rpfc

I am happy to draft 'non-altar boys' but here is a bloke that allegedly cheated on his wife-to-be and mother of his children with schoolgirls. Plural. Not the same as a wayward teenage Martin. If Dusty had done that before he was drafted, it would not even be the same - he would have been screwing schoolgirls as a schoolboy...

I would ask the leadership group whether it could work - gut feel, that in 2017, that LG would say 'let's talk to him but we don't think so.'

Posters who tell me 'X hasn't done anything for X amount of years' are not allowed to critique the terrible development standards we have had since time immemorial, the Bailey 'no defence needed' years, or the Neeld 'let's not go there' years. Stay with some relevance, we began again as a club in 2014.

I just had visions of morning talk back with the CEO/coach/prez of the club that recruits him. Value went down with that article.

Wow, that'll affect the value they get back...

I would keep him (for the proposed trades) and I don't even think he will propell us anywhere. Team balance is becoming important now that Oliver, Viney, T Mac, Hibberd, Petracca , etc are propelling us up the ladder. I am a coach and I have won flags with 'soft' blokes you 'gotta get rid of', there are roles for different types of players who specialise in different aspects of the game. Love me some role players (I was one).

Happy for him to play as he did prior to the hammy for a year and a half. No need to talk about potential. I know what he can do. And it is not what you build a team on. But that is ok, great teams need balance and they need role players. I will take the bad with the good because the good is what we don't have much of. At all.* *This trade period has to deliver a ready made player of sublime skill that can find a role in the best 22. Doubly so if Watts is moved on.

I am aware of Watts' issues, my point is that why is this role player the scapegoat? Tackling was brought up as a point of concern and reason to move him on because our helter skelter game (like the Tigers) is based around pressure and turnovers (Garlett started like a proverbial house on fire with that and slowed down, Hannan is middling to poor at pressure, and Watts is middling to good with his pressure acts). I am simply deflating that argument so that those that want to move on Watts can find the crucible to their argument for moving him on. If the argument is he still has commitment issues (ie. the start of the season) then that is fine. Leave it there. The tacking on of other reasons is grating on me - usually when someone has 5 reasons for doing something, they have 5 flimsy reasons all sticky taped together to convince themselves they are right.

He was off for a month. No speculation there, that is a real tear to be off for that long. Injuries affect players performances when they come back. Argue that if you want to. Happy to stand here and say 'a bad hammy tear affected his form.' Feel free to disregard.

In the three games he was pizz poor in after coming back from his hammy and before he got dropped - he was 5th, 5th, and 10th for Pressure Acts. Of the forwards - only T Mac and ANB were ahead of him in the last game, ANB and Petracca the game before that, and those two again in the first game above. The rest of the 'small forwards' in those games... Hannan 10th, 8th, and rested. Melksham 11th, 13th, 17th. Garlett 15th, 7th, 13th. ! Who is getting pushed out again?

If you had written this two years ago I would have agreed with you. But the last two years have seen his most consistent effective footy, and while he is just a role player he has a dire need of ours - outside skill and run and vision. Criticising his tackling numbers as an indicator of his inability to apply pressure is a misnomer - I was at a coaching conference about 4 years ago and Clarkson was banging on about people talking about tackling numbers when he doesn't care about tackle numbers (incomplete tackles another matter), he cares about pressure acts and keeping the ball in your half. As an example, Watts only had two tackles against Collingwood but was equal 5th with Jones for pressure acts. Stats make us liars at the best of times but make of that data what you will...

Coz he was out for a month with a 'slight' (heh) tear and it came straight back into the team and was rubbish. If we are talking about correlating those three weeks of poor performance before he was dropped with anything - there is a higher connection to his hammy than to application and commitment issues. In a thread full of speculation - saying he was brought back from his injury too early is not a stretch...

He is very popular, not that that should matter too much. But seriously, how hard is it to only have members of the FD take media for a couple of weeks so that players like Jack and Dom don't do BS spots on TV and radio. There is your disconnect at the club - no-one tells the media bloke anything...

I guess that would be my question. But again, I will take what you said as a compliment.

Well summised, you are probably closest to what Goodwin and co. are thinking, with that said the logical summation or conclusion is what BB pointedly says below: The final act of the chosen one, the messiah, may be to perish for the sins of all the players and coaching and development staff. Quite fitting really...

'Losing their minds' is a subjective analysis and I don't care about the nonsense that it 'is showing the club is divided' - I don't buy into that and equating those that question this move with those harbingers of drama and doom is effing frustrating. My points are that we are not going to get value for what he could bring to the club and that he is unfairly singled out as the root cause of all our troubles, and they won't disappear when he does.

You are responding to my comment about the change in our culture. That is all Roos. The people he brought in from Sydney on day one, yes, even bringing in Goodwin, but the club needed to be altered - Jackson chased him down and Roos delivered.

I will take that in the best way possible.

Can people stop equating 'Watts being traded' to 'The Demons no longer tolerate inconsistency'? Again, Watts rocked up in 'The Most Important Game in a Decade' - and that isn't an argument to keep him - it is an argument to say that the undertone of 'if we get rid of Watts we will get rid of the problem' is absolute nonsense. It is another irony that his last act is to be the scapegoat once again for this club when that ire should be reserved for others in the eyes of many supporters.

You have got to be kidding about that Roos part. Where would we be without him coming on board? Talk about changing the culture... Goodwin is riding Roos' coattails.

The most ironic thing about all this? If Jack Watts was at another club, he would be the exact type of skillset we would try to get at a bargain price. 'I could get him back to 2016 form' Goodwin would tell himself...

Hypotheticals are fun! He would have been in a finals winning MFC team. Winning that game changes everything.

No shiz, Dr. But that game is why we are having a major [censored] over the last month and more relevant than the pre-Roos era footy. Ie. the course of his career. Up until he did his hammy, his career trajectory was fine. Is that relevant?

I was about to say "I will pay that myself!" And then I thought, 'nah, I can't afford that.' I need to buy a new skillet...

Played 6 pizz poor games and got dropped for three weeks. Same as Jack Watts. Fortunately for Melksham he started the season with that nonsense, and our memories only go back so far... Really good last three months but only when Goodwin abandoned the reason for recruiting him - to play him on the HBF. I'm happy for him but I am vexed.