Jarka

I love trade week!

I'll throw a hissy fit if that happens :angry:

I think he meant that Geelong originally picked him up in the psd. We swapped pick 12 for him that we received via Adelaide from the Eagles.

Friday I believe. If all this is wrong and Judd does decide to go to Collingwood then he will instantly become the most hated player in the comp. Eagles won't be happy because Collingwood offer is the worst. Carlton and Essendon fans both hate Collingwood anyway and the general consensus from opposition supporters is that if their team doesn't get him they'd be happy for him to go to the club he barracked for as a kid. It would be a sign that he's more interested in money and luxury than anything else.

Got a message from this bloke (i promised I wouldn't say who) who does business with a MFC board member. He's been told by said person that Judd has picked us but I can't confirm how reliable this info is.

This brings up an interesting question - Are we drafting the right players or do we fail to development them properly? There have been a number of KPP's drafted late, here are some examples 2006 82 Edwards North (Not big but can take a contested mark) 71 Westhoff Port 64 Nick Gill Ade 63 Goldsack Coll 32 Tippet Ade 2005 42 Warnock Freo 33 Gilbert StK 2004 62 Egan Geel 40 Maric Ade 2003 63 Bower Carl 58 Hudson Ade 46 Pettigrew Port 2002 72 Brad Fisher 55 S.Fisher Stk 51 Boyle Haw I didn't put too much effort into that so I'm sure there have been some that I've missed. I'm not happy that we've continued to give away decent picks for mature players on the decline. I also question whether we have been able to develop ruckman, I don't rate either Jamar or PJ as a ruck and Simmonds and Jolly played their best footy in other states. It would be unfair of me to say that we should have gone for player 'x' with the wonderfull asset of hindsight backing me up, so I'll refrain from that. I will say though that the attitude of going for 'best available' and not going for a specific position with the early picks is what I favour. Leave your later picks and rookie selections to try to solve problems with positions.

Our record of drafting KPP's is deplorable so I'm confident that the club would have stuffed up that selection if they had of gone for a kid instead....But back to Holland, in my opinion he is ordinary at best but let's fast forward 5 years. Due to the decisions of Daniher and co, Bailey has inherited a list that is desperately lacking in quality talls, and the Holland trade is just another one to add to our pile of poor recruiting decisions. Of recent years only one KP recruiting move has been successful, and that's Rivers (Newton has yet to establishment himself yet).

Slightly off topic but a sad but interesting useless piece of trivia - the MFC doesn't actually own any cups as all of the premierships won was when the club was a part of the MCC who has ownership over them.

There were still some very good players available at that pick - examples are Adcock, Peake, Buchanon, Rischitelli, Symes. But there were major questions about Holland at the time which in my opinion have proven to be correct, but really in any other team I doubt if he would have played even 20 games. He's looked good with us simply because of our lack of KPP's to compare him against. Not good enough to play up forward and too slow for a defender, and in reality if we hadn't have got him then Richmond would have delisted him when his contract ran out and we could have picked him up in the psd for nothing because no other club was interested in him. My main query though is that we should be building a talented team through developing youth, and an early second round pick is still a good pick, and too valuable to waste on a reject from another club.

I don't see Bate as a key forward, and from memory Bailey has already mentioned to play him and Dunn as midfielders

When lookign back at a draft it's important to look at the other players who were rated as highly at the time. That means for us we did very well with McLean as most had him going later in the first round. Sylvia at 3 is interesting because even though he hasn't been that great there really hasn't been any other players who were rated as highly at the time that have been a standout ie Ray, Bradley and Tenace have all been dissapointing. CJ as a 3rd round is a loss but not a bad one. I'm still not happy over the Holland deal, stupid move by the club.

From the rumours I've heard what happened was worse than that. The coach at the time said that he wanted to most mean and aggresive KPP available, so we didn't even go after the best :angry: I believe that this was the only time that Daniher ever overruled CAC with a draft pick. Just another example of our poor record of recruiting KPP's

We're very lucky to read his posts, I don't know of any other recruiting manager that does the same thing.

If you go to their profile and look left down near the bottom there is a section called "last seen", if that person is logged in it will tell you which forum they are currently in, but if they are either reading or sendign pm's it will also tell you that (i forget the exact message though)

Which is funny because when he was logged on he was sending pm's..... B)

Using the pm cac? Please cc me in as well, this suspense is driving me up the wall (and the butterfly effect has pssed onto my wife and daughter!)

Everywhere I turn I hear that we're Judd's first choice but until we have him signed at the end of trade week I won't believe it because I'll be devastated if the rumours turn out to be false.

Due to popular demand here is the Best Moderator Award! 3 Votes - 2 Votes - 1 Vote Good luck guys! (and gal )

Good idea, I'll edit my previous post

I wasn't too sure if I should or not but we can run with two awards this week, and as Jaded suggested I'll create another thread. (Edited)

The time has come, this is the big one, even bigger than the Brownlow (well, perhaps I'm getting carried away). You guys know the drill, please give your 3-2-1 for who you think were the best posters over the last season. I think I need to set some ground rules, you can't on-trade your votes (sorry deanox) and voting will finish on Sunday at 17:00 (extra day because I was late) Good luck everyone! 3 Votes - 2 Votes - 1 Vote -

My issue with the previous coaching panel is their seemingly unending ability to take a young player out of their favoured position and screw them up by trying to make them into something else. For example, Brad Green can lead well, is a great overhead mark and is a beautiful shot on goal, but foro some f^%*ing reason Daniher played him off the half back line??

I agree to some extent, but when this trade period is over we need to have depth in our midfield, not just one star. Right now our inside mids consist of J.Mac, Jones and McLean. Junior is in his 30's and will slow down so that leaves just two genuine inside mids (and there could be a good argument stating that McLean isn't a genuine inside mid). If we trade away either of these two then will be in the same position (albeit a bit stronger) as before, a great starting lineup but when we go up against a team like Collingwood who does over 90 interchanges a game then it won't matter if we have Judd or not, we'll get run off our feet. West Coast were successfull because that had a group of great players not just one star. We need to keep our best midfield together as much as possible for the Judd trade to work.

Personally I'd prefer to keep Jones over McLean, but those two should be our 'untouchables'

godamnnit you beat me to it. Shinboner spirit my hairy but