grazman

Gee Burgan gets good mail. He's slotted Morton and Cheney and has listed both Grimes and Maric as two of the handful we were looking at for 14 and 21 respectively.

All the picks look really sound, but they always do at this time of year. Obviously we've targetted skill, endurance and character, but also reading the play as well. I really like the comments by the SA Development manager on our last pick McNamara... " He played reserves for us and I didn't see him lose a contest. He plays half back but will develop into a centre half back. he reads the play well, is cool under pressure, he wins contested footy and is very disciplined in everything he does." Gee I wonder who he'll be compared to? Just by way of interest. Daniel Bell (186)is 2cms taller than Leo Barry(184) and 2cms shorter than O'Keefe (188). Height is one prerequisite for playing KPP, but if you have enough of the other attributes, then the difference between a 192cm and 194 cm defender is irrelevant.

Here's my two cents worth... The AFL draft age is too young. Would Lachie Henderson be a good investment at Pick 4 given his injury riddled year, we know the margin of error on a player like Masten isn't nearly as great. Was the club right in speculating on bottom age players like Dunn, Newton and Bate? Would it have taken Molan at pick 9 if it had seen him play until he was 20? The draft is based on the American NFL, NBA etc, but almost exclusively their players come from the college system, and it'd be interesting to see the success rates for their first and second selections compared to the AFL. The system won't change, which is why clubs will continue to draft 17 Year olds that already have OP because as an elite footballer they play in excess of 35 games a year, and it's why at 18 most KPPs are a gamble - there are too many unknowns for the vast majority of them. It's also why it's blatantly unfair to allow some clubs to have a greater number of rookie's than others. It increases the odds of them being able to identify talent not exposed to the rest of the competition.

I imagine there'd be a couple of people squirming uneasily over their cornflakes this morning. Good to see that at least Trevor Grant isn't afraid to fire some shots across the bow of the AFL. http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/footy/com...5E19742,00.html

I stand to be corrected, but like Sylvinator I was given to believe that Embley is contracted and can't walk. He won't be released - unless Fonz bends them over - which he won't. Wishful thinking on the behalf of many Carlton supporters.

I know it's poor form to be quoting oneself.... but who would have thunk it. Greg Gecko and Fat Pratt. I still remember the eighties...vaguely and without much nostalgia. Like you Jack, I'm hoping for the good of the game someone with some kahuna's steps up to the plate. At least Jason McCartney turned them down... I hope for the right reasons. and for those that believe that all was not necessarily all that it seemed it was with Judd. They've resurrected a thread on BF from the 23rd April where Judd was seen meeting with Pratt and Co...

It's unlikely that the AFL will do anything over Pratt, and the Victorian Gaming Commission (I'm not sure of its official title) will probably spare them the embarrassment. It's highly unlikely Pratt will be seen as having the necessary requisites now to hold a gaming licence which means he becomes ineligible to sit on the Caaarton board - unless they get rid of their pokies. He's served his purpose anyway. The AFL is a laughing stock - but that's what happens when you put success ahead of integrity.

I wonder about Palmer. The interest from him seems to be a lot stronger in Victoria than WA. The general consensus on most of the sites from WA people is that it is Morton, Masten and then Palmer. I have full confidence in whoever CAC and the team go with, but I'd be a little surprised if it were Palmer. Kreuzer, Cotchin and Morton are almost universally acknowledged as the top three outstanding talents in the draft, but the two biggest queries for me are 1. Will Richmond by-pass Cotchin for Morton ( a possibility, but only speculative at this stage based on trading for his brother) 2. If Cotchin is gone would West Coast draft Morton given the problems they've had with his brother and father ( I'd think this is greater possibility) I think there's no chance of Cotchin slipping below pick three and a slim chance Morton might. Masten, Henderson or Palmer? If we take Henderson then he'd have to be special.

I don't buy the West Coast supporter arguments that they've been punished enough by losing Cousins and Judd. Surely both are a direct result of their own poor management of the situation. They've harmed the sport enormously here interstate I can tell you. I'm not confident that the AFL commission will punish them (though I think big Mike might want to). - If they impose draft sanctions at all it would be more appropriate that they lost their original first pick in the draft rather the pick (13) rather than the one they got for trading Judd.

Unfortunately we are as much to blame as anyone. Given that the current format is a compromise then the AFL can wash it's hands of trying to create the perspective of an even draw. Would we rather play West Coast at the MCG in a home game or Essendon? We just can't get enough people through the gates at the MCG against the interstate sides to make a profit. Those games lose us money. Scheduling them for the Dome is no good as we don't want to play there. I agree there should be a more even distribution of Friday, Saturday and Sunday games, but as far as scheduling matrix's go the whole thing is very complicated because there are so many requests that need to be factored in. We got our wishes for all our home games (Manuka excepted) to be at the G, and for more equity in the reduction of six day breaks (and no five day breaks this year) It's the first time for a while, what we need now is people to start turning up to games, because bums on seats is the only thing the AFL and it's broadcast partners listen to.

In the five senior games he's played in four years he averages only 4.1 possessions per game. Injuries aside, he hasn't found the ball when he's been picked. I don't know what his WAFL form is like, but 2003 was a long time ago.

That'd be a real fillip for a bloke that many bagged, but has a heart bigger than the MCG.

Correct. It was rumoured that he wanted to come to the Dees because of family connections... He chose North and was swapped for Schwass... the old family barracks for the MFC scenario... :angry:

Thanks for that Nash. I couldn't remember if it was Collard or Jetta that was the flakey one. It was Jetta, which is why I'm surprised Collard was delisted after only 12 months. It raises suspicions about "off field" issues. I guess CC would know.

Collard is interesting - second round pick in last year's draft and delisted already.

I know I was replying to your comment, but the information wasn't meant for you alone.

Seeing as I posted the comment, I'll elaborate. Molan was drafted a while ago now, and I'm pretty sure this has been referred to in a number of posts around the time, I just can't be bothered looking. It was a period in our list rebuilding where Danners was particularly worried about some issues such as KPP and "hardness". I believe his actual instruction were for CAC to draft the "toughest" player he knew. Now as you point out H, that shouldn't necessarily have been at the expense of actually being able to play and I'm sure that CAC thought the kid would be able to. The situation is not that uncommon. Sheedy at Essendon did it a lot. Coaches presumably talk to their recruiting guys all the time in relation to list needs and that's not a bad thing, only when they start to restrict the "type" of player that your pick can be used on. I raised the point simply to highlight that left to their own devices recruiters make a better fist of it without interference.

I don't think it's fair to use Hird, Buckley or Voss as comparison's either. Each has very good claim to be the best player their club has ever produced. If CAC recruited anyone of similar ability outside of first pick in the draft, he'd hang up the boots and look at himself in the mirror all day and marvel at his insight.

It's been a fascinating discussion, but I think there's a couple of points that should be highlighted. Firstly there's a recruiting team. Are we confident that every single selection is actually the kid that CAC would he himself choose? If Don Barron approached him and said "This is the kid we have to take" would Craig not give that due consideration? It's a matter of public record that Luke Molan was not his choice, he was under instruction. There were others too I believe. So how do you assess one person's performance when it's clearly a team process? (should it be "Come on let's work as a team and do it my way" or "It was a team effort and everyone else let me down" ) Secondly I might be drawing a pretty long bow here, but I reckon WA clubs can highlight WA talent a little better than there interstate rivals, ditto SA clubs. I think it's probably an issue for the Lions to look at as well, because I don't believe they do it particularly well. Going through the drafts and picking out blokes we could have had can only be done with the benefit of hindsight. How much did any other clubs know about Dean Cox or the Cornes boys? If you don't have the resources to look at players in one comp as often as others then it gets harder to make the calls. I'm sure the recruiting department sit down and do a thorough evaluation of their own performance, I'm also sure they are a lot tougher on themselves than we are. You learn from your mistakes. Finally if we want to be arbitrary and analyse the players we've missed that were good, how about the ones that were bad? Anyone up for the challenge of comparing our individual draftees against their cohorts, our first, second, third rounders against the league averages etc.... oh yeah that's a Stan the Statictian from Stradbroke Islands dream. Whilst it maybe still too early to make the call I'm far more happy with Frawley than I would've been with Sellar. Jones and Petterd are out of the box, ditto bartram. If they are too recent then let's go back to the "no good draft of 03" Anyone remember when it looked like we were going to get Tennace and Ryley Dunn, - perhaps Farren Ray or Kepler Bradley would have been better choices? I get far more excited by the draft than the trade period. As Fan would say - I'm turning into a bit of a blue sky junkie.

The proof of the pudding is in the eating.

Soften the blow Didn't work for us when we dobbed ourselves in.

The most obvious answer is they needed a ruckman and with Pendlebury and Thomas they believed they had two more committed versions of Travis anyway. Dare I say they were well aware of his various "issues".

Will there actually be any? Excuse me if I'm sceptical, does anyone seriously believe it would be the same if this were happening to us or Richmond or any other of the "expendable" clubs? The Age article below refers to the ingrained drug culture at the Eagles that they've actively hidden. Caro is still punching away and now the fight seems to be taken up by others in non AFL states. http://realfooty.com.au/news/news/eagle-sa...2300952277.html So the club that sacked Ken Judge when he wanted to change the culture, told it's players to shut up (in some organisations that's called corruption - but I guess only in those that have moral standards) , referred to 25% of it's senior playing list as a "small minority" and took measures to address the culture by sacking one 31 year old player looks like they will escape further punishment. The club has specifically said that it wasn't aware of any problems until about 2006. If the AFL really wanted to restore credibility to the game they'd go Spanish Inquistion style on the Eagles. They won't. The Eagles are running this show and the AFL are like an ineffectual school teacher watching his class run amok and satisfied with [censored] excuses. I hope there's enough people like Mike Fitzpatrick that are getting pretty jacked off with the whole situation. I think Mike Fitzpatrick want's to do something about it, Demetriou clearly doesn't - couldn't have anything to do with his rumoured close friendship with the Eagles power brokers. You'd like to think he'd leave the decisions to others to avoid any perception of a conflict of interest, but we know that's not how the AFL does business.

Correct. Just use your current membership number.

I'm not trying to be deliberately inflammatory, but I have no sympathy for his position or other drug users or alcoholics or any even smokers trying to give up. All my empathy is used up for those that have no control over their situation... like their kids.