rpfc

The Online Demon Shop has come along in leaps and bounds in a few months... I am in IT and what they had up until very recently was just awful to use and to look at. I wonder if they have seen a jump in sales? But again, you have to sell the change - I had no idea there was an updated interface and payment system until I saw Jeremy wearing that top and I wanted to buy it...

That is a two way street - clubs are routinely not committed to players but don't return the respective honesty that Henderson has shown... Also, players let clubs know they are leaving but that club doesn't make it public. Carlton don't want to win games and so they have released his desire to move on to serve the purpose of losing games. I don't like the release of information prior to the end of Rd 23. I would punish players, agents, and/or clubs for confirming rumours if I was down at AFL HQ.

Rd 9 of this season I would have gone after Leuenberger. But our current dinosaurs (Gawn and backup 1st ruck Spencer) are more than adequate.

Emphasis on the poor drafting. Leadership can be improved, Coaches can be changed, but a list has a longer half-life. And our midfield gets punished against mediocre teams, let alone hungry and fast and talented teams.

9 minutes is a long time in football... Jones, Vince, Tyson, Viney, Brayshaw, Vanders, ..., ..., ..., and .... These players I have faith in to play strong footy with dare and confidence and skill in a midfield rotation of 10 in 2016. We are in need of more than this 'star' player with all the requisites you and Brayshaw Self espouse. We need a couple of Redden's really...

I know you don't think that, far too smart to think that.

Mate, he would be competing with Tyson and Viney to be our third best mid. We need at least 10 players to run through there and I have faith in about 6.

Lynch plays a different role to Dawes but he would fill Howe's shoes nicely I reckon. Had him in my UF team last year and was impressed. These are the players that don't excite people but I am fascinated with the mundane filling of specific but important roles so this excites me...

Different timelines CB. Geelongs drafts were 14-16 years ago now with Selwood added later. Hawthorns were 9-11 years ago with Rioli added later.

Well, up goes the money to the grass roots to compete with other codes, up goes the money to the players, up goes the footy dept spending at big clubs that others have to compete with, etc. The core elements of the game have to reconsidered for all clubs to be secure - the fixture, the giving out of drawcard timeslots, the money from the gate shared from all games, etc. It's not 'more money' that will save the 18 clubs, it is how the money is distributed. It's socialism but it is how you create an even competition worthy of being entertainment.

Geelong I heard.

If you are dropping Watts for this weekend's game then you are refusing sane logic in favour of a deep seated dislike for a bloke or you are trying to 'set a standard' with the same whipping boy to avoid tough questions of others. Drop all the players you want before last week - it would not have stopped that first half...

At some point those that have said; "if Watts doesn't show anything then he should be traded/delisted," should surely accept that he has shown that he can produce football worthy of his spot in a good team? We have had all these projects in the past that have never delivered and here we are with one that might finally do so and we want to go back to square one. We are not going to trade Watts for his worth to us in our 22. We just won't find a partner will to part with anything worth our while.

Not if you are in a weaker market...

So have two of the three channels playing the same thing? I don't think that is a winning argument.

At times - the game against Geelong doesn't happen in the vacuum of instruction - but games like the Bulldogs do. Unfortunately, the players fall back into valuing their own disposal efficiency, and kick count, and the effect of 'their bloke' and whatever dare was there is replaced by passivity and inertia.

The automatic 2 year deal is for 'First Time' draft eligible players. That means for those straight out of the TAC Cup or kids applying to be drafted for the first time. So we can take the Vanders equivalent on a 1 year deal in the ND. I would never take a speculative teenager straight out of the TAC Cup with a pick lower than 50 but for mature age players, I would use the ND picks where you would have a better chance to get those players than waiting for the Rookie Draft.

That's not 'match day coaching' - someone suggested having Goodwin match day coach would be best, but getting set ups right is nothing compared to preparing a lasting confidence in the players that they have a gameplan that can win and players to execute. And that stuff is reinforced during games but is prepared during the week and over summer.

Harmes and Vanders have been promising picks but it's a tad counterintuitive to say that ND65 or ND85 will have less worth than say Hunt, but if we picked up Harmes and Vanders as ND85 the last two years you wouldn't say that would you? The perspective that the ND is shallow but we should keep taking Rookies don't run together well, if the draft is so shallow, those players should be taken earlier - ie. in the ND.

If your best player is literally not going anywhere - that is not good. He is like Jones to us, he should be taking it on himself to take the game on and not abdicate to someone else. One stat that I know are used are Pressure Acts (tackles, corrals, smothers, etc.) and the position of those acts - the Dogs have a high number in their forward half, and we have a high number in our back half. The more you have in your forward half, the easier it is to score obviously. The Dogs have based their game around pressure in their forward half.

Match day coaching isn't the problem - the players cannot sustain a style of play that is bold, daring, and one of good execution. I have argued that we still don't have the midfield that allows Jones and Vince to have down days, and that is true, but that doesn't excuse that first half or last quarter. They are still so inert and reactive and passive. I don't believe it is past demons, it is present demons - the same demons that plague all bad teams - when things are not going well, you go into survival mode, the more players worried about themselves, the less you do as a team - if there are 36 blokes on the field and 9 of your blokes are more worried about 'their man' - then it becomes a simple maths equation not in our favour. Roos has helped them immeasurably but he is struggling with maintaining their confidence and trust in themselves and their teammates and their gameplan. We all hope that Goodwin can build on all of those gains and the improvement will be more marked next year and the years after.

That interview, that you can't quite remember, also had Hogan extolling his belief that the team he plays for will be 'pretty special' in a few years time and that he is keen to stick around for that. The more you worry him into a commitment, the more you will worry him into leaving. I hope the club isn't as desperate or involved in as much shadow jumping as the fans are.

Stop anytime now...

And let's not forget - we have improved by 50% since last year, and that is a scientific fact...

I did say that none of the re-signings are 'musts' - I would back McCartney and Co. to get something out of him but if we moved him on, that is fine too. But the measure has to be what we get back. As LDVC alludes - is Hunt for ND85 a win? Borderline, but if you get it right and pick the best 22 year old playing in the second tier leagues - you might have another Vanders on your hands.