rpfc

Yes, it was quite something. And it reminds me of the gameplan used by Neeld after his first year in charge. And he only changed 14 players. You can have your belief that the vast majority of the players should be removed but don't let yourself forget the reality of list management - it cannot be done in one Summer. I don't want us to take a kid with Pick 100+ because it will mean we are wedded to that player for two years as per the CBA. We can overhaul the list in a rational manner and if you want to discuss it further, there is a thread on the subject on the Trading Board.

Yes, but what evidence is that used for? A past decision? Hypothetical re-ordering of the draft is classic masichism from MFC fans who love to play this 'what if' game. When you draft a player in the first few rounds of the National Draft you should be choosing the players that will be the best players when the enter their prime.

Craig started his caretaker role as zero chance in the eyes of many. For him to have had any sort of chance is a credit to the work he has done in the games previous to the NM game. -50 in contested possessions, -100 in unconstested possessions, and -35 in Inside 50s is untenable and all too familiar. If Craig makes last week an outlier he has a chance. The price he pays for being apart of the Neeld debacle is that the performance of the team in these last 11 games will determine his future. And the boys don't seem capable of the confidence and trust in themselves and one anotherto avoid these thumpings. Freo at the G, Adelaide at AAMI, and the Dogs at the awful Etihad to finish the season will dictate in what light Craig is seen by Jackson and his committee, assuming Roos has not had an about face and jumped aboard for 2014. Neeld finished with a percentage of 49.8 so improvement is not difficult. But perhaps it is too difficult for this group and where their head is at.

To be Delisted MacDonald - Hogan Gillies - ND2 Jetta - ND21 Davis - ND41 Sellar - PSD2 Rodan - ND61 Possibles Davey - ND82 Nicholson - Clisby Tynan - Magner Taggert - ND95 I think Davey is pushing his worth close to ND 82 at this stage... What a shame. And I would be tempted to delist Nicho to put Clisby up a year early if their form holds. If we get a FA or two, Davey and Nicho will be gone IMO.

And well done to 45HG who leads the race for Pick Number 1 in next year's draft by beating the league leader. I will resurrect the thread I started for the AFL as a whole for this - I really like it.

No doubt it would change but the argument of a few in here is that we needed to get an 'impact player' with Pick 4. What nonsense. You do not draft in the top 10 for the next season's impact. You try and use all your collective brain power and footy knowledge and try to draft the best player when they are 22. What a ridiculous notion to draft an impact player... It would be funny if our drafting in the past hadn't been do heinous. Use trades or the draft after Pick 50 for impact.

By 'stalking' does Baghdad Bob mean 'a poster following him from thread to thread?' For those who delineate between to the two.

Well, I always think that they play with a group of older, experienced players that take the share if the load. A much better situation than the one the find themselves at the Dees... But these kids have never been further away from being physically ready for the AFL.

How do you think teams get bad? Have a sit down and think it through, you will have an epiphany. Teams become awful because they fail to get their picks right or trade away their picks. All teams bring their awfulness on themselves. And we have an avenue to regulate the league and improve a team that is so terrible it is an impediment to the league. It is called draft assistance, and we should get it.

Yeah, I am not surprised by this result. For those that are struggling to see how 22 blokes can be so dominated by another 22 blokes - it is not just a coach. It's inertia. The feeling that attempting something will be met by failure so the attempt is affected or not even bothered with. You won't run past a contest to receive a handball because you know, you just know, that your teammate won't get the ball and you are more worried about making sure your man doesn't get the footy. So you don't attack. And then, when the ball comes out of the contest, only one team is setup to win it. And they do, and they win the next one too. You don't run. You don't trust your teammate to get the ball in a one-on-one, so you get in and 'help' and the other team has an immediate advantage with a release player created. You become inert. And you get thumped.

I had to put the stats out didn't I? Never effing learn. What a massive letdown.

2013 has seen a remarkable level of ineptitude from this club - staggering really. I have highlighted a few key stats - ahead of the median AFL teams in green, behind the median AFL teams in red. Under Neeld, compared to the median AFL team(s), we managed: 23 Contested Possessions LESS 29 Uncontested Possessions LESS 12 Inside 50s LESS 5 Clearances LESS 7 Marks LESS Under Neeld our opponents, compared to the median AFL team(s), managed: 5 Contested Possessions MORE 46 Uncontested Possessions MORE 8 Inside 50s MORE 3 Clearances MORE 14 Marks MORE Under Craig (and leaving aside the Geelong game which skewed every stat up or down), compared to the median AFL team(s), we are managing: 16 Contested Possessions LESS 1 Uncontested Possessions MORE 5 Inside 50s LESS 4 Clearances LESS 13 Marks MORE Under Craig our opponents, compared to the median AFL team(s), managed: 9 Contested Possessions MORE 7 Uncontested Possessions MORE 2 Inside 50s MORE 3 Clearances MORE 11 Marks LESS Our net improvement under Craig from the first 11 rounds has been: +3 Contested Possessions compared to our direct opponent. +70 Uncontested Possessions compared to our direct opponent. +14 Inside 50s compared to our direct opponent. -1 Clearances compared to our direct opponent. +45 Marks compared to our direct opponent. It's a staggering improvement, and while we are still some way off the pace of other clubs, the key determinators or run and spread in the modern game: Uncontested Possessions, Marks and Inside 50s have all shot up dramatically under Craig.

This is the part I don't follow: You say we were patheitc under Neeld as you still regard us as non-competitive. And that is fine. But then you say that Neeld could have brought about this improvement that we are seeing. He didn't. He had 33 games to show some sort of consistency of performance and didn't get what Craig has been able to get in his 5 games. We are still losers, and Craig may not be the man for the job - he may be simply getting 75% out of this group, but it is better than whatever percentage Neeld was getting out of them. He was a failure, and I didn't need the juxtaposition of the perfomances of late to prove that, but it has been quite a exclamation mark.

lol Exactly. Who replaced Moloney in the midfield rotation? And how did he do? Then you can do your flawed maths.

Further to what alias has said - I have plenty of chats to older Canberra footy fans who claim that prior to the Raiders rocking up - the local AFL league was better attended and more closely followed than the local rugby league offering. You put a club in and suddenly the area is a convert as it makes ties to the area and makes the changes that alias alluded to like grounds being built to house your only national club and so forth. We were always going to put a second club in Sydney. I don't understand the animosity to it being set up. Should the Swans be taken back to rot at Albert Park? Because your equivalents back in the 80s probably argued for it...

I really don't follow your reasoning, jumbo. Do you feel that this would have happened with Neeld anyway? Do you feel it would have happened with any other caretaker? Or do you reject that it is happening?

lol

Of those 12 reasons, I dismissed in my head about all but 2 or 3 of them. Selwood diving in a tackle is The Bloated One's fault?

Is this as sinister as it is made out? It was essentially just giving them a head start with regard to PR - their absolution will not arrive, the penalties would not be mitigated by that press conference way back when. Convince me this is sinister.

People go on holidays. People also have health issues - they also go on holidays. They can still be functioning members of society - fancy that.

His wallet was probably doping too.

Depends when they wear off? Looking at his team - he has got a few good months of extra strength and muscle twitch.

Good thing he took those peptides. Help him carry his wallet.

That's an ironic sentiment of misleading stats as you brought up the number of wins without mentioning that Neeld had 11 games for his one win and Craig 5. We are all very smitten with winning. It's quite important. But so is form, and many are just pointing out how it has changed for the better. There is no need to be snarky or imply that posters don't care about winning because there are improvements to be seen in a loss.

1899 Cleveland Spiders. Lost 134 games of baseball in one season.