Chris

I had a bit more of a play at lunch and have it now that you can enter any line up in the normal fb, hb, c, hf, f, fol, int format and it will give you the average age and games played. Would be easy to copy to a new tab and enter any other teams list and team to get the data. I can't be stuffed but if anyone wants it they can take it and build it further.

That for me is the biggest issue, the players seem to have all the power, they can veto trades and demand everything in every circumstance. Tail and dog come to mind.

Maybe throw J Fitzpatrick in as well, or even J Grimes. Plenty of J's at the Dees to go around, hopefully not too many e's though.

I have been as simple as using the ages as of April 1 2016 (roughly round 1). Couldn't be bothered going to years and days so just stuck to whole years. Thanks.

I have it set up in a very simple excel spreadsheet so you can change the team to suit your thoughts and see the changes in averages very quickly, Happy to send it through if any of you are interested.

As requested here are the average games played stats.. The list as of round 23 2015 = 64.6 The list minus Cross and Russian = 58 The team I listed above for round 1 = 67.9 The team minus the seven over 25 years old = 32.5 If you swap White for Garland (as is more likely) in my team the average games jumps to 74 for the team, this has little effect on the other stats. Shows again that there is a core bunch of inexperienced young players making up two thirds of our side.

Why not be involved, as Daisy points out we are responsible for various innovations in the game, why not this one. Not sure what you mean by concentrating on the MFC, she is the captain of the MFC for crying out loud. The AFL are also taking steps to build a women's league over the next few years, why not be involved and help drive this, or do the women not deserve it?

54? Might want to check your maths.

They do go along way but not forever. I am also not talking about next year or the year after, I am talking a few decades down the track.

Absolutely there is, the point you are missing is that soccer will most likely become the top code in the land. That may well mean no more MCG for the AFL as it will be used for soccer as the MCC will make more money that way. It may mean half the current teams gone. If we keep our insular view of the world this outcome becomes all the more likely.

Rugby league is irrelevant, it is soccer that will take over. You are right that the AFL will survive but runs the risk of being second fiddle by a long long way. If that happens you can all but wave goodbye to half the teams, ours included. The writing is on the wall that this is occuring, many people can't seem to be able to read it. But like climate change really.

I didn't even mention picks as it wasn't what I was talking about and maybe you should be viewing it as the AFL as a whole, especially as it doesn't exist in a vacuum. That it what I was talking about, a required shift in attitude. If it doesn't happen we may well say good by to the AFL as a whole in the future.

While I usually agree with the idea behind that argument it doesn't work within the AFL. The way I see it the AFL need to act in a very socialist manner and ensure equality between teams. By this I don't mean premierships won or games won, I mean access to the market and opportunities to make money. Doing this will provide the AFL with as many strong viable clubs as possible which overall will make the comp as strong as possible. Where the 'Tea Party Argument' comes in is in the competition between codes. If the AFL has mass inequality and supporter dissatisfaction they stand no chance against the other codes, that's why I think there needs to be a shift in thinking. Most people see it as club vs club in every way, this ignores the more important league vs league battle. In terms of health we should be looking at the health of the AFL and what is best for that. We know the answer but those at the top can't see it as everything is rosy. The likes of Eddie need to answer if they would like a 6 team comp that plays second fiddle to at least one other code in the country as that is where their stance is taking us.

With Fitzy at the helm they may well end up with the first 5 picks. 1 as a priority pick, 2 as a sorry you were accused of tanking pick, 3 as a compo pick for not getting every Friday night last year pick, 4 as compo for the reward of their tanking pick, and 5 for winning the wooden spoon pick. I'm sure if he really tried he could think up some more too.

Will see if I can find half an hour to burn on Monday and add that.

The issue with the inequalities in the draw and the time slots given is always raised and is countered by people saying 'win games and the good times will come'. BS, watch Collingwood get great time slots and home games against high drawing sides even though they only won a couple more games than us. The rich are rich because the AFL made them rich and mooched of their members for their own survival, the poor were forgotten and it was hoped we would die during the 90's. The AFL now has the problem they have bolstered these clubs so far up that it is near impossible to bring them down again or even have them agree to the idea the poor clubs should get some of the benefit too. The almighty dollar is ruling the AFL and the way it is now is not sustainable.

Good to know, i'll keep em coming then

Was having a think about how young this team is as I keep asking my self the question of is the team as young as we actually think it is. I looked to answer this a few ways. The average age (as of April 1 2016) of the whole list (including rookies) as of round 23 2015 was 24.09. If we remove the Russian and Cross the average is then 23.6. If we further remove the players many on here are calling for (being Bail, McKenzie, Terlich, Howe, Fitz, Newton, Michie, Hunt, and M.Jones) then the average drop again to 23.4 That means 11 players gone in the turn over, much the same as the last two years. The I looked at my starting 22 for round 1. Obviously this depends on the trade period etc, as does the age profile. White Dunn Jetta Lamumba TMc Salem Vince Brayshaw Tyson Kent Hogan Petracca Garlett Frost Harmes Gawn Jones Viney Pederson Watts Stretch AvB Average age 23.9 I then noticed there weren't many that seemed old so I removed all over 25, there were only 7 players over 25 and the average age of the remaining 15 is only 21.4. That confirmed for me that we do have a great very young core of players that are coming through supported by only a few experienced heads. Sorry for boring you all.

The fixture is whole other animal and it is disgraceful how it is handled and I don't disagree at all. Teams can get near the top without that help though, but it is harder to sustain or make money from.

I think the list of teams not to have made a prelim is very symptomatic of the compromised drafts, with out those years it may look very different and I don't think the AFL envisioned the effect it would have. This will even out over time but can the league wait that long. The AFL's mistakes in all this are many but here are my top few: - Bought in 2 new expansions teams far too close together so the draft issues were compounded, this would have been alleviated significantly if there was a 5 year gap between the two new teams introduction. - Bought in free agency at the worst possible time as the clubs hit hardest by the draft issues above have been hit again by this. Again I think a gap between the introduction would have worked far better. - The free agency rules do not mix with the current trade rules because as it currently stands any player, regardless of contract status, can effectively nominate a club they want to go to and the trade generally happens. They either need to remove the clause in trades that says the player must agree or scrap free agency. Having it both ways means the players can walk and the clubs have little or no control over their list going forward, far too many questions for effective management. I don't think the AFL though about this enough (not surprising) By bunching everything together the AFL have effectively made the pain (for a few clubs and the league as a whole) worse than in needed to be, but they may also have made it shorter for the rest of the league. Essentially they have asked, without asking, for the bottom clubs to bare the weight of the change while the top clubs flourish. This will correct it self but it will take time. Hopefully the AFL see the damage they have done and continue to help those who bore the pain, but I am not holding my breath.

He thinks you were talking about Roos, I read it as you were talking about Goodwin. Which was it?

Was that not a comment on Goodwin, that was how I read it anyway.

2 years? Would probably be time to close the doors. We are on our last chance, make no mistake.

The draft actually seemed to be working fine until the new teams got everything on a silver platter for years, it artificially held the top clubs at the top and the bottom at the bottom. We may see this go back to the normal rise and fall over the next 5 or so years, just a pity the hawks were one of those held at the top!!!!

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/carlton-requests-priority-draft-pick-from-afl/story-fni5f5nx-1227522366222 So Carlton think they deserve a priority pick too. If they get pick 2 for Kruezer, the priority pick, and Brisbane get one too then that would be the top five picks going to two clubs. Surely the AFL won't be that stupid as they can see the damage the compromised drafts did in the last few years, then again it is the AFL we are talking about. I think we should put a request in as well as we have been worse than Carlton since 2006. That might put the cat among the pigeons!