deanox

I'd happy give them 62 and 63 as well. Thag means they only lose about 200 draft points for a 1st grade (capable) ruckman while we lose picks we aren't going to use but gain an early 2nd rounder. Win win. We would have 22, 23, 83 etc Usually we need to take 3 picks at the draft, including rookie upgrades (with list sizes reducing that could be cut to 2). Either way, we have Lockhart, Brown and Bennell as potential upgrades. We can use pick 83+ on those. So if we upgrade one rookie, we use both 22 and 23 at the draft. If we upgrade two rookies, we can use 22 and trade 23 for a player.

Ah so you must rate ANB? These stats are from the essendon game but are pretty consistent: ANB is regularly listed in the top 5 on ground for fastest average speed, faster in attack and defence, most distance moved at high speed, number of sprints and repeat sprints. Fwiw I agree with you about these things being more important than top speed, and I'm taking the [censored] RE ANB a bit: this is his strength and why he gets picked, and I don't think he is as bad as others make out, but he doesnt do enough other stuff well enough which is why he is on the fringe.

I think smaller or larger list sizes would work, but right now we are in an awkward spot. Make it a senior squad of 32, and a development squad that fills the reserve league: allow interchanges between the 2 squads on long term injuries or at set windows (e.g. 3 times during the year). Alternatively make the lists 55 and field a senior and reserves team from the list. The current list size means you have a "best 26" and then a developing squad of kids not really ready and a handful of journey plugs to fill gaps where needed. This means that our main product (the AFL) is not always the best players possible. It also means that the reserves comps aren't as strong as they could be: many players who would genuinely be in the next best players in the country aren't on AFL lists (they aren't developing) and they don't play for the reserves comp. I think bringing them back in the fold would actual speed up development of juniors at reserves level, and also ensure that all players in the 22 have earnt their spot. If you aren't drafted at 18, and haven't developed by 21, you are virtually lost to the system. IMO the problem is the AFLPA. While they should be trying to get living wages for as many players as possible, they seem more focused on getting the most money for the elite players at the expense of the rest.

He has been rubbish since he went on the IPA podcast.

Not having a seconds comp had made it very hard for him to find firm, confidence and learn what the coaches want.

Similar: discount on academy or f/s could decrease with ladder percentage. Although I think 20% is too much.

You can do a couple of easy things to fix this though. Top 4 sides could lose their next pick after the compensation when recruiting a FA (ie say PA win the GF, if PA recruit someone from Essendon and Essendon get an end of first round compensation pick, then PA lose their second round pick. If PA have traded that pick out in advance then they lose the equivalent points worth from their prior pick. So Essendon gain 19 (end of first round), PA lose 37 (their second round pick), or if they have already traded their second round pick in a previous year, then pick 18 (their previous pick) is reduced by 483 points (the value of pick 37), and becomes pick 36. Then top 4 sides still pay significantly under market value, but they can't double dip. In addition, then could allow the bottom 6 to have a marginal increase in salary cap for a year (say 2% or $200k). That will help them retain or attract FA's as well. It would definitely help even out the comp, which should be the aim of the AFLPA: so that all players have a chance of winning a flag in their career no matter where they are dragged.

Nah Polec got him on the arm/elbow and started to wrap, but Shoey shrugged his arm up.

The salary balances out if we trade TMac for him. Both need a scenery change, both on big money in the reserves. If we think Polac offers us more than TMac then its an easy decision. If we think TMac can get back to his best, then it's not a good deal.

Gee watching that in slow motion, the decision is outrageous.

I'd love them to push it to 24-26 games by playing mid week games and having 5-6 days breaks the norm, and an occassional 10 day "bye". At 26 you play 9 teams twice, much better than 5 and more likely to even the field rather than have a couple of teams get lucky with fixtures. At 26 there is more requirement for all Vic teams to do a share of interstate travel. More games with a functioning reserves comp should result in a bit more squad rotation to manage fatigue, which forces clubs to try and hold on better players who aren't in their best 22, instead of cutting for kids repeatedly. We'd also see more fringe players and kids get a few games. I like mid week footy when it's consistently on.

And (according to the officially announced info) 20 of the 44 players still don't have contracts for next year.

Mellsham had a terrible year. I have no idea why he kept getting games. He shouldn't have ever been captain. But I don't know how you can take from this that the other coaches don't rate Melksham, but Goody played favourites so he stayed in. What evidence is there that this decision was his alone? Do you think the captaincy was soley Goodwin's call and not supported by the other coaches?

You go and spend 12 weeks locked up with your work mates and your boss. And your bosses boss. And all the support staff whose jobs it is to micromamage every aspect of your life. No escape, no break. And then at the final hurdle, the group of you screw it up and ruin all 12 weeks of work. They lost a game. For you it might be blow the tender or the sale or the project fails. Then, less then 24 hours after it is officially blown, on the day before you can finally leave the hub, you are forced together into a camp kitchen for a partipation award ceremony. You've failed, your opponents are playing next week, these awards are kinda nice but they don't matter. It's possibly held during the day, in polo shirts, like some weird school assembly. You're each given a glass of yellowglen (no one was drinking beer) and you toast the winner like it's his wddding. Normally the bnf is a few weeks after the season. Players have processed. They've had time apart, they get together to celebrate the year. This wasn't that. It's not a party, it's not a celebration, it's the end of the hub. Don't read into it.

Yep exactly. Even when we go with small/mid forwards they are ineffective in this area. You might get away with it if you are the inside 50 goal assist master Melksham was in 2018, but otherwise you need to pressure. I actually think that's why ANB gets so much of a run. He is better than almost any others in that area.

1. Petracca 2. Oliver 3. Langdon 4. May 5. Viney 6. Salem 7. Gawn 8. Lever 9. Fritsch 10. Hibberd 11. Brayshaw Jmac (esprit de corps): VDB Ball (best young player): Pickett RBJ (leadership): May

Melkshams shocking year really didn't help either. If you think about it, we started with Pickett, ANB, Spargo, Bedford, Melksham and Fritsch in that forward line, trying to create the pressure. It clearly didn't work: perhaps they aren't manic enough? Perhaps they were too inexperienced playing together and couldn't set up right? Perhaps it was because we bombed it long to smalls?

If you live in the SE it's an hour to the airport. Need to be there an hour early in case traffic, car breakdown, etc From boarding to disembarking Melb to Syd is 2 hours. Board, wait, taxi, take off, an hour 10 flying, land, taxi, disembark. Collect bags for 25 players, plus any club gear and load onto a bus, 30 minutes. Drive to ground. 30 minutes. This is a 4-5 hour process. Getting tp the ground 2 hours early for strapping, warm up etc. Makes it 6-7 hours before the match. For a day game not feasible. For a night game, maybe but it's a killer on that team vs the local team.

Same day travel is horrible, unless both teams do it. I bet only Vic teams will cop it too, not NSW or SA.

Super interesting idea. That probably covers 4 minutes each quarter at least. Time goes back on when you kick. You toy can't do the 55m out "in having a shot" then short pass, and the umpires can't call someone on who is legitimately having a shot.

I wish those stats were available. Tackles only counts a tackle that results in dispossing an opponent (inc forcing a ball up). There are stats for attempted tackles, broken tackles, etc. I think these are aost more important, because in a little handball chain you might have 5 tackles, all which force the opponent to dispose of the ball under pressure but none that register as a tackle. Then we have genuine missed/broken tackles, which are a problem. I don't really like the tackle stats for this reason. Sydney and Adelaide were 2nd and 3rd for tackles this year. West Coast and us were 17th and 18th. Means nothing. We were 6th for tackles inside 50 and 7 of the finalists are in the top 9 for that stat (apart from Carlton and us) so correlates with ladder well. Also our centre mids are great tacklers. Oliver is one of the best in the comp. He had the third most tackles in the comp. Viney was 28 and Petracca was 54.

I think these two tell the story perfectly. We win more clearances than our opposition. We thrive on contested ball. But we try to play a fast pin point disposal game with lower quality disposal. That means we turn it over more and have less uncontested possessions (which are usually long disposal chains). The least opponent turnovers is interesting because we are also the number 1 intercept team (according to AFL Stats pro). I'm assuming this is May and Lever in the back line getting intercepts but less pressure around the ground causing turnovers. Deapite having more i50s we actually average less disposals than our opponents. This goes against the "overpossesion" theory. To me, we are doing two main things wrong: - Kicking into forward 50 isn't good enough. Midfield forward connection etc. - Not forcing enough stoppages. Instead of halving contests and getting a ball up or throw in, we are turning the ball over. This may be a result of losing the TMac contested marking as well as poor kicking inside 50. It's interesting because in raw numbers it looks really fixable. If we can improve 10 i50 kicks per game so that they really in a stoppage instead of a rebound, we'd probably play more to our strengths.

Wagner, Wagner and Dunkley delisted according to MFC website.

Absolutely game style this year. There was great discussion (on here perhaps, @A F?) about us playing the wrong style for our strengths. Instead of moving the ball forward the locking it up for a stoppage, we were trying to finesse and over possess. We arent as strong with disposal skills as we are at stoppages, and thus we had lots of turnovers. Id love to see UP differential, tackle differential and turn over differential.

I like that Oliver is recognised because I think he really grew this year. He looked to kick more, struggled at first then realised he needed to use his pace to gain space to kick (whereas handballs out of packs happen immediately). He made this change while still being one of the most prolific midfielders and best tacklers in the game. Also I think he is criminally underrated by the umpires and gets a raw deal, getting in this squad does seem to help that.