rpfc

1. He has influence dontyathink? 2. Apparently. 3. Thinks he can be a tall mid. I don't necessarily agree with any of these, but there are the clift notes - I saved you some time.

He already has been paid. Through his wage, coz it's his job...

The easier-to-find option is a tall forward who is not useless doing 25 minutes in the ruck. Edit: Thought you meant the backup ruck. Different types of rucks are desired - tap rucks like Jamar are becoming irrelevant, but they have their place if they have a midfield to service. I agree that a more mobile ruck that can affect the game more is desired, but not essential - if he can get 30 taps and kick 2 goals he is value in my eyes and will make the other team work to keep him quiet.

I am not wedded to any arrangement for these teenagers to spend the two years after they finish school. Frankly, some of these kids won't make the TAC U/20 and there would be players selected from, you know, interstate where there isn't a TAC Cup-like competition. I am only wedded to the increase in the age limit. And it is not without precedent - it was increased by 4 months when the GWS came in.

Everyone (mostly) on this site is in the bandwagon - sitting patiently. We didn't get out when the wheels fell off, we didn't get out when the roof came off, when didn't get off when we thought it was going to start and then didn't... One left in a Tiger Dayz for some reason. That's about it IIRC.

I am impressed by the patronising tone... As PSD noted, if they draft age was lifted, other things will change along with that - it won't happen in a vaccum. I am amazed that we can't seem to continue a debate about the draft age. In the NFL, players have to be three years removed from high school. In the NBA, you must be one year removed, this may become two years. They are becoming more comfortable with the next LeBron spending two years in College learning little and being paid nothing or getting paid to learn defence in Europe for two years. We are not the US, and we have to find our own answer, but there are base similarities - like the fact that we have boys being thrown into a sport at 18 that is no longer something that happens in the NBA (Exum is a rare example of an International exception)and that is not supported in their football code. Two years removed from school. It will be good for the kids and great for the competition. Bring it in over a 6 year span by bringing the age limit up by 4 months every year. The AFL can look at an elite U/20 Competition or they can put money into grass roots footy and their programs. These clubs would thrive on the responsibility.

I don't think this fear of development is founded on anything other than fear of what you don't know. The TAC Cup pathway is getting further and further away from the AFL. The VFL, SANFL, and WAFL is not as useless as you seem to think they are when it comes to - doing what is best for young players and developing players. I have first hand knowledge of a second tier league development pathway up here in the ACT and it is entirely focussed on improving players with their future drafting in mind. In the better leagues around the country that will be even more pronounced. How about we think about this the other way around? Why do we have to have teenagers, straight out of school (or still in), to be professional footballers in the highest league in the country?

Forget about 53 - that will be Jetta being upgraded. ND40 is an opportunity to get a mid - I think we will delist a player to use it - but I don't think it is a 'wonderful' opportunity. It will be a speculative teen. the best opportunities for mids is ND3 this year and FA next year. The point I was making is that the MFC has no spots for these picks because they have targeted experienced players to improve the list and team, including the midfield. ND2, 22, 23, and 54 were turned into ND9, Tyson, Michie, and Vince. Riley and Newton cost nothing but the picks we won't use in the draft. ND72 (Riley) and ND53 (Newton). So Roos has given up the kids we could have got for ND2, 22, 23, 53, 54, and 72 for ND9 (Salem), Tyson, Vince, Michie, Riley, and Newton. That realignment can't be judged fully yet, but it looks very good at the moment.

As a Melbourne supporter over the past decade - evidently, it isn't.

Modern footy has seen a move away from a traditional 6 forwards, 6 backs, 3 mids, 2 wings, a ruck, and bench spot back up for the fwds, backs, mids, and ruck. A ruck, three marking forwards, one of which has to be a back-up ruck, a small forward, three tall defenders, one small defender, and possibly a dedicated HBF who doesn't go into the rotations. The bench would have two more mids and a backup defensive minded player. The sub would always be one of the rotation. So of the 22 I would have 5 or 6 defenders, 4 dedicated forwards, 1 ruck and the other 11 or 12 would be part of the midfield rotation that plays HFF, HBF, wing, centre, and the traditional and anachronistic rover positions. I see the better teams playing with a platoon in the middle and we can compete with Jones, Tyson, and Vince, but our second and third units are not near being good enough. We can compete with 7 or 8 solid mids, but if we want to win against the best midfields - and that is where the game is won - we are going to need an engine room that deep.

That is the identification of the best players only. The exposure and sample is against men in the state leagues - for two years - and that will help them adjust to AFL footy and the AFL teams will be able to see more of them and see who is going to be worthy of the top picks.

And there would still be the U/20 State Carnivals and so forth - there would still be the 30 best in each state treated like the next coming of Jebus. I really think that the plusses outweigh the minuses when it comes to raising the draft age.

It's not an elite junior program - that's the problem - these kids are coming from this grounding and are floundering. The rare exceptions can take to the AFL well, the masses are finding it tougher and tougher to make the step. It is diminishing the power of the draft as a force of equalisation and wasting time and money of clubs - invariably the ones that cannot afford to waste time and money.

No. We have said he is to be promoted and he will be promoted on ND day with our last pick.

It's not staggering. We are realigning the list after so many failed years of drafting poorly. We hardly had anyone good between the ages of 20 and 26 when Roos took over. The fact that we have brought in 9 players (plus Jetta) onto the primary list with AFL experience is a good thing if you don't want to wait for those draft picks to come good (if they do come good). I think we will delist a contracted player and rookie them and use ND40 but I don't hold much hope for that pick.

I didn't have a chance to write down a definitive list. I don't see a lot of ball winners there, I don't think Toumpas is a pure mid, and I don't think much of Michie TBH... We can add Riley too. I don't think that list is very impressive. I just come back to the fact that star talent generally comes from the top of the draft, expensive trades, and difficult FA targets. If McCartin is that star talent, far above the mids of his class - then so be it. But if he is isn't, I can see a Roos led MFC making the strategic decision to 'reach' and select a mid with ND3. That is the sum of what I am saying.

Don't mention Ocean Grove... I would struggle to name 12 good mids for 2017, that we have now. Jones is 30. Vince is near the end. Tyson, Viney, Salem, JKH, Newton, Brayshaw, and Kent. That's 9. They all have to come on - they won't. I hope they all do, they won't. There will be some that come out of nowhere. Maybe Stretch will be ready. Another class mid needs to be added now IMO.

Ok, you have more chickens then the MFC has midfield prospects.

Spangher was traded for a low pick. Not sure of the connection.

I am a patient, realistic person. In no way I am expecting ND2 and ND3 to repay on their investment until 2017 at the earliest. I just realise that there are very few chances to get the kind of talent our midfield needs; the very top of the draft, through costly trades, and difficult FA targets. The easiest place to get that talent is with the draft picks we have. The medium to long term investments we have made in the midfield, to add to Jones, are; Tyson, Vince, Salem, JKH, Viney, Kent, and Newton. That's not enough. I don't even know if JKH and Kent are pure mids. I don't know how good Salem and Newton will be. We have a chance to help fix the single most important area on an AFL field - I hope we make the most of it, and reap the benefits in 4 or 5 years time.

lol

I would prefer to fill the midfield void than worry about the possible Hogan void.

Yes, but the club had to work with him because he was endangering his own health with his technique. http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/melbourne-coach-paul-roos-says-coaching-staff-instruct-jack-viney-to-brace-for-contact-to-protect-against-concussions-wants-explanation/story-fni5f91a-1226909515291

Updated. Another deletion required for ND40.

No, you will find the ones that will develop are already on their way to developing and the ones that were never going to make it are no longer costly mistakes.