rpfc

Gotta pay somebody. Literally, we HAVE to pay 95% of the ~$9.3m cap. That is how it is set up so that there are no more Fitzroys that just survive year to year paying two-thirds of what other teams pay. And as others have said - we frontloaded contracts under Schwab and that would be the only way we could do reach near 100% in 2015. So I assume we are doing that. None of this means that we have no cap to use in 2016 - only that we are paying near 100% in 2016.

Dawes is not on $700k, please show me where they got that figure from if you are going to throw it out there. He is rumoured to be on around $500k. http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/dawes-now-a-2-million-demon-20121016-27pmn.html

Homer: Prestia? Marge: No we can't afford Prestia... Homer: Prestia? Marge: We are on a budget. Homer: Prestia? Marge: Umm, yeah, sure. Prestia...

Well...that was angry. Please put me in the "they are not heartless squibs" camp - just a lazy way of criticising players you don't like. They don't get it enough, their skills aren't reliable and they struggle to beat players in one-on-one situations which makes it hard for them to play in the backline.

I don't think so... MFC supporters are so uncomfortable with talent performing at an AA level, that when it doesn't perform at that level for a month - they want to drop the bloke. Just...stop.

And how shallow our midfield is that this kid is already the 5th best mid.

Not playing with a full set if you think the Trengove deal to Richmond was all but done... THEIR doctor saw something in the MRI. That means we agreed and they were doing their due diligence in the medical.

The reality is that Dawes' role is going to involve creating goals for others more and more. He is a competitor that you can kick it to and know he is not going to get beaten very often. Hogan owns that forward line now, Garlett is so effective and Howe is impossible to match up against - these are the blokes that are going to kick us a winning score.

More talented he means.

That was an internal reference that no-one would have possibly got - the team we played in the GF abandoned the press before qtr time. I doubt they will leave it unless we are absolutely smashing them - which is unlikely.

Teams that play a press can be destroyed if you have a team that also communicates and is disciplined. The press is the nightmare of the dumb footy player. Sorry, to be so blasé but the best teams don't get flustered by this tactic - they manipulate you for using it. It riles against one-on-one contested footy, excuses players from winning the footy in lieu of 'intercepting' the footy that was won by the other team, and instils an ethos that winning the footy isn't paramount. Played and won a GF last year against a team that used this tactic. Move the footy quickly and win it out of the middle and this 'web' will be abandoned by qtr time.

That asterisk next to Tyson means I couldn't find confirmation - but it made sense that it was a 3 year deal.

If we beat Geelong in Mordor in Rd 3 we would have another 5k members. We didn't though - so here we are...

This is what it boils down to - we can wax lyrical after the fact about how 'tall we were' but if your midfield doesn't get enough footy - it's all moot.

Um, Howe did play well in his 0 disposal half. Again - admitted bias being a CHF - but he hit packs, chased blokes, got to contests, and rarely allowed Geelong's defenders to have an easy grab and a switch to the other flank (all our forwards did this really but Howe was the focal point at FF in replace of Hogan). Forwards are measured in goals scored and I get that but as someone who has to kick goals, compete so that others can kick goals, and organise the mess of the forward line - I can tell you that Roos wasn't blowing smoke; he liked the way Howe didn't go up looking for touches or slide off a pack looking for a spill when he was charged with the spilling. You can tell me it's all just 'to get his value up' but don't be so basic with your thinking around forwards.

Well, as long as one of us is happy.

And you said you would be 'happy' to proven wrong...

Good convo you two. And another poster got the above from the club.

Yes, and it happens to be the main driver for those games. Lose money or send them to NT and make a mil? It's not a hard question - I hope it gets harder as we get better but its not a question for the next few years...

As I said - I like Garland's flexibility - he can play on anyone minus the person that Nev Jet would get to play on. He doesn't look 'mentally scarred or hampered' and seems to have a pretty good relationship with Roos judging from the words that come out of his mouth and the embrace he gave him after 'the win he didn't play in.' And that doesn't tell me we don't need him, anymore that it tells me Hogan is surplus to requirements because he also didn't play... McDonald, Jetta, and Dunn form the nucleus of our backline at the minute and Frost has not done enough to convince me he will be able to play the role that Garland has been capable of playing. Salem is a lock when he comes back too. Outside of those four, we have Lumumba - who plays up the ground more than Colin does, and a whole lot of kids and NQRs with Howe heading back to the spot he wants to play in - the forward line. And Nathan Jones has gotten the most out of himself at a club where that was difficult to do, I am happy for Colin Garland because he did the same, battled through some injuries as well, and emerged through that river of [censored] clean on the other side. Ultimately, Roos and co. will do what they want but it is not as straight forward as you make it seem.

"some say it's dreaming"... "some"

Oh, yeah, I have no idea about the magnitude of how bad we have been over the last few years... FMD. I have seen it - don't patronise me because I can see the merits in keeping Colin Garland in the backline. That's what we are talking about here. Nathan Jones will be next on your list wouldn't he? He was here during our Valyrian Doom? Lose the chaff, keep the heart. Rinse, repeat.

We wouldn't be the first one he flays either...

Makes more sense when I read it backwards...

How about this logic - build a list by keeping your better and most consistent players and discard those not up to it and who haven't performed regularly and who don't want to be at the club. That is Roos' guiding star - not some half baked idea of 'value with FA' or tea-leave abusing 'moving on from 'mentally scarred' players' meme that has cropped up with every player who is down for a few weeks.