grazman

Get the sense from hearing him talk though he's not dumb enough to stay with the club, reading between the lines he feels betrayed.

Apparently Dyson couldn't believe that one of the papers ran with the fact that the players hadn't disclosed on match day the supplements they'd taken... but the paper was only reporting the evidence that was offered by ASADA/WADA - presumably passed on by the AFL and presumably which the players and Essendon could have refuted with their own documentation.

Beat me too it Maple, Maybe we can do our season opener to an Ozzy or Alice Cooper rendition. Plenty of pigeons in the local environs.

Not meaning to be picky, but I think you mean Bryan Adams 'Summer of 69' - but agree that they're all in the one category of music for me. Not sure how much the Tiges would be making from such a venture, but not enough to buy back their dignity.

Assessments of our upcoming season like Roundtable and Wallace's are actually based on last years data which is why so many preseason prognostications look so silly come the end of the season. That's why its easier to call the top 8 after rd 11 than before rd 1. Call them A and B graders or elite (top10%) and above average (top 35%) - premiership contenders have around 15 on their list in the first two categories and finalists somewhere between 10-13. I'm not sure how many we had last year but expect us to have between 8-11 this year. In the last two years we tracked according to club expectations (though 7 wins last year was at the bottom end of their target). They've set a target of finals for this year. Maybe they're right and maybe they're wrong, but I think this is more significant in shaping my expectations than analysis based largely on yesterday's 'metrics'. Though many commentators have been happy with our preseason the sample is too small and the reliability of the comp is questionable.

Nothing guarantees wins except playing better than the opposition. Keeping in mind most expert assessments of our upcoming season are actually based on last years performance which is why so many preseason prognostications look so silly in hindsight. So how many A and B graders do you expect to have this year? Using the data that the roundtable used for elite (top10%) and above average (top 35%) premiership contenders have around 15 on their list in the first two categories and finalists somewhere between 10-13. For mine I expect a fit Jones, along with Vince, Garlett, Gawn, Hogan, McDonald, Viney, Salem, and Tyson to be above average or better this year. (that's 9- not too far away) Lumumba, has in the past as well (not sure if he will again), while Watts, VDB and Kent could as well based on their preseason form. Dunn, Jetta, Garland, Harmes, Pederson, Kennedy, Bugg, Matt Jones I expect to be in the average range. Brayshaw, Oliver, Petracca, Frost, Hunt etc I don't expect to be anything other than break even for this year, but clearly like you say there are lots of reasons to be bullish about the first three (although Frost might actually have a few seasons below average before he starts to show the fruits of development). Trenners as you say is just too much of an unknown quantity, but if he can get back then obviously it makes us just that much better. Now I'm happy to be corrected, but in the last two years we tracked according to club expectations (though 7 last year was at the bottom end of their target). They've set a target of finals for this year. Maybe they're right and maybe they're wrong, all I'm saying is that they're more likely to know what is a pass mark and what isn't compared to any of the media experts or armchair analysts.

-I think this is where some of the superficial aspects of analysing teams lists comes in. I'd argue your first point is not assessable until after the season. The footy world wasn't going ga ga at the thought of Bernie Vince coming to the Dees, now according to the panel he's been just about the best pick up of the last few years. Bugg and Kennedy might not have quite as big a profile as Melksham, but they make our list better and importantly fit the demographic we're targeting. -Talking about the impact that new recruits might have is not really a factual statement, it's an opinion - if Oliver continues in the same fashion, Petracca has a similar impact to Brayshaw last year (not unreasonable I would have thought) and Trengove can get half way to his 2012 form, we're a better side this year than last. -I think it's a little absurd to compare the natural improvement of talent like Hogan, Brayshaw, Viney etc to most sides outside the eight with the exception of GWS. (lets compare apples to apples) We have the 16th youngest list, but as Prodee pointed out its the quality of player we have been able to select that is the point of difference in the expectations. If you want to talk facts, the stats will show that with the picks we've had (and proper development) we have a much greater chance of our youth 'improving' compared to a team like St Kilda.

Good point about the Tigers. They haven't really improved their list at all, they didn't get Treloar as the gritty inside mid they sorely missed in the pressure cooker of finals and settled on Yarran instead - whose going to miss the first 6 weeks with a foot injury. Conca and Edwards out. They could be 6 and 5 by rd 11 or just as easily be 3 and 8 if a couple more go down.

I always find it interesting to hear other people's views on footy supported by evidence - even if I don't always agree with their interpretation. I think it's harder to pick who will slide than who will climb. Interestingly over the course of the shows different panelists made sound arguments about why sides like Freo, Sydney, North and Richmond might slide and why sides like Gold Coast and St Kilda might not rise. There seems to be a lot more uncertainty about who can make the eight. Overall I found the sentiment around Melbourne a little more bullish than I expected (even on the back of a good NAB). The one piece of information that I found exciting was our list profile. 16th youngest and 16th experienced. I think once we get 50+ games into Hogan, Petracca, Brayshaw, Oliver etc we will be hosing down expectations rather than being miffed at being overlooked. As a quick aside one of the panelists made an interesting point. Geelong have recruited Zac Smith to ruck, yet have Vardy, Clark, Blicavs and Stanley as ruck man ... any chance they have overcompensated for injury prone talls at the sake of other areas on their list?

Personally I don't think Pedo has a case to answer. A legitimate hip and shoulder where the initial contact was with the Saints player's shoulder. The fact that the player was off balance that resulted him being spun around makes it look worse than it was. Cameron on the other hand left the ground and made contact with the head of an opposition player fracturing his cheekbone. Not dirty, but not legal either. Three weeks down to two.

I I don't think he's purely insurance 'alone'. Insurance alone would mean sides would play a second ruck man on the bench with minimal game time - a la Darren Jolly under Neale Daniher. Sides need to be able to not only cover opposition strengths, but expose weaknesses as well. I don't necessarily disagree with your proposition, he needs to get far more of the ball, but I will be surprised if he isn't picked in the opening round.

Well it's a Banksy...so he was definitely referencing Paul Simonon. The reason I chose it is it because I love intertextuality. I love both Banksy and the Clash. It's also referencing the past ten years as a Dees supporter!

Structure and flexibility. Frost is insurance up forward, down back or in the ruck, he's also athletic enough not to lose any run by leaving him on the ground for extended periods. He's not getting a lot of it at the moment, but I can see why he'd be picked. A work in progress.There's talk that various sides might go with four talls at various stages to stretch sides. Lumumba is just not good enough one on one to play tall.

Nice dilemma to have as opposed to having to pick from a bunch of NQRs or underdeveloped juniors. Goodwin thought Oliver was a little sloppy in the first half, and certainly the entire side made a slow start (that's three from three- let's see if we can't fix that for the season proper). The Saints were on top in the clearances early, we came back stronger in the second half - Oliver is the most exciting genuine inside mid I can remember for a long time. It's not hard to see why people compare him with Brayshaw in terms of potential impact. Both hard at it, uncompromising and excellent decision makers. He Is the best handball exponent we've had since Alan Jarrot. (well OK, we might have had some others since the mid 80s)

Harmes unlucky, but someone has to miss out. Personally I think if Lumumba plays well at Casey next week he'll be picked, but there's no doubt he's going to have to play much better this year to hold a spot in the 22. Jetta Dunn Garland Lumumba McDonald Salem Vince Tyson Brayshaw VDB Pederson Watts Kent Hogan Garlett Gawn, Jones, Viney Int: Frost, Oliver, Bugg, Kennedy Emerg: Harmes, M Jones, Nice that our younger players can get some continuity by developing together at Casey. Looks a Handy sort of side too (though I think guys like Smith & King will play mainly Casey seconds). - Also not sure on the injury status of White & Newton. Terlich ??? Wagner White O Mac Hunt Grimes ANB Stretch Petracca Weideman Mitchie King Hulett JKH King, Trengove, Matt Jones Int Newton, Smith INJ/Unavailable: Spencer, Dawes, Melksham

I think Wagner, Hunt, White, Lumumba and Melksham are all competing for the one run & carry defender's position. Wagner & White are both rookies and fighting with Mtichie to be nominated to replace Melksham. I seem to recall that White had a preseason injury - or maybe that's my imagination... anyway the other one to consider might be Harmes whose only real knock at this stage is his kicking.

Exactly what I was thinking. We had something like 136 last week to Port who had around 90. I can understand why though. The best way to build a winning culture is to build belief, and the best way of building belief is to start winning games.

Exactly what I was thinking. We had something like 136 last week to Port who had around 90. I can understand why though. The best way to build a winning culture is to build belief, and the best way of building belief is to start winning games.

No, now I'm on the wrong side of 47!

Oh to be on the wrong side of 27 again... sigh.

my bad. Perhaps in Pyongyang where they're not adverse to using AA guns to discipline high ranking transgressors.

Anyone who has listened to her program "the ticket" and commentary on this saga would realise she is hopelessly biased when it comes to this topic. This is simply a forum for the cannonisation of St James to join his place amongst the martyres.

I reckon in twelve months time you could add Salem and Petracca to that list and hopefully Trenners as well.

Sorry my bad, both would have been very handy on our list, but neither would have been what Danners had in mind. With the benefit of hindsight it is easy for us to criticise the coach for interfering, but specifying a type isn't the same as picking a name, and whatever else you can say about the process, Danners was acutely aware of the weakness inherent in our list at the time. I would think that many other coaches have done the same thing, but probably none had the misfortune of having that pick suffer as badly from injury as Luke Molan.

Dal Santo. IIRC Daniher didn't specify Molan, rather he asked CC to draft the 'toughest' kid in the draft, which CC assessed to be Molan.