Rodney (Balls) Grinter

Or 12

Also worth noting that Hawthorn lost to the Lyons twice and North, that kind of offsets the advantage of their weaker draw. The other key factor is that they got over St Kilda and Sydney by a few goals or less in the run home, where we lost to those same sides by similar margins. The respective results Vs Geelong are probably part of the same story. It's a game of inches sometimes and that's probably where our lack of experience and in ability to close out the close games probably hurt us get that top 4 spot.

Good teams don't make excuses and/or rely on the draw to finish in a good position. I think it can artificially help poorer ones, but doesn't make much difference to good teams that put together a dominant season overall. Look at Richmond and to a certain extent West Coast. It could influence the make up of the rest of the final 8 and lower part of the ladder to a certain extent though and that's more I think was more my puropse in posting it. If we have the sort of quality team we think we have, do ok with injuries and manage the team well thoughout the year, then the mindset shold be that we make our own destiny and let the rest sort it's self around us. I'm probably just parroting Goodwin here, but I think it's the right attitude. Draw should be meaningless to us. Easier said than done, because I bet that Richmond, West Coast, Collingwood and perhaps one or two other teams would probably also think they are in this position.

Agreed. Many comentators and media have us as finishing 1st/grand finalists or top 4 as the base 'expectation'. I personally the most optermistic predictions are somewhat unrealistic to have as an expectation. Was a point that PJ made pretty well in his exclusive Demonland interview that there could be speed bumps. Geelong and GWS were a few of the examples he put up.

I could have been wrong. Demon Wiki actually has us finishing 3rd at the end of 2000 home and away (an abortion for the MFC post 64). I can also find a few 4th place finishes between 1989 and 1991, but from recollection they were also the days of top 5/6 and so finishing 4th was of no real advantage. Has been the story of the MFC in my lifetime. Good sides, but could never put together an entire season to set our selves up properly for a genuine crack at a flag. This is the one thing I'm hoping Goodwin does better at.

I think this article is interesting in the present context. AFL fixture 2019: How weighted fixture helped Collingwood, North Melbourne in 2018 and who it will impact most in 2019 https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-fixture-2019-how-weighted-fixture-helped-collingwood-north-melbourne-in-2018-and-who-it-will-impact-most-in-2019/news-story/d61d171a77108a94459b7f31d3efb9f8 Honestly though, I think the draw is only important to the weaker teams. If we are a good side, then we should relish the opportunity to play top teams, because we give our selves a better than even chance of beating them. I think it is also a double edge sword in that respect, in so far as playing other top sides gives you an opportunity to deny them a win and push them down the ladder. I don't think a tough draw did Richmond any disservice this season. Biggest thing to be gained with an easy draw is having a bit more tolerance in the case of form slumps and injuries etc.

I'm not thinking too much about where I think we and everyone else will finish at this point (might as well throw darts at a board or play pin the tail on the donkey to some extent). But I do know where I want us to finish and that is simply top 4 as a starting point. In all my years as a supporter (post 86), I don't recall us finishing above the equivalent of 4th (i.e. with a garenteed double chance and potential week off prior to the prelim). I don't think it matters so much to finish 1st or 2nd, unless it ment finishing below that meant an interstate trip first week of finals.

My biggest beef out of the trade period would have to be bloody Richmond picking up Lynch for nothing trade/draft position wise. Would have loved it if we could have picked up May for nothing like they did. Still bird in the hand is better than two in the bush I guess.

Not that much I'd think if him taking unders money wise is really true. I think it's possible we could have got more for him next year. He wouldn't have had this foot injury thing hanging over him potententually devaluing him, could have had a huge year and kicked 60+ goals. My view is if things had fallen trade wise and he stayed he could have been pretty motivated by finals and sucess, assuming we continued on our upward trend. There may also have been more competition from West Coast for his services if he was really still determined to get back. In a lot of ways, it was possibly not such a good time to trade him. ...but it's all water under the bridge now, so no use crying over spilt milk.

Too true.

The AFL has a long term expansion agenda with GC and GWS to tap into markets which have growing population and a huge established population respectively. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'd say that both these clubs are still loss makers, being subsidised and propped up based on that long term vision. Doesn't work that way for the MFC. Our sponsors will still get something out of game day and further exposure through out the week if we are sucessful. Just think of all those mid week press conferences with our players standing in front of a wall of their logo. Sponsors also like to be associated with sucess, so that will increase our marketability and the premium we can put on our sponsorship as well. The other intangible factor that could play into our hands nicely is popularity/likeability. Durning finals, it seemed like every non supporter of our club was adopting the MFC as their second team and that will also generate interest and exposure. That good will probably only have a limited life span, but it could last for a few years too. I think Geelong and the Brisbane Lyons experienced something similar for a good number of years, before people thought ok, you have had your fair share of success now.

Yeah, but we don't get a direct take from ratings and we do the gate for home games. If it could be structured to maximize TV ratings for away games and the gate for home ones, I think that is the ideal for the MFC. i.e. play WC and the Swans away in prime time TV and the big Collingwood, Geelong, Essendon games when it maximizes attendance. Just thinking about it, I realize why Collingwood would claim Rd 1 as a home game for them, due to the somewhat of a gentleman's agreement we have that Queen's Birthday is our home game. Still prefer a day game Vs Collingwood Rd as it would be good to get some momentum going with getting huge crowds and lots of MFC supporters going to games - winning will be most of it, but we also need to embed a mindset for our supporters to consistently turn up to games and create atmosphere and good commercial returns for the club. If we can lift the average game day attendance for the lesser clubs, that will have just as much if not more benifit to us than getting one or two block busters. Big crowds probably also helps gain the attention of TV audiences, broadcasters and sponsors as well, so it becomes a feedback loop.

Stephen Hill would be 30 by the time he is actually available, so that could make him a pretty dicey propersition. Glad Jonesy is our only FA as you say, because I think there is FA chance he is leaving. That said though, I think we have a ton of players comming out contract at the end of 2019 ...not that contacts actually mean anything much these days anyway. As we have seen, it's probably just as important to look at who the FA are in 2020. It still grates with me that we didn't get a recruiting free kick like Richmond did with Lynch this year. Failure to get Gaff is the only thing that I'd put against Mahoney & co, though there is only so much they can do as it takes two to tango and it sounds like Gaff was more intersted in comming back to Vic for big money than sucess, so F off, don't want you anyway.

Yep, the AFL and broadcasters just love to play these things up, don't they. I can just imagine the tacky over dramatized pre game narated video now: "He was the child prodigy that Melbourne thought they would build their forwardline around for a generation. But family tragedy and a personal near death experience have brought him back home to the WESST. Now as Fremantle stuggle to win their first game of the season, Melbourne sits undefeated on top of the ladder, Jessy must be considering what might have been as tonight he faces his former DEEMONS and meet the man that was his replacement head on. Buckle up, folks, this is going to get ugly".

It certainly had been, but I have an inkling that last year we played no home games at Docklands. I could look it up, but I'm in a lazy mood. Since Docklands no longer represents the hoodoo to us that it once did, it would almost be worth us playing the eagles there just to deny them exposure to playing on the G, even if we no longer need to sacrifice home games to Docklands. We have played the eagles only once a season and on their home deck on every occation for the past two years if I recall correctly. About bloody time that we play them on the eastern side of the Nullabour. Alternate to denying them the experience of the G (which they probably have covered by the GF anyway to be honest), I recon it would be great to play them at the G in about Rd 4 or 5, when hopefully we are really hitting our straps and pulverize them in front of a home crowd of 75,000 - 68,000 of them being Melbourne supporters. The umpires can give us free kicks for tripping over our own feet then, just like they do the eagles in WA.

Yeah, maybe. I recon the eagles were just far fresher and more switched on at the start of the game than what we were thay day in the prelim. We had essentially played 4 to 6 weeks of finals, where as they had somewhat costed to the end of the season and played 2 games in a month. It was more our shocking turn overs, though appreciate that is related to physical pressure. If you go back to Rd 22, we hit them physically as hard and with a similar sort of intensity that they did to us in the prelim. My recollection is that had we kicked straight in Rd 22, we probably would have ended up smashing them on the scoreboard by as much as they did to us in the prelim. Key thing for us is that I felt our younger guys started hitting physical maturity as team last year and pushed us over that critical mass in that respects. Guys like Brayshaw, Harmes, etc had the grunt run, rough and tumble in the guts all day. Viney was already a beast. AVB had a big physical presence when he came back. I'm really hoping that as guys like Oliver, Weid, Oscar and the rest already mentioned get that one more preseason into them that it will allow us to absolutely bully, monster and intimidate the opposition like those great Lyons sides of the early 2000s. Then we just need the runners like Hunt and Freitch to find some form, run and dash on the outside. Yes May and perhaps Preuss wI'll somewhat complement that, but I think it will be our physicality all over the ground that will damage sides more so. I also like the idea that Preuss might give us an option much closer in height to plan on the American Cox. If Cox continues to improve, watch out, he could become even more of a wepon and having tall options to nullify him could become pretty important.

Don't mind some Friday night games, but prefer the more traditional time slot, particularly for the opening Rd.

I heard somewhere they have 9 players over 30 next season. I hope their playing falls off a cliff like ours did 12 years ago. Furthermore, so sick of this Clarkson being the messiah crap. A bit like you, I hope the high risk recruitment plays thay the Hawks have made come back to bit them, Clarkson gets the sack, and we transfer the Norm Smith curse to them for another 50+ years, hereby to be know as the Alistair Clarkson curse.

Would the reason for the 4 years be more based on that was when he was contracted till with GWS?

Do we still play any home games at Docklands/Marvell? If so, I'd love to make it against WC, to deprive them of a game at the G.

Who cares about the TV ratings, I'd have thought the club would get more from a good gate. What's this notion that Collingwood always get to start the season?

This probably appeals to the 50% of MCC supporters that are not MFC duel members - "oh, jolly good dees, god bless their majesties"

Surely Gunstan or Bruest are up for free agency soon? Didn't they kick 40 odd goals for the Hawks this year? Roughead must be close to pulling up stumps and I'd love to steel one of those two off them to totally cripple their forward line for a few years, just to spite them for Frawley. Plus, how good would it be for the WEEEEEEEED to kick it to BROOOOOOOOST and vice versa.

PJ did provide a soundbite that could get the media and footy comunity talking: "GWS - no one cares about them because they are from Western Sydney" Couldn't have put it better myself. Get writing Caro, Barret and Co.

Agree to a point. I think he was being somewhat gaurded, because he wasn't part of the process to select him, perhaps didn't believe it was his role to be part of that process and thus he didn't want to be seen to responsible for Pert's performance to be associated with the PJ legacy. Who knows, maybe there was some animosity regarding the selection between PJ and the board regarding the selection or PJ not being taken by suprise with a lack of notice from the board before it was publicly anouced to the media. Key thing is that our board and PJ are tight enough and big enough team players that they are not going to air their dirty laundry out for all to see if ever there was actually an issue worth writing about and that it wasn't big enough for PJ to sour his affection of the club as the rest of the interview showed that he was still clearly invested in our sucess without him being there. PJ did give some limited endorsement i.e. something along the lines of Pert having a track record at a successful footy club before, was selected by our board and that we can trust that the board went through a process to get to that decision. No doubt this issue will cause lingering media interest and be refered back to when ever things look like they are not going so well at the MFC, just like the suposed pre season camp issue caused a huge rift with the coach and playing group in the eyes of the media to speculate on. Seriously some of these media types should report for trashy celebrity gosip publications like Woman's Weekly, New Idea, Who magazine or something and not for the football sections of credible media outlets.