grazman

There's a number of issues here. First one is that the GC not only need to get something back for Bennell, they need someone to take on his contract. He's reportedly on good coin, Bennell's not going to take a pay cut if he's got an existing contract that says he earns $X and his new club say we offer you less. Second point is I think you're giving Harley far too much rope in terms of what he would like in terms of surrounding himself with the right people and structures. He pretty much ignored the advice and assistance at GC, I'm not convinced he's learnt his lessons yet.

None of that comes as any great surprise... except Melksham. Competitive and has pace, but also has a terrible haircut. I think all parties would benefit form this if it comes about... Watts for a top ten pick - pen please.

Sean Charles was a fantastic talent, one of the most dynamic players at the club I've seen alongside Jakovich, Farmer, and Jurrah.I also don't think Walker is that bad an option, I think people are being a little unrealistic in terms of what's needed or available. It isn't about how many goals they kick themselves, it's about how many they create for the team. We need a lead up forward with strong hands that is marking the ball forward of the fifty and allowing Hogan to play deeper rather than hunting kicks on the wing. Realistically these players are rarely on the market. You aren't going to prise Tom Lynch away from GC and we couldn't get his namesake from Adelaide. The market is thin, Walker or Tomlinson appear to be the two most likely, or we make do with what we have - against GWS, Dunn played the role on the absence of Dawes/Pedersen, but he's too small (192) to play as an effective chop out ruck (while Walker is a little taller at 196)

Lions sooking in the Age this morning, reckon it might take them another 15 years to win a premiership. I'm guessing their request for a PP (as opposed to generous FA compensation) didn't go that well.

Who is he and why should we believe him?

Love Kahneman, I use his thinking fast, thinking slow theory in teaching operational decision making. It's wonderful how the mind works at filling in the blanks in high risk/ high stakes, compressed time situations, its unfortunate, that most of the time its wrong.

If somehow Brisbane do get a PP, then its unlikely that based on the AFL's secret formula they will get Band 1 compo as well for Leunberger. If they don't get a PP and get Band 1, it will be similar to our Band 1 compo for Frawley... a PP in disguise. I doubt Kreuzer will leave the Blues now, so they don't get any Band 1 compensation for another bloke (like Leuy) that never gets on the park.

Contracted till 2017.

You forgot, he's playing in a side sitting 2nd on the ladder. Means he won't get anywhere near the same level of criticism for his performances. In a winning side everyone's contributing, in a losing side its who can we blame.

What if they're dead and lying frozen on the ground?

Dropped means he should play 2s - unless he isn't eligible because they're playing finals. Will be interesting to see what comes of this. It maybe that a trade has been already agreed to and if so, you don't want the deal being spoiled by Watts doing an ACL. It does seem though that all the tough talk from the club might be followed up by some action in the next month and a half...perhaps.

Ok, I get it now, it's not about the theoretical possibility, just the price. The price is always negotiable. Like real estate the price the seller wants and the buyer is prepared to pay is framed by the market.

Wonder why though - do you think they will get better offers elsewhere or simply refuse to trade them? Both out of contract and murmurings that Aish might consider going to Carlton in the PSD. Things are crook in Tallarook Brisvegas.

Food for thought, one of the more sensible suggestions I've seen. Brisbane might (what are their needs - draft picks?), Melbourne might (our needs, outside pace & skills), would the players though? If Aish is truly looking at Carlton as an option then we would have to be an option too - depending on the size of the contract. Definitely in the realm of blue sky mining.

Yes, dependent on the upside. The other way of looking at this (and I'm not saying this will be the case with Toumpas) is that emotion plays a part in any decision and sometimes clubs 'chase their losses' particularly if they've invested a top pick. Whether a player gets more time on a list to develop shouldn't be determined by what draft pick they were taken with.

Or Money, Coach and Captain.You would imagine that whoever misses out on Treloar will look closely at Redden, but they're unlikely to offer up the same sort of deal for him. Brisbane will be chasing maximum compensation so if Jack is just happy to be traded and hasn't nominated a club it will come down to which club is prepared to pay the most for him. The only way we get him is to pay more (contract and picks) than someone else is prepared to.

Counterfactual history- is there any point to it?

Apologies for the length of the reply, I realise that in an age where the medium is the message, few may feel the inclination to read this, but I didn't have the time to write a shorter response... I’ve been a bit perplexed at the criticisms of Paul Roos over the last few months. I hope the recent storm in a teacup is not an end to the relative harmony and unity since his appointment and a return to yet another perpetuating cycle of denunciations and recriminations that have been the cornerstone of MFC politics that have existed since the aborted merger. One of the obvious obstacles for Roos to overcome is the expectation that many though the club would be ‘fixed’ after his tenure. I like Paul Gardner and I appreciate his views, but I’m not sure what they add to the debate other than static. I think most of us would have accepted that 7 wins was a modest target, but the rub is that ‘most’ of us aren’t intimately involved in the Footy Department and the process of ‘rebuilding’, so such observations made in isolation are nothing more than more bullets to fire at a coach already under siege. ( if you’re not part of the solution you’re part of the problem) Self-fulfilling prophecies versus realistic appraisals of capablilities – it’s a matter of perspective. Yesterday’s man, outdated game plan, not emotionally invested in the club, process over passion etc. Personally I think Roos is a really strong level-headed character who just says it like it is, but he’s in an unenviable position of being damned if he does, damned if he doesn’t in terms of the statements that he makes about the club and its culture. He has to deal with what I would call the MFC single loop negativity spiral. Football has often been equated to religion, and certainly there are a lot of similar connotations in terms of faith, salvation. ceremony etc. The problem that exists is its history of false prophets. In my lifetime I’ve seen high priced recruiting failures, failed premiership windows, aborted mergers, tanking fiascos. The veil of negativity that Roos talks about is actually a fog of negativity that has settled on the club, its players (body language and performance) and its supporters (DL meltdowns for example). As a long time follower of the Dees I now expect us to lose the very few games we are favourites to win, because in recent years this has become the norm and the norm influences the expectation. Being a Melbourne supporter is a maniacal obsession where the high’s (such as beating Geelong) are irrationally high and the lows (losing to GWS last year and Essendon/Carlton this year) are unbearably low for having believed in the false dawn the highs had previously offered. Like most religions we’re left with only two spiritual alternatives, become godless or convert to another religion. Neither holds much appeal for most, so we lapse until we once again we receive a new Messiah. Roo’s has slipped from the pedestal of being the Messiah (only the Messiah would claim not to be the Messiah) to having feet of clay (he’s a witch- burn him!). He’s subjected to scrutiny and criticism, which in terms of process is both fair and reasonable in terms of accountability, but in terms of outcome I think has left him bewildered and unable to accept to the unhealthy cynicism of the average Melbourne supporter. I for one didn’t take offence to his comments, but the club will not find a solution to its cultural woes until it addresses the two interrelated parts of the problem. The first is the playing list. This is about realised talent and the unrealised potential which contribute to both individual perceptions and wider expectations. The discontinuity here is that such perceptions and expectations are shaped by both bias and incomplete information – do we really know how ‘bad’ bad is and how much still needs to be done in relation to addressing bad habits? The other aspect of the playing list is the actual player attitudes and culture. Any cultural change is long and difficult, it requires clear direction and strong leadership and the playing culture itself is simply a sub-set of the larger MFC culture. Players are affected by supporters attitudes and beliefs and this is what Roos was hinting at. Poor performances result in hyper-negativity from supporters that conditions the playing group to a ‘siege mentality’ where it’s everyman for themselves. Many have argued that it’s the coaches’ responsibility to break this cycle and get the players to play better. I would argue that this isn’t about ‘motivating’ players on game day, this is about reprogramming an entire football club. The second part of the equation is the single loop negativity spiral. Supporters are both impatient for improvement and unreasonable in many of their expectations* (shaped by their impatience) and thus unsatisfied with the performance of the club, this fuels a reaction by the club in responding to the negativity of its support base in terms of trying to placate and attract new members (because poor clubs don’t win premierships) with the promise of better. Inevitably we move from one coach to the next, from one game plan to the next and from one ‘great white hope’ to the next and arrive back to where we started. Little is done to address the root causes of the issue. There is a simple answer for this, but simple is not always easy – nor is it simplistic. Breaking the single loop model isn’t just contingent on the club, nor is it just about the supporters, it’s about both working towards the same end. The club has to start winning games again and as supporters we need to be far more circumspect in the way we treat the club we ‘support’ and its representatives. I deplore and Barry Braveheart glib observations and bile directed at the players on this site, there’s nothing to be gained by it. It only perpetuates the endless negative cycle of ‘the club is stuffed and here’s why’. I believe the club is improving and some may disagree, but I see that we are beginning to get the necessary skill sets and knowledge into running our football operations and we are starting to identify and recruit talent better. All of these things take time (which we want to speed up) the club is developing and doing is working towards establishing a better culture, there is more to be done, just as there is more ‘supporters’ can do in supporting rather than attacking the club. Just as success breeds success, positivity breeds positivity and negativity, negativity (think of a shark that eating itself). Most organisations relish constructive criticism, no one begrudges people from having opinions, but destructive criticism is never welcome, is seldom useful and rarely makes the perpetrator feel better about themselves. As far as possible and within the bounds of reasonableness we should aim to be positive about the club (especially when they aren't performing to expectations like last weekend). In the words of Robert Louis Stevenson ‘Share your courage and keep your fears to yourself’ – lest you look like a lightweight. It’s not all about me after all, as REM says ‘Everybody Hurts’ - including believe it or not the coaches and the players.

I agree, you don't improve culture by giving up, either as players or coaches (understandably supporters do). You don't rest the captain so he can play his 200th in front of an empty Eithihad stadium, you don't drop the young kids so they can avoid being 'scarred'. You drop players that are injured or under-peforming. Outs would be Lumumba, Garland and probably Dawes all injured. Howe unfortunately for trade purposes continues to play unless he is mysteriously injured. We lack aggression and we lack intent. The only Melbourne player I can recall getting in the face of an opponent was Bernard against his mate Patrick in Adelaide. Football is a contact sport, as the great John Kennedy said the 90% is played above the shoulders, mentally we're too submissive to the opposition. This isn't about the coach, its about the players belief. We had 2 tackles in the first 20 minutes last weekend and only 5 in the first quarter, you have to have the mindset to compete, even before the opening bounce. What I want to see is the Hawthorn metaphorical line in the sand, I want one of our leaders to come off the square in the opening quarter and flatten Fyfe or Mundy. I'd happily give away three or four free kicks for physical acts (not like they won't win the free kick count anyway) and start setting standards.

After Jones retires it will be Brayshaw by the length of the Flemington strait.

Yeah absolutely.... because you know Howey is MFC through and through.

Easy to miss in the insipid performance that some things are getting better. Showing a bit more every game along with his mate ANB. Good call on the FS pick by the club.

I think what this year has shown is that the likes of Hogan, Brayshaw, vandenBerg, Viney, Tyson, Kent, Salem, and to a lesser extent ANB, Stretch are key drivers in our performing well. Along with Tommy Mac and Gawn these guys are the future, but it's been a long year and many have dropped off/tired. We know what we get with Vince and Jones who are both good, but lack support. Newton, Riley and Mitchie haven't really been able to provide the midfield chop out that's required. Garlett, Jetta, Dunn and Dawes play a role. Watts will hopefully continue to improve his consistency.

The two most common adjectives to describe the Dees over the last decade (that my Blue supporting best mate loves reminding me of), are hapless and insipid. You could add dee-plorable, dee-moralised, dee-spicable, diabolical and un[censored]-supportable

Because you'd end up delisting 20 players.