Red But Mostly Blue

I agree. I've got some money on Maxxy, but I think Clarry might take some of those crucial votes.

Totally agree with this. It means we do something different instead of doing more of the same. Trac is looking good, and I like him through the middle. Kent would be interesting with the opportunity, and again, he's different and not Tyson, and for that reason alone it's better to look forward than persist with the past (i.e. disappointment).

Given Viney's predicament, I can see the value (and perhaps necessity) in bringing back Tyson. But it all just feels so familiar. We drop Tyson because he's slow and keeps turning the ball over to opposition, then clamour for his return after a week in the 2s on the basis that maybe he's gotten faster and improved his disposals in the week off? The same goes for Bugg, but double. So we can't risk his return for such an important game. I thought we were pretty decent on Saturday without Tyson/Bugg. Hannan didn't set the world on fire, but I see more potential in him developing than I do with Tyson, who is static, and costs us goals.

Stats don't lie, the man is a freak - I can't wait to see how much he develops in the next 50/100/200 games!!

Given the percentage that cost us a spot in the finals, having Jake in the team would have saved some of those precious points scored against us. If we had made the finals, who knows what could have happened. We beat most teams in the top 8. We beat Adelaide, and should have beaten the Tigers (before we choked - in a game where Jake's skills could have stemmed the tide). So players like Jake make a difference, and lift the rest of the team. This trade is costly, but you always get what you pay for. We're paying for 10 years of actual defence, and youngsters to one day learn from Jake and the others who have benefited from his presence. The fact that Jake wants to be here shows we're on the right track. Bring on 2018.