titan_uranus

We're not a premiership contender. We're not a top 4 contender. And if we play like this against any side who turns the pressure up, we're barely a top 8 contender. Until we beat someone ranked higher than Adelaide on the ladder, the big question mark will deservedly remain. The pressure we faced today was off the charts compared to the pressure placed on us in the six wins and we looked more like the team in the first 5 rounds than the one in the next 6. Gawn and Grundy was a great battle all day I thought, and there was no obvious winner. Thought the umpires gave Grundy too much leeway but Gawn fought back. However, because Gawn didn't dominate, our mids didn't get the armchair ride they've been getting. Couple that with a stronger opposition midfield, and the smashing in the clearances becomes easier to understand. We need to work out how to adjust when sides get right on top in the middle because once we lose the quick movement out of the stoppages, we fall apart around the ground. Joel Smith was OK today, but will need more time to settle in. We need to give him not just the Port game but the three after (St Kilda, Fremantle, WB) to see if he can settle. I'll back us in to respond against Port without making too many changes. However, Pedersen can't play the role he was asked to play and should be dropped for Weideman. Don't bother trying that again. We also have to make a call on Petracca soon. He's bottom 6 at the moment and IMO getting games based on potential/reputation, not on form. You are, without a doubt, the worst poster on this board. Everything you write is tripe. Everything.

This is the most pressure we’ve been under since Richmond and it’s showing. We are making the same sorts of mistakes we did early this year. Structures are out, transition is too slow, kicking is poor. We have more room for improvement than them but it’s going to take a big effort to get this done.

I thought Kent was OK when he played earlier this year. I highly doubt VDB will get back to good enough form that he'd be pushing for senior selection this year. So whether or not he gets another contract will come down to how well he plays at Casey and whether our list could use the depth he currently offers.

Pedersen for T Smith seems a given. I'd expect J Smith for Lever - the closest replacement and keeps everyone else playing their same roles. If Lever wasn't injured, we wouldn't be discussing bringing Hunt in for one of the defenders so I don't see why that becomes an option now. Second time in a week you've posted like you know something from the inside that others don't. Care to elaborate?

Not sure why everyone is getting so worked up, it's a mid-year AA team picked by a hack journalist. Has no meaning whatsoever. Grundy's having an AA-level year. So is Gawn of course, and IMO Gawn is better, but the idea that someone might pick Grundy over Gawn if they're going with one ruckman isn't ridiculous. Martin and Rance shouldn't be in anyone's AA side right now, though.

Winning these early season games and building percentage has been crucial because of what is to come, not just the opponents but the travel. We still need to win 5 games to ensure we make the top 8. Top 4 will take additional effort on top. Hawthorn has a great run home so will challenge one of the current top 8 for their spot. Let's hope we win the games we should win so that it's not us who comes under pressure.

Nope, all bar Sandilands and Hill are out of form and completely past it as AFL footballers. They are more competitive without them.

What seems clear to me is that we will be trying to minimise positional changes. So someone is going to come in from Casey to play Lever's role. Whether that's Frost or Smith or Wagner or Hunt or someone else, I expect someone to get that role and Harmes to return to his normal role.

Having now seen the replay, the most pleasing thing for me was that we found away to get back into it after the three early Dogs goals and then to control general play despite being beaten in clearances. In most of our wins this year we've dominated around the stoppages. I'm not able to put my finger on why we got beaten so badly, but whatever the reason, we adjusted. We also adjusted to combat the loss of Lever nicely. Harmes played well across half-back and Lewis and Jetta both played stunning games. Hogan and TMac up forward are gelling so well together.

He's right. The game should be alternated. Next year we'll be away on both ANZAC Eve and QBD. But that doesn't mean we can't get a home game against Richmond or Collingwood as a return game earlier/later in the year. It also doesn't mean we can't play Essendon, Carlton, Hawthorn or Geelong in home games at the G. The year after we should remain away on QBD but get ANZAC Eve at home again, and then from 2021 onwards they can alternate.

Here is the distribution of Thursday and Friday night games for the rest of the year (not including Round 23 which is unfixtured): Richmond - 6 Sydney - 4 Geelong - 4 Essendon - 4 St Kilda - 3 Port Adelaide - 3 Bulldogs - 2 Adelaide - 2 West Coast - 2 Carlton - 1 Melbourne - 1 Hawthorn - 0 Collingwood - 0 North Melbourne - 0 GWS - 0 GC - 0 Fremantle - 0 Brisbane - 0 That's seven sides who won't feature in prime time for the rest of the year - four of which are right in the thick of the finals race, two of which are legitimate top 4 chances (North and Collingwood). Meanwhile we will see Essendon, St Kilda, the Dogs and Carlton, all rubbish sides, 10 times between them. The distribution is just completely out.

He's not currently best 22 but we won't be making/winning finals with a squad of 22 and no more. I expect to see him back in the seniors at least once before the end of the season. Whether that's pessimism around injuries or just a belief that players can improve in the VFL, I don't know.

What? Who said that? All that stat shows his how many losses Nathan Jones has been through to get to 75 wins. When compared to someone like Joel Selwood, who debuted a year after Jones but raised his 75th win in around 2010 or so, it just serves a nice reminder to non-MFC supporters of how hard Jones' career has been.

Adelaide's next five games: Fremantle (away), Hawthorn (away), (the bye), West Coast, Richmond (away), Geelong. If they don't get their injured players back fast, their run to the finals looks incredibly difficult from here. Really? They haven't scored 100 points since Round 11, 2016. Since that game, their record is 8-36. Two weeks ago they lost by 109 points. They have a soft draw from here - games include Fremantle x 2, Brisbane, St Kilda, Gold Coast and the Dogs. I reckon Bolton needs to win most of those to show they have a true future.

Melksham should be fine, based on the interview that was shown on one of the news stations tonight. Assuming T Smith is OK, I expect just the one change, with a replacement for Lever. If Ben Reid comes back for Collingwood then we might need a second taller defender to take Lever's spot. If Reid doesn't return, though, then I expect us to pick the best performer at Casey who can play in the back six in Lever's spot. That may well be Wagner, given how many games he's played this year. I don't see us replacing Lever with a mid. That changes the balance we've struck over the past few weeks and I don't think we need to do that.

That's where the MFCSS kicks in. It's not rational, but I can't help shake the thought. I'm just not used to be confident.

They beat St Kilda by 52 points the week before, they followed up our game by beating Carlton by 86 and then Hawthorn by 28. The only other sides to beat them this year are Port, Richmond and GC in a downpour. Watching that game back, we clicked far more than they stunk. And, as Nasher says below, part of the reason North looked poor against us was because we played so well. That's also part of the reason why Adelaide looked so poor last week. Our win over North is not getting enough credit. Agree. Still, there's no doubt we have harder games to come than the games we've just played and there's no guarantee that the way we've looked over the past 5 weeks will carry over into a game against a stronger side than last week's Adelaide (ostensibly the strongest of our the last 5 opponents).

No surprises with team selection. MFCSS says that the mass positivity, confidence and optimism around us, and the disdain with which we are talking about the Dogs, means we're setting ourselves up for a classic MFC loss this week. The Dogs still have 13 premiership players and some A-graders (Macrae is in super form). But they also have some spuds and they're just not playing very well. If we approach this game like any of the previous five, we should win by 40 points minimum. But, if we're even slightly off, who knows. Agreed, that was my only thought as to the team. Tyson, Hunt and Garlett all "dropped" from the emergencies in favour of Bugg, Stretch and J Smith. Not sure what, if anything, it means.

That's precisely how I feel. I'm concerned about the OTT stuff being said about us (we're not premiership favourites FFS) and, like many, I'd love to see us play like this against a stronger side than North Melbourne or a two-thirds-strong Adelaide. But I love feeling like we're a genuine top-flight club. I love knowing that we play the most exciting football in the league bar none, but that we're also the best side at contested ball (by a mile, too). I love feeling confident and I love having genuine belief.

The opening on Footy Classified wasn't too bad.

IMO the biggest problem is Thursday/Friday night games - these are the games that get the most people watching on TV and set the tone for Saturday AFL media and subsequent interest. So far we've had 12 Thursday/Friday night games. 6 of them have featured Carlton, St Kilda or the Dogs. So that's half of the prime time games so far this year featuring rubbish sides. There are 17 Thursday/Friday night games left for the season. 6 of them feature Carlton, St Kilda or the Dogs (one of them is actually St Kilda vs Carlton). That's more than one-third. The AFL has two big problems. The first is that they have no flexibility in their schedule so they can't move games in/out of the Friday night slot. That means they're pre-determined and locked in based on the previous year's form. However, the bigger issue is that the AFL doesn't properly allocate the games amongst clubs. There isn't enough variety in the teams we get to see on Thursday/Friday nights so it just becomes repetitive. And the AFL continues to do things like give Carlton, St Kilda and the Dogs a stack of prime time games when none of them made the finals and then, surprise surprise, all of them stink in 2018.

There have only been three 90+ point wins this year. We have two of them, and the third belongs to Richmond (vs Brisbane).

Yes, Adelaide was missing Sloane, B Crouch, Walker, McGovern and Seedsman (and Smith for the year). But they still had Jacobs, who was destroyed by Gawn. They still had Jenkins, Betts and Lynch. They still had Talia, Doedee (who they've been fawning over all year in Lever's absence). They still had M Crouch, Gibbs, Atkins, Laird (3rd most possessions in the league to date). That line up would beat many sides this year. Indeed, with the Crouch brothers and Sloane missing large portions of the year, they were still 6-3 going into the game. We've now got wins over North (6-4, 120.49%, 5th on the ladder, and at a time when we had injuries to key players and they were close to full strength) and Adelaide (6-4, 109.68%, 7th). That puts us at 2-2 against the current top 8, with one of those losses by a kick. We shouldn't get carried away, and we have a much harder fixture post-bye than we do pre-bye, but maybe the narrative around us, that we haven't beaten anyone good, deserves further thought.

I am happy.

Two interesting things in the article. First, the deal is between the NT and the AFL, not the MFC. If the AFL wants it to continue, then it probably continues. Second, the comment that we are “contractually obliged” to play 9 home games at the G. I’ve never heard of this before. Is this a maximum or a minimum? If it’s a maximum, where did it come from and why doesn’t it apply to Richmond?