Gator

I agree. But if Steven is allowed to run amok he'll cut us up. Running one hard tag doesn't mean a man-on-man game-plan. I'd tag him. Efit: they may go head to head in the first instance, but if he gets off the chain ...

You have rare sense. Alas, it still won't be enough for some.

The track watcher you're referring to thought Viney was below average last preseason and therefore didn't include him in his round 1 best 22. Naturally, it was poor insight and Viney had his best year. People put too much emphasis on amateur "track watchers". I've been to training plenty of times myself and while reports are fun to read no real relevant insight into training standards is gleaned. They're best for "who trained, who didn't and who is in rehab". I'd never read anything more into them than that.

Steven is the player who concerns me most. I think our midfield is better and I like our contested brand where we outnumber the opposition at the stoppages. But if we can't control Steven I think we'll lose. If we can nullify him I reckon we'll win. By meaningless I was referring to their win by 92 compared to our win by 54. Nothing should be read into the margins, because the personnel was vastly different.

With regards to the Saints beating Carlton by more... Carlton were more competitive against the Saints than the Dees in the first quarter. Scores were level with about 2 minutes to play before 2 late goals gave the Saints an early lead. Then the floodgates opened. Against us Carlton fielded Gibbs, Murphy, Kreuzer, Simpson, Docherty, Casboult. None of these players lined up against St Kilda, although Cripps had his first hitout. In other words, the margins vs the Blues are meaningless.

Firstly, I won't be moderated by you. Secondly, some players are behind in the pecking order. In a list of 40 players plenty won't get a look in. They'll either be depth, young, not in great form, or simply not as talented. Goodwin has made it clear that he's been getting game time into his best team. There's no suggestion that other player's training "intensity" has been below standard, only Watts. There's no evidence whatsoever that Watts has been singled out and it's mindnumbingly stupid to suggest otherwise. Goodwin would have made it clear what he expected of the group and Watts has been found wanting. He didn't meet quantifiable criteria. I don't know what that criteria was, but I don't need to know. Credit to him that he's taken it on board and risen to the challenge and takes his place back in the team.

These are the types of comments I find absurd. You have no basis of fact to back up this comment. You'd rather blame the coach for not accepting poor standards than the player not producing what's required. Unfathomable to me.

I can live with the odd poorly weighted kick. Without pressure he usually hits his target. I'd like to see him more composed under pressure. The better mids, like Hannebery, make better decisions and have cleaner disposals in extreme heat. I'm sure he's working on it, but for me it's the aspect of his game he needs to work on most.

"Seasoned track watchers" ? Thanks, I needed a laugh. There seems to be an incredible amount of yearning for a lack of "intensity" during training sessions to be anything other than a lack of intensity during training sessions. You say he may have "fallen asleep" during a meeting, whereas the coach says it's an issue that has been evident for "months". What appears to be clear at face value suddenly isn't necessarily clear as posters are desperate to believe it's actually not what the coach says it is. Maybe he hasn't been leaving the toilet seat down ? FMD.

Oh, that "attack" ? Right.

Attack ? What attack ?

It's hardly a revelation that amateur observers miss the nuance of conditioning and intensity as they watch training. Watching training and picking up some odds and sods is very different to processing training, knowing what the coaches are assessing, as well as being behind the scenes in meetings/conversations and having an understanding of what is being asked of the player. Scoop is worried that his entire 2018 training observations won't be taken seriously because he had no clue Watts wasn't meeting training standards. Annoying players by questioning their injuries and getting told porkies doesn't help his credibility either. I draw both of your attention to these direct quotes from Goodwin, "Jack had a few months where he wasn’t at the level, to his own admission." Link below. It also mentions in the article that Watts came back "underdone", although that's not a quote from Goodwin, so no doubt you'll dismiss it, because it suits your biased narrative even though it's a logical conclusion given recent reports, as well as comments from @Leoncelli_36 who received inside mail that this was indeed the case.. So this isn't about one intra-club performance as Scoop asserts, it's about "a few months" of below level training intensity. However you want to put your own slant on it you're both wrong. Accept the coach just may have a better handle on things than your good selves. http://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/jack-watts-slowly-building-training-intensity-as-he-pushed-for-spot-in-melbourne-round-1-lineup/news-story/b1e55d6e171bfd20008a8d0215fb172e

It's been made clear that Watts was underdone when he returned. Just because you and others couldn't notice a difference doesn't mean he came back in the condition required.

How valuable is up to Jack. He potentially has 7-9 years left, so he has plenty of time to stake his claim as worthy of a top 3 draft pick, or even numero uno. If I could give Jack Watts one gift what do you think it would be ? A pen and a blank piece of paper. The note would say, "How do you want history to remember you by the end of your career, Jack ?" How I'd like him to respond ? "I know how history will remember me, because I'm going to write it."

I'm not sure why so many supporters have a predilection to quote me re Watts. My views on him are nothing more than plain speak, but for some reason plain speak makes people feel uncomfortable in what has become the most politically correct generation in history. 10 points... 1. Watts didn't ask to be pick one, but he wanted to be. Most elite talents want the mantle and Watts embraced it and Melbourne at the time. Petracca also recently said he wanted it, but didn't get it. And with that honour it's my view a player should do the utmost to make themself the best player they can be. Not only for themself, but for the club that showed enough faith to bestow the honour. Whether others see such a leap of faith (pick one) as a poisoned chalice is up to them. I don't subscribe to that theory. You may not ultimately be pick one worthy, but dedicate yoursel to be the best player you can be. Every player should aspire to fulfilling their talent. 2. Was Watts developed properly ? No, he was handled poorly by a poorly run club. He should have been protected from the limelight, not made into a messiah. The club let him down. 3. Is he an elite talent ? Yes. But his talent is overrated for one main reason, he doesn't and never has had courage in the air. Young, skinny Weideman has courage in the air. Many players don't. Watts doesn't. Btw, there's a difference between not having courage in the air and being soft in the air. Unfortunately, especially when he was younger, Watts was soft in the air. 4. What level does Watts have the ability to reach ? A-grade. Due to a lack of physicality and courage in the air it's my view he could never be absolutely elite, or a bona fide star, but he does have the ability to reach AA status and be considered a top 50 player in the game, which is enough to be considered A-grade for mine. 5. Has he had passable years ? Yes. As a developing young tall his third year was reasonable and last year was a very solid B-grade year and something to build upon. 6. Has he underachieved over his entire career to date ? Yes, notwithstanding the poor early development, he hasn't been driven to be the best he can be. And one B-grade year for a player of such talent is a fail. If you think 2016 was the highest level he can achieve then we won't agree. And even if I accepted that view it's still a minimum standard. 7. Do I like or dislike Watts ? I often dislike the footballer, although 2016 was a massive step in the right direction, but one cannot but like the person. My eldest Brother (Hawthorn supporter) was on the same plane once and Jack walked down the aisle smiling and saying hello to everyone. He's just a lovely guy. 8. Do I respect his talent ? No, he was born with it. It's what one does with their talent that's essential. 9. Do I want him to fail ? No. I laud him when he shines and I'm critical when he's insipid. I want the club to succeed, I want every Melbourne player to succeed. 10. Do I think other supporters are soft on Watts ? Unquestionably. They're satisfied by third rate performances. All they see is a talented player who gets a hard time in the media. They must have been shocked by his 38 goal haul and improved play across the board in 2016, because to them he was fine before that anyway. If the club traded him many would have blamed the club, not the underperforming player. And then they felt vindicated by his improved output last year even though they never called for it. Not only didn't they call for it, they defended his C-grade years. They're probably lovely people, but I'd rather spend a year in solitary confinement than have to discuss footy with them over a beer. Hopefully this post means that no boring braindead apologist ever needs to quote me again on Watts. I apologise for future plain speak and the subsequent offence it will no doubt cause. All I do is say it as it is (what happened to that poster ? ).

I agree with some, but not all of this. One good year in 8 is a miserable output. That said, I'm not sure why you're quoting me, as your post is utterly irrelevant to my question. Someone said Watts has been better than many other no. 1 draft picks and I was curious as to who they thought he'd been better than. Another poster answered the question. Badly.

Since 2000 who has he been better than ? There's no point going back 20+ years ago when recruiting was far less savvy and recruiting departments underfunded.

Is this talk all because Vickery said he'd love to play with Martin at Hawthorn, or is there more substance ?

Like others have said, there are injuries and there are injuries. Not great for the players concerned, not great for depth, but barely a ripple on the best 22. Hopefully Kent can play in at least one of the remaining two games (JLT or Casey) and mount a claim for round one.

Umpires terrible, but the worst thing about the game is Kelli Underwood's horrendously repetitive commentary and appalling nasally voice, which features the flatest vowels I've ever heard. She makes reporter Teagan Dolling from 7 news sound like Queen Elizabeth. I now have it on mute.

I agree it won't be in 2017. I'm more talking 2020. I think there's enough evidence though that it's going to be very competitive this year and super nasty/brutal in years to come.

Yeah, I love Brayshaw, but I see Tyson as more a Pendlebury clone.

The talk isn't insane at all. There are always stars retiring and stars emerging. It's been this way for over 100 years and will continue for the next 100 years. There will be a group take over the mantle and when I look at the already exposed form of Viney, Tyson, Oliver, Brayshaw, Petracca, together with Jones, Lewis and Vince I see no reason it won't be this group of Dees. It's not a far-fetched call in my view. We're developing a skull-cracking midfield and the competition knows it. EDIT: I'm not suggesting it will be the best midfield, although it's conceivable, I'm talking toughest.

I agree, Doc.

True, some disappointments there. Back to Watts. If pivk one isn't A-grade, you at least want B-grade. Unfortunately, Watts has had a C-grade career. He's produced one B-grade year. Let's hope he can build on it. He has a chance to make his next 5 years A-grade. The innate talent is there.