fr_ap

I'm not sure on Curtin for a few reasons: 1) Speed / Agility appear a little lacking if he is indeed to turn into a bid bodied mid; in that context I'd like to see more of his contest work in the midfield to assess 2) At the same time, as a key back he's a little undersized and doesn't have huge athleticism to match the likes of Curnow, Walter etc. 3) Appears a different kind of character to the other boys at the top end (can go one of two ways) Looks a well skilled and balanced footballer but I just don't see the dynamism for the top level. Almost the polar opposite of Caddy in that regard who has all the dynamics but question marks over a lot of the other stuff. The Steven May comparisons look well off to me - people see a left footed full back and go there immediately. I honestly think Sanders or O'Sullivan are probably our best bet at 6, though I'm not overly enamoured with either of them either. 11 can take either the slider out of the bunch and/or get into the Windsor/Leake/Wilson range. Watson - I would be keen but we have so many smalls on the list. I won't hate it if we take him, as he's a potential game-winner/cult favourite and could release Koz for more midfield time, but it seems a waste to have so much of the list focused on small forwards. *EDIT* just saw the highlights package in the Watson thread. I'd be ok with him... It's just such a shame we won't get McKercher. Assuming Oliver gets back to being himself, Colby would totally complete our midfield and make our forward line issues look way better too. Such a shame.

80/20......our gate takings each year rise and fall on the Anzac Eve and QB games. We know the seasonality of them. Bigger picture & longer term thinking - with the amount of night-time games, the brand will get more exposure - if we play well and are decent to watch. Not going to hold my breath on that though

Laurie isn't exactly tall ...and he plays smaller than his height? Not even sure how that would work

I don't understand this round zero thing. When do we get our extra bye? Sydney in Sydney to open the season will be tough considering the respective off seasons. Grundy v Max again like the old days.

Old mate on the absolute warpath here Love it

A couple of things on this thread: 1) Aaron Vandenberg is a legend. Thanks to the poster that brought up his name. Good memories. 2) We should have smoked Collingwood really

Not every recruit needs to play in the 1s and have 30 mate. We're not assembling a fantasy team on FIFA. Dunstan was a crucial contributor to Casey winning a flag, which benefited all of Chandler, Woewodin, JVR, Turner and Bedford (benefiting GWS), most of whom are now regulars in the 1s. Schache likewise - takes the best defender and kicks bags in the VFL Casey's success is crucial to our fortunes in so many ways. A lot of people don't understand this but there is a clear correlation of the strongest VFL teams with the strongest AFL teams. Bit chicken or egg - but either way, seasoned experience that helps Casey is valuable. Not saying I love this acquisition btw as I never really thought he had the athleticism against AFL forwards. I'd rather someone who was depth but a greater capacity to impact at the top level and carve out a spot - someone like Mannagh. But appreciate he will likely go in the ND.

If we do that deal and take Duursma we will regret it for a very, very, very long time.

Not sure if anybody has said it but the comparison is Fyfe. Moves extremely similarly Edit: sorry indeed others have said it

Why would we do this for Duursma? Mckercher is far and away the better prospect

Sorry but this is nonsense. Neither Curtin nor O'Sullivan have any significant exposed form forward of the ball, so your comment is entirely subjective and baseless. Caddy certainly plays like a key forward. Whether he can be a good one is of course up for discussion. I'm not sold but there are some exciting aspects to him. Would be unnecessary if they believe in Jefferson (I do not). On balance I think there will be better options for us at 6, but would not be surprised if we pull the trigger on Nate. I do doubt we would draft talls with our first pick three years in a row....but stranger things have happened.

What's the consensus on Nate Caddy? If McKercher is out of the frame, I'm warming to Nate as the slightly undersized key fwd (though he plays bigger, jumps at the ball) that we need (assuming Petty is out long term). He's far more dynamic than JVR and I like the way he plays with aggression and authority. Has a little bit of DH about him but in a good environment he has the tools to be a star (potentially C Curnow like). Feels like one we'll regret if we miss. Pretty sure he wouldn't last to 11 but not sure about him at 6. Anyone know anything more about him? Would definitely prefer him to Watson.

I'm a Yes because I've been vocal on our need for depth with AFL experience. I think he'd provide good cover around the midfield, wings or half forward. Similiar to the Hunter pickup but probably with more upside/time on his hands?

I think what people miss is its not necessarily the players who need to be back home, near their mum etc. With Jackson, and I think here, a driving force is that the parents / families in many cases are very dedicated to supporting the player, and attend most games etc. in support. That becomes a whole lot easier if 2 out of 3 weeks they're only driving 6 hours to Adelaide rather than 6 hours to Adelaide, 3 hours transit to Melbourne and staying at Harry's house overnight. Not excusing his comments and I'm still furious, but I think its clearly more families than players themselves that drive this as soon as the player has any sort of leverage/power (which they don't have when they first enter the system - need to go where they go and establish themselves)

Honestly disgraceful interview. The channel 7 one is all he should have said. Why should we invest any more in his development, his rehab, his leadership, his knowledge of the game when he has told us he'll be out the door and it's just a matter of time? Many of us get the realities but the club's and players owe a duty to their extremely loyal and long suffering fans to not let dialogue like that into the open air. If you're to say that, just request the trade and be done with it.

Sounds to me like they're still in his ear trying desperately to convince him. For all our sakes let's hope they're unsuccessful as we've never been a team to hold a player back from a trade once they've actually lodged a request...

Fair enough. I think all of JJ, Harmes and Dunstan (though never used) were reliable enough. I certainly knew with JJ i'd be getting midfield accountability, and with Harmes, an understanding of the structure that makes us a good team. With Dunstan I knew that if there was a 50/50 to be won - he'd put his weight into it as he understood what it takes to play at AFL level. Certainly none were without flaws and JJ and Harmes let us down in particular moments. All speculative as to whether a certain kid would have done better in that situation, or even worse, or maybe never even been in the chain of possession to turn it over in the first place (in Harmes case). We will see I suppose - experienced AFL depth is valuable imo - very raw kids can be a total liability and none of the 3 in question were quite that

Happy to concede that 'unbridled' is an over embellishment on my part, but don't conflate exaggeration with misrepresentation. One is an amplification, the other contravention. He/she picked up on not 1, not 2, but 3 posters well-reasoned thoughts & outlined his/her basis for disagreement, which is perfectly fine. To then sign off that it is "pointless viewing the situation in anything other than my way" (optimistically) is, indeed, directly saying that he/she is not interested in any other point of view (as to do so would be pointless and not worth the time or effort). It follows by any logical inference that he/she would therefore not be interested in discussing said other points of view. So yes - as good as saying not interested in discussion. Is hypocrisy a pet hate as well?

Of course you can - but again, that's not what you said. You said you 'frankly can't see the point of anything other than optimism'. Just like you saying you can discuss things while being optimistic, I was saying equally, you can discuss things whilst being realistic. In any case - moving on haha

You said you don't see the point in anything other than unbridled optimism. On matters of opinion that's as good as saying you're not interested in discussion. Agree on the FS, a total game changer. We benefited with Viney (Woey?) & hopefully get our dose coming soon with Kalani (maybe Yze, but the wraps arent as high).

I never said that none of them would improve, I just said not all of them would. It's just realistic. In every year, for every team, some players accelerate forward and others regress. Like clockwork. None of us thought that Spargo would be out of the team after how crucial he was in 21. None of us thought Salem would be on thin ice. None of us thought Sparrow would basically at best the same player, in reality arguably worse, than he was in the 21 finals series when he went beast mode. None of us thought Langdon's output would wane. What's folly is to assume not only that all young players will grow together, but that that growth will be at a faster rate than similar players on other teams, who - you guessed it, are all banking on & assuming their young maturing players will also improve. It's the classic safety net for supporters who are at best optimistic, at worse delusional, and mostly just naive. "Well, our young players will get better. We needn't worry - all a matter of time. We'll be right". We've all been around this block enough times to know how that ends. You need to be aggressive, and you need outstanding coaching & culture to drive growth at a faster rate than the competition, year over year over year over year. Our flag was literally built on aggressive off seasons. Bolting for Clarry at 4, going after the 'bad egg' May, getting in Lever and Langdon's ears 2/3 years out, and then capitalising our on quick dip in 2019 with 3 nailed early-ish selections. If our players grow at the same rate as the market, we stand still. I'm not saying we're a bad team (not by a long shot), or that we're done, or that our youth are no good, or that our coaching is abysmal. What I'm saying is you need to look at our attributes in all those realms in context of the competition around the league. So when I look at those players of ours you've named - do I think most can improve? Absolutely. Do i think most can improve faster than Carlton's youth, Brisbane's youth, Gold Coast's youth, Fremantle's youth, Adelaide's youth? Not necessarily. All a matter of coaching, development, and of course your own opinion on each player's ceilings - I think all those named can be good players and that some (Rivers, Pickett, Petty) have very high ceilings. This gives me hope. I also think that some are probably already at or close to their ceiling (Sparrow, Chandler, and I'm sure controversially, JVR and McVee to some degree), in that I would not be surprised if JVR kicks less than 28 goals next year, Chandler less than 24, and McVee places lower than 9th in the BNF. Their output this year was actually pretty high. And yeah, we got close. But not close enough. But to keep up with the growers in the comp - and every year there are teams that outgrow others due to the factors I listed above - for us to be that close again, all those named will need to at least replicate their 23 output (or others step up in their stead), whilst Petracca goes top 5 in the Brownlow again, Viney top 10 in a career year, Fritsch continues kicking goals for fun in spite of our horrendous efficiency, and Gawn & May keep up their form 1 year older. This is not a controversial view and if you speak to non-Melbourne supporters, you'd understand it. All oppo supporters fear Gawn, Trac, Clarry, May and Fritsch. None of them think that any of our next tier are on track to be scary. Not like Ashcroft for Brisbane, Daicos for Coll, or Curnow/Walsh/TDK for Carlton. Our stars are amazing - our 2nd tier is good - but our 3rd, 4th and depth is not. You can't have it all - and what we have can be enough if things go our way - but you need to respect how good some other teams are as well. And on the depth - no one is claiming that JJ, Harmes or Dunstan are world beaters. But what they were/are is mostly reliable - senior bodies who could take the heat & adhere to structures, there to fill gaps when our 1st choice players are unavailable, track a player back to goals & get a fist in when a youngster might be ball watching. They won't win the game for you - but they can at least keep the team ticking while your game winners find a way to get it done. You put kids in their absence - and they lose 3 out of the 5 critical contests that come their way over the game - those moments accumulate across the ground and you find yourself losing games against the best teams. Depth is depth - by definition, they can't be our best players, so claiming "we've lost very little" when it walks out the door is redundant, and lacks an understanding of the nuance & requirements of building a list. There are many opportunities to improve, and there is no reason we can't be the big, outperforming grower next year. There is plenty of room for optimism. If pick 6 and 11 turn out 3/4 as well as Jackson and Kozzie did - we'll be well on our way. We aren't far away - that much is obvious - but asking the question of where our improvement is coming from is not pessimism. It's just discussion. If you can't see the point in discussion then I'd question what you're doing on here at all. There's an echo chamber available to you at all times if you want to reassure yourself that we'll win it next year (and no doubt, that there were terrible, unique, unprecedented unforeseen circumstances that prevented us winning it this year).

Inclined to agree with this. Put another way - it's not silly to suggest that Mcvee at least, if not JVR, will have dips after outstanding first seasons (in effect for JVR). Rivers should theoretically continue to improve but it's hard to tell where the ceiling is. That goes for Bowey, Sparrow too but you're right - some middling improvement out of that tier is probably not going to be the difference. I had hoped for a real career year from Gus in the middle and think he tracked into great form this year - but now there are some doubts there as well (regardless of what Edmund said). Significant doubts on Oliver for obvious reasons and there will of course come a time when Gawn, May or even Trac start to dip after being up so long. We'll get consistent output from the likes of Lever, Kozzie and ANB in that next rung. Each are a difference maker say 1 in every 4 games, and we need that to rise to 2/4 or 2/3. There is of course scope for players like Turner, Laurie, AMW, Howes or our draftees to come in and do what Mcvee did. But no guarantee and you're lucky if you get one newbie a year playing to that level. I have a strange amount of faith in AMW and really think he's developing well (tbh, with a higher ceiling than Kade), but McAdam probably prevents him from breaking into the team this year. I think Woewodin has real scope but not sure he's a top liner starting mid. Certainly feels to me that the FD are just banking on the same squad (and on scoring shots, they'd be right) and can only foresee us getting it done the way we did in 21. But our depth is thin - it wasn't in 21. Our structures are aged - they weren't in 21. And our key position players are aged/ageing - they weren't in 21. 22 was such a wasted year in more ways than one. Went all in on B2B and barely played a youngster all year, even when we had the stars running round on broken legs.

Seems to me that he will stay and try to win a flag, but is going home regardless in 2 years. Doesn't sound great. We better hope we get the value for him that's on the table now...

Went and read the Adelaide BF board to see the reactions when this news first came out. In general, most see him as best 22, "a shame to lose him" and and as someone who "changes their forward line dynamic significantly". In the context of Adelaide I don't know exactly what that means (less Walker centric? Takes a defender away from Rankine?) but probably the best way I can describe this is if we were to lose Melksham (3 years ago), or maybe from today's team, a Sparrow or a Bowey. Good player, not a game changer. They also said he has a strange habit of pretending he's injured (or emphasising bad knocks), particularly after he does something bad (e.g. missing a shot for goal). Weird trait but several of them mentioned it unprompted by each other...

Agree with you mate. I think he'll be a miss.