deanox

This year he had 27 SIs from 65 disposals. In the 8 games we played we had 145 scores (inc rushed behinds), so he was involved in >19% of our scores. 24 from 90 in 2019. Poor year for him and the team. A whopping 93 from 219 in 2018. We had 446 scores (inc rushed behinds) in his 18 games, so he was involved in >21% of our scores. Shorter games and season, but only 17 players in the comp had more then 93 this year.

I still think what sets Spargo apart is his ability to create, or add value to his disposals. He is almost the anti-Oliver. He hardly gets any touches in comparison, but none are incidental. They almost always improve our onfield position. I suspect he has the highest "score involvement to possession" ratio of any player on our list, and probably in the top handful of the AFL on that measure. It's a weird choice of statistic but it demonstrates how involved he is in our "connection".

I'd go as far as to say "members only" as well.

I like playing in front of big crowds, but this is one time that being a Melbourne supporter will be a benefit.

It also tells me we've had about 25 players get to 200 games, and another 35 to 150 games, and about 100 more to 100 games out of 1358 players. So historically 2% play 200 games, 4.5% get to 150 and 12% to 100. When we rip on players like Omac or ANB for being "average footballers", we forget they have played 80+ games for us, and in the 15% most capped MFC players ever. They might not be superstars, but they have been successful players for us.

wrong quote: this was for @La Dee-vina Comedia Seems to be an auto Google translate feature.

Jones, Jetta, KK for sure. Vanders, Hibberd depending on age, injury or form. Then the numbers made up from ANB, Smith, Baker, Nibbler and the stragglers, pending trades in/out and lost sizes. But 2022 is going to be an imtereating year, with only Melk and maybe Hibberd near the end, and mosy of the stragglers gone this year or next. Maybe a Hunt or Hore gets a 2 year contract this year, but there don't look like many planned outs.

And then there were 8 (plus 4 rookies): Jones and Hibberd signed for 1 year each. With Hannan probably going to the doggies, the list is starting to take shape. I suspect those last few will really hinge on what happena with Brown, Smith, Smith, Tmac, etc.

I can't wait for "guess the silhouette on the demonland banner" next year. With hair like that, I will be guaranteed to get one right.

I'd think there was only room for one. However he was a rookie, so if that could be extended, maybe. And if Tmac goes, that mightbe enough to keep a depth KPF. It might depend on where they see Petty playing, which might depwnd on what happens to Omac and Hore.

I agree with this, insofar as indistries can be limited. I'm in a professional services environment in which there are only few hundred people Australia wide specific to the area of technical expertise. So there are external mentors, related to general career or internal related to technical. They have different roles and different frequencies. So I could absolutley see an ambitious young player having a mentor within the footy industry, and one external, general to professional sport, say someone from rugby league. And I could imagine an introduction to Goodwin as a fresh retiree (still more Adelaide than Essendon) as a "1st year player mentor", that has grown past that into a loose informal relationship over the years. All Im saying is it is not as unimaginable that it could happen as some are suggesting.

Absolutely agree. I just thought that imcluding those rumours might help put the "but why are they pushing him out the door" questions to rest.

In non football industry, many people have mentors who work for direct competitors. You might meet them through an industry association or be introduced to them by someone within your organisation. They may be directly related to your role or a more generalist. In fact mentors outside of your organisation at one of the best ways to help you learn and stay on track. Remember, mentoring is about listening and helping someone find their path, about providing an occassional external perspective. It isn't coaching. I can't comment on whether the Smith/Goodwin story is true. But given Goodwin has a reputation for being a people person/relationship builder, and also for being a dedicated, hardworking footballer and coach, it wouldn't surprise me if Smith reached out based on reputation, or if someone at Adelaide said would you have a coffee with this kid when you're in town.

@xman97can you or anyone else confirm this? I would assume that their points deficit hits a pick they hold at the end of the 2021 season, not any pick that may be linked to them. Otherwise clubs would do this all the time: trade out picks, then bid and burn their trading partners. I can understand that it would apply to any picks they still hold at the end of the 2021 season, because then they can trade them and both parties know the value.

I agree with all of that, but for completeness note the stories/rumour about why he may be NQR are: - Knee injury shot (should be able to resolve through medical assessment); - His wife is a disruptive influence around the club (possibly interpreted from, related to issues you mentioned); and - He is very family focussed and not as footy focussed any more (could be partially true, but related to 2020 at North Melbourne, rather than footy in general). Personally I find the issues you listed more likely to be real, but at least here is (an almost complete) list of rumours/issues.

Gives off to Brown who kicks to Brown and scores. Oh look there is Wagner and Wagner in the crowd.

I think you've missed my point E. I wasn't saying I rate the list higher, I was saying that his ratings were not consistent with the ranking system/criteria he gave. For example, Langdon may be a B grader in your mind. I'd probably agree because he is a good player with flaws. But the definition of B grader given was play 10-18 on a list. He is better than that based on hus last 3 years bnf results. I think Tomlonson is a good ordinary footballer. Career role player, who gets a game more weeks then not. C grade is probably a fair description. But Tomlinson has played 86 of 92 available games in the last 4 years inc 13 of 17 for us this year. Only 12 players at MFC played more games then him. You cannot possibly argue that makes him player 18-30 on a list. By the ranking system provided he has to be called a B grader, regardless of our opinion.

I'm only going by the rankings they used. A-grade: Elite player on any AFL list B: Top 10-18 player on most lists C: An 18-30 player on a list Langdon has finished top 5, 3 years running, of course its reasonable to assess him as "probably top 9 on most lists". I'm not arguing that our players are good, i'm saying I think the system is terrible. I would have thought that A grader was at best 3-5 per team, and B grade would be top 10. C could see you out to top 18, and D below that.

I think its probably not a great way to rate the lists and as a result its a poor effort: Langdon, Lever, May, Oliver, Petracca are comfortably in the top 9 players on almost every AFL list, which would make them A grade in this rating system. Oliver and Langdon have finished top 5 in his clubs bnf the last 3 years. May is a gun and was his club captain. Petracca just finished =3rd in the Brownlow. Lever hasn't performed as well as hoped, but is recognised as being a player of that quality. Arguments could be made for Brayshaw, Salem and Viney to be in the top 9 of many lists. Probably not enough to meet the A grade on this scale? Hibberd is getting old, but he would still get a game in most teams, therefore the B grade is reasonable. Tomlinson has played 140+ games in the last few years, he is definitely in the 10-18 player list Harmes would get a game for all teams, therefore he is in B grade Preuss is about to be drafted into a club and become their ruckman, and probably play most games, therefore is B grade on that scale. My biggest issue if probably their choice of scale than anything.

Absolutely. I have a lot of compassion for the mod team too, you are all doing your best. And sometimes, you dont have the time to investigate or the emotional labour capacity to interpret pages of posts to analyses tone, or historical interactions to work out who is trolling, who is reacting etc. So sometimes I'm sure you give a mute or a warning to everyone imvolved becauses that's easier. No problems with that. And also the mods see things through the lens of their own experiences, which adds to interpretation of what is or isnt political ideological etc. We are all part of the community, we're all responsible to set the tone and standards together.

I think this is true, in that if you ignore all aspects of politics, social issues etc. you dont make it apolitical, you just make it "conservative" (I'm meaning the current political status quo, not using that as a pejorative). For example, the current discussion around coaches mental health is inherently "political". Is calling someone "crazy" offensive or is that "too PC"? Should they "toughen up" or is that "toxic masculinity"? Are we as a society doing enough to support mental health? What about our role as an AFL community? I'd hope that any discussion that does touch on these topics need not be automatically banned because they are relevant to how we think and analyse, interpret and understand. But also how it plays out determines that: arguing, fighting, baiting, trolling, doesn't help. And when these issues derail the conversatio and become the focus, it changes from a footy convo with social commentary to a political, religious or ideological discussion, and this probably isn't the place for that. My experience here has been overwhelmingly positive, I think most of us do a good job of avoiding conflicts or derailments. But special thanks must go to the admin and mod team for making it a great space.

From memory, the reports were that they thought his ongoing concussion symptoms were actually related to a neck issue, rather than concussion itself. He'd done a body of work to put it behind him and medical advice was that he was ready to go. It might have been a bad call, but sounds like it had its reasoning.

I've already apologised for derailing, and asked that we try to move on. Perhaps you missed that? No reply necessary.

And people wonder why we look to bring in players like Smith, Lewis etc

Agree with his poor effort and form, but I think the reaaon he wasn't dropped is because he was considered to have the potential to fix the connection.