rpfc

Do 'we'? I rarely judge picks because I do not watch any junior football, I keep my thoughts on recruitment to; those that have played AFL before, and general musings on why a type of player would be selected above another. If you don't think I have made a good point, say so.

To a few on here the proof is the pudding! I would love to eat some pudding from the 2013 trade and draft period in a few years time.

[shrug] We have Jamar.

Most 4th round picks in the Rookie Draft players don't amount to much...

The bigger accomplishment would be to do it in 2015... The Roos signing has got people excited, but March and April may bring us back to earth. If 2014 is as tough as I envision it to be - it would be huge if we got to 40k members in 2015.

Well, now you're just being ironical...

The wall comes after.

If you are looking for depth for 2014 do you pick the undersized 24 year old who has spent a few years at FB in the SANFL and can do a job instantly or do you pick the 20/21 year old who needs work, and a few years, to be considered good 'depth'? If I was to pick 'depth' players, I would choose 23+ year olds and I would use the RD.

You are talking about the 41st to 44th players on the list. They are all so speculative at this stage - you just sound naive when you say we had an awful Rookie Draft. Everyone usually has 'a bad rookie draft' - the exception would be to have a good one...

He has taken the 4th position on the RL. The last player taken by this club. Who do people who hate this selection think is out there at this point? The last few players on your list is the place to punt; we have picked up two raw mids (Hunt and Harms), a beanpole (King), an ungainly medium defender (Georgiou), and a tough, hard if limited midfielder that we know quite well (Jetta). If your argument is that we 'know' he cannot become anything, then you should have that view of any delisted player being picked up by this club. Maybe their is a role that Roos sees him a chance of fulfilling. You can't say that Watts or Trengove will find their way under Roos while dismissing the improvement of players you don't think are any good.

My 'like' button would not have troubled by many of the above... This is where you should take 18 year old ruckmen (if you take them at all) but I hope they realise that this is 2, possibly 3, years on the RL (if it exists for that long) and then 2 years on the Primary List before this selection comes to anything.

It may have cut short that awful training thread if a poster admonishing all the nastiness got enough likes to make people think twice and/or go back and delete...

I don't think he was on Geelong's list - only their VFL team.

Jeez, guys...

Rookies are outside the cap. Coll and Syd will have 39 and 38 players respectively from reports due to that fact. Again, need to get rid of the RL.

It's not just that, it's the way he answers questions in the best possible way. Clarkson will look at you sideways and try to 'figure you out' - hell, we all do that - but Roos just seems to take every question at face value and not be offended by the implicity of any question. And there were a few of those questions when he was thinking of being coach of this club, and certainly when he took over.

http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/2013-06-06/evans-signs-new-deal-with-dees I don't know if I am following what you are saying. Both were 2nd year rookies in 2012 and they were given seperate contract lengths from 2013. Evans with a 1 year that he extended for two as the article above stipulates, and Nicho got a two year contract.

I had heard that for agreeing to spend their second year (2012) on the RL, they were assured contracts on the PL after that season. Evans evidently got 2013 (as he re-signed this year), and Nicholson must have got 2013 and 2014. So in essence, he got a 3 year contract.

3+1 Has to meet certain criteria for the 4th.

Yes, and this may blow your mind, but I believe the Nicholson contract is a legacy, not of Neeld, but of Bailey... Only at Melbourne...

Apologies for the Nicholson confusion, I made the assumption that we gave him and Evans the same contract but they didn't. I always worry a bit when we don't release details of contract years because it usually means they have been given a contract The Footy World would think is too long... Again, any inside knowledge on Riley, Michie, and Tyson would be welcome.

Sadly JFK is dead. He was shot in Dallas some 50 years ago. He also had back issues so he probably was never going to be a long term answer as small forward.

I paraphrased. You are still dismissing me, not the argument. 'Everyone wearing white' is not only not convincing, it isn't true. Coloured jumpers were used early in the 1860s (Geelong did not wear a white jumper until 1862/63 and only for one year. They then moved to blue and white when we stole their colours - or the other way around - in 1872) when early clubs were formed. Caps were worn but the the jumpers were all distinct. http://australianfootball.com/articles/view/Football%253A%2BThe%2BAustralian%2Bgame/284

That's what I am doing - discussing it. Many don't know about our white heritage and I think we should embrace it. Dismissing the fact that it is because of cricket whites isn't good enough for me. Geelong didn't just use their whites, they wore a blue jumper. This is a club born out of a cricket club. I happen to be an MCC member who is very proud of the role of both clubs in the foundation of the game. This heritage is also linked through the away shorts worn by all clubs - 'white'. Maybe the AFL is right to push white given the games foundations. You don't have to be convinced, but dismissing my view as opportunistic and hollow is not fair in my opinion.

Yes, they would. If you cannot play an offensive or, failing that, defensive forward role - you won't play as a small forward.