rpfc

This post has aged well... Seriously, though, can we fit Gawn, Pedersen, Watts, Tom Mac, Oscar Mac, and Frost? Good thing we don't have a hulking gun forward to fit back in...

Yeah, a few things: Tom is the better player. Oscar is a promising kid who is developing at a normal rate. Oscar is not best 22 in 2017. He is progressing well and the fact that he is 'making so many mistakes with the he footy' as 21 year old with 26 games is a good sign. The hardest thing in footy is getting the footy. But his brother and Frost are ahead of him in the backline for talls and they are more dynamic and versatile. Hibberd, Jetta, Salem, and Hunt are starting 18 backs and will make it hard for us to play the big three down back.

I am going to stand up for tackles here, tackles are great. Leaves tackles alone!

I think this would be a by product of his role in contests - we want him on the end of handpass out of traffic not in there competing and tackling to handpass out...

Bump. Finally showed up... Welcome.

Not even. Different drafts.

Brayshaw has the potential to be an A grade mid - they don't grow on trees. i hate it when people say - 'we can find a mid anywhere'... You won't stumble across a rolls Royce often and mids win flags.

Double bump. You know you have been here a long time when you can do that... I don't agree with you, Wise - CB is usually positive but like all of us, has his bugbears - one of them are the basic things that excellent teams don't do but we just can't get out of our habits. Saw those bad habits on display yesterday - and yes, we are few months younger than the average AFL team - pointing out those habits helps explain performance like yesterday, and the difference between seasoned teams that will beat us this year and us.

We didn't get in the way of players developing themselves - Jones, McDonald, Garland, et al. So that in itself makes it better than our drafting - we were terrible. I don't want to start a 'drafting' vs 'development' argument because you need both but the raw materials are delivered through the draft and we didn't get them in to even experience our poor development...

And then re-started in 2014 when Roos turned him into one of those Sydney Defender Robots that just do everything right and don't get beaten.

@45HG

If not for his suspension, he would be playing in that backline, being a part of what is going on and you lot would be grooming your pincers talking about how good "the recruitment is 'round ere, these days..."

If Viney has a case to answer, that is where I would head for his defense - the guy stayed short - kept his knees bent and was trying to milk a reversal by going down like the proverbial. He should have retired last year.

Jeez, he looks good... Very exciting next few years for our midfield but more immediately - he is a big chance for GWS.

Yes, we used the new rules to our advantage and were ahead of the curve. That felt strange to type...

I don't see BBs posts. Mainly because of reasons like what you are referring to - getting paid a commensurate wage and playing in a winning team is accusing someone of being a mercenary? Good lord.

Well, there you go - the path to empathy; treat all posters you disagree with as you would your half-cut self...

But you can retract a scrubber. Scrubber - Yes. Simpleton - No. And while I look forward to the snide - isn't it easier to understand where mo64 is coming from when you were once there?

If we draft a Casey player in Feb onto the Rookie List - they will invariably play for Casey...

I don't see why you won't let those that administer those ethics do their jobs as the CAS has? It has taken an effing age but the players have reached their point of judgement and justice and they will pay their penance. I think it is naïve to think you can apply such universal and holistic punishments. Jake Melksham is hardly Lance Armstrong. And Jake will serve his punishment and the effects of that judgment and punishment will reverberate into the future and affect the rest of his life. I see no point to stick the knife in further.

I think your view is violently reasonable. I don't see the need to condemn so universally and in perpetuity. Life (and footy) is not that simple.

It's a shame whether you think he would have won it anyway or whether he 'cheated' someone else out of it. It's bad for footy, for careers, for the legacy of great players (who were great before these so called performance enhancers were used), and for the real culprits in the Essendon footy dept.

Well, in theory, we should have already 'scoured the country' for the best players to put on our list. I have no problems with the filling of spots through use of the Rookie List for PA, StK, Melb, and WB.

Nothing is ever black and white. I don't see the players as drug cheats - I see them as idiots who should be more sceptical and less trusting of sports administrators with needles and no explanations. Call Essendon what you like. But Watson will lose his Brownlow and that is a huge shame - you think I am going to see him as a 'drug cheat' and all the connotations of that label when his career is done? No effing way.

Well, this isn't great, and would we have done this deal if we knew he would miss a quarter of his contract? That's hard to say. I take solace in the issue being a broad one with Essendon, Port, and St Kilda dealing with more headaches than us... And just like we can't ignore that this is a massive setback for our player, it doesn't give a final determination on that trade either. How history sees this trade is a few years from being written definitively. Hasn't started well though...