rpfc

He drove to the game expecting to play - he felt he could play a full game. It may be humiliating for Brad. The whole of 2011 has been humiliating for him. For us. For the Office of the Captain of the MFC. For the club. I don't care that Brad Green felt bad to wear the vest. I don't care that we have disrespected the Office of the Captain of the MFC. Means jack-all at the moment.

This poll is flawed as I am uncomfortable giving Frawley the captaincy by himself. But he is the only one under 24 I would consider to have the captaincy all to himself. Adding some shared captaincy scenarios would be good. Grimes, Frawley and Trengove etc.

At Collingwood, Maxwell relinquishes the captaincy every year - he has to win it back. He wants it this way, as he doesn't want to have a situation where he doesn't have the backing of the club and the players. We should do the same.

I really dislike your attitude here. Green to be given the 'soreness' excuse and be dropped? Yeah, I am sure he will take that well too... 'I also want to see a loyal clubman play out his days at the dees and nowhere else.' I want to see him play for the Dees but I am not about to let his position as Captain, a position he has held awfully, to stop a message being sent throughout the club that what has gone on is not good enough. Isn't it funny - we are all happy enough to sack a bloke who is The Coach, but we are stroppy about giving a vest to The Captain. And we honour what Brad does by paying very well. And we honoured him by giving him the Captaincy... We have to stop honouring tenure... Sometimes dishonouring 'loyal clubmen' is something a club has to do.

If we have joint captains it is because Trengove needs help. I don't want to see our NQR 'senior' player share their inadequacies as captains. And your first line grates with me... 'This terrible situation of our older players feeling unwanted.' Why do we care if they feel this way? They were given the leadership of the club and they have failed totally, destructively. I don't care if they complain to the board - it is evident that the FD is right to push the younger talent ahead of the older players. I have said this often - we have to move toward our future, and give them the reigns. The older players can stay and contribute, but they have failed to drive this club and this club has got to get past them.

Disrespect the office? As HT said - what has Green been doing? I am ok with disrespecting the oh-so-important office of the Captain of the MFC if it means that this club shows its next generation that the expectations on its leaders have been raised.

You do realise that this was written by some kid on a sports blog? WGAF? Basically, this is your idiot Geelong supporting mate who has no idea about the Demons (although Barrett, Stevens and Co. resemble that...) spouting off rubbish he half understands...

I don't think he will go anywhere. He doesn't deserve the captaincy for another year and it should be given to another - the LG should be given to the talent that we hope will get us somewhere. Brad should stay and he should realise that the future of the club does not have his face. It is difficult to come to terms with, but the truth is the truth. He can ride the wave if his form holds but we as a club have to move on and not be held to a poor decision just because it 'will look bad' if we reversed it. New Coach: Sell a future, put that future in charge, tell the 'senior' players that that future will take them to heights if the future is empowered now.

ICGAF. Green has been horrible and if he has to be sub because his worth is rated the 22nd most in the team then so be it. I'm sick of the MFC putting up with nonsense from very well paid individuals who talk well about leadership but clearly have no idea of what it means to be a leader. A title doesn't absolve you, and it doesn't mean you shouldn't be a sub if your form and attitude demands it.

He is one year into a 5 year contract as a development coach. He'll be around. But I think he realises he isn't the person to be in charge.

I don't think the argument was as simple as 'it will happen.' Unaccountable for the losses? In 08 and 09 we applauded the losses. Was it 2010 when we became unaccountable? Here is your touchstone - the 'quarters won'... He failed that measurement - we won't even get to what we won last year. It is the KPIs that was the problem, it was obvious that he couldn't get the players to buy into what he wanted, or didn't push them to improve, or didn't have the right balance of structured defence and flowing attack. I will stand by this - the kids are not the problem - they are good enough to take us where we need to go. The albatross on our ship our the senior players like the frontrunning Moloney, the undisciplined Sylvia, the disappearing Davey, and the embarrassing Green. I don't think Bailey would have changed anything... What a strange thing to post. He's gone. And he went with the blessing of a large majority of posters you are trying to tar brush here.

Sylvia? We can't go down that road. It's not even paved. Up until a couple of years ago, it was a very bumpy paddock.

Why? Because it is a public sign that we made a mistake? Who cares? Nick Maxwell says that each year he has to get the captaincy - he doesn't inherent it. We should make Brad 'get it' again, and I don't think he will. Sh!t happens, this year has been a failure and Bailey has gone - the Leadership Group and the Captain should be 'stepped down' too.

What a touchstone that has become. As comical as it was, it wasn't what it was depicted as... Morton has been poor but better last week and I would like to see him continue these last two weeks.

I picked the wrong week to stop sniffing glue...

His body language is pathetic. His head is down and he is more concerned with winning free kicks than inspiring anyone. He can go missing for massive periods of games - and this isn't about form. He had one kick against the Cats in the first half of that massacre. Bad form would be butchering 10 pressure touches - hell, I would take that. But to be nowhere in a game like that? For a coach you love? And then he has the temerity, the blinding lack of self-reflection to do a 'nervous laughter "one of those days"' radio interviews after the game. And his mea culpa's in the press since haven't been good enough - he should be saying "I need to harden up and expect more of myself, my body language, and my actions" but instead he is talking about how sorry he is for Dean and how hard the year has been for him. I don't care what it has done to him, I care about winning a flag. And the senior players having more influence over this group is not going to help us. We have to move on.

Hey Rusty, you ever seen a grown man naked?

Was really good. It's funny, I would be trading for someone like Blease - plenty of run, quick, decent kick, 20 years old, good brain. Turn him into a HBF and he and Nicho are exactly what we need down there.

Stability? How about some leadership? We have to move past our NQR 'over 25 year olds' and give the reigns over to the generation with fight and talent, before they are poisoned by the affliction that has bleaded the relevance out of their more 'senior' peers. You want stability? Give me this Leadership Group (or something like it): Garland, Frawley, Grimes, Watts, Scully, Trengove, and McKenzie and they will be there for a decade.

Some bad puns there... Thought there would be a thread for this... Should be one at least. He cannot be captain next year. Discuss.

I think Todd realises his limitations. He won't coach in 2012. And Lyon can mentor Watts and Co., but let's poach a forwards coach from somewhere.

Colin can be elite. He isn't, and it is his own fault. He will never be a leader, but perhaps the new coach can get him to play like that on a consistent basis and actually adhere to structures. I want to keep him, of course, but I am not going to sit here and chastise those that have had a go at Colin in this thread following one game - a fortnight after he was playing for Casey.

I don't think Eddie knows... From what I gather, they are still trying to design a role for him that he is happy with. I don't think they will ever get there, and wither of two scenarios will eventuate: 1. He doesn't agree to the design of the role and moves on. 2. He agrees, finds it difficult and within 12 months moves on.

I was being flippant. You said this: The cash comes from the Board's resolve, quite correctly, not to pay Scully an outrageous salary which would destabilse the team. So I said this: How cash can be obtained by not spending an amount you were never going to spend is beyond me... You are trying to say that we will spend money on a coach as opposed to a player, I replied by saying that the 'extra' money set aside for Scully is non-existent. We have reportedly given his management our 'best offer' of around $3m over 5 years. With that in mind we can now move on because the scenarios are now down to two: 1. He stays on that salary. 2. He goes and we have $600k to spread around. There was never a time when we were going to match the Scully offer of close to $1m - so you cannot reallocate funds that were never allocated. Maybe the next time you don't understand what someone is saying you can ask for clarification.

Sense of smell?