rpfc

We don't have a cue. Every team is in the pub and has a cue (GWS has a pencil). The MFC has a trout.

Well, I taped it and watch it just before going to bed (slept well) and I also got a great deal of satisfaction out of the interview. Jumbo has said he only has blame and no vision, and I understand the frustration in hearing these uncomfortable truths, but if you do not correctly diagnose the problem then you cannot treat it. We have relied on where we have picked in the draft. We have spurned experience in lieu of the high risk potential of mass youth. Our culture has been near-enough-is-good-enough for my entire life as a Demons supporter. My satisfaction comes from the words said and not the deeds done, so Jackson has to back up what he sees with action to do something about it. We need to build a culture from scratch pretty much and, hopefully, that will entail a competent, proven Footy head, either Eade, Craig, Williams, or Roos as coach, and the targetting of some senior players from other clubs that can help our emerging players onfield. I didn't want to hear a few things that he said, but I know that he is a proven Administrator in an AFL environment and that he knows best practice. And he is right - we are fueled by nothing but hope at the minute. Thankfully, it's a renewable resource.

Now THAT is a hypothetical.

If they cannot get Thomas under their cap, they cannot match a bid he has agreed to.

You can't understand those that do not like Dunn? Re: the bolded - he has rarely done 'his bit' in the past, his pride ususally means jumper punching, his aggression usually means jumper punching, he rarely wins his position, and he has been nowhere near Colin Garland in terms of performance and consistency. He plays a good 6 or 7 games every second year and I am thankful he is playing well currently. There is a spot for him if he can continue his form - but I won't put any money on it.

Just outbid them and we can keep Pick 2. I think that Thomas will not want to come to a club in which he would be the Number 1 midfielder. I really don't know how he would go in that situation either.

Yeah, I can smell it too.

I would love a dynamic mid that does both - but there are not many of those available (or at all). But I would never sneeze at anyone who can get 15 to 20 uncontested possessions a game. We need run and confidence more than hard ball gets.

From the perspective of possible FA additions I would think that the following players would be considered: Dale Thomas, (26) the outside mid most teams are chasing. Xavier Ellis, (26 at Rd 1 2014) horrible couple of years but has talent. Matt Thomas, (27) terrifically hard player with not much else. Dylan Addison, (26) adaptable smaller player who plays taller than his 185cm. Daniel Cross, (31) hard nosed veteran for a short term deal. Obviously, there is only one of those we can all agree would be a good 'get' but perhaps a couple of the others represent an improvement on what we have. The only thing that is an impediment is that if Sylvia goes, we will not get our Pick 22 (that I think we will get) if we sign any FAs. The Players Union is right - the compensation system is poorly structured. But the answer is not getting rid of the compensation - the answer is getting a better compensation system.

Where did GWS get Pick 10 from?

The consolation finals is setup for the same reason I set up the % determinator - to try and keep people playing.

By all means see what is out there. But don't burn people to a point where we have to move them for very little. How we handled Moloney's exit from a list management POV was atrocious. First we diminished his value by making him well aware he was not wanted through comments fo the coach and the selection committee, and secondly we made it clear to the footy public that this RFA was not welcome back at the club. If you have a commodity you want to get rid of. Don't force that commodity out until you have something coming back the other way, and don't just let that commodity go for nothing on the market. This is probably best placed on the other Forum.

Of course you are. Although this is very early. But the point I made in the post was that it is not advisable to draft for immediate impact. Top draft picks should be investments in the future, not used to acquire 18 year olds to compete straight away. If you want that - trade the pick for a known commodity to perform straight away.

Yeah, that was a case of copy-paste disaster there - Fitzpatrick is no longer a chance to be delisted.

Battle of Ego's? You called it a rant. Personally, I thought it was better thought out than a rant. My point is that it isn't a case of 'sooner the better.' List management is an art form in need of some science. We have got quite a few players that I don't think much of - and some that I am sure I will come to that conclusion - but we have to be methodical about how we do this. Unless we get something in FA I can see us only parting with Gillies, Sellar, Davis, Rodan, Jetta, and McDonald because of what we could bring in.

I completely forgot about the consolation finals... With that in mind I would say no. It would leave the chance that a strong team that finished 9th could romp in a few wins and sneak a top 3 pick... It's really meant for the bottom 5 teams to keep playing and trying to win and doing what 45 did on the weekend.

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.