grazman

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.

PJ is least stepping up to another level (I wish a few more would take his lead). Junior played his 200th for our club. Morton is going to be a player. We were competitive for about forty minutes - which is about 39 more minutes than we were last week.

I'm super impressed by Bailey. He's not fazed, he absolutely believes in what he's doing and I'm prepared to back him in. To be brutally honest the crap that other sides have thrown at us about being soft and downhill skiers is true - Bailey is teaching us to be hard again - it'll take time and probably take quite a few casualties, but I like his approach even if I don't like the current results.

I'm despondent, another performance like that and I'll officially be depressed. My wife is from NSW -so she doesn't understand why I get so upset about a game. I see the President was quoting Midnight Oil in his luncheon address...Apologies to any Radiohead fans, but "My Club's got the bends, we don't have any real friends I'm just lying in a bar with my drip feed on talking to my girlfriend waiting for something to happen and I wish it was the sixties I wish I could be happy, I wish, I wish, I wish something would happen.."

Ahh this shits me... so winning games of footy is stupid now.... a pox on Carlton and their supporters for cheering the loss.

Yes but they have one win already and play us twice....

He's a 300 game player for our club, our leading goal kicker and one of the precious few senior players that leads by example.... he wanted to play on - he was far from our worst today. It's obviously his last season and it looks as if we're going to struggle anyway. I'd be more concerned about the future of some of our younger players after today's performance rather than Neita's.

Exactly Tess. I think Bailey will be a little more hard nosed about these things.

What a load of crap. You don't like Bruce - big deal. What would Cyril Rioli have done for us today other than go missing like three quarters of the rest of our side. The Hawks were good tonight, and it kills me to see the player we almost had in Sewell continue to carve up opposition sides - but we don't and there's no point bitching about it.

Just so you don't feel alone SBT... I was also in the Wells for Sylvia camp... this year should provide us a very good indication of where both are at. Sylvia of course was out for disciplinary reasons and Wells by his own admission needs to be consistently better.

The good version or the broken one?

Another theory maybe that neither Moloney or Petterd played according to instructions (lack of accountability)- actually I'd prefer this because it would mean regardless of how many possessions you get, you better do what your told or start learning at Sandy.

Jerry I think it's a valid concern, and one I'm sure a lot of people have been thinking a fair bit about. Certainly I think we'll see a fair amount of chest beating and finger pointing over the next couple of weeks if we get another couple of those results. Unfortunately there are no easy answers. Firstly I like the youngster's you've nominated for the leadership group and would probably add Bell to it as well, but disagree with you in part about Miller. Here's my take on the situation - and without wanting to sound like an "I know boats" prat, I have had a bit of background in both leadership training and practice courtesy of professional experience (though sometimes as a reluctant participant) and as a football captain and coach. The situation the club is in has been long identified, under a new coach they've chosen a new path, but the end result I guess is the same- it was only natural that the most senior and experienced players were elected because in looking at group dynamics that's the norm rather than the exception. Given where our list is I don't see that apart from Green there were any other genuine alternatives. In Footy a leader needs to be the following: 1. Good (top ten in the B&F) 2. Courageous 2. Selfless 3. Responsible 4. Honest 5. Obedient Communication skills are also an asset. Now we can judge the current leadership group against those criteria fairly harshly and we can argue the toss about players like Miller - who I think is a good leader - till the cows come home; but the alternative is to promote a group that aren't ready ahead of their time and potentially have a different set of problems. We need to get it right, the club has put a process in place to develop leaders at the club, it's pretty clear there'll be some short term pain (but hopefully some of the current batch will step up), and it's what many of us have known for a while would happen until the younger players are ready to assume the mantle.

Who do we play in Rd 22.... D'ohhh.