Demonated

Lloyd criticised Hogan and I agreed with him as he made some good points based on his own observations. I can't say I liked him as a player but he does put in work and try to provide a level of analysis. Matthews from what I have heard, both in regards to Melbourne and other teams, seems to be lazy in his reporting and analysis. Same goes for Bartlett generally, tends to stir the pot without any depth of knowledge. I'd say it's more bemusing just accepting the opinions of others based on their standing in the game. Matthews commentating in our win vs Bulldogs last year demonstrated a clear lack of knowledge towards our team. Like I said, the average poster here would know more than Matthews about Melbourne, because we don't watch them twice a year and make sweeping statements based on that. I respect him greatly as a player/coach, but he doesn't receive automatic credibility because of who he is IMO.

Lethal is one of the best players ever but he made his mind up before he even saw Hogan play. Last year he was commentating and more or less said Hogan was an aerial threat but didn't have the tools to compete when he didn't mark. Remember his pickup and left footed goal vs St Kilda? How about him gathering his crumb and getting around Thompson from North? Or his handball to Pederson into an open goal? Lethal actually knows Hogan's game less than the average poster on here. Hogan for his size actually has above average speed and very good aerobic endurance. I'd be willing to bet Matthews isn't even aware of this. If what he is saying was true, Walker and J Reiwoldt wouldn't have the tools for the modern game. Hogan's problem at the moment is purely attitude, he showed that he is much more than capable last year and the game doesn't immediately change in 6 months. The best players from last year will be the best players this year. At least the other people criticising Hogan have an idea of how he plays, Lethals is largely based on very small samples and preconceived notions.

Either way he has performed well in reserves competition and is still struggling at AFL level. Does Weid have the strength yet? Probably not. Does he have the fitness required? Almost certainly not. Does he have form in the 2's to demand a spot? Not yet. What box has he ticked that makes him deserving of a debut? We do play young players if we think they can impact such as Brayshaw and Oliver, we even give players games for experience such as ANB, Stretch and O Mac who got games after injuries and form in the VFL. Weid has barely any experience at state level, missed a lot of last year, is underdeveloped at the moment and is yet to earn a spot in any capacity other than him being a high draft pick. What sort of selection policy is that? It isn't daring or exciting because it's not like he will come in against the Roos and shake things up and be a matchup problem. Hardly high risk-high reward stuff, just high risk, very little reward for either the player and the club.

Paddy Mccartin at saints does all those things, has put together some real form at VFL level and still isn't quite yet there for AFL level. Putting Weid in and expecting him to do much of anything would be wishful thinking. I don't think it is taking a risk or being adventurous as much as desperation if we put him in the team already. Let him string a good month together before he gets a gig.

Can't say I usually agree with Lloyd all that much but I did post this in the changes for next game thread a few hours ago- "I know this is a complete overreaction but would it be the worst idea to actually drop Hogan for a week? He is still our most talented player and makes us semi dangerous in the forward half but my logic is this and this alone. The club has talked about not just gifting games to anyone and they have to earn it. Hogan obviously has credits in the bank and is by far our best forward however, if you need to work for a game, he hasn't met that criteria. Not performing is semi justified if there is an effort made by the player. Hogan however is barely leading, and when he loses a contest, he doesn't even make a token 2nd effort. It would not help us in the next game by any stretch of the imagination but it would at least make us honest, instead of saying 'you earn your spot' and then turning around and literally gifting games to a player who is giving absolutely zero effort. He has had 6/7 quarters out of 8 so far where he hasn't even bothered trying. If one of our less talented players (say Matt Jones or another 'fringe' player) did this they would be dropped without second though. Why not practice what we preach and show Hogan we mean what we say. Trying is an absolute minimum, performing is an outcome and great talent is a bonus. Imagine Neitz doing what Hogan is right now, it would never, ever happen. Neal-Bullen performed in the 2's yes? He gets a game. Dunn gets one too. Drop Hogan to make a very strong point to everyone and Kent because he didn't want to be there on Saturday. Let Tmac play forward for a week, Dunn down back and ANB for Kent. It'll make our team weaker but I don't want the club to bend to the will of a 20 year old with amazing talent and a sometimes shocking attitude." We are sick of being the joke of the AFL, talk about change coming through from the top PJ/Roos, etc, and that it isn't necessarily a matter of talent anymore. We can't just let our stars give up and not even try. Hogan could very well come out and kick 5 against the Roos but he isn't excused from trying. Let him know that it isnt acceptable, and it might show the entire team that you earn games and are not given them. I'd love to see it but I know it would mean we also go in with a much weaker forwardline.

I know this is a complete overreaction but would it be the worst idea to actually drop Hogan for a week? He is still our most talented player and makes us semi dangerous in the forward half but my logic is this and this alone. The club has talked about not just gifting games to anyone and they have to earn it. Hogan obviously has credits in the bank and is by far our best forward however, if you need to work for a game, he hasn't met that criteria. Not performing is semi justified if there is an effort made by the player. Hogan however is barely leading, and when he loses a contest, he doesn't even make a token 2nd effort. It would not help us in the next game by any stretch of the imagination but it would at least make us honest, instead of saying 'you earn your spot' and then turning around and literally gifting games to a player who is giving absolutely zero effort. He has had 6/7 quarters out of 8 so far where he hasn't even bothered trying. If one of our less talented players (say Matt Jones or another 'fringe' player) did this they would be dropped without second though. Why not practice what we preach and show Hogan we mean what we say. Trying is an absolute minimum, performing is an outcome and great talent is a bonus. Imagine Neitz doing what Hogan is right now, it would never, ever happen. Neal-Bullen performed in the 2's yes? He gets a game. Dunn gets one too. Drop Hogan to make a very strong point to everyone and Kent because he didn't want to be there on Saturday. Let Tmac play forward for a week, Dunn down back and ANB for Kent. It'll make our team weaker but I don't want the club to bend to the will of a 20 year old with amazing talent and a sometimes shocking attitude.

If we did somehow get him and then play him as a forward I would be less than impressed. He was drafted as a backman, played forward for a number of years where he had very mixed results, struggled marking the ball and never kicking 30 in a year, and then was moved down back where he became an AA. Hurley and Hooker are going to have 600k-750k price tags attached to them. To pay that for someone who can pinch hit up forward isn't smart recruiting. It's very justified for getting one of the best key backs in the comp. We may currently lack a 2nd key forward, but Tmac and Dunn are not always reliable against the best of the best, or even say like how a Daniher or Cloke tore us up last year. I doubt we land Hurley but if we do it's to play on Buddy, Kennedy, J Reiwoldt and Tex. Not as some expensive decoy for Hogan. Just my thoughts.

Ok, I'll start by recognising I'm not a regular poster but a very regular reader, but I don't want to discuss where Watts went in the draft, how hard he is at the contest or what we think he will become. I don't want to discuss how we think he has turned out after all these years or how he should be playing right now. I am a demon fan as you are all obviously on this page. We have all seen Watts play very well at times and very bad at times. We are reluctant to give him credit while we will give Hogan, Oliver, Gawn et al the praise they deserve. I just want to say that while you are all celebrating that not quite convincing win, I'd like us all to acknowledge the impact he had in the last quarter. As much as Hogan lifted, make not mistake, Jack Watts, our favourite whipping boy, won us that game. Not Salem, not Petracca, not Brayshaw, not Jones. We might give him a bit but we know we love him. Watts just won us a game as the underdogs. Think about saying this a year ago, it sounds ridiculous. You want to know what makes it more crazy? He has a history of going to water after he loses his confidence. He and the whole team lost it in the 2nd quarter. For the first time in his career he took charge. I truely believe that something has changed. He set the tone in the last quarter. I want to talk about this but if there is already a thread or discussion, feel free to merge or delete.

Yeah I agree he was a rung below Carey. As good as the Ox could have been we are talking about a player that I strongly believe to be the greatest to ever play. Schwarz could have very well been one of the greatest CHF's ever if not for injury but I doubt he would have ever matched Carey. In saying that, probably the most talented player to come through our club ever with the possible exception of Flower who is forever underrated (I can't speak for players from earlier eras). A healthy Ox could have eclipsed Kernahan, Brereton, Reiwoldt and others as a CHF I believe, he had more talent and an all-round game than them that's for sure.

He will be a lot bigger than Viney but as for competitiveness and aggression, I doubt we have anyone on our list that has or will match Viney. He is probably the most aggressive midfielder in the league at the moment and physically hurts the opposition far more than many players much bigger than him. Viney will be our battering ram for the next 10 years, Brayshaw, Petracca, Oliver (and VDB) are also bulls but will hopefully bring their own unique skills and traits into the team.

Am I the only one that hates the thought of Frost in the forward line? He is a great athlete and very competitive but if people are worried about Dawes taking a mark this also applied to Frost. I think he is an even worse mark and doesn't know how to play as a forward. I see a place for him long-term as a replacement for Dunn but with the distinct lack of skills and polish we have in the forwardline, Frost is not the answer. Pedo gets first crack at 2nd forward for me, a very good mark and decent shot on goal. It will likely be a temporary solution to a foil for Hogan but it's the best we have. If not Dawes gets the nod for me. When Gawn needs a rest we can play T Mac as a second ruck, he won't do great in the actual ruck contests but will be another runner and knows how to take the game on. Dunn and Garland can cover for him for 5 minute spurts. I genuinely believe Frost is depth ATM, but it seems the coaches rate him higher than I do. Be that as it may, I don't want him up forward.

It is ok and doesn't diminish his talent nor fitness. However it is not very quick by any standards. I've ran a 3ker in less time than that and know many others who have done the same. It's pretty decent for someone his age and definitely for someone of his body type though.

Howe was a complete oversight by me there, would definitely be in our round 1 team. Which also makes me realise that with both him and Cross gone, we have lost quite a bit in terms of backmen peeling off and taking an intercept mark. Seems we only have McDonald who can do that now. Would love to find someone else who can do that in our team but I'm drawing a blank. Salem could try but he is quite short and Dunn/Garland are more effective stoppers. Lamumba and Melksham are more attacking and not great in the air. I think we need to find someone on our list who is capable of this role so we can attacking from defthe nice rather than just kill the ball coming forward.Jetta is probably our best bet but he is also short (although the decent with a high ball) on top of having to take care of the Betts, Wingards and Walters. We really lack players who can execute this now.

Yea I get what you are saying and I agree that he should have the ability and be able to adapt quickly. I'm basing my assumptions of perceived fitness bases. Of those you listed above, they all came in more fit than Oliver other than Ziebell and Martin. Ziebell took until his 3rd year to play more than 15 games and Martin is one of the most talented players in the league. On top of that, Roos has been known to hold young players back a little, dating back to his Sydney years where he did the same with their gun draftees. If Roos believes he doesn't have the fitness to run out an entire AFL season, history tells us he won't hide him in a forward pocket every other week so that he does play 20 games. He would generally look to rest these players or let them play a few weeks here and there in the 2's. While Hogan already provides little in the forward pressure department, if we have Petracca and Oliver down there for most of the season, it sort of jeopardises what Roos is going for in regards to defensive pressure. If selection somehow came down to Kent or Oliver, I think Roos wouldn't think twice. If Oliver does become a lot fitter over preseason or he shows Wines 1st year form straight away, that all changes of course. It will be interesting to see.

It isn't quite the same it will be harder for 1st yer players next season than in season 2015. The very simple reason for this is that we have not lost any best 22 players (besides Cross, and Melksham probably gets first crack at his role on HBF) but have added a few. Included in this are Brayshaw and Vandenburg who can play a similar role to what Oliver does. So he has to fall in behind all of our regulars plus Brayshaw and Vandenburg which is 2 more than last year. On top of this, there is also Petracca who is regarded as a better prospect generally by the football community. He will have to do what Brayshaw did but with at least 3 additional players who we can assume are ahead of him currently. That is a good thing as it shows we are adding depth where we need to. I'd also add Roos has always prioritised beig fit enough to defend regardless of position, Oliver isn't coming from the greates base fitness wise- even Brayshaw from mid season onwards was barely hanging on.If any 1 of Harmes, Stretch and ANB have a great preseason they could also find themselves ahead of him come round 1 despite playing a different role. I wouldn't say with any confidence that Oliver will play over 15 games, which would be great for him and great for the team.

After Jones, Vince, Viney and Tyson we are still looking to integrate Brayshaw and Vanderburg into The midfield more. The. We have to consider that there may very well be cameos with Petracca and Garlett. I'd be more than a little surprised if he got many midfield minutes early days unless he has a massive preseason and somehow overtakes some of those names.

I already stated I didn't really want to get Parish, this was based on my own perceptions of his highlights and profile more than any inside knowledge. For this reason alone I'm happy we looked elsewhere. I like the way Oliver seems to play. He plays like a more physical version of Dom Tyson in packs with head and ball fakes to create space for himself and his kicking seems effective. He is also a very willing tackler and good overhead, but he may take at least a year before he has the aerobic capacity to play many midfield minutes. It isn't really too important because he won't be a dashing line-breaking player at AFL level I wouldn't expect, but he is the worst bouncer of a footy I think I've ever seen in the AFL. It's almost comical how bad he looks at it, but like I said, I doubt it will be much of a factor.

Vs collingwood? That's was amazing, pure footy instinct to give himself time and space to have the shot.

Was absolutely stoked when we got him from Carlton. Always liked him as a player and if I recall correctly he has a rough childhood, may have even been living out of a car for a while if I recall correctly. Even at Carlton I wanted to see him have a successful career and was a little dissapointed when he went off the rails for a bit there. It has worked out really well for us though. In the space of just 12 months we went from having no threatening forwards to having 2. Just need to add another 1 (Petracce/Kent?) and we may just have a dangerous forward setup.

Salem has more class but Brayshaw is slightly bigger and stronger which I think just gives him a slight advantage overhead. Although Salem is quite good at that for his size. Salem also showed his strength with that tackle against Jeremy Cameron in our last game of the year. I think where Brayshaw gets points is that he is very effective on both sides while Salem favours his dominant side a bit more, which is a trend seen amongst almost all left footers.

I agree he doesn't have a weakness in his game. Tough, skilled, good defensively and strong overhead. Has a burst of speed and can kick on both sides. He isn't close to being our best player yet, but he is the most well rounded player on our list. I cant wait for another 2 preseasons into him.

Harmes for me. Has a point of difference to his game and shows the competitive drive to become a good player. I think we are all expecting big things from Salem but he will surprise the rest of the league, I've found many non-MFC supporters either know very little about him or don't rate him. I expect him to take a big step but I don't really want him to play much in the middle like the rest of our supporters apparently do. He should provide our class and creativity off half back while occasionally pushing up to a wing when circumstances allow for it. Skilled, tough and composed- he doesn't really have a weakness to his game, just need a clean run at it and he will gradually improve.

Almost certain that Viney would be the leader of the young guys. I think he would be a great one too, not the most naturally talented bloke but a strong performer who clearly has high demands on himself and hopefully others. Our young players only need to look at his last season to see how to contribute and have an impact on the team.I'm interested to hear about Petracca's fitness and running capacity, from memory it was the area he most needed to improve upon. It may also be a large factor into how far Roos pushes him and plays him next year, he often protects younger players earlier in their careers by giving them a limited role.

That's fair, but we sorely lack x-factor. How reliant on Salem are we for a bit of polish and skill? We have basically zero versatility when it comes to having mids who can play elsewhere. Our three best young mids- Viney, Tyson and Brayshaw looks like they all are suited to being clearance and inside mids with only Brayshaw looking like he can also incorporate an effective outside role. Nat Jones is more effective as an inside mid. Like I said it was based on limited knowledge but he is touted as a pure midfielder when I think we should be taking more dynamic players. Fyfe, Bontemelli and Stringer were seen as these versatile players with no set role as juniors. We are almost there for inside grunt work but have absolutely nothing in the mould of versatility and damaging utilities. Petracca is our best shot at that and he hasn't played a game.I expect that we will take Parish and I have to trust the recruiting staff, but I'm not salivating at him as a prospect, just my opinion. We must understand that AFL clubs actually get it wrong just as often as we as fans do, even the good clubs. No matter how much work they put in, it's impossible to project how someone will actually fare in the league. Credit goes to the club for the last 2 drafts though, I can't ignore that.

I can only judge off what limited footage I have watched but I think we should take Francis at 3. I think Parish has more chance of being found out at AFL level while Francis seems more versatile and more skilled. I actually don't want a 'pure' mid, Francis can be part of a rotating midfield division with Petracca, Brayshaw, etc. Tyson and Viney are already pure mids along with the skipper we have on our list and I wouldn't want too many of them. Hawks don't have many while Sydney have about 3/4 which compromises ability to adapt to different teams and game plans. This looks to be an important aspect going forward, particularly with limited rotations and an ever evolving game. I know we are looking to improve our midfield but my limited knowledge says that Parish is an underwhelming 'best mid' for a draft. Would be very happy to get Francis and Curnow.