fr_ap

I'm not basing it on a twitter comment - I'm basing it on having been a young Aussie male in the same venues, both City and Country, as players many times...and witnessing it with my own eyes. Considering I rarely see players out and about otherwise in this city of 4-5m people, I'd say that's more than coincidence. But acknowledge it could be, and also acknowledge the subjectivity of my individual observations. Maybe I've only witnessed the exceptions to the rule.

Good balanced response and mostly echoes my own experience. I only had one close mate descend into the really hard stuff with any regularity - and he has (largely) since pulled himself out of it. Smartest guy I know which is often the way - he's self-confessed on the spectrum (undiagnosed) and just finds life a bit boring without drugs. I worry for what he's done to his system over time & he has been a bit addled here & there (stutters etc. developed), but he's mellowing a little as he grows up. He's still a good person. Several other friends and in-laws have been badly impacted by cannabis. Brother in-law the prime example, with teenage use causing extreme schizophrenia & ultimately violence against his own family, my wife included. I've got no time for people who try to tell me that Cannabis is harmless. As for whether any of it should be legal or not - it's really difficult & I can see the arguments from both sides. Given my lived experience though I tend to revert to the status quo (illegal) - ultimately the damage that can be done is catastrophic & as we know all laws sadly need to cater to the weakest person in society. This is not to say that Alcohol is really any different though, and its peculiar that it is allowed when others are not. As for Ginnivan - he deserves whatever punishment he gets - IMO less because he's breaking AFL rules, moreso because he's a young man who needs guidance & direction to help him mature. That should be the Collingwood's #1 concern. If he loves playing footy then the suspension is an appropriate punishment. I'm not convinced given his character that he'll be at all concerned by having his reputation damaged. As for footy more generally - it doesn't make it right but we all know he's not alone. His teammates would have been in the next cubicle...maybe he's been exposed because there are still a lot of people that loathe the way he plays. Someone out to get him perhaps. There was a comment on twitter that said if we caught and suspended all the AFL players who've used , we wouldn't have a league to watch, which I think is probably true. I've seen enough of them in person to convince me of this - including certain stars we love to talk about on this site.

I was about to ask - what do we know about how their pre season has gone?

So who do we think will be nominated tomorrow? Turner or Burgoyne?

Full marks for this post...for saying that Jefferson marks the ball at HIS highest point. Drives me mad when the bozos say that player X Marks the ball at ITS highest point which implies some otherworldly space jam giant grabbing the ball at the top of it's arc

Can anyone elaborate on Salem? Did he not find the ball? Others in more prominent distributor roles? What's the deal? Was a top 5 player in a premiership year, in an area we've lacked

Have you learnt nothing? Freo had no capital to get the Jackson deal done either. Certainly not to the level we wanted. It doesn't matter. The player has all the power particularly when OOC.

Strangely emotional reaction to a normal discussion. I didn't say winning was unimportant, I just said it was less important than other factors. As I said this has been proven over many examples over a long period of time, across all sports. Jackson couldn't have had a more 'winning' start to his career with the MFC, in terms of games or individual success (RS). Ultimately, that success appeared unimportant to his retention, and potentially even tipped the scales the other way insofar as him not having any 'unfinished business' with the MFC. I am also equally unphased with whatever it is you think. Its interesting that in this day & age there are still supporters who think that winning will solve everything. The majority of players aren't as invested in the fabric of the club as you think they are, and are nowhere near as invested as you are. It serves them well to view it as only a job, and one they can do in 18 places around the country for similiar or better pay whilst playing in the same position, against the same opposition, flying round to the same stadiums and staying in the same hotels. If they can do all of that then with the (more important) factors taken care of like family and lifestyle, this is what will drive most decisions. All players are different though, and success will be more important to some than others. Most will say success is a factor usually for favourable optics for their new team ('I really believe this list can have success') but the evidence does not support the claims. There is little to differentiate the club's themselves, especially for middling teams like us in terms of prominence and size. We don't have the pull of Richmond or Collingwood and we don't have the lifestyle benefits of Geelong, Brisbane or Perth. Success is momentary and transient - at best it can last 3-5 years, on average it lasts 1-3, if you even get there at all. For players looking at a 10-15 year career, they know that all clubs will have both ups and downs and they'll be there for them all. Kossie would know that he's currently at a successful and very well run club. He'd be well aware of what he'd be leaving behind, because he himself has been a key part of driving it. Port are hardly a cellar dweller in any case. If he leaves, it will have nothing to do with success.

I don't agree. There are many examples of players leaving successful teams in favour of family or location or lifestyle. Lever left the grand finalist to play for us when we were bottom 6....

If that was the case no one would be looking to leave us. We've won more games than any other team over the last couple of years. This won't be about success but geography, family and crowds. If he prefers the town of Adelaide, having family around, and big adoring one-eyed crowds, you couldn't blame him for leaving for port. We love him but he spends a lot of the year doing ridiculous stuff in front of a sparse or quiet MCG. But more than any other player we've had leave the club, he's the one I really want to stay. Whereas I was somewhat resigned with Jesse and Jackson, I'll be utterly heartbroken if kossie leaves. An extremely rare player, a rare endurance-speed combo, supreme skill off either foot, significant power (kicking 55 with his frame is not easy), disciplined and defensive without the ball, spunk flash brilliance and marketable all round. One of my favourite ever MFC players and he really is just scratching the surface at 21....he's well on track to be far better than any of the modern day small forwards (including Cyril and Eddie at the same age). There are very few small forwards that have kicked 40+ in consecutive years around period, let alone at the age of 21. I wanted us to pick him and was thrilled when we made the reach in the first round. Wouldn't be fair for someone else to benefit from the risk we took and investment we've made - I want to be watching him at the G for the next 10 years. We will be a significantly worse team without him and he was a very large part of the flag year. Unfortunately if he does leave, it won't be for two first rounders. Even the best small forwards don't have that kind of currency - Rankine's recent value is about the best we could hope for. I really hate that there is a thread for this. Saddening.

Agree entirely. On balance they were a top 4 side last year - people talk about Collingwood's statistical anomaly - the team on the flipside of that anomaly was Carlton. Lost quite a few very close ones. They have every piece in place and a coach who has learnt some humility, we know can inspire and has them playing tough footy. They've got offence figured out (bit like us in 18). Perhaps a roleplayer or two short, but you could say that about most contenders. I declared them 23 victors but we know you need a lot of luck....put it this way - they'd be very short odds to win 1 of the next 3 or 5.

Carlton will win the flag in 23.

He was critical of all of those selections. Particularly Kozzie as he was of low output - said we would have been much better taking.... Jack Mahoney. Says it all really. He also declared Lukosius the greatest draft pick ever made. He's a very dedicated, overly verbose nuffie who lacks any real feel for what traits are important at AFL level. And a Collingwood fan to boot. Fair play for getting himself into ESPN as he has been doing phantom drafts for a long time, well before it was hip - but it also says a bit given this history that he's not progressed further & is still bignoting himself on BigFooty with the other Youtube heroes.

I count 6 different hairstyles across that gamut of videos This alone is very impressive

Is that not the playbook?

Take that Freo

Would have liked you to have been right as I liked him as a player. Now gone!

I'm not sure we're into him as we're fairly well stocked for small half forwards with Laurie Chandler ANB etc Tbh, I think we've got Keeler in our sights having failed to get Barnett. Would explain why we haven't traded up for any of these obvious talents

Man this trade period has really not gone the way we wanted

Very well put

It's no secret that our team & gamestyle is built around competitors & toughness - players who will win 1v1s, punch above their weight (so to speak), and bring 2nd/3rd efforts. We're not a beautifully skilled team, our gameplan isnt attractive or free flowing. We're down & dirty. We win contests. This is why we wanted to trade up for Humphrey & had George in mind - brutes who play with authority & power. These are typical JT picks - Sparrow, Jordan, Bedford, etc. - none were the most polished or skilled players but they never die wondering. This is his MO & is his philosophy on how AFL footy should be played. From what we know Jefferson goes a little against the grain in this regard. HIs 'contested' marks (at least via highlights) aren't truly contested in a body sense - they're run & jump, outreach. He appears nice and agile & I like the groundball stuff I see in the videos, but apparently those moments are few & far between. Seems a nice kid without too many hard edges. There are some obvious parallels to Weideman across all these attributes...long reach, nice kick, nice skills, good athlete, nice guy. We waited years for Sam to add to his frame thinking this would improve his physicality but ultimately, he just couldn't take contested marks when he was bodied early. He doesn't play with any authority. KPFs in AFL without authority don't make the grade. Jefferson looks like a nice player, but his style would typically work well in a team that moves the ball quickly and kick to his advantage or an isolated/space situation where he has freedom to run at the footy. Weideman would do well in this type of team as well, and I expect he will be improved at the Bombers for this reason (+, nothing like a club change to pull your head out), noting their style under B Scott is TBD & their inability to win contest is why they've not recently been as good a team as us. I just think it doesn't feel like a Melbourne pick. A part of me thinks JT doesn't quite know how to pick KPFs - his preferred attributes (toughness, competitiveness, heart) are rarely seen in underage key forwards because Height, not power, is why kids are told to play forward in junior footy. Its why key position players are such a crapshoot at the draft In any case, all the players I preferred (maybe other than George, who's speculative in his own right) were off the board by the time we picked, so I have no issue with it. We've filled a need, he's a great height, and its all in front of him as to where he can go. I'm behind him 100%.

Yes, you probably could. Both King brothers arguably stronger in the air at this age and have a few extra cm's as well. Vs Weideman Jefferson looks to be a bit more agile and ground level capable, so hopefully that serves him well. I like the Jarrad Waite comparison. I think the Charlie Curnow comparison is a long way off. Not writing him off, just sharing my immediate reaction.

Somewhat disappointed as I think he's a very 'un JT/Melbourne' player in terms of competitiveness and physicality. JTs KPF drafting has been his weak spot and all else being equal, this is a very similar pick to Weideman albeit without the spectre of the McKay or Curnow misses. Like with Weideman, my concern is you can't teach physicality. It's innate in some, lacking in others. Jesse had it from day dot, JVR has it. Weid looked a million bucks with a run and jump (which if you recall, was his touted draft strength) but at AFL level you just rarely get the opportunity to attack an aerial ball unbuffeted. Hopefully Jefferson has a few more strings to his bow. I really do hate to be critical of an 18 year old kid who hasn't played a game and presents well. But it feels like a story we've watched to the end before. Having said all of that - I'll be right behind him, hope I'm so far wrong and he's Josh Kennedy reincarnated.

Am I the only one that sees a little bit of Dusty here? The power, lateral movement, 1v1s and the general creativity is similiar. Dusty was also a pretty loose kick when he started...

She got a boot to it!! Wtf mate! In a sport where 1 or 2 goals can make the difference, just criminal