the skills to make vids like that. i honestly wouldnt no where to start, would have no idea where to get the footage from. and probably wouldnt have the time either. but it would be cool if it was done. if the afl was open book it would be something they would do, because those incidents are important so people know what they cant do...but alas they think 'image' is more important than 'honesty' or 'fairness', and almost important as 'money'.

bell gets hit from the side, or gets hit while propping because there is noone ahead to kick too (his decision making problems are evident here). he often holds it too long. sherman was running along the wing and got ran down from behind by the biggest block in our side.

thats what i would've thought. if the club medicos decalre you fit, and you cant offer any medical evidence to the contrary yet you refuse to play surely thats breech of contract and the mfc can stop paying you?

what are the reprucssions of this in relation to the 50% payment for next year due to 'career ending injury'. i suppose he could claim that he never played again after his injury so it was career ending. interesting position to be in for the club. our medicos are declaring him fit. wonder if he has any medical advice to the contrary?

obviously, but it is good to hear whether they worked on what was asked of them, and they generally say whether the disposal was good or wasted. and i thought that read 17 1%'s including 12 tackles. which makes a big difference...

sherman and ricky are similar ages. both had a really great season before succumbing to injury and have either not played much or stuggled to find form since. sherman arguably had more influence than ricky did when he was playing his best. but you say ricky has more potential? what i am saying is if we wouldnt trade ricky away for nix, why would brisbane trade away a young player who has shown he could play high quality footy? unless he asks to leave, or unless there is something wrong ie injury recovery isnt going along to plan, there is no way brisbane would let him go for anything less than what everyone here would trade ricky for...