ChewyOnMyBoot

I agree. Some of the arguments have ventured towards making it sound like they think the coaches have a vendetta against Jack. I've possibly ventured down that line too. In the clear light of day I would be very surprised if the coaches had a vendetta against Watts. I guess I've ended up going down that path is because, personally, I'm not sure I trust McCartney and I'm not sure what influence he is having. He's been proven to cause disharmony at another club to the extent that players (not just 1 player) threatened to leave if he wasn't got rid of. And yes he was supposedly 'great' at Geelong (under an experienced coach) but I'm not sure a leopard can change it's spots. What caused me to get on and say something on this topic in the first place (and probably said too much and spent too long hanging around here) is what I consider to be the appalling manner in which the coaches/club/FD have handled the situation. In particular, the continuing change in the explanation they have offered up. The changes in their 'stories' are making me incredibly suspicious because changing your story is the number one indicator that your telling porkies! Maybe they just haven't explained it properly. Mahoney yesterday gave me a little comfort but too little too late to remove my feeling of suspicion. The coaches/club/FD are the ones that set the culture - not just playing standards. Culture includes, honesty, integrity, supporting each other, not airing issues they have with a player in public in the manner they have (compare it to the way the Bulldogs have handled Stringer). Particularly when the player is: 1. the most scrutinized player in the AFL (and probably ever in the AFL) as a result of the clubs previous actions/handling of him 2. extremely popular among the playing group 3. polarises the supporter group between effusive love and extreme dislike (almost said 'hate' - but it's a word I don't like. I hope there isn't 'hate' but some Demonlanders come way too close to expressing hate for my liking) If the way they have handled this is an indication of how they plan to handle matters going forward then I am extremely worried and keep on having flashbacks to the good old days. Thank you Mr Neeld!! But, having said all that it's AFL. And it's life. Not everything is handled the way I would like it to be and things don't always work out the way I want them too. So I suck it up. There's something called perspective. As long as my daughter wakes every morning and is healthy and smiling I don't give a rats what happens in my life.

I feel the beginning of an addiction - to posting on a bloody football forum - coming on. I'm going to have to fight this to the end!! Nooooooooooooooooooo. Hope my kids never find out. Any advice? Anyone? Is it the beginning of the end?

Yeah. Some are like that aren't they - good assistants but crap when they're top dog. I guess the aim I took at McCartney was due to something I read earlier about him having been heard openly taking a pot shot at Jack at some function or other. I probably should check that that was fact before I do so. Again, just not acceptable if he did. Your point is taken though.

It ain't. It's football. As I've said before I don't particularly care what happens with Jack. We'll survive but just don't think the way it's handled is particularly good for culture. But happy to be proven wrong - and I better be. A position and good performance in 2018 finals will do that.

Ok. Just not the impression I've gotten from your posts.

Yeah. No problem at all with higher standards. Peak performance demands it. But there are ways you do it. So do you reckon the FD wasn't expecting "higher standards" during the Roos years? Just to put the fear of God into some already trembling hearts........anybody remember this headline. I'm just sayin!!! I'm sure it's just a totally unfounded coincidence????????? If i recall, this became the headline the day after their captain left the club!! What was he heard to be saying about Jack again? Hahahahaha. You gotta laugh haven't you? Or else you'll go crazy!!!! Wonder how much influence Macca is having on a relatively inexperienced coach. No issues from the FD under Paul Roos - a coach known for building strong, resilient cultures - but once he left it seems as though it didn't take long for the shoit to hit the fan.

If Jack does stay he's either: 1. a bloody lunatic, 2. a massive sucker for punishment, or 3. his loyalty knows no bounds! Other clubs will be climbing over themselves to get Jack. And believe it or not, in the "manly" world of AFL football, many clubs approach player management with a supportive, encouraging, trusting mindset (albeit not 'soft'). Roos knows him in-depth and didn't have any driving reason to come out and paint Jack in pretty glowing terms. IMO, other clubs will have a pretty high respect for Roosy's opinion knowing that he ain't no fool or two bob coach and is pretty demanding himself.

Fair enough. Can see that statement relating to a non on-field performance matter. Not sure they're saying they don't want him around anymore. You really don't like him do you? Like...really don't. I'm just fascinated by the absolute polarisation of the "Jack Watts as a player" topic.

I'm finding it difficult to 'reconcile' your statement with the following comment by Mahoney in his interview on SEN: “Jack’s [discussion] is purely about performance. Our expectation on Jack, as a nine-year player and 150 games is what this discussion has been about." I can't help but think that if it wasn't about Jack's on-field performance then Mahoney would've used different words e.g. "attitude", "application", "effort", "professionalism". I guess he could be using the word "performance" in it's broader/wider context but effort/attitude/application in football speak are normally described exactly as such. Anyway. I reckon Jack's gone so it's a mute point.

Was interested in the comment above (that I have bolded) that inferred that the comparisons between Lynch (Adelaide) and Watts based on the 2 year 'performance' data that I provided earlier (and which showed that there isn't really a significant difference in their stats) would be quite different if I extended the period to 5 seasons instead of 2. So I thought yeah, lets look at the last 5 years. I admit that I too thought that this would show a very different picture to the 2 year comparison. But it doesn't (as far as I can see). Averages for the last 5 seasons (2013-2017) Adding my comments from my previous post on this so that they can be read in context of the above 5 year data: Interestingly, in the areas where it seems people (and the general football public) seem to have a real concern with Jack (the contest e.g. Tackles, Contested possessions, Contested marks and One percenters), Jack is certainly 'up' with Lynch. I'm not convinced that Jack is used/sought out as the 'link player' at Melbourne in quite the same way as Lynch. Adelaide looks with much more intention/purpose for Lynch than we do for Jack (who I think quite often makes fantastic position on the ground but is overlooked). I'm not certain, but I'm thinking this could explain the reason that Jack is below in total disposals. I find the stats really interesting given the level of praise that generally gets heaped on Lynch as a player and as a link man by the media compared to what Jack cops. Just sayin'! It kind of adds to my confusion and inability to come to a definite pro or nay Jack position in my own mind. This all goes to show why statements (of opinion) on player performance like the ones often made about MFC players (and seemingly in particular Watts), that aren't based facts, can be quite misleading. Some would say irresponsible. For me it shows how biases (which I'm sure are the result of the expectations created by the preaching directed at us 9 years ago that the messiah had arrived and would lead us out of the wilderness) can result in distorted 'impressions' and opinions - ones that aren't supported by the facts anyway. Following are links to my source for the above data in case anyone wants to check up on me: https://afltables.com/afl/stats/players/T/Tom_Lynch0.html https://afltables.com/afl/stats/players/J/Jack_Watts.html Disclaimer: If any of the data is incorrect (I have triple checked it because i was surprised by the results) it is quite unintentional. I am neither pro or nay Watts. Just like to take the emotions and bias out of performance assessment.

Do you mean in the 2 seasons that Jack has been treated like a human? (Quoting Roosy). Understand your reading and point of view based on the stats. Interestingly though, in the areas where it seems people (and the general football public) seem to have a real concern with Jack (the contest e.g. Tackles, Contested possessions, Contested marks and One percenters), he is certainly up with Lynch. I'm not convinced that Jack is used/sought out as the 'link player' at Melbourne in quite the same way as Lynch. Adelaide looks with much more intention/purpose for Lynch than we do for Jack (who I think quite often makes fantastic position on the ground but is overlooked). I'm not certain, but I'm thinking this could explain the reason that Jack is well below in disposals. I find the stats really interesting given the level of praise that generally gets heaped on Lynch as a player and as a link man by the media compared to what Jack cops. Just sayin'! It kind of adds to my confusion and inability to come to a definite pro or nay Jack position in my own mind. Thanks for taking the time to review the stats and form an opinion on the data.

Oh. Ok. I probably missed your point too Wiseblood.

IMO Weideman is being given the time out of the spotlight and the space that a young Mr Watts would have benefited from, immensely, upon his arrival at the club. I am quite confident the Weid has what it takes. As long as they are able to develop and handle him in a way that builds/maintains his confidence and develop his strengths rather than focus only on his weaknesses.

Thank you. I take that as a compliment. Hahahahaha. (Hope they let me out on my own tonight!!!!!!)

Not sure what there is to wonder about how I've done that. Or why you would need to wonder. Wouldn't have to read too many threads on Demonland to come to the conclusion that little is backed up by fact. Particularly when it comes to player performance (or team performance for that matter). Happy for you to prove me wrong. But I won't hold my breath!! I have actually been a reader for a long long time. Have never felt a desire to say anything before but I was becoming deeply fearful with the mess that the club/Goodwin/Jack was creating after Roosy (and PJ) had done so much to create some respect for us in the competition and had prevented us from descending into eternal basketcasedness (??). It was reminding me too much of the Neeld age and I wanted to express my concerns. And that drove me to sign up and post for the first time last night. Expect I'll go back into hibernation after this goddamn mess is over.

Thanks Ron for responding to mo64. I wasn't going to bother. Sometimes it's just best to ignore ignorance.

Thanks ManDee. Have loaded the image as my profile pic.

Hahahahaha. Good on you. So he got dropped for poor form. As many, many players do. Surely a players 'under performance' would need to be assessed over a longer period than just having been dropped for a couple of games? And I'm not trying to support Jack or otherwise. I'm just putting up some facts that are too often missing from Demonland commentary and have left it for you to make your own assessment - whatever that may be I couldn't give a rats. Is it a coincidence that the part of my post you included in your own post stops at the point where I said that what I was doing was for the " esteemed and highly educated and insightful followers of Demonland. "? I assume you realised that it wasn't meant for you to go any further.

So much of what I read on Demonland is conjecture and opinion made to sound like fact. My missus does the same and I call her out on it all the time (except when it's about how gifted I am in bed - hahahaha). Fortunately she has a giggle every time call 'bull***t' on her 'facts'!! She takes it in the way it was intended - just me wanting to clarify if what she is saying is fact or not. Demonland would be so much more productive and informative if every now and again opinions/claims were supported with fact. So after seeing mo64's comment re Jack being an under performing player (which is so like many others on here) I thought that for the greater good of the universe, if I am to do anything today, it must be to pull together some 'facts' about Jacks performance for the esteemed and highly educated and insightful followers of Demonland. I figure there are 2 ways in which the 'performance' of a player can be assessed: 1. Against other 'similar' players in the competition (e.g. those with similar skills, roles, etc. - how do their stats compare) 2. Against the standards expected of the player given the players perceived talent and skill The 2nd option is obviously quite subjective and will differ (very widely in Jack's case) from person to person depending on things like their 'affection'/bias for the player, their own assessment of what skills are important and their own assessment of how far the player goes to meeting them. This assessment is highly influenced by personal opinion and not necessarily by fact and so I won't go down that track. (My own opinion is that Jack doesn't produce what I believe he is capable of because I believe he has sublime talents and an uncanny ability to create time and space when he gets the ball. BUT I do believe that he produces at an acceptable level (for me) for an AFL footballer - I just wish he'd do it more. But some of the reason, I believe, for Jack not appearing to do enough is that I'm not sure that they have ever settled him in a role or known how to use him). The 1st option lends itself to being able to be more factually based. For me, I really admire what Tom Lynch does for Adelaide and the role they have him play. I wouldn't say that he's particularly 'tough' and 'manic' around the ball but I consider him incredibly efficient with his disposal and a great decision maker. And I think the role he plays for Adelaide is a role that somebody needs to play at Melbourne - the link up man. And IMO Jack is the perfect man for that role. The difference at the moment IMO is that Adelaide players more frequently look for their 'link man' when they are coming out of the backline whereas Melbourne doesn't. So how does Jack, in terms of performance, match up against Tom Lynch. Below are the averages from the 2016 and 2017 seasons. All sourced from https://afltables.com/. I'll leave it to each person who reads this to make up their mind as to how Jack measures up against Tom Lynch:

I don't particularly mind if Jack goes or stays. But this whole situation is getting an awfully bad smell about it. And, I'm starting to feel distrustful of anything the club or Goodwin proclaims about this mess......and I don't like that. Tell me if I'm wrong but originally, from what the club or Goodwin had said (or somewhere), I had the impression that it was Jack's decision to look elsewhere. Then a couple of weeks later (and confirmed in the clubs letter above) it had changed to being a 'mutual' decision. And now, what I'm hearing is that it's actually Goodwin's decision. For a coach that wants his players to be hard at the contest, he's playing this like a '[censored]'. Certainly failing to stand up like the man he wants his players to be and take ownership and responsibility for this decision. Just to the same level that many on this forum are asking of Jack. So Goody, get a good grip on them, man up, and tell us the truth. Honesty is not something that you can play with and decide to apply when it suits the circumstances. F**k with honesty and you can destroy a culture. As for Jack, my opinion is that he's been hung out to dry by the club and coaches a number of times. His 'carefree' attitude (some would call it 'balanced' and 'healthy') seems to make it his own doing - either way, not sure if the way Jack has been treated is ever warranted. Roosy early on made comments about how badly the club had handled their 17 y.o. messiah. And in Roosy I trust!! He took us from being a basket case to almost respectable. After all the attention that Jack has had to endure (tell me anyone that has had to endure anything like he has had to), is it any coincidence that the best football he has played for the mighty Dees was under a coach who managed to reduce the external attention on him - even though Roosy's defensive game style and slow movement of the ball didn't necessarily suit Jack's strengths. I am pretty impressed that Jack hasn't just turned his back on it all. For those of you who say he lacks strength and courage, I think you look too shallow. To deal mentally with what he has had to over 9 years displays incredible inner strength. One last thing, does anybody really know what they mean by "Jack came back underdone to preseason" - like I mean the facts - not the speculation. And what would be the measure that they would use to identify that Jack came under-done? 3km time trial maybe? Does anybody know? Do they get reported anywhere? I assume it must have been pretty awful. Or is that simplifying it? Anyway, good luck to you Jack. Whether you stay or go. I admire your strength of character even though you can frustrate the bejesus out of me from time time (like most MFC players do). But the 'new' coach and the club is starting to smell a bit like the good old days. And I'm a bit concerned.