rpfc

Give the captaincy to whoever Neeld and co. think is the best candidate (candidates for joint captaincy) and renew it every year. Maxwell says it has to win back the captaincy every year and he wouldn't have it any other way - he doesn't want to be Mitchell to anyones Hodge. I see Moloney as the only one who can manage it by himself, with possibly Grimes if he can do most of the pre-season. Or Trengove, Frawley, Grimes, Garland, and Jones can make up the three who share it. If rpfc was to make a decision right now: LG: Grimes, Trengove, Garland, Frawley, and Jones. Captain: Moloney

The high-altitude training is welcome news. The rest is BS and conjecture.

Ssshhh! Redleg is right, the RD is much more exciting. It's like a Christmas morning where you don't know what you are going to get except that what you will get will be thankful to be given to you. Ok, the metaphor fell apart at the end there, but you know what I am saying...

I doubt there would be berries... I think it would be fruitless...

As I go on and on about - we should have a u/24 Leadership Group. Trengove would be a monty for that obviously. As for the captaincy... This Pre-Season will be telling, those that can stay fit and can be seen to be having an impact on the track, on the field, and around the club, will be putting themselves up for the captaincy. I don't like joint captaincies but if the FD or Neeld thinks it is the best of adequate options then so be it.

My guesstimate is that clubs like Melbourne will abide by the edict or be fined money we can't afford to throw away...

I doubt there would be anything close to a banana in there...

It's funny how the 'forever thus' has morphed into, after the decades of failure, into a writ of perpetual failure, a promise of eventual doom. First step would be to grow out of that.

If we see ourselves outgrowing AAMI then we have to look at alternatives. I know it makes a few dizzy after all the talk form the club saying they are so glad not to be nomadic anymore... But, that's life. Things change. I would love for Casey to have a 25k seater stadium that we play GWS, GC, PA, Freo, Adel, and WCE as it would make us a power club and assure our future but that is probably not going to happen...

No he didn't. Garland would take the mobile CHF who was invariably the second tall. Rivers would take the resting ruck or the more hulking CHF like Cloke. This would answer you question that follows. Garland came 6th in the Bluey and 9th the year before, keeping in mind he missed a month with an ankle and was rushed back into the side (it was initially thought to be a longer absence). He is highly thought of at the club. He can be a 3rd tall with one skillful arm tied behind his back - he is doing a great impression of being a 2nd tall... And Tynan? I will take that as just the grandiose statement of a fan who always sees the kid we just got as better than the bloke doing the job. He's just a kid, taken at 52, he has a long way to go to get near where Colin is at. I won't be there but I will tell you that if that is the line up for the NAB it is because they are resting Garland for the important stuff... Honestly, Sellar has been here 5 minutes and he has taken Garland's position? He has played 21 games in 5 years and this is just another case of the new bloke being better than the bloke doing the job. And Rivers on a HBF?

I would love to know what contorted position you think Mitch could be in that would allow the '11' to be seen on his back (because that is the story) and also the vacant left-side of his chest...

Grantland is very good. They had some great pieces when the Penn "we employ people who know that we employ a paedophile but meh" State stuff came out. But, yeah, journalism is in a bad way.

I don't want us to compare JV to HWFUA so I would go for 23. We are going to compare them, aren't we? We are such douchebags...

Is VISY public? If it is I stand by my comment. If it is not, I will...not.

I think it is time to end our farcical, schizophrenic attitude to where Martin plays his footy. He strung about ten of his best 15 games together last year as a back-up ruck to Jamar who went forward and kicked a few goals. Let's work on him there and develop his prowess forward. With Clark there now, the back-up ruck just has to be dangerous enough to take a good tall forward away from Watts or Jurrah leaving those two with the third and fourth talls and making life more pleasant for rpfc.

Unless you are in the recycled paper game... It's a tough business. There ain't no virgins in recycled paper...

Maybe the club doesn't see Nicho as as sure a thing as we do...

One thing I overlooked that drdrake did not is that Jamar can be moved to the VL from 2012, Rivers will qualify in 2013. Davey and Sylvia in 2014. I don't know when the decision has to be made but the only reason I can think of for not putting Jamar on the VL would be if we need his entire wage to pay into the cap. But that isn't a great reason. If we are waiting to elevate him until next year to coincide with the Superdraft 2012 then why not just elevate Nicho now and put Jamar on the VL?

Dunn, Bate, MacDonald, Batram, Bennell, Jetta, Spencer, and Strauss would be the most vulnerable and out of contract I believe. Green may retire, Sellar might be on a one-year contract, and we may trade another... Things change quickly, I can't say for sure.

It is a massive issue... I don't like wasting time - my first instinct would be to activate both and try and trade for something special. If that trade falls through - take the kid. Keeping the equivalent of Pick 11 or Pick 15 can be self-defeating if you never get that suitable trade. I don't really care about filling holes in the future - Clark fills the massive structural hole (or at least we hope he does) we had - now we need star players. Pick 11 or Pick 15 will not get you that. Both picks might. So either bet that you will get that star player and hold off on the picks or activate the picks for next year and try in October and then take the kids upon failure to get the trade. The thing that plays into this is that FA will allow us access to 28 year olds and partial access to 26 year olds to find that star player. So activate both or neither but if you do neither - you better hope you get that star player in a trade week in the not-too-distant future...

I can see this as an issue too. Will Kelvin Lawrence be that answer? Hard to say. Will Jurrah play a 'smaller' role with Clark in the forward line? This is certainly true. Just how much 'smaller' we will have to see...

Our list requires a small forward. Discuss.

It's great to see him pushing Gysberts and Blease and while they must dread every running session they will be amazed by how much more they will be able to do on the field.

Looks like he is earmarked as the 'gorilla tamer' if he can prove himself more reliable than Warnock was in his few games last year. Some believe it will push Garland onto a flank but I am not sure about that... If Sellar can get a game I think he will play on the hulking FF (Dawes, Lynch, Petrie, Tippett) or the resting ruckman (Sandilands, Mumford, etc). Invariably we have attempted to get Rivers to play on this type, Frawley to play on the more dynamic FFs (J.Riewoldt, Brown, Kennedy) and Garland to play on the CHF-type lead up players (Franklin, N.Riewoldt, Cloke[when outside 50]). Garland and Frawley also interchangeably play on smaller dangerous forwards (Johnson, Le Cras, Giansiracusa). So I see Rivers being pushed into a Nick "I don't like playing on anybody but I am bloody effective" Maxwell role. Which I think he would excel at. But Sellar has to prove himslef up to that first. I think that the extra two inches he has on Rivers and Warnock will help him play that role.

Well said once again, WJ. This internet was not great. You are off the mark Barry Dawson and don't blame the 'PC crowd' for your condemnation.