Axis of Bob

Vet's list is still there, but the rules have changed. Instead of paying half outside the cap, now it's just $100K per player. (You stupid idiot!) B)

So, according to the great Albert Einstein, how will continuing to be a miserable pessimist help us to be successful and you to be happy? "Every great and deep difficulty bears in itself its own solution. It forces us to change our thinking in order to find it." - Niels Bohr

Some people don't want to be happy.

I'd be keen to get Dawes. He's no superstar, but he does have some attributes that are very attractive to the club: - Really hard worker - Leader - Mature, but young (great age) - Fills an important role that we can't currently fill (power forward to complement Clark) - Great competitor If we are looking to get free agents in (like Byrnes) to set an example and create a high performance culture, then Dawes will be perfect for that- plus he has the ablity to play a long term role in the side. As long as we don't expect him to be Mitch Clark, then he'd be a very good acquisition.

TPM, I'd like one of your crappy diamonds. In return I'll give you not one, not two, but THREE steaming turds! It's better than one turd, isn't it?

Why do you assume that 'no stone unturned' = making offers to everybody? A scattergun approach? I would think that 'no stone unturned' was to investigate all options available. This includes looking at players like Knights, Goddard, Chaplin etc and then making a decision on whether or not we should pursue them, and how hard we should pursue.

The reviews are useful and interesting if you don't mind reading between the lines. If you need to be spoon fed then it won't be much use. I suggest trying religion.

You have said, repeatedly, that you've put B-H on ignore yet you keep replying to him. It's also funny because he has put you on ignore, so he won't see it. Please stop posting. You make this forum a worse place.

That is genuinely funny.

(he means us ... we are at AAMI Park)

Scully senior signed with GWS a full year beforehand. This was far earlier than when you stated that the real thread was not GWS, but instead it was Richmond! No offence (well, actually some offence), but the whole line of argument was pretty funny. Continuing to hold on to it is even funnier. This thread is comparably funny.

I love irony.

Exactly. It's also why some teams play much better at Etihad than the MCG. Same reason Geelong do so well at home - it's is such a narrow ground that a lot of teams have great difficulty. Subiaco is much longer than most grounds, so it requires teams to carry the footy much more. That's how North lost - because they were unable to get outside West Coast, who run the ball with their top level runners like Embley, Gaff, Shuey, Masten etc, who complement the inside work of Kerr and Priddis. It suits the ground. North do much better in the confines of Etihad.

I think Richmond is the biggest threat.

Have Geelong activated that pick for this year?

He is no star, but he is I mature player from a successful club that fills a role we can't currently fill. This is what free agency should be like.

I'd keep. He's strong, fast and competitive. It's a really good start to play Neeld's style of footy.

Neeld has had a year to work out the lie of the land. We've already seen in the last draft what Neeld value highly when he drafted Taggert, Tynan and Sellar - hardness and athleticism. In other words, the ability to compete. Cook is a wonderfully skilled player who makes great decisions when you deliver him the ball. The problem is that he's slow and not a physically dominant player. Not a good combo because it means that you have a lot of trouble competing. Gysberts has some of the best inside hands I've seen at Melbourne for a while, but is not athletic at all. It just means that he struggles to spread and struggles to get to contests and compete - which is important for Neeld. Compare that with him wanting to keep Bate - strong and a really good runner. Neeld just found out, after coaching him, that he wasn't good enough. But there was a definite reason why he kept him.

One of them probably broke up with their girlfriend recently. Have they let the supporters down by not telling us? Get over yourself. You aren't that important.

You're

Why? Anyway, I agree with the poster who said that Tynan will be a good, long term role player for us. He apparently has a fantastic attitude, is a good runner (good pace), flexible (good size and courageous in the air) and competitive. He'll play a flank at either end and, at worst, will be a good AFL player. May not have that natural class to be a midfielder, but he'll be one of the first picked each week due to his ability to fill a lot of roles well. A good late® pick.

Culture. Which, ironically, is the likely reason why he probably won't be with us next year.

It looks like that was his dominant half of the game too!

The benefit is that we could screw a team over for one pick in the draft (which probably won't make any difference to the player we get anyway). The downside is that we could never do another deal like this with any club ever again, since nobody would trust us. So if there is any chance for us to get a gentleman's agreement with a team that could give us a significant benefit (like the Viney deal) then we could never do it. Nobody would come to us in a trade with good faith. I wonder how Billy Stretch is coming along?