titan_uranus

From memory, this happened last year around exit interview time. Rumours of players wanting out. None of which eventuated. Sometimes I think the issue is as simple as a player expressing disappointment about something in an exit interview which then get spread as a rumour and mutates slightly ("Petracca was upset we didn't make finals" becomes "Petracca's upset at Goodwin that we didn't make finals", for example). I usually take the view that where there's smoke there's fire, but nothing came of any of this last year so I am sceptical of these "X wants out" rumours.

Tom Browne's a terrible journalist so take anything he says with a grain of salt. Like, what does "support for four day breaks" mean? No one in the league would ask for a four day break unless there was context to it (in "normal" years clubs complain about five day breaks). So what's the context? In the event we have to hub again in 2021? To allow a condensed fixture if that's required in 2021? If there is no need to hub in 2021, I don't understand the need for four day breaks or same day travel. Those should revert back to what we had prior to 2020. Minimum five day breaks (which should be rarely if ever used at all) and why would a club be required to travel on the same day as the game unless it was their decision? Quarters should return to 20 minutes as well. Again, unless we're affected by condensed fixtures, there's no need to shorten quarters again. It robs the game of time for goals/advertising anyway.

It only took three posts for someone to pull out the old "talk is cheap". What is it that you expect from him in the week after our season finished?

Congratulations to the top 5. Whilst I personally would have had Oliver and Langdon above Viney, ultimately it's a reflection of great years for all five of them. Special mentions to Hibberd, who bounced back well after a shocking Round 1 performance and from being dropped, and Weideman, who made the most of his opportunity after not being selected for so long at the start of the year. Very surprised to see Brayshaw finish as high as he did. Would not have argued for him to be a top 10 B&F finished this year. Disappointed to see Lever, Melksham, Tomlinson and vandenBerg score so low. Not surprised at all by Melksham's poor result. The surprise is that he didn't get dropped. Lever only just missed the top 10 but that's a disappointing result, and a surprising one. I would have happily said he had a better year than Brayshaw, Hibberd and Weideman who all finished above him.

I know in that photo he stands out whilst everyone else is smiling, but I think it's very dangerous to read into photos like that. Who knows what was going through his mind or of the context. No smiling issues in his photo with his trophy or with the top 5.

His display picture is him in a Melbourne jumper and his most recent photo is him and Petracca. So, no.

Strip the title back and assume it was called "Melbourne's 2019/20 pre-season". Would anyone care then? I suggest the answer is no. Because, if you watch it, you'll find that it was a well-made series which showed us members what we were doing in the 19/20 off-season to try to improve our 2019 season. It wasn't designed to tell a story to members that we assumed we'd win the flag, or even make finals. At worst, it was designed to show us all that we were putting in hard work (which, if you watch the videos, you'll see we did) to try to have a much better 2020. Which, of course, is what we all wanted. The title gives rise to flak but title aside, it was fine. And I think it's rich in the extreme for someone to tee off about it without having watched it.

I really like Gawn's quotes in that article. I'm sure the usual suspects will say "talk is cheap" or "too little too late" etc., but I like Gawn's attitude here and I think what he says is fair.

I think on the idea of us not forcing enough stoppages, our tackles are an issue. How often does it feel like opponents break our tackles easily and get out of sticky situations?

Agree. I think at best he demands attention from the opposition secondary and maybe frees up some space for others on our offence. It's crazy to say and a bit early obviously but right now you'd have to say we're a decent chance to finish bottom of our division, given the improvement the Cards have shown (I like Murray a lot).

It's the right call, on both fronts. J Wagner didn't do too badly in his two games this year but he's a limited footballer who hasn't really developed beyond what he initially showed in his debut year in 2016. Good luck to them both in their future endeavours.

Agree. We're going to struggle to compete in a tough division and with a schedule featuring the Packers, Patriots and Bills. I haven't posted here regularly for a while so I might have missed this but do you think we can get anything out of Sanu?

Doesn't sound true. Source?

As the OP said, we're 15th for clearances. But we're 7th for average clearance differential (at +1.4). So we're top 8 for having more clearances than our opponents despite being bottom 4 for total clearances. I think that must say we play a low stoppage game. So our raw numbers are low but we still win more than our opponents. We're also 9th for inside 50 differential at +2.2. Port lead at +10, then it's Richmond, Brisbane, Collingwood, Geelong, the Dogs, St Kilda s and Carlton. So the top 8 for inside 50 differential this year has seven finalists and Carlton. Then us. West Coast, the missing finalist, is 10th. Goodwin always talks about it being a forward half game. That inside 50 stat lends support to that theory.

It's like the whole thing about the club requiring him to add muscle. That was spread on here like gospel. Turns out, as far as anyone is aware, there's not a shred of evidence to support it.

The frustrating thing is, this reduces May down to one stat. He's so much more. So, so much more. Intercept marking. Pressure. Kick outs from defence. Leadership. Zoning. Reading the play.

Just to be clear, my view is that Gawn is overall 10 times the player Naitanui is and has a career that is 10 times more impressive. But in 2020, my view is that Naitanui's influence on games and overall product has been stronger than Gawn's. I'm not as harsh on him as @A F. I cannot agree with a lot of what he says about Gawn's game. But I do agree that Gawn didn't have the same overall influence on games as he's had in previous years. Maybe that means I'm unfairly holding him to the standards he's set in previous years.

Ridiculous and insulting to exclude May from the squad. Not only was he at the absolute worst on par with Moore and Weitering, he also deserves at least a squad spot over Pendlebury (missed a month), Gawn (missed three games and was nowhere near as good as recent years), Cam Guthrie (serviceable), Maynard (WTF). Gawn shouldn't be there: love him but not good enough this year. Goldstein probably the season's second best ruck but who cares, Naitanui was so far in front of everyone else. Oliver's borderline. But if it were a choice between May and Oliver, it should have been May. Petracca should be a lock for the 22, but May should have been a lock for the squad so who knows.

I would prefer to sign him right now than trade him, so if that means he's "untradable" then sure.

For those who put any stock in Sam McLure's word, see here: https://www.sen.com.au/news/2020/09/22/sam-mcclures-comprehensive-trade-update-on-brown-daniher-crouch-saad-cameron/ He says he doesn't know about TMac but suggests non-Victorian clubs would be interested. Says Hurley, Cameron and Perryman all staying and Brown going to Collingwood or Hawthorn.

Genuinely don't understand this suggestion. May's in line for an AA spot this year as a key defender. He's in career best form, as he's just admitted. His work with Lever improved all year and our defence was rarely outpointed. It's not like when we desperately threw him forward in our losing matches that he starred, either. And when he was played forward on the GC he struggled. If they were all free, Cameron is obviously the best. But he's not free and we almost certainly can't afford what other teams will be able to pay him (although in saying that, TMac's salary is reportedly sizeable and if we are able to offload that, maybe we're not so far off). I agree with you that Brown is the next best option. His pace and defensive pressure are a worry though. He's a good mark, a good kick for goal and has an under-rated workrate/fitness base, all of which help us, but if the ball hits the deck we can't really afford a slow, lumbering forward who can't/doesn't chase or tackle. I'm certainly open to the idea of Brown in our forward line but I'm not sure it's a 100% great fit.

Merrett would fit into our midfield but: I can't see him leaving Essendon; and I can't see how we can afford him.

That is not a reason to start a thread about trading him. And it's not what you initially said either. Your position on Fritsch, like your position on most things, is untenable when you think it through even for a second.

I agree with those who suggest we won't just do a massive cull. However, if the list shrinks by 2 and we want to draft 3 kids, that's already five spots before we get to any FA/trade decisions or additional draft picks. Based off @Lucifer's Hero's list, I'd start with Jones, Bedford and J Wagner. If Jones wants to play another year we have a very difficult conversation on our hands but I just cannot see a best 22 for us in 2021 that features Jones consistently. I don't think we should be keeping all three of OMac, Hore and Smith. I think one has to go and IMO it should be OMac: he's had plenty of time on our list to develop but just has not fixed his weaknesses. That's four, and I suspect there will be one or two more, which starts to put pressure on Hore (although I like him and would prefer him to Smith), Hannan (how many times was he dropped this year?) and then Jordon and Nietschke. Hard to know if it's fair to keep them when they've not had the chance, but the flipside is that we can't hold onto speculative players indefinitely just to see if they can crack a game in 2021. Rookie wise I'd keep both Brown and Lockhart, both of whom should probably be on our senior list. Subject to knowing the full story and context to the Bennell issue, I'd keep him as I think he could make a big difference in 2021. I'd otherwise move on from Chandler, Dunkley, C Wagner and Bradtke. I don't know how retirements affect the salary cap but the writing is on the wall for Jetta and KK (for different reasons) and I'm not sure either will be getting much game time in 2021.

Nope. The Dogs have a far stronger list than us and the real truth is that the Dogs should be a top 4 side, not barely scraping into the 8. The Dogs have Bontempelli, Macrae, Hunter, Libba, B Smith, Dunkley, Wood, Johannisen, Naughton, Wallis and Daniel. Those 11 players are not just the equal of our top 11, they're significantly better IMO. Their midfield depth is enormous, allowing them to run Hunter off a wing and having Bont/Dunkley rotating forward. We might shade them down the spine (Weid, Brown, Gawn, Lever, May vs Naughton, Bruce, English, Gardner and Keath) but it's not like their spine is uncompetitive. King's fast becoming an irrelevant sensationalist. To suggest we've made no progress at all, coming off a 2019 season record of 5-17 with a percentage of 78.6% to a 9-8 record with a percentage of 107.8%, is stupid. There have been a number of signs this year that we've developed our gameplan to be capable of producing wins without needing to rely solely on clearances, CPs and inside 50s (look at our four most recent wins over Essendon, GWS, St Kilda and Collingwood and you'll see we didn't win games like we were doing in 2018). That doesn't mean our 2020 is a success, by the way. Making progress and failing are not mutually exclusive. Both happened in 2020.