stevethemanjordan

Well wtf are you arguing/whinging about ? The only thing it's potentially inhibiting is his distance. Have you checked the bloke's accuracy? What is it about his 'flawed' action do you see that needs changing? Do you understand that the last few steps he takes before hitting the ball are fine and his ball-drop is generally fine? And that that's the most important part of his 'technique' and kicking a football in general. What you're basically saying is that the before bits like his stutter steps etc are contributing to his inaccuracy? Is that right? How can you argue such a thing when to date, he has been pretty damn accurate with the exception of a few 'off' days. What are you arguing mate?

The ball is always positioned more favourably in his left hand on his approach which is what makes it look like he's left-footed. He also takes his first step with his left foot, (I think). It's unorthodox, but works for him. The last few steps and then the ball drop are usually fine. It's everything before that, that looks like a mess.

Cool. I'm giving a reason as to why he has a set-shot run up like he does. He is Jesse Hogan. Not Robbie Flower, or countless others.

Excuses? Mate, everyone has a little more penetration on the run. But a set shot is not an on the run kick and Hogan has always lacked penetration. He can kick 50 if he runs around on a slight arc but you minimise your chances of making sweet contact if you do that which is why sometimes he doesn't get the distance. But in general, he is not a booming kick. How can you say he doesn't feel comfortable with that routine if it's the one he's had since coming to the club? Do you mean to say that you don't feel comfortable with it? That would make more sense.

People continuously overlook the fact that he is left-hand dominant, (Tasks/activities with his left hand. Eg; Playing tennis, writing, drinking tea, shaking hands etc). However, weirdly enough he is right-foot dominant. That is a [censored] up of hemispheres and I'm sure this makes it extremely difficult for the brain to make his set-shot routine look 'smooth'. If people knew that, they wouldn't bang on about it. And I wish commentators would get the mail on this too because it's becoming infuriating. His run up is what it is and if he feels most comfortable kicking this way, then he should be left to it. Especially given the uniqueness of having two opposing limbs that are dominant. We all know he lacks penetration. But that's always been the case and I don't think he'll ever change that significantly.

He'd be an upgrade and offer more versatility than Pedo who he'd likely replace in a hypothetical. And given we've only offered Spencer a one-year deal, it suggests to me we're keeping our 'options' open in regards to players like this. The importance of keeping Gawn fit and on the park cannot be underestimated considering the advantage he gives our mids and side in general. And I think that will be the thinking here. Gawn needs support. Goldstein and Nic Nat both have better support which allows them more breaks both forward and on the pine. Gawn needs to be managed carefully, he is like gold to us. To me, most of the top sides have 'ruckmen height' talls in their forward-line who provide solid relief for their side's number one ruckman. Pedo has provided admirable support at times but I'd be very surprised if supporters would prefer him to a 200cm forward/ruckman who'd potentially provide further relief for Hogan as well as offering better assistance when in the ruck due to his height. But like others, what's hard to envisage is a future forward-line of: Jenkins/Gawn Weideman Garlett Watts Hogan Kent Seems to be too top heavy.... But at the same time it looks awfully difficult to match up on.

Who is Dan? Or did predictive txt just have its way?

I pity the fool that thinks in this manner. He's contracted until the end of 2017. It's a waste of time and energy.

If all of the pointless threads, from all of the football forums, formed their own forum - OF POINTLESS THREADS - In that forum, this would be the most pointless thread.

Not sure about others, but I reckon Terlich and Grimes

I don't think anyone is disputing that we had a young side in, as we did the previous two weeks. However I refuse to say the loss came down to 'inexperience'. That's just garbage. Conceding seven goals with such ease is not solely down to inexperience. Dunn, McDonald and Lumumba have plenty of experience they all had really poor games. Not average. Poor. Pederson had his worst game for the year, Vince refused to play tough footy and Dom Tyson wasn't near it. Sure some of those players are still young and so off days are forgivable. The trend is there. We have players, including senior ones who are far too inconsistent in their output. The difference between McDonald's best and worst is far too great. The difference in Dunn's best and worst is far too great. The list goes on. It's the number one contributing factor as to why we still have what many supporters would call 'Melbourne moments'. We saw it with Frawley, Howe, Jamar, Bail, Grimes etc etc and with Garland who is playing ressies. Over a career at AFL level, the hope for all clubs is that the players who last the longest on AFL lists are the ones who will be the most consistent performers at their clubs. And if you look all around, you'll see that all other clubs have them. This has been the norm for all AFL clubs excluding ours which is another reason why we've been the laughing stock. We have one home grown player who fits the description. One. Nathan Jones. Jesse is part of a new breed who everyone is hoping will buck this trend at the MFC and I'm sure he'd be excited at the thought of what they could achieve together. However, I also strongly believe that he'd look at guys like Dunn and McDonald on their underperforming days and question whether or not these more senior guys have the ability to help carry the club also. As for the satisfaction comment. He is 21. Frawley was 27 when he left I'm pretty sure and went to the flag favourite who had just won back-to-back. Very different. Jesse would have a myriad of clubs to choose from unlike Frawley and lists with just as much talent and much better leaders. Jesse will not leave because of a 'loss'. He'd leave because of the perpetual underperforming of senior and experienced figures that have contaminated the club for years.

Lose sometimes? It would have absolutely nothing to do with losing sometimes. It would have a lot to do with the downfalls of periods of these games that are the reason we end up losing. These are trends and are inherent problems that still exist within our current group and are visible to outsiders watching. Why do you think during that third quarter capitulation, people say it's the 'same old Melbourne again'? Where does that come from? And what does that mean to people? I can't understand these reductionist posts. Whilst Saturday's resulting 'loss' this early in the season is hardly worth crying about, it is the same patterns and trends that continue to concern. Why do so many seem to miss that? Quite obviously it's got nothing to do with 'one loss'. I find it hard to believe that any supporter wouldn't think that Jesse wouldn't have those things on his mind in regards to how far this club can go and how far he can take his footy with this club. Especially given what he's endured since arriving and what he would be able to see on game day in regards to old habits and new. Again, supporters are kidding themselves if they believe a Saturday's loss can be reduced simply to 'inexperience' or 'losing a stat count' ad nauseam. Here's one small example: Having two of your most senior and experienced defenders in Lynden Dunn and Colin Garland playing as if they are first or second year recruits. Neither can find consistent form. Both have played VFL this year. Neither provide inspiration nor instill confidence within the back six because of this reason. Tom McDonald. Our second start up KD. Clearly has more time on his side however a trend emerges here also. Inconsistency in his performance. He has some elite attributes for a defender and when he is playing well he is clearly a really vital part of our defence. But when he's not, his more valuable to the opposition given his inherent skill and decision making problems. Turnovers resulting in goals, leaving his man to make an ineffective spoil resulting in goals etc. I would go as far to say that I think Tom McDonald's weaknesses are as bad or worse than any other key defenders in the competition. His best attributes are up there with the best. His worst are horribly bad. I'm giving examples of three players whose gameday output is hugely influential to how we defend, instruct and move the ball out of defence with confidence. This is one area of the ground. Dunn and McDonald were incredibly poor on the weekend and Dunn not only rarely contributed positively to our side, he gave away free kicks, a 50 metre penalty and he turned the ball over. No doubt there were other players on the weekend who not only were off but were simply horribly underperforming. Pederson, Frost, Vince, Tyson, Gawn whilst a host of younger players were also well down on output and touch (more forgivable). But I am talking about trends and habits that I continue to see that are the main reason behind such dramatic dips in form. Jesse would without a doubt identify these kinds of problems that remain at the club and wonder how and when it will change. And ultimately, unless things like what I just pointed out actually CHANGE, I honestly don't think he'll want to hang around.

Pedo, T-Mac, Dunn, Vince, Gawn, Tyson. They were all extremely poor. It's not just about inexperience. It's when most of your side are playing their worst football. And for some reason we see it too often.

Was a great vintage for reds in Coonawarra.

Ahhh Sat-man. You're gorgeous.

Enjoy that you can provide info from the mouths of some of our players. But when you say something like 'he didn't think much of Perth growing up' I'm not sure who's words they are.. There are countless interviews in which he makes it no mystery to anyone how he feels about Perth/his home. He loves it. That's not to say he dislikes Melbourne. But you're certainly painting a different picture by saying what you have.

Yeh big fella I do. It's 'reasons' though. Not 'reason'. You're pretty much painting it black and white. And I refuse to. Selwood is great. Jones is great. One has been blessed with having a really easy path to reach his potential as a player, the other has had an enormously challenging one. Looking at each player in isolation, (without the stats and accolades) I honestly can't see what Selwood possesses that Jones doesn't. They both have a very similar skill set. Combative, competitive and contested ball winning machines. What would you say Selwood unequivocally possesses over Jones in any given attribute? Regardless of mother[censored] stats bro. Just imagine them playing. In your head.

Yes. You're pointing out what the stats say and the accolades he's received. I'm arguing that much of this is to do with the environment he found himself in once drafted, the group of leaders he played under from a young age, the quality coaches that developed him and the immediate success that surrounded him at Geelong which brings about an increase at every emotional and feeling level. Confidence and motivation. Two things he would never have had to think twice about from his development years at Geelong. Yes he was a higher pick than Nathan and perhaps he is a bit better than Jones in some areas. But the gap isn't as big as what you make out. Put them head-to-head in a couple of training drills and it'd be more even than you think.

I'm almost certain none of Selwood, Pendles or Fyfe would have been able to drag us over the line for a win in any of the years from 2011-13 such was the state of our list and club. Draft an 18 year old Selwood to the MFC in his draft year and I can guarantee he wouldn't be seen as the player he is today. Draft Nathan Jones to Geelong at the top of their power and I can guarantee he'd be valued more highly as a player amongst wider AFL community. Regardless of all of that, the 'star' debate is a waste of time. It's like arguing on the best Ice Cream flavour. Everyone has their own flavour. It's subjective. Not only that, many other variables come to play. For example, the Selwood Vs Jones debate. Selwood will obviously possess the better stats in almost every category due to playing in such a successful team during such a successful era. Jones the complete opposite. His stats even during his best years individually will suffer due to playing in a far less successful and competitive side over such a long period. That is one example. Geelong have suffered since the departure of Ablett and ageing and retirements of midfielders Bartel, Johnson, Kelly and Corey. Without them, Selwood hasn't been able to win games off his own boot and his form really wasn't that consistently good this year. Selwood and Jones are in my mind very similar in playing style, attributes as well as height and weight and if we're isolating them as players, I don't think it's fair to say that Selwood is better than Jones or vice versa. However if we were comparing Fyfe to Jones, or Pendlebury to Jones then it's a different story. They're very different players. Finishing on Oliver vs Jones - Comparing the two from the age of 18 I'd say that it's obvious Oliver has more to offer in terms of attribute diversity, however it remains to be seen whether he has the application and will to get the best out of himself in the way that Jones has been hellbent on doing his entire career. Like ProDee, I'd hope and expect under our now rock-solid environment and development team that Oliver will be better player than Jones.

The more I read from you, the more I'm certain you and 'Hogan's Heroes' are related.

Seconded.

Francis doesn't have an issue with the physicality of the sport. In fact, one of his strengths is his competitiveness and aggression. The complete opposite of Watts. Not only that. Jack Watts was a key forward for the entirety of his under 18's year whereas Francis has been used as a utility for much of this year. Neither are the foil for Jesse. But the Weid certainly could be.

This.He had an OPERATION in May. An ankle op. Imagine how much time he'd have spent off it... Why do posters look at these numbers and think it's the 'be-all-end-all'. Fark. The bloke is a supreme talent. Clubs just want to know that his body will hold up under what I can only imagine would be a seriously stressful environment for the human body. Especially a body that has had some history with serious injury. That's all we'll be looking at. And if we deem him a safe bet at pick 3, he'll have all the pre-seasons in the world to get his 'beep test' up to scratch for all you number lovers. This is not a [censored] potential Olympic marathon runner's draft. It's the AFL draft. And this bloke is a Full Forward.

Hasn't played since May this year after having his second bout of ankle surgery so I've heard. Not only that, he's a stay at home Full Forward. Yet posters are concerned with his beep test and 20 metre sprint test results? Absurd. Clubs would be happy in knowing that he was able to complete these tests. Simply. There's nothing else to it. WTF were y'all expecting? It's a tick off the list in my eyes. Had he not been able to complete the tests due to persisting injuries, it'd be different. But it's not. Wonder what Jake Stringer and Lever would have scored in these tests 6 months after serious injuries...

Salem the ectomorph? (I should never have opened my mouth).