rpfc

Lovely. Or someone who can't play in the cold I presume?

I wonder if people have a different opinion of Frawley now. His value is going up. The thing about losing him is not just losing a very good player (that's bad remember - you always complain about that), you are also hamstrung in Free Agency once again. We won't want to go after players as it will dilute our probable Pick 3-5 compensation for Frawley. I hope we keep him and he will be well paid - we don't have much talent to pay, so the talent we do have is overpaid. Deal with it.

Internal pressure from Members and coterie members after the Essendon game last year led to the aftermath.

I try not to individualise drafting, recruitment, or development strategy - it's been a collective failure on all fronts for the club over the past decade. Those that want to hold grudges can do so, it looks petty anyway. But those who are genuinely looking for ways to get better (or reasons why we have been so bad) - can't ignore past failures as a point of reference. Ignoring the reasons that have led us to this point is not healthy.

Take your own advice - if you don't like people judging how we went in the 2011 draft - don't click on a thread titled '2011 Draft'...

lol What the hell is the problem with talking about past drafts? Or is the drafts we do badly in we can't mention? Honestly, think before you post.

To expand: we traded Pick 12 for Clark. A fruitful year to be sure... But lower down on the list of drafting failures.

Come off it - what do you say when someone has a similar refrain about Jake Spencer?

*backs out of thread slowly*

I find that saying 'he wants $X - that's ridiculous' is a little meaningless as the Salary Cap will near $10m next year. I would prefer to talk about percentage of the cap. And Betts 6%? That's ridiculous...

Had a fantasy auction and got Brees and Gonzalez as 'best in class' for their positions but had to settle for Gore and Ball as RBs to back up Lynch. Welker is a gem pickup IMO and I hope Mike Wallace can get near the puss that Tannehill will throw at him... I am pretty confident but we will see how the 49ers and the Broncos use their RBs before being too confident.

This is what I am talking about - Jetta is a mid. Tapscott doesn't get to the right areas, Kent is a baby and a mid, Bail is a mid, Blease is a wing. Only Davey and Byrnes are small forwards and they are both about to retire or a year away from it. Get a good small forward to work at the feet of Dawes, Hogan, and Clark and it will mean we keep the ball down there and are a more dangerous proposition.

196cm small forward... The idea is that Hogan and Dawes don't have to create a contest and then be asked to fight it out for their own crumb. I don't think we should fashion a forward line that sees Watts close enough to their space to crumb from them. Watts will bring his defender into the contest, and you don't want another 190cm+ defender competing with Hogan in the air. You want to isolate him and his man, and get a small into his area at the right time. And you cannot just plug a midfielder into the forward line and call him a small forward. If he doesn't get to the right areas and if he doesn't kick goals - he is going to be easy to defend. You have to have a small forward who is aggressive offensively and can also play a periphery role.

Yes, but I baulked at your assertion that we should 'get midfield types who get their own ball and kick goals'... It's much easier to find a small forward and make them useful up the ground or in a complimentary role. Teaching mids to play small forward is tough. Get a crumber, who reads the play well and has kicked goals and teach them a complimentary role.

rjay - you are being far too simplistic with this 'Small Forwards don't exist anymore' spiel. They do exist, but some have had to bring another skill to bear so as to avoid being one-dimensional as you say. Rioli goes into the middle and is aggressive in his defence work. LeCras goes up the ground linking with the midfield. Stokes runs through the midfield. But these guys, and others, are dynamite around goals. If you ever play in a team with dominant tall forwards (which I do) and you don't have a small forward smart enough to get to the right areas (which we don't), then you really feel the effects of wasted entries forward (which we do). A small forward who can read the play and be useful when he is not kicking his 3 goals are a great resource and definitely a priority once midfielders are found.

If it makes you feel better I don't think he will play regularly until 2015... Ruckmen are such an investment. Especially ones taken at 18 with bad knees.

I cannot stand the references to Moneyball in the AFL. Neeld has used it aswell. It doesn't transfer over well. Neither the measurements, nor the value aspect. AFL isn't an individualised sport and it doesn't have concrete, transferable contracts that are the underpinnings of this idea/theory/religion/thewaythecubswillfinallywinapennant.

More like a Rd 1, 2014 debut...

I would like to get one of Caddy, Wellingham, or Stevens. Caddy would be 3rd in my line.

That was a rumour. Don't believe it had a good source. I think we are quickly running out of good sources though.

What the hell is going on here?

Yeah, I am also going to have to disagree with that last line. They'll like us when they are on the list. If you put yourself out there in the AFL industry you may not go to the club of your choice. I wasn't put off by Luke Ball being intransigent a couple years ago. Schwab wasn't put off by Clark's desire to be on the other side of this huge continent. Caddy might quickly learn the lesson that you don't always get exactly what you want. If we want him, and GC don't see a good deal elsewhere - Caddy will have a decision to make.

Tale out the tone that you read it with and take it as I meant it: It would be nice if the "Editor & Chief Football Writer" went and did a piece about how it all works as no-one in the corporate media seems to know/care/bother to understand.

I didn't say he did write it. I said it was from the club, which it is. But it is just a CTRL C, CTRL V job from this article: http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/130820/default.aspx I would but I am not a journalist.

Doesn't say that - players that are there for 7 years or less have no FA until they are delisted. It's complicated and the MFC website has done itself a disservice by simply cutting and pasting from a 6 month old article - Burgan should go and do a real piece and ask the AFL HQ some Qs.