Chris

Would be difficult to get around as you need to pay 100% next year and then 100% the year after but you would have a whole lot of players who had improved and under contract you would have to pay them more, especially as the bonuses etc can't exceed the extra cap allowed for that purpose. It is easier on a whole of list basis to do as they do now which is front end contracts so we are paying more now to a lot of players with the view that as we pay them less we have room to pay the young players who are improving more. It is counter intuitive to pay more now and less next year when you have improved more but it is the only way to make it work. One downside is we could end up with another Frawley situation where the only reason he was an unrestricted free agent was because we front ended his contract so he wasn't being paid much in the last year. If you averaged his wage he was in the top 10 paid and would have been a restricted free agent. Hopefully we don't fall in that trap with the likes of Hogan in the future.

One very large problem with this is that the AFL deem we must pay 100% of the salary cap, that means if we pay many less money then we would have to be paying a few heaps.

Is that the year of the Sheep, or the type of year whee we don't finish last, or the type of year where an interstate team will probably win the flag?

A chimp would be more appropriate than testing on his players!

Does he want to throw a Torana in so we can offer Howe and a Torana for Elliott? Being Collingwood how could they resist

Jamie Elliot? They would never let him go but could fill the forward role we all want Howe to actually fill. Plus we would be in with the running for mark of the year still!

Bollocks mo, you seem to have missed the point completely. Bringing in the players the club has was done to provide leadership and a good example to the young players. This was done to ensure good habits were put in place for long term sustained success as we didn't have many experienced players at the club and the ones we did have may were not up to it in a lot of cases. If you listen to the club talk they speak a lot of long term sustainable success, that would indicate a fair amount of forward planning is going on. You keep living in the land of no vision for the future and grab what you can with no eye on the ramifications though, it wont get you anywhere but hey, we would have some small spikes in performance that might make you happy. Quoting anything to do with Schwab is laughable too, he was an abject failure on too many measures to count, long term planning being one of them. If you want to look at where it has worked look at the successful clubs of the past decade. Bring in talent when needed, recruit what they will need in future years, sound familiar?

We are an incredibly poor example. Look at the successful teams and ask the same question. If the club not looking at what the list will look like in 5 years time then we are doomed. That doesn't mean we don't solve the issues of now, such as help for Jesse, but it does mean we need to look forward at what we will need in the future and have a plan for how to get what we need. Without that vision you end up chasing your tail and never actually get things even close to right.

Did have a bit of time free to set up the spreadsheet, now it is done it is a simple case of entering the team and the stats come out for the parameters above. Have only built it for us, StKilda, and the four finalists left though.

I think you are kidding yourself if you aren't planning 4 or 5 years ahead, every other team will be. If Frost goes forward, as I think he will, that leaves us with one key back, a potential key back, and zero depth. not a great position to be in. Not sure what Jetta has to do to make you happy either, or Garland for that matter. Both could be better but so could the other 42 players on the list.

Yep, my thoughts exactly. Better to develop the young backs while the oldies are there, not recruit them once the oldies leave and throw them to the wolves. I think Frost will end up in the forward line helping Hogan, so it only really leaves White and O Mc, I think we need another couple of young backs on the list to develop.

yet the backline they lined up with in their last match had an average age of 25.7 and average games of 111. That is very similar to our best team listed above and is hardly a rookie backline. I agree we need a gun midfield, and forward line, and backline, my point is that the age profile of each line is out of whack and we need some young backs to come good when the other lines do. Who do we have to replace those we will loose to age in four or five year time?

Defence is the interesting part, what we need int eh other areas is obvious and is covered well by you. Looking at the ages we need to cover for Dunn, Lumumba, Garland, and to a lesser extent Jetta in the next 4 years or so. We have T Mc and Salem as good young players in defence, if Salem goes midfield he will rotate through a back flank so not much of an issue. Coming through we have O Mc and maybe Frost who could be forward. Given the time it takes to develop a tall key back, or even an effective mid or small back I think we really need to focus on this in the next two years. Every one seems so focused on the obvious needs, which shouldn't be ignored, that they miss the ramifications for the future of having gun young mids and forwards with an almost geriatric backline.

This is how Hawthorn lined up on the weekend. FB Stratton Lake Frawley HB Birchall Gibson Burgoyne C Hill Mitchell Shiels HF Rioli Schoenmakers Smith FF Breust Roughead Puopolo Fol Hale Hodge Lewis Int Suckling McEvoy Duryea Hartung Average Age 27.1 Average Games 160.4 Back Line Ave Age 29.3 Ave Games 201.3 Fol (includes wing) Ave Age 28.2 Ave Games 202.3 Fwd Ave Age 25.8 Ave Games 133.8 Int Ave Age 24.3 Ave Games 76.0 Games Backline Fol Fwd Int total 0-50 0 0 0 1 1 51-100 0 1 1 2 4 101-150 1 1 3 1 6 151-200 2 0 1 0 3 200+ 3 4 1 0 8 22 The difference in age and experience is stark. Hawthorn lined up with more players in every category over 50 games than we have on our team. They lined up with more players over 100 games than we have on our entire list!

FB Jetta Dunn Garland HB Salem T McDonald Lumumba C Vince Brayshaw Tyson HF Petracca Hogan Kent FF Garlett Frost Harmes Fol Gawn N Jones Viney Int Watts Vandenberg Pedersen Stretch Average Age 23.3 Average Games 73.4 Back Line Ave Age 25.2 Ave Games 115.2 Fol (includes wing) Ave Age 23.5 Ave Games 88.7 Fwd Ave Age 21.2 Ave Games 34.7 Int Ave Age 23.5 Ave Games 45.8 Games Backline Fol Fwd Int total 0-50 1 4 5 2 12 51-100 2 0 0 1 3 101-150 1 0 1 1 3 151-200 1 1 0 0 2 200+ 1 1 0 0 2 22 This shows the backline is out of proportion ot the rest of the team in terms of age. Once our mids and forwards are flying in a few years the backs will be getting old. With the exception of O Mac and maybe Frost (if he isn't forward) we don't seem to have many young backs coming through. Something I think we need to address in the next year or two. Right now we need another tall forward to help Jesse. This will allow frost to go back, helping with the issue above, and Pederson is getting on a bit and needs a replacement in the wings.

With the herbs it would need to be a lot wouldn't it? On what we need, the backline are getting old so a new back or two wouldn't go astray.

Sad reflection on the state of ignorance within this country !

That explains why it continued and I agree, but it wasn't shadows they were reporting, it was loud continued booing at all venues in all games whenever he went near the ball before the Media Shtstorm erupted. Why did that occur?

Dog with a bone is a saying that comes to mind.

Cue Stevethemanjordan to come in with his usual vitriol against Garland.

No one has been seen to have done anything to take this seriously from the AFL. They way this has been handled is a joke and WADA won't let it go until such time as it is taken seriously and the AFL come into line with the rest of the world.

Not to mention the potential dollar value of the team from companies wanting to be associated with women in sport and want exposure to primarily women. Plus potential new women members. I don't see this as one way at all and am very proud of the club for pushing it. If only Bev would come back to the board too!

Have pm'd you.

Bye, can't say I will miss your or your complete misunderstanding of the issue at hand.

Someone mentioned above about the split across areas of the ground. Here are the averages across the ground for the team I have selected. Shows pretty clearly that we have an inexperienced forward line, an experienced backline with the followers approaching the 100 game average. FB Jetta Dunn Garland HB Salem TMc Lamumba C Vince Brayshaw Tyson HF Petracca Hogan Kent FF Garlett Frost Harmes Fol Gawn Jones Viney Int Watts AvB Pederson Stretch Average Age 23.9 Average Games 74.0 Back Line Ave Age 25.7 Ave Games 115.2 Fol (includes wing) Ave Age 24.2 Ave Games 88.7 Fwd Ave Age 21.8 Ave Games 35.5 Int Ave Age 24 Ave Games 48