grazman

Thanks MFM. Of course it's just my personal opinion, and I'm always open to the notion that I could be wrong - but Bailey is a good leader. There's no panic and there's no hesitancy in the face of adversity, just flint hard determination. I still think we're a better side than the likes of Carlton and Richmond, and I expect that the game plan will start gelling towards the end of the year.

I think to be fair Franky, that getting the players to play for him is part of the 'culture problem' we continue to bemoan at the club.... and yes those words may very well have described Danners in his first years - and he was a very good coach, but he lost his way IMO. He put far too much faith in players that continued to let him down and our problems in developing the hard edge needed to go further were because he was too emotionally attached to the senior core. As a result there's still a bit of baggage amongst many of our list that still needs to be discarded in terms of habits and attitudes. A new coach doesen't so much as have a honeymoon period, more like a hangover period. Bailey's pretty upfront and honest. The players will come around, of that I've no doubt. They may not like some of the messages, but the truth, as they say, hurts. Time to dry their eyes and get on with the job at hand. Just by way of example, Neil Craig isn't exactly loved by the Crows players. Not all players adjust and some leave, but I've been waiting for a while for their list to bottom out... Coaches don't have to be liked, but they must be respected. Balmey suffered because of injuries to key players there's no doubt, but comparing him to Bailey is like chalk and cheese. Balmey relied on luck (and he was unlucky) - there'll be no luck involved with Bailey. BTW his talk wasn't really a Churchillian oration, more answers to specific questions, but you certainly get the impression from him that near enough will definately not be good enough.

I see the obvious solution here, keep changing game plans until we start winning and then stick to it like glue. Absolutely under no circumstances should we review our list - we'll be a pioneer amongst league clubs. By all means lets keep talented players with poor attitudes. We've already traded Trapper unfortunately, but maybe we can get someone like Chris Tarrant in a trade

I was pretty happy that he was the best man for the job after he got through a pretty thorough process as a virtual unknown. If there were any seeds of doubt they were completely blown away when he presented his views on coaching up here in Canberra. There are three things you immediately feel when you hear him talk, firstly he's extremely intelligent - he understands the game and importantly can communicate that, secondly he is extremely confident, not in an arrogant sense, but he knows what he wants to achieve, how to do it, finally he's determined, absolutely 100% committed to success and while that may sound trite in relation to any league coach or player, he's a tough cookie and will expect that of the players. It doesn't surprise me he doesn't sound fazed by the losses. He would have had an understanding of our list from an outsiders perspective, but he would have seen pretty quickly that the transition was obviously going to take some time and casualties.

Oh dear... you don't think character in some way contributes to performance?. Why were so many Melbourne supporters so in love with Trapper? Ah yes it was our facilities that cost him a premiership medallion and not his approach. All the talent in the world and only 51% of the application needed.

A good analysis Scoop. I thought Davey working his way back into the second half was a positive as well. I just watched the second quarter again, and PJ is having a very good year, except kicking against the wind he continually turned the ball over by foot yesterday. He and Belly must have shared a dodgy curry, because their disposal is usually a lot better, both had pretty off days in terms of delivery. I was super pleased with Brock's game yesterday, even after the Ling tag he still got enough of the ball and he was blocking and shepherding for team mates and giving it off straight away (I think the more he doesn't play with Trapper the more he won't try to nail the 'perfect' option as opposed to the 'best' option). Jonesy is still young and he learnt a lesson about how to execute a tackle yesterday (and I hope he got a bake for trying to kick a fifty meter goal against the wind without even looking up to see if he had any forward options). I was very pleased for both Cam and Wheaters yesterday, they had super games and they're the sort of blokes you'd just love if you were a coach, because they just do the job they're assigned without any fuss. The margin could have been worse, but the positive was that for the most part we stuck to the task all day, though as you pointed out - we're not going to win too many games of footy unless we learn not to butcher the ball.

McLean 22 disposals including ten contested to half time He's getting first to the ball. He's in his element, Geelong are a very good contested possession side, but they aren't exceptionally quick. Brock is making sure he get's there first. Dunn, White and Bruce are playing significantly better than last week and PJ is continuing to improve - even took a contested overhead mark. We won't win this one perhaps, but you can see what Bailey wants to achieve with this team.

Leunenberger looked very good last night Fan.

I know many have doubts as to the viability of Valenti due to his lack of foot speed, but if our current situation continues I don't think it would be the worst thing in the world to give him a go for a few games. It's unlikely that all of Jones, McLean, Junior and Valenti could run through the middle at the same time, but if he can replicate his preseason form in the season proper, then we should look at other options like playing Brock off a HBF, where his field kicking could be better used.

Does he know Kelly O'Donnell?

Wrecker I was incredibly disappointed with his first up performance in rd 1. Last year he was committing himself to second and third efforts and chasing hard out of our forward line. In rd 1 this year, he made that lazy arse Trapper who literally walked from one contest to the next look like a workhorse. I hope it's a confidence thing rather than attitude, because you can give a player confidence, you can't give them hunger.

The Bulldogs won because not only did they get superior numbers to the contest, but they were able to run the slow Saints off their feet. Triple teamed Riewoldt and made Gehrigs lack of pace and mobility a huge issue for the Saints. The Saints rebounders were pretty much harassed out of the game. This seems to be the new trend in Modern footy. I still have nagging doubts about the dogs. Welsh & Hudson were both two very good low risk pick ups that have slotted in nicely, but I just wonder how their light frames will stand up to the rigours of a whole season, especially in September. I would rather have a Jonathon Brown or Nick Riewoldt standing at CHF than a Robert Murphy.

Buckley has one !% and five tackles in two games. He's only got 35 possessions and 9 of those are errors. It's got nothing to do with giving kids a go, he's got stuff he needs to work on and the selection committee want him to work on them at Sandy. I don't have a problem with that. He's ostensibly been replaced by CJ (very similar players IMO).

Now come on Bobby boy, you know there are some of us that are always interested.... but point of order. Chicken Burrito (Firito) started as a run with player and wasn't used in a key back role until late 06 from memory. - but I agree with you about Frawley. From where I sit he's got a lot of very good attributes to make a good KPP back. He's quick, physical, mobile and is a pretty good decision maker. Jim's alright IMO. I'm sure if you asked 12 under 18 coaches you'd get 12 different opinions. I remember speaking to Aaron Rodgers U18 coach at a clinic one day after we drafted him and he told me he'd be a 200 game player. - He was no fool, but sometimes there are things that are just impossible to predict in terms of player development. BTW for Jarka's info - CAC rated both Frawley and Petterd very highly and had significant difficulty in splitting them. In the end he went for Frawley on the hunch that Petterd may still be there with our second pick... he was right. There were a lot on here (via Big Footy forums) that wanted James Sellar... in fact they were pretty shitty we didn't get him. The rationale from CAC was that Sellar had too many limitations including a pretty poor motor to make it as an AFL player. Time will tell.

I liked the bit in the rag yesterday about Noel McMahen and how Checker Hughes thought that for every inch above six foot players needed an extra year to develop It's just patently unfair to expect a tall to develop as quickly as a mid or small defender. Most good tall forwards are quick and surprisingly agile - Frawley will be alright. I wonder Jarka if you were one of those that was pumping for James Sellar ahead of Jim?

Interesting.

Exactly RR. Bailey will stick strong with those that follow the team rules over those that don't. Which is why we won't see Moloney, Newton or Petterd this week and I doubt we'll see Yze again for quite a while if at all. I'd love to see Riv get back in and this week is when he was scheduled to return. If wheels has pulled up OK he may come back in as well. I have a feeling Bate will get a run with Sandy first. So for me: In: Rivers and Whelan Out: Davey (inj) and Garland Weetra survives for one more week.

The original rumour was quite funny, Players who supposedly didn't like the Bailey regime were going to go and play under Neil Craig. Craig if far from popular with the Crows players, but the proof of the pudding is in the eating. I'd tipped them to bottom out for probably the last three years... He knows how to coach - even if the players wont have a beer with them I'm sure they enjoy winning a hell of a lot more than getting belted every week.

I doubt that's Bailey's style. He's interested in results. I don't have a problem with players being proud, some of them will naturally buck against criticism, but they have to learn to accept it, if they can't then that's when they'll learn the hard way. Bailey doesn't seem the type to get too perturbed about conflict with players - in fact I think he'll expect to see some angst as part of the process. Moloney was omitted. He failed to play on the weekend for Sandy because of a corky. Want to bet he doesn't play for the seniors against Geelong this week? The players have been given to rd 6. Anyone who hasn't taken on board his lessons by then is fair game -for the coaching staff and for us as supporters. And as for players choosing which club they want to go to they'd do well to remember that Bailey came from a club that let their most prolific ball winner walk in the preseason draft rather than get bent over. They reaped the rewards the following year as well. ( and do you reckon Port supporters don't remind Stevens about it every time he plays against them)

If he's Joffa's son then he's definately a FS option for the Saints.

Most estimations are that the top three picks will be a raffle between a ruckman: Naitanui, a midfielder: Rich, and a KPP:, Hurley. There are also a number of other (about six) very talented KPP options that will all be available. If Melbourne were to pursue the Hawthorn model, then we'd want to trade one or more likely two players to get another pick inside the top ten to ensure we have four picks in the top twenty.

I'm glad others think the same - what a waste of cyberink.... I've go another insight for you Matt. If we score more goals than Geelong on Saturday we'll probably win...

Ahh Grant Thomas - the enema of football! It sounds as though he's been having too much sugar on his cornflakes. Even if it were true I want our footy department to become tough and uncompromising - no excuses, no second best. If there are those that can't stand the heat then show them out the kitchen door.

Scoop I think the point is that even though we made the finals from 04-06 quite simply we were a fair way from being a contender. The [censored] that was thrown at us about being 'soft' was being thrown for a reason. The truth is that we suffered in those years from a serious over valuation of our lists merits. We should have delisted far more vigorously than we did. The problems that Bailey inherited aren't of his making and the decision to trade TJ was largely made by others around him. It's unfair to say he should have swept more out the door before he had a chance to critically assess them and work with them. By the admissions of many folk, we have a good dozen players that are ready for pasture or delisting at years end - you can't trade away everyone before you know whether you can fix them. TJ obviously couldn't be.

I don't think he's living in denial. Having met him in Canberra at a coaches forum and listened to his thoughts on coaching and player development in general I've absolutely no doubt what so ever that it is not apathy or ignorance on his behalf. He's incredibly focused and determined. I had a lot of respect for Neale Daniher, but he was too close to the players to be objective. I don't think we'll get that with DB. If Moloney and Petterd were dropped ahead of Weetra and Garland this weekend it was for a specific reason. I think he'll be brutally honest with the players and they'll play his way or the highway. It's easy to be suckered in and say - well lets trade McLean, Sylvia and Newton and start again, but I think that Bailey and Co will say that the problem isn't about skill, it's about attitude and we need to fix the attitude.