titan_uranus

For mine, the planning component is huge. What happens if the top 6 at Round 17 contains five interstate sides and one Victorian? The Vic club has to make, what, three road trips in five weeks? Or you end up with Perth sides and Queensland sides and they are all forced to make multiple cross-country trips in the last month leading into finals. Or, of course, those clubs are all in the middle six and have no ability to plan their final month of training to work their way into the 8. The current system is flawed. But, unless we play 34 games every year, every system is flawed. The 17-5 model is a logistical nightmare and creates new problems the game doesn't need (see above). I'm against it, but not against something new for the fixture. A 3 or 4 year plan in which the AFL clearly sets out who plays who, and when, and how often, could be an easier option (similar to how the NFL has conferences and uses those to ensure each club plays each other club at least once every four years and home/away once every eight years, something like that I think is far preferable to having a 5-week unknown block for 17 weeks).

The batting really is shallow. Warner and Marsh are in form but otherwise there's only Smith left, the other 8 of them are struggling. The Mitch Marsh experiment is surely over. Cannot be that weak a batsman and bat at 6, regardless of bowling. We are continually going to lose if we can't put up big enough scores with the bat and numbers 3, 5 and 7 aren't strong enough to hold an awful number 6.

Decent start, although from 5/81 I think we'd be a little disappointed to have let them get to 242. Nonetheless, at 0/105 we clearly have the Test under our control, but our biggest weakness is middle order batting and there's not a lot after Smith at 4. The Starc-Hazlewood new ball combination is starting to really gel together, IMO. I like the call to give Siddle the third spot too.

Bangladesh has just taken 10 wickets in a session to beat England and win their 8th ever Test. Great for Test cricket.

This is, in almost all respects, a good draw for the club. Getting a Friday night home game is a huge step in the right direction. Home games against Carlton, Hawthorn, NM, Collingwood and St Kilda are all good for us, as is not having a home game at Etihad. We also have to be stoked with the teams we get twice next year. North, Carlton and Collingwood are teams we should be beating next year. And to only get Adelaide from the top 6 is very fortunate indeed. We also get two of our interstate games on Channel 7 (vs West Coast and vs Adelaide) which, IIRC, hasn't happened in about 5 years (all our FTA games have for the last few years been Melbourne games). The amount of six-day breaks is a bit disappointing but, ultimately, it's a draw that gives us a good shot at finals and is at least some reward for improved performance (how St Kilda got 4 Friday night games is beyond me).

More tidbits: http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/more-news/afl-fixtures-2017-collingwood-lose-prime-time-pull-after-three-years-out-of-finals-contention/news-story/063cda05cc059922138ca732a048fdcb It looks like we play Geelong in Round 3 at Etihad Stadium. Again, unclear if that's our home game (if so, not sure how I feel about that) or away (if so, good result). Collingwood is going to lose prime time exposure (great news).

A few more tidbits before the release tomorrow: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/afl-fixture-2017-sam-mitchell-to-tackle-hawks-in-round-five-20161026-gsbk4e.html We play Hawthorn at the MCG in Round 7 (doesn't say if it's our home game or not). Hawthorn has a home game at Etihad (avoided that this year, possibly means Richmond or Melbourne could avoid having an Etihad home game next year?). Hawthorn has lost 3 Friday night games - at least one will go to GWS but could mean some more sharing of the Friday night pie.

They've been having 4 home games at the G for years now. Interestingly, with Hawthorn being one of their MCG home games, they'll only have three left between Carlton, Collingwood, Richmond, us and Geelong (who they want to host there for their "country game", whatever that is). It might be the case that they don't get a home game at the G against us which could, in turn, mean we host Essendon for the first time since 2010 and only second time since 2005!

Agreed. It's an away game, so we don't lose out by having a Sunday afternoon home game on Grand Prix day. We're not interstate, which as you've indicated hasn't happened to us in Round 1 this century. We're playing a side we should, if we are serious about finals, be able to beat. Not that big of a deal. I'm sure there will be something worse in the full fixture on Thursday.

Upon reflection, I agree. I definitely think the bye week helped the Dogs in terms of being fit for the Perth final but that's a good thing, not a bad thing. Adelaide, West Coast and the Dogs were three of the best sides in recent memory to miss the top 4. There needs to be an incentive/reward for finishing higher on the ladder but I think the double chance (not necessarily the week off, but the chance to lose that first final and keep going) plays that role.

Not an important question. 14 is a number. It doesn't have to go to Hibberd because Dunn wears/wore it as a backman. Lewis can have whatever number is free. They're just numbers.

Agreed. Smedts is not much of a player and Geelong supporters don't rate him at all. In their eyes, they're simply sliding back 5 or 6 spots to gain Tuohy. Why? Our trade week played out all year when we re-signed every single important player not just beyond 2016, but beyond 2017 too.

No he won't.

Great news for the club. His leadership should help show Jones, Vince, Gawn and Viney how it's done. And we essentially gave up nothing for him. As an aside, I hope this helps us secure a Friday night game next year vs Hawthorn. We already beat them this year, now Channel 7 has the "Lewis vs Hawthorn" story to make out of it.

Missing a few days of Demonland at this time of year means missing roughly 70 pages of posts. I have no idea how or why Gawn's name is in this thread. Ditto Tippett. Awful player.

I suppose only time will tell if Hawthorn's got it right this year but pushing out 4-time premiership players who have taken pay cuts to stay together and deliver huge success, high membership and money for the club, to bring in a hack (Vickery), an unproven injury-prone kid (O'Meara), and a good, even great, but nothing exceptional midfielder (T Mitchell) surely won't sit well with the rest of Hawthorn's list, will it? Knowing Hawthorn, it'll probably all work out, but fingers crossed it doesn't and it all blows up in their faces.

I'm not a huge fan of some of what Lewis does on the field but he has always been considered a leader at Hawthorn and given he was 2nd in their B&F this year, clearly is still playing quality football. Given he approached us, I'm also confident we won't be paying overs, assuming this ends up happening. If it doesn't happen, I won't be upset, but if it does I think overall it will be a good thing. You might be right about Lewis' speed (and whether he's a good fit, as I think it's quite arguable either way) but even if you are, he's a better option than Barlow who, other than being marginally faster than Lewis, is probably inferior in every other aspect. Personally I think foot speed is overrated and I think Hawthorn's midfield has consistently shown you don't need to have quick midfielders to be successful - they've had Hill and Smith running on the wings but a midfield of Hodge, Mitchell, Lewis, Burgoyne, Shiels, Breust etc. is no quicker than what we have.

I really do not understand why people get angry/upset/stressed over our name not coming up in the media during trade week, the more so given we're coming off our best season since 2006.

Why should we be in the hunt for Ahern and Pickett?

I don't like the current AFL culture of non-FA players nominating the club they want to go to. But I'm not convinced there is a problem. Yes, two players have nominated each of Geelong and Hawthorn, but both clubs have indicated there are problems. Geelong said on radio today it will struggle to fit both Deledio and Tuohy into its salary cap and to do so, it seems it has looked at trading Caddy - some on here are having a go at Caddy but IMO he's an important part of Geelong's midfield. Neither Deledio nor Tuohy fix Geelong's current problem of an over-reliance on Dangerfield and Selwood but Caddy helps with that. Meanwhile the mere fact Breust heard his name being used as trade bait has "rattled" him and, again, Hawthorn is going to release at least one of its promising mid-tier players (whilst its top-tier players age another year) to get Mitchell and O'Meara in. The rule that has been brought in requiring clubs to have two first round picks every 4 years is a good one and will assist in stopping the stronger clubs from continually trading out their first round pick for established talent (which, IIRC, Hawthorn has repeatedly done over the last 5 years). Let's wait and see what the end of the trade period looks like before deciding the system is broken. Aside from tanking, the other problem this has is what happens when the wooden spooner makes a rise up the ladder the following year and their salary cap then comes down. That would create more problems than it's worth.

Maybe this will mean there will no longer be a requirement to have a certain minimum number of games there per year, which will mean we (along with the other MCG tenants) are no longer forced into Etihad home games. Did Demonland exist in 2002?

Wonderful news. It's incredible to think we have re-signed every one of our (important) OOC players this year (including Hogan who technically wasn't OOC this year).

This is, honestly, one of the stupidest posts, and arguments, I've ever seen.

Aliir wasn't fit so they had to replace him but agree, I don't think Mills or McVeigh were 100% fit either. Bad selections on both fronts, I think. Parker was in the top 3 or 4 players in the first month of the year but I think opposition coaches have put a lot of time into him since then. Kennedy is nearly unstoppable but Parker is less so. Hawthorn/Box Hill did it in 2013 I think.

I think anyone who disputes having felt even the slightest twinge of jealousy is hiding it well or too proud/stubborn to admit it. IMO it's only natural for us, as Melbourne supporters, to be jealous. I want to feel how the Dogs' supporters are feeling. I want to ride the wave of making the finals, winning finals, making the GF, winning the GF. I'm sure, deep down, we can all admit to that slight twinge of jealousy. That doesn't mean I'm not, overall, extraordinarily happy - 2016 might have been the most even season of AFL ever, the finals series this year may well have been the best finals series ever, and the year's result showed that you don't need to be one of the modern "big 3" or one of the traditional "big 4" to be able to win the flag. A great result all round.