kurtneverdied

Was thinking this earlier. Last year we had so many injuries I guess it was a bit harder, but can't be a continued excuse. We don't drop senior players. In fact I'm not sure there is an example of any tough/ruthless decisions within the club.

When we got Lever, Hibberd and Langdon it was well reported during the season that they were likely to come to us. However I feel the journos are less reliable or more trash to sort through now.

I look at a game plan as each play having a % chance of working out. An attacking game plan which requires shorter kicks and more hand balls needs each possession to work at a significantly higher % rate to work compared to a kick it long and direct one. More possessions to gain ground without turning it over needs players to create space and foot skills to maintain a high % of retention and/or gut running through the midfield for a chain of handballs. There is no room for error or a weak link and the team has to be on the same page and know exactly what we are trying to do. Personally I'd put our best marks and readers of flight into the forwards and just get it in there if they can't spot a open target. 3 players need to go in there. Gawn, May/Lever, and Viney as a hard at it forward crummer. Campbell to ruck, Johnson back and Kossie/Sparrow splitting the midfield time. % ball FTW!

I don't think it's rubbish post. You could debate Oliver is or was a problem that started more problems no matter how good he is it was. One thing is crystal clear from this thread is that there are spot fire problems everywhere. Problems that may or may not be the problems affecting success on field. Problems that we are speculating on. I don't think anyone really knows what the problems are tbh. I sure can't see the spot fires stop spreading until change happens. Our list is stale. Hasn't changed much in 3 years. No decent player from another club since May. We never try players in new positions. We never make the tough list decisions. Out with the questionable and in with the new as it's overdue for change. I like the idea of Viney as a small forward. Maybe Campbell to ruck and play Gawn a bit of everywhere. Gawn with May or Lever forward again and just kick it in there. At least they can read the flight well and take a mark. More likely to work than the last few years of our forward line. How about a "crazy rotation" game plan where we are constantly switching positions. I probably sound crazy to most now but I'd rather "something" than what we are getting.

I agree it's time to cash in on those like Kossie where there are doubts about commitment. I don't think a full rebuild or any bottoming out is the answer. We are better off just adjusting the list like a few other clubs have done successfully over the last few years. If we can't recruit anyone with the picks then yes go to draft but we can't afford to do what Richmond is doing now and the Kangas did. If we get a new coach that can get the energy back into the group then there is no reason we can't be a top side. Geelong has held up so well. It feels like we've been calling them old and waiting for them to plummet for 10 years now and I see us in a very similar position to where they where or now are.

No damn rebuild. Make some tough list calls and trade for ready made talent. Why? We don't have our first pick. We still have generational talent. Other teams have shown that a rebuild is not required rather a rejig. We are on shaky ground off the field and the post Daniher era showed perhaps a rebuild is not the way. We can't do that again. We can't be like North was. We adjust and go full steam head. No losing culture again.

I agree with most here the time is now for Simon to go. Don't think it's time to think for a rebuild as we haven't got next next years first and perhaps whoever coaches next will tell the players they have faith we can still make the 8 and bring and bring some spark back and hope of success. We can't lay out swords down and have the attitude this group of players are not capable as what will the senior players motivation be to be at the club anymore. We all painfully remember the post Daniher era and the mistakes of the first rebuild. We need to model a transition of change like other sides have done recently. Priority number one is not letting the players feel there is no success to play for. The Bulldogs come to mind as a club who is has seen big name players leave but have managed to stay competitive. I was never a fan of Bevo until I thought about how much his back was against the wall and what they have done so far this year. Swans and Geelong are more examples of how to manage change when the time comes.

He stuffed up saying 2 or 3 first round picks. That means 2.

Swap that demon with this!

Someone made this 10 years ago. Don't think the demon is perfect but it's not bad.

I don't get Windsor and Rivers swapping places, makes little sense. Both should be in the mids bar injuries. How's Melksham looking? If fit he should be best 22. Need Billings out of best 22. Hope he proves me/us wrong though. Agree with those that say we need Johnson/Campbell in side. Backline looks a bit out of balance ATM. 3 talls. May and Lever next to each other. Bit of a concern when ball hits the deck. Bowey and Salem both need to lift this year. Windsor I always imagined we drafted as a winger. Rotation of players through the mids is critical due to lack of depth. Forwards can't get any worse than last year. Chandler not a pocket player, gotta be half forward. Keep Trac a mid only this year. Get Lindsay in best 22 asap. Prefer max of 2 talls in fwrd line Just my rambling thoughts...

Twomey got as taking Lindsey instead of Allen after saying Allen might be taken at 6 by Tigers. Tigers take Allen after our 2nd pick. Sure. Makes sense.

I have zero worries about Langford and speed. Yes Bont and Cripps were picked on for it in pre-draft profiles. Does Langford near top of 2km time trial counter that fresh speed though? I'm all in on Langford at 5. Bo Allan another beast midfielder who has little flaws. I'd be super happy with these two. I couldn't think of a better result personally. I have this hunch that we will select Travaglia though. His profile screams what JT loves. However... I've been left disappointed in the past and I'm nervous. Those saying all recruiters would of taken Weideman over Curnow/McKay. Then praise JT for getting later picks right. I say this. We took Weideman, JT and team can only take the blame, no excuses. It was obvious Weideman wasn't a competitive beast. Secondly if JT hasn't learnt the lesson that picking a key forward in the top 10 is a gamble after that then doing it again is so damn stupid. If we take Armstrong I'll spew. I'll be ropable. Finally on a positive note it's great to see we have talked to perhaps all the top names and probably linked with most the top 10. Over to you JT.

I always wanted Langford for us. His height is a POD for our midfield and also his marking will be valuable. Potentially able to swap roles with Trac during the game seamlessly.

What's this whole attitude we can't draft 2 of the same type of players? Langford and Smillie for example. What height gives them is flexibilty to play anywhere on the ground if they don't turn out best in the midfield. In juniours the best players play midfield and it's not until there last couple of seasons they may be moved forward or back as they join the best of the best of their age. If there was a Pettracca clone we would draft him etc.

5- Lalor/Langford 9- Smillie/Lindsey/Reid

How many list spots do we have? Is Tomlinson staying or delisted? Like some have said, splitting pick 9 is a bad idea. Go through the last 10 years of drafts. Compare success rate of picks 1-5 to that of 6-10 and so on. 2019 (I think) was the deepest of the lot as I suspect this one is. Most drafts picks 1-5, 7/10 are decent or better. 6-10, 4/10. 2019 was deep so 11 out of the top 13 were decent or better (IMO). I'm no draft expert but the numbers don't lie on just how important 2 top 10 picks in a deep draft is. Of course you have to be a good recruiter to not get it wrong, it has to be easier than plucking one in the 40s though. History is against the talls. Particularly forwards in the top 10. Personally would like a mid with some size. Langford ideally. Has the versatility to be a forward too if he failed to be a mid. Pick 9, next best mid.

I wish we could play mind games with North and Tigers and say we are targeting a 'utility' at 5. Green has already come out and said we are prioritising the midfield. Could still try...

His profile does read very nicely.

Pick 5 I want a tall, well built mid. Both Cripps and Bontempelli pre-draft profiles are particularly similar to Langford and Smillie. However the slightly shorter more versatile Lalor edges both out for me. These 3 can also hit the scoreboard regularly which besides Trac we desperately need as well as to add some youth to an ageing midfield profile. As for 11 I hope say Smillie slips. If not next best mid available. Hotton sounds like a potential gun.

The last few years we've tried trading up. For Watson last year (I think). Humphries year before. Really wouldn't surprise if we go for Norths pick 2.

I really believe we can't pass up on best available mid for at least pick 5 in this draft. I hope s mid for pick 9 too. Stuff putting Mcvee, even Rivers in mids. They can play back and we draft quality mids. Another reason is we still believe we are in the window and I doubt Armstrong helps like Windsor did this year. Looking back at previous drafts, it's rare to have depth going to pick 10ish. Top 5 picks have roughly a 7/10 chance to be decent. Picks 6-10 is far less, around the 4/10 mark. This is a massive opportunity to get 2 star players and a gamble on Armstrong is just wrong. JT picked Weideman over McKay and Curnow, plus the other fails and questions over Jefferson who right now has a serious question mark of being a pick 15. Our success with talls has come late in drafts. Petty, Turner, even JVR pick 19. Before JT, Gawn and McDonald.

I hate the idea of going for a specific type of player in the top 11 picks of a great draft. Best available. I'm sure we can fit them in whatever "type" they are. Every year I have flashbacks to hearing Gysberts name called at 11 (I think). Was sure we were taking Talia. Another thing stuck in my head. SANFL form means nothing. Aka Toumpass and Trengove. Body type means nothing. Tapscott cough... Key forwards. Apart from Hogan (who's taken 19 years to have an impact). I don't want another Cook or Weideman.

In my experience I really hate the whole setup of boards. They generally have no idea what's going on in day to day operations. They get there information glossed over by one source, normally the ceo, who is just looking out for themselves. I knew a great CEO that was replaced and the culture went toxic, very quickly. It took at least 5 years for the board to get an inkling that something was wrong with the culture and that CEO was the fault. In that time I'd say more than half the workforce quit. There wasn't anyone making the CEO accountable and that lost link of accountability caused the downfall of everything. This is where we should never of failed. We need everyone accountable but preferably by more that 1 person. Transparent from top to bottom.

Hi Fan, shh. I don't want Courtney to know I am alive and living the quiet life in country Victoria.