deanox

wow. where do i start? i will first of all say that i agree with a lot of what you wrote, and that it is a breath of fresh air for one of your posts to be so reasonably constructed and based on a logical argument, rather than an emotional out-pour. although i believe you probably wrote this post in frustration, which means the logic was probably an accident http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/pc-melb...emons--adem-yze here are yzes stats the last few years. the last 3 have been his lowest years for average disposals since 2000, he is also averaging .5 goals per game this season. hardly 1 freak goal per game. he is lucky to kick one. players like yze are, when on song, damaging players with the ability to turn a match. he can kick freak goals, he can take great marks. he no longer does either often enough, and when you arent doing enough of the good things (kicking goals) your deficiency's become glaringly obvious. your lack of chase, the choice you make to kick off the ground instead of trying to pick it up, the selfish snap instead of the pass to an open player become the focus if you havnt kicked 4 goals yourself. that is what is happening with yze. i think if you read what i said, you will find that i never said he wasnt in our best 22 3 years ago. in fact read it again and you'll find i wrote "how good was yze 3 years ago?" it is a rhetorical question. he was fantastic when he was kicking bags and getting close to 20 kicks a game. and you will find that this is the crux of my argument about why you would trade bruce if the right trade came along. bruce, while playing good football, his kicking isnt up to scratch. i dont believe we will win a premiership while he is around. we need a new ruck and a new FF before that will happen, we are still just a bit away from it. IF we can get a great trade for bruce, i advocate taking it. only if its a great trade for good draft picks, because then we can build for the future. i liked my quote about the trading of bruce and the comparison with yze so much that i decided to leave it in here again. the argument for trading bruce for good value is made well in this quote: and now back to your post... that sounds to me like you are saying bruce isnt much chop? i disagree and think many other clubs would find him valuable. i think the bulldogs, fremantle, geelong, essendon and hawthorn would all jump at the chance to get bruce for various reason. he would add to all their lists, freeing up other players to play in other positions, helping to teach the younger kids. the bulldogs and freo think they could win it this year or next, bruce would add to that. what would they pay for him? im not sure. if it was a good deal i'd take it. if they offered a first round and a 2nd round we'd be silly to say no. bruce has kicked more than 30 goals in a season only twice since 2000, in 2001 and 2004. in fact he average 1.1 goal a game, about 22 a season if he plays all the games. not 30 to 40 like you claim. this year he is averaging .4 goals per game, well done on his career average. i agree and believe you have a valid point here regarding supporters favourites. however i think that a premiership is more important than a player. maybe not as important as david neitz, but more important than cameron bruce or adem yze. if bruce finishes his career with the dees and get 250 games then he will be in a different situation, but at this stage he has played 150 and is still up for trade. who will brock look up to you ask? well there are a plethora of senior players at this club, neitz, white, yze, bruce, green, godfrey, the list goes on, who have all been here for a while. brock is now in the leadership group. while he is still learning, i dont think he is in a position where he needs instruction from elders. he will learn leadership from neitz not bruce. yes, if he is underperforming and it is to the betterment of our team. but i dont think we will have to. yes he has. everyone here agrees that he has, in fact it has been a subject of debate for a number of years. check the link i posted above if you want stats, or start a thread asking opinions on this topic, but i am confident on this one. yep. 100%. i want a premiership, i want success. i want our club to be the best. if we are good enough to win a premiership we will have 22 players who will replace bruce in the eyes of supporters. we will have new kids to watch coming through the ranks that we can be excited about, just like we are with the current batch. players careers are finite, the team is always melbourne. the great mark and great goal are mere highlights on the way to success. if you like highlights, watch you tube and 'the season that was' videos, dont waste your time watching a team play, because those highlights rarely happen. i love when players do great things, but i love it more when they win, and i take a premiership above almost anything. answer me this, would you take a premiership, or a package of 'goal of the year' 'mark of the year' and a brownlow for bruce? i'd take a premiership, because thats why you play, for the team, not for individual glory. i agree with your assesment of ND 100% and have nothing further to add. brad miller would not have been captain based on one game. it might have put him back on track. but are you suggesting that that one game, the fact that we lost a final where brad played well has consigned him to being an average player in the sandy team? but if we won he'd be the captain of the mfc? you're kidding yourself. he has played a lot more games than miller, is only 21 and has a brighter future. if you want this to be a miller versus brock argument you are going to lose. you also loose the brock versus bruce argument because brock is 6 years younger and is only going to get better. bruce is coming to the end of his career and his kicking is currently off. i said the same thing about miller, i was wrong. he was among our best in 3 games, but he has been horrible in other games and has hardly had a touch at sandy. maybe his form was at the wrong time, maybe he looks good when everyone else plays badly. maybe when we play good footy it shows him up as being average. i dont know, but what i do know is that he is not best 22 material atm. i dont wanna see him sacked. i wanna see him traded (if we can get good value) or kept. thats wrong. not sure where you got that idea, butmiller kicked 6 and hasnt done anything since, has looked poor in fact, while dunn has played well. he is our most versatile, and one of our best. he might well get captain next year. i have never said he isnt good. i have said id trade him in the right deal. oh yeah, and his kicking has been terrible. and yes it has been obvious. he is missing set shots, his field kicking is poor. days gone by he has kicked 7 goals in a game. now he is lucky to snare 2. it has been a big factor, you just havnt noticed it because we won 2 games and then everyone got smashed last week. thats the last 3 games. dont get me started on bell, who has had a wonderful year. hope that clears some stuff up. any problems? post em, its all up for debate. just do me a favour, if you're going to post, make it a post like this. this was a reasonable well thought out post, and you made your points without attacking, and without carrying on without reason. im always open to discussion.

i'll throw in $20 if newton plays this friday. could one of the mods maybe start a new thread and sticky it where everyone can pledge and we can keep a running total at the top?

there is a good case for both keeping and dropping frawley here. i think the thing he needs most is game time. if he is going to be 4th in line behind carrol, holland and bizzel (and perhaps 5th behind wheatley) there is no point in keeping him at mfc if he is going to not get a real go. i would rather him then play a full game at FF or CHF for sandy for practice and experience. if however we are going to drop one of holland or bizz (holland atm) and frawley plays as a kpb then im all for keeping him in the mfc lineup to learn that way.

two points to make here. if the rule stayed the old way, there is every chance we could rort the system a second time (ie low finished bookended by finals seasons...the other point is im not sure about two seasons of four wins or less. i reckon that will result in teams ending up middle of the road, instead of a large rebuild...but im not really sure.

touché, mr. salesman, touché!

im sorry but i fail to see any reference to the richmond game in that post. maybe the top line was a general statement, but it isnt specifically about the richmond game. but that aside, the crux of my argument was that he should be judged on the richmond game, more than the others you listed, because of the external factors associated. if you disagree with that thats fine, difference of opinion.

i think that play epitomised jones attitude all day. he doesnt give up, he gets in there and tries to get the pill, even if he's on his own, and not successful. thats why i gave him votes even though he wasnt the leading possie getter, or didnt kick 3 goals, he tried his guts out all day under those packs and didnt have much support.

i think you hit the nail on the head but you didnt realise it. "danihers demons", not daniher soley. daniher is not the sole person responsible for our poor performances. do you advocate sacking any of the players mid season? bruces kicking has been poor. but other aspects of his game have been fantastic. should we tell him we're sacking him at the end of the season? you need to judge daniher on a number of things, not only his match day coaching, but his preparation, and training, his organisation, god knows how many other things he has to do. are you suggesting that ND sits in the coaches box and says 'yeah do what you want, i dont care if you cant hit targets, i dont care if your soft etc..."? you dont announce that you are sacking him, right after you dont need him anymore, you review the situation, interview the appropriate candidates (including neale if he applies) and then make a decision. if you wish to do what you have suggest (tell everyone he is sacked at the end of the year), why would he keep coaching? why would he do anything to help the club? id be surprised if he didnt walk straight away. what you are saying is tantamount to sacking him there and then, and i think you'll realise that the public blood letting of a coach is not necessarily a good thing. it leads to temporary coaches, it leads to instability and uncertainty around the club. ND has worked hard for the club and deserves the respect to see out his contract, til the end of the year. of the games you mentioned i like you missed the one that mattered, the richmond game. we have had a horrible run with injuries, both during and before games, we have had instability in the 22 picked on the park and we havnt been able to get up. the richmond game was a disgrace, but the other games were expected in all honesty.

and apparently the current coaches page isnt update either http://afl.allthestats.com/coaches/currentcoaches.php

nah they wont do that. thats not fair to the coach who has a contract and a job to do. what they need to say is 'we are reviewing our coaching panel and structure for next year and will be interviewing all applicants for the job to ensure that we have the right person for that job. whether it be neale or someone else. he is still contracted til the end of this year. he knows he wont get the gig next year, but we need to start looking now.

i get the feeling that you've decided to take it upon yourself to be illogical and champion a cause just because you think it might even up the discussion or something? there are no reasons why you would defend bruce to the teeth in this discussion. he is tradable without a doubt, if we can get ourselves into a better position with that trade. when was the last time he won a game off his own boot? not recently. and the way you attack other players, including brock mclean is illogical and uninformed. do you have a personal grudge against him? because if not you will realise that brock is a player who can win games off his own boot. bruce can, but hasnt for a while, and at 27 it is getting past him. consider the careers of bizzel and yze as of today. while biz has produced some honest performances down back this year, he is realistically on his way out, most likely his last year. the game, it seems, has gone past yze. he has struggled for a couple of years now and is really well past it. i would be srprised if he gets more than one year at the end of this season. both players could of been traded a couple of years ago (when they were 27) and we prob would have got great value for them. a couple of years on and we are stuck with them underperforming. if bruces kicking doesnt improve he could well go down this path (laugh if you will but how good was yze 3 years ago?). if we can get a 1st and 2nd round draft pick for bruce, we'd be mad not to take it. the young kids coming through would play with the current group of under 23s for 7+ years, giving us a chance at a premiership that having bruce won't. therin lies the reason why you dont trade mclean. he is part of that next group. even if bruce is a better player in your eyes, bruce will be gone in 5 years, mclean still has 10 at least. maybe 12. it is not about dont trade my favourite player. it is abut how can we win a premiership.

i rate bate, and think he will be a good footballer, and could well be a superstar. but you're wrong. he is not yet a superstar. if you want to rate him as a superstar, you need to rate ben holland (nearly 200 games, and nearly as many goals), jmac (mr consistancy), bell (who has played more games and whos best game to date has been better than bates best game to date) and others. you use the word too lightly. i bet you were one of those people who called stuart diver a hero when he survived the landslide? you've no idea.

should have read "Barry Hall...a Barry Crocker!" :D

it wasnt me bandwagon if thats what your suggesting lol i don't have stuffed toys anymore. but i agree you get a lot of idiots in the outer, no matter which side your from. thats why i enjoy the redlegs seats. apart from the odd moron everyone is cheering for the same side, and most people have the right idea.

but i want to hear how many shots he got for the game. he has a history of playing good for some of the time. i want to hear he has played a good second half and kicked 2-3 more, finished with 5 or 6 goals 5 behinds and 2 on the full. 13 shots, 10 marks inside 50, 18 kicks and 24 disposals lol and the mandatory screamer. and we'll see if the mfc can somehow not pick him next week.

any other scores? please tell me newton finished with 6

and i would still trade him if we were offered a top 10 pick and a half decent player. why? not because i dont like him, but because by trading for picks now we are more likely to win a premiership. bruce is now becoming part of the older group yet still has high market value. by getting a high draft pick you get a chance to add to the 18-22 yo group who will hopefully challenge for a flag. we wont do this if we cant get anything good. and we wont do this unless its part of an overall strategy to get a number of low draft picks but if we want to rebuild that is how you do it.

good edit to get rid of the spelling mistake

how many typos can there be in a professional article jaded? lol

my dad heard from bartram it will be two more. doesnt mean much though, they have been saying that for a while. and he has missed so much footy he will have to come back thru sandy.

disagree. davey is a front runner. yes he has pace, yes he can break lines, but he wont win the game if the rest of the team is being beaten. brock could get under and lift the team. michael voss could do that. pavlich or judd can do that. davey is not in the class of these players, and is therefore up for trade if the right deal comes. http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/ft_play...2&pid2=1498 here is a link with a stat comparison of the two. yes bate is playing good footy at the moment and dunn hasnt cemented a spot but dunn is 20 and has played 17 games. remember there are people here who want miller retained and he has played 85 or something. bate is not a superstar. he averages 17 disposals and 1 goal per game. that makes him a promising kid. nothing more. miller was called a superstar before he was due. use your words more carefully. the kid has potential, he doesnt even have consistency yet.

bizzel got 6 kicks (and 10 handballs), 5 marks and no tackles. imo there were more players worthy of votes than bizzel. he did his bit down back but we got smashed. who was his opponent? with richmond playing loose men in our forward line bizzel seemed to be a loose man quite often. bowden was a loose man for richmond, he got 33 touches.

yeah i thought wheats was around the mark for he end votes but i tossed up between him, bate and green for 1 vote. in the end i went green because well, he had a couple of more touches and i couldnt split them any other way...

thats what we seemed to do in the second half and it ended up being 8 men in their forward line at 16 in ours, because when we manned up richmond put another man back. i thought the open forward line really suited richmond and gave richardson a lot of freedom to run around, made it easier for him. how often do we complain that neita doesnt have space to lead into? richo had it in spades today and robbo was cramped. i agree, clint, that we should always man them up at first to negate their running game plan, but then i think e need to devise a way to drag their players back in front of the ball, even if that means pushing some of our forwards back to drag their defenders away... perhaps the 'extra' forwards (players 7 and 8) who have been dragged forward for match ups should start up on the flank/wing allowing loose possessions 60 to 70 out from goal? at least it sets us up, rather than a blind bomb from the centre.

cheers for the kudos i only watched the game live, i really cant be bothered sitting through a replay of that! a good point you make about browns early touches, and a similar thing could be said for richo and his kicking, he was kicking poorly, all we needed were a couple of good spoils and it would've made it very hard for him to get back into the game. as it was, those two caused us lots of problems. imo holland was the wrong match up for richo, and we shouldve gone for carrol from the get go. i think you also made a good observation regarding their willingness to use the loose man as an uncontested runner, while we looked to kick it into the forward line quickly. it was like we wanted to get it there and not muck around with it, but our lack of organisation in the forward line destroyed this. i am not sure if our loose player(s) worked hard enough to get into a good position for us either. im not sure the value of a loose man at the stoppage compared to a loose man on the opposite wing. too many times did the tigers clearance go straight out towards where a loose man was waiting, away from everyone else. our loose man might help us win the pill but then we had no one to give it too. is this a problem with the players work rate or a problem with the under lying tactics?