deanox

i dont mind you disagree, this is healthy debate here! the 4th 5th game wasnt dead rubber. if two of 6+7+8 beat 3+2or1 then the loser of 4+5 gets eliminated. regarding the new system being fairer, how can it be fairer that the top four get a double chance and a home final? its fairer for those who finish in the top four yes, but not for anyone else. you finish 5-8 and win, you should be rewarded. the way it stands now unless you finish top 4 you have virtually no chance of winning the flag because there are too many concessions given to the opposition (exception, a situation like the kangas because they get a final in melb next week by chance)...unless you are so superior you can win all the away games...

i'll raise your hawthorn kangas story, one collingwood west coast story. west coast get done, but have somehoe 'earned' the right to a home final against collingwood who won their first final. i hate collingwood, but this doesnt seem fair to me... i agree with the adelaide melb 1998 issuesort of, however i dont think it is as bad as it is now... kangas WB sydney melb adel st kilda wc essendon we beat adelaide, kangas beat essendon, sydney beat st kilda and wb beat wc. kangas and WB get a home prelim final, they finished 1+2 and won, no worries. wc and essendon go straight out, they finished 7+8 and lost. melb and sydney now get to host games in week two of the finals, as we won our first final, we had earned that right. we beat st kilda, and adelaide were good enough to beat sydney in sydney. they then travelled again to beat WB in melbourne. im not sure why it isnt fair that adelaide stayed in...3 teams below them lost in the first week of the finals...and then they were good enough to win the next 3 games interstate to claim the cup...

i mean i believe the club saw itself in premiership mode. why else would it trade for pickett and holland? why else wouldnt it move on older payers like brown, ward, etc it thought the list could get us there and kept trying for it. we failed, i think we are mid rebuilding, but we need to really sweep it out this year and next. i see us being 3 years into a 5 year rebuilding phase...lol but i agree the list has suffered by holding onto players...

the first problem is that there is too much difference between 4th and 5th. if percentage seperates it virtually cuts out your chances to win a flag. the second problem for me is that the loser of 1v4 ans 2v3 get a home final round 2. how does that work? you already get a double chance, why should you be rewarded with a home final for losing? the team that finished in the bottom four and own should get the home final... i liked the mcintyre system. 1+2 are gauranteed a double chance. the two highest placed winners got home prelim finals (even if that was 5+6. the two lowest place losers got kicked out. ok so this favours 5+6 and takes away from 3+4 but at least it was more even across the board, a sequential grading of advantage rather than a block of four and a block of four. what are other peoples thoughts?

dont get me started on umpiring...bugs me everytime. they need to be paid more and they need to be full time professional. thats all i'll say today.

i know we have lots of tall forwards, but if we could draft one who is like franklin i would take it in a second. newton looks ok. bate looks ok, dunn looks ok. franklin kicks goals and wins games. we need that. other wise i would take high quality key defender, midfield pace, ruckman, in that order. i still think the best option with ruckmen is to develop them off the rookie list. unless they are a star (who will go number 1) rucks are too much of a risk.

i agree we need to act on some other senior players and if we do we will look at getting 1st and 2nd round picks...if you read my post in the 'edit your list' thread you will see where i think this list could head over a few years, especially if we can get 4 top 20 picks this year and next... my issue is trading a 25 year old player who has shown he can be an amazing footballer but is injury prone. that would be a very brave move. trading a 27-28 year old before the slide is more likely to be a win for us. i think the first alternative has too much risk associated with it, unless you are sure he wont get up again. and it is worth noting that our club has been in 'premiership mode' for the past 3 season...trading for players, expecting to win a flag...

i agree that you should trade players who like like disapearing, but i dont think that we would of considered trading wheelan 2-3 years ago, nor should we have. he was the only small defender we had and while he had had some injuries i dont think anyone would have expected it to be like this...

Keep because i want them Clint Bartram, 20 Matthew Bate, 20 Daniel Bell, 22 Simon Buckley, 20 Cameron Bruce, 28 Nathan Carroll, 27 Aaron Davey, 24 Lynden Dunn, 20 James Frawley, 19 Colin Garland, 19 Brad Green, 26 Paul A. Johnson, 23 Travis Johnstone, 27 Nathan Jones, 20 James McDonald, 32 Brock McLean, 21 Brent Moloney, 24 David Neitz, 33 Michael Newton, 20 Ricky Petterd, 19 Jared Rivers, 23 Russell Robertson, 29 Colin Sylvia, 22 Isaac Weetra, 18 Matthew Whelan, 28 Matthew Warnock, 23 Paul Wheatley, 26 Jeff White, 31 On the list because they are contracted or have a specific role/depth, but are likely to go the following year: Simon Godfrey, 27 Ben Holland, 30 Adem Yze, 30 Trade Possibilities? (either trade these players or keep them on the regular list. millers size is worth keeping, CJ is young. only delist is we are sure we'll get something worthwhile) Chris A. Johnson, 22 Brad Miller, 24 Promote from rookie list Jace Bode, 20 Shane Neaves, 20 Rookies Daniel Hughes, 21 Daniel Hayes, 19 Gone or should go (all should be offered for trade (except retirees) and if not traded, delisted) Clint Bizzell Nathan D. Brown Byron Pickett Mark Jamar Ryan Ferguson Heath Neville Daniel Ward anyone else on the list is up for trade if the price is right. if you are young the price automatically gets heaps higher. next year will be the last year for holland, neitz, yze, mcdonald and white imo. with five forced delistings on the horizon, we need to dump deadwood this year to ensure we dont lose 12 players this time next year, or get stuck with these players we dont want. assuming no trades, and that we only draft 18 year old players, we will have to draft 5 players this year (two rookie promotions), and 5 next year. assuming we keep cj miller and godfrey, our list average will be 23.17 next year, and 22.4 the year after. if we draft some decent kids in the next two years i think our next good shot at a flag is not until 2010, but 2008 we have one more chance with the old guard (if everyone stays fit) and 2009 we only have a chance if the mclean, sylvia, bate, newton, dunn, bell core stands up a treat.

didnt g train retire? and kosi will prob be out injured anyway...

this is the 'most entertaining poster' not the 'best poster' joeboy! im not sure demonland writes them all, i think they are written by various contributors (scoop junior, beach road baz, clyde the cabbie, whishpering jack etc) and demonland just posts them...

from my professional source (a physio who worked with the geelong football club for a bit) there is a large degree of correlation between weak 'core strength' and groin injuries, and other leg soft tissue injuries (hammys in particular). i am not sure if this extends to OP, but it would make sense if it did in some way. i think there are a number of points here: the players need to have the muscle strength and endurance to be able to withstand the forces required (long distance running, sprinting, and kicking). the core strength must be strong enough that it can support itself, and the groins and hips are not balancing the body excessively. players must be given adequate rest to prevent the onset of OP. ie hours and hours of kicking practice on top of running and agility work, followed by weights sessions, will probably lead to OP. another point i am interested in regarding OP is the types of players that get it. midfielders mainly, but also hard running (large engine) talls (mostly forwards). perhaps because their bodies are not condition to the running like a midfielders body is.

it would be funny if trapper was secretly disguised as someone else on the selection committee, and voted against any coach who suggested trading him... :D

just in time for the 'most entertaining poster' awards too

Well the most entertaining poster is a tough one...i'll go with 3: Joeboy. his efforts with the 3 word analysis make for entertaining reading every week. you dont have to agree, and often its better if you disagree because that generates some good healthy discussion. just a pity the last few weeks people have taken to attacking him for his views. i'd still like to see a joeboys 3 word description of each poster! 2: Yze_magic. at least he has conviction in his outlandish statements. and there is no way that you could ever confuse his posts anything except entertainment. good discussion value. 1: Rhino Richards. If you have had a hard day at work/uni, get home to relax, start reading demonland and realise that someone has written something ridiculous, at least you know you'll get a laugh next post when RR lets rip with another scathing comment. Not always fair, but hey none of us are all the time. At least you'll laugh, and thats what 'entertaining' posters are about.

i think you probably hit the nail on the head with this post. you are claiming that BB is bad luck. that has nothing to do with his methods or training. perhaps he brings bad luck. but i still believe that anything BB does would be under direction of the footy dept, and from sources that count i have heard nothing but good things about BB.

i know what your saying, he isnt the typical leader, but i disagree. i think shows many leadership qualities. he directs the play, he is often in there trying to fire other players up. he works hard at the morale of his teammates. i am not saying he is captain material, but these acts are all examples of leadership...

i think its been mentioned above that china (and its people) have a habit of getting into random sports. i have no evidence to back this up. but i know heaps of chinese people who live in australia, and still speak chinese first. (well i dont know them, they just turned up at uni one day ) and regarding china itself, its population is soo massive, that you only need a few to like what they see regarding afl for the potential to be massive. at the end of the day, i dont believe anyone expects the china initiative to be a short term success, i think it is planning for the future, putting the steps into place now to ensure we are at the forefront of that initiative if it eventuates. for the record, does anyone have any connections with china? do they get any afl on cable tv?

RE the china thing, i think it probably costs us nothing (or close to nothing) to run, and if we get something out of it all the better. we are positioning ourselves to be the best club to get that market share, if it comes. man u is a global sporting club. collingwood are national (or at least they think they are). i think we are doing smart things to position ourselves to appeal to an international audience. i have no problem with the china project for these reasons.

Any word on who kicked the 21 points? And this will make Geelong's run to the VFL grand final a whole lot easier ...

can we have an award for the best idea? lol

now now. its not all melb supporters who feel like that. and i still believe the reason why mfc suporters use the term 'seconds' to refer to sandy is not because it is meant as an insult, but because in football, traditionally, when your players get dropped from the 1sts the go to the seconds, its the way it works.

i hate PA. too me they are the collingwood of the interstate teams. however i respect the way their footy club goes about success. they expect success. and when they dont get it, they review everything. they are ruthless. they are a club that goes about winning football, not just about playing football. i was going to post this as a reason for why i am excited about getting bailey, because he comes from that culture, but thought i would add it in here. the last couple of years havnt been great, but they havnt gone on about 'rebuilding' or 'youth' they ahve just gone out and done it. yes i know they have had a strong core of senior players with leadership, but that was developed over there in the first place. hopefully bailey can bring that to our club.

how bout we make 2 threads. one for votes, and one for discussions about the votes?

i would like to hear your three words out of interest... when i get a moment i'll try and do mine.