rpfc

Starts?!! There you go again with the excuses for Bailey... What does it matter how we start if the middle and end isn't good?!! I'm sick of hearing about starts!! And wins!! All I want is Bailey to say 'we are going to win the flag!' and go out and do it!!

Shut-the-frack-up. By a nose... (Taking the [censored])

Because you would prefer it there than at the other end... Now we are to the I50 one?! That's a good one. We let Essendon have 60 a couple weeks ago, and had only 35 ourselves. !! Efficiency can be the problem of Mahoney, although we are reasonably efficient. Quantity is the problem of the midfield - they are lazy, and easily bullied into submission, and they are also young and inexperienced. But the amount of footy our backline sees is a problem, and getting and keeping the ball in our forward half is the next big challenge for this side. It's a huge hurdle.

Which is why it is another KPI that Bailey harps on about. Posters are going on like this 'quarters won' measure is the only thing he says...

And another Bailey KPI that he has harped on about. What a [censored] he is, having the crazy notion that concentrating on a few simple stats as indicators of improved performance would actually help improve performance.

That is another one of the 'mindless, repititions of Bailey' - to stop the the times when we are getting flogged. Minimise consecutive goals against. There are a myriad of KPIs that the FD has, and people are picking this one out because they unthinkingly equate trying to win 'quarters' as tacitly allowing losses if you 'square' the quarters won column. And I think that is not a very well thought through notion, to say the least.

Please do.

I wonder if Bailey's fascination with quarters is why we went form having a percentage of 62 in 3rd quarters in 2009 to 132 in 2010... Nah, probably not. Because winning quarters doesn't matter, only winning games and players don't realise that under Bailey. If only he had told the players to win the game instead of saying to win the quarter at each interval! Because it is a known fact that you can win 4 quarters of footy and still lose the game. Known. Fact.

Yeah, but we recruited women like Watts so...

Yeah, it's called the League of Sane Posters.

Smart arse. And no. You may have unthinkingly given 'two years' but it has become an expectation of many here to see these kids do what they cannot yet do, and won't be able for some years. Look at the time it took Garland, Sylvia, and Jamar to fulfil the potential that you saw in them. Why not have that same patience that you had with those players for the Bailey tenure and for the young players that have arrived under his tenure?

And the club is right to do it. Some on here have unthinkingly managed to expect this club to go 3rd last, last, last, 12th, 7th-ish, top 4 and fighting for the flag in 2012... And I don't mean you don't think - I am saying that you haven't thought this particular issue, through.

3rd chance. Doubt he will play too many games.

It's not 'kind of like that' at all. What a ridiculous equivalency. And we get the point - we don't think it is a good one.

Well, here is a turn up - I, the 'soft, constant excuse maker' expexts to win Rd.1... Who are the wrong types? How many games do you give them before you write them off? (and calling them the 'wrong' types is tantamount) Was Garland in 2008 the wrong type? Was Jamar in pre-2008 the wrong type? Was Sylvia pre-2009 the wrong type? Is it an innate desire for the contest? Is a 23 year old more or less predisposed to show it than a 19 year old? Two years or less?! Huh?! So this rebuild is to be repaid by 2013? Watts, Scully, and Trengove will be 21 with around 60 games worth of experience and you are expecting them to give you a flag? Jeez...

How devilishly redundant.

AND MEANS I AM SAYING SOMETHING THAT HASN'T BEEN HEARD BEFORE - IT IS DOUBLY IMPORTANT THAT YOU READ IT.

Started another league - 518127.

No, it's you who isn't even on top of his/her own point. The term 'less talk, more action' implies a lack of action. There has been plenty on this long road back to relevance. You don't just dismiss it because the calendar has ticked over into a new year.

Alright, as long as you are willing to put up with 12 losses and some very awful displays on occasion.

I had to read though that a bit. That is incredibly good. Our last qtrs must be pretty awful but such an improvement in the 'Premiership Quarter' is unbelievable.

Jeez, Nasher. Can you turn that down?! Some bloody loud actions... Hurting my eardrums.

No, it's pretty fracking loud. You're just not listening.

It's the opposite, and that's the problem. The last two decades are littered with Melbourne doing a good job, but not a great one. In the age of the draft - if you want the ultimate success - you have to build from the draft. But it takes longer than just getting a 'good' team out there and competing with mid-range sides but not having enough talent to beat the best. Everyone kept on saying, whinging even, during the '00s that 'we don't have any star players!' and 'we can't win a flag without them!' Now we went about getting them, by clearing house and 'bottoming out,' and we have these POTENTIAL stars of the game in Morton, Grimes, Jurrah, Watts, Scully, and Trengove to be in the company of are only star - Frawley. But the oldest is 22! It's going to take time. And OD and RF - I can understand that you have seen more of the (promising but failed) ups and (severe) downs. But you should understand that it has no relevance to what is happening now other than in your own psyche. Our mongrel is there, but having a desire to win doesn't change the reality of our list. It isn't there yet, and no amount rahrah about 'running out of excuses' is going to get it there.

We went from getting 118 points averaged against us in in 2008 to around 89 last year... So there is an 'action'. Obviously not loud enough...