rpfc

I'm just saying, if you are unwilling to read beween the lines (or in some cases - the lines themselves) you won't get a true account.

I agree. It reminds of the blownup kefuffle in Cuba in the early 60s. The actual time line reads like this: Cuba had nukes. US saw the nukes. Cuba got rid of nukes not two weeks later. End of story.

At some point we are going to have to bite the bullet and recruit (and maybe trade more than we want to) a big bodied FF/ruck. The reason why you can't build everything you need for a flag through the draft is because talls, especially rucks, take longer to 'come on' than mids. Taller players in our top 25 players were drafted in 2001 - Rivers, 2002 - Jamar, 2004 - Dunn, 2004 - Bate, 2005 - Warnock, 2006 - Garland, and 2006 - Frawley. This is opposed to our rebuild drafts that our flag tilt is made up of: 2007 - 2009. In fact the only taller player that is near our 'best 21+1' at the moment from the 'rebuild' drafts, aside from Jack Watts, is Cale Morton. And I don't know if he will settle into a KPP, in fact I am pretty certain he won't. Moral of this post: You can't build an entire premiership team through the draft. Bailey didn't have to worry about tall defenders and a number one ruckman when he arrived, and built the rest of the team through the draft. Now he needs, and the rest of the FD evidently agrees, that we need a FF/ruck. We only get that in October, and I am ok paying a little too much to get that last piece of the flag tilt puzzle.

It is superiority complex or superior attitude. The first one makes more sense. Yeah?! What of it? Seriously, some of you people need to stop taking yourself so seriously. When you think I am attacking you personally - I'm not. Fact remains that Geelong overpaid for Ottens but got a flag. I wouldn't mind getting a really solid FF/back-up ruck in these two years and being shafted in the deal. I want to win a flag.

I agree that some on here have an unhealthy reverance for draft picks. I am looking at you Deeluded! However, I'm pretty sure that Hale would have been a good option for the price we wanted (or a little bit more), and I am sure White would have been a good option for the price we wanted. But the theme is 'the price we wanted.' Obviously, White was a lot harder to get than you thought and the price on his head was too exorbinant. There is little point getting a FF/backup ruck if you are jettisoning another vital aspect of that flag-winning team. I was disappointed we didn't fill that need but we have a couple of years before we hit our window to find that FF/backup ruck so we time on our side. We will be looking in October 2011 and that's ok. I don't care about finals appearances, I care about flags.

The facts have changed slightly in that we didn't get what we wanted in trade week. PJ's use, however small, was not snuffed out. The problem is, however, that we need spots for Picks 49 and 52 or whatever they will be. Unless the FD rate Johnson and TMac as more value than those picks I am afraid they are gone. It would be a bit of a wasted trade if Pick 52 is not used from the Cheney deal. However, if you look at it from the POV of moving Cheney out so TMac or PJ get a reprieve - then it is a success. Again, it depends on your view of the players mentioned. I really feel dirty talking about players that are in the bottom 4 or 5 on our list. Surely they do not require such attention? Eh, that's football. A bunch of idiots arguing the toss.

The fact that it doesn't look good on paper is meaningless to me. Whatever they do with that pick, it looks good to me. Johnson may get a reprieve here, or McNamara. For varying reasons Cheney was more expendable than either in my view.

Ugh.

I would give Pick 12 for White let alone the non-deals that are 'Maric and Pick 50' and 'Maric and Pick 32.' Sydney wouldn't even go for the Pick 12 deal let alone the package of 'crap and crap = awesome' deals that those latter two are.

I think he's gone. We have upgraded two rookies and are running out people to delist.

Yes, but Hale gave us a forward and some ruck relief for Jamar. I would prefer Johnson to ruck over Westhoff. He's an option but he's a waif.

With McKenzie and Spencer on the list we now have only freed up 1 position so far with Green onto the VL and Miller and Bell delisted. So if we love that pick 32 so much, and a lot of posters think it super-important to our future, we have to release a few more players. Do we want a PSD pick? No? Ok, then. But we still need to release 2 players at least before the ND. So Johnson and ...?

I think by 2012 Watts would be more solid than Westhoff. I am really looking for a more solid type. And a better ruckman.

I think it would be 'in-name' only if we went in with Jamar as our 'No.2.' Who do you think would be the preferred ruckman in the second half of a close game? I don't think it would work.

I didn't mean that they needed to become AA ruckmen. Jamar took until 2009 to shore up his position on the list, let alone the 22 (or 21). No reason why they cannot come on before then, but they are both speculative nonetheless. I just think that they would have to get to a higher level in a few years due to the fact that we will be much better than we are and much less willing to allow a 21/22 year old ruckman/forward to take someone's position for little effect, or if they take the 21st position on the field whether they would be a burden for the forward line to carry.

You're right. That is still 4 years away. And when it comes to ruckmen I think you should push it out by a year or two. What do we do in the mean time? I still think we will looking for this player in October next year.

It was a very deliberate question because a few on here have intimated that Jamar should be that forward who rucks and I just wanted to get it in 'writing' who thinks it is just a swell idea to turn an AA ruckman into a back-up for a NQR ruckman.

Fine then - 70% of you think the two kids will 'come on' by the end of 2014. If we go by Jamar's standards we should expect them to 'come on' in 2018. They are unrealistic standards from a couple of speculative kids to see one of them get there in half the time it took Jamar.

I think we can all agree that signing Tom Scully past next year is a good idea. What I also think is a good idea is to not stare at our collective navels worrying about losing the best 19 year old in the country simply because we are MFC supporters. I cannot believe the neurosis sometimes, it is stunning, really stunning.

I'll tell you what else came over the radio - The War of the Worlds. It also was BS. Still frightened MFC supporters though... Tards.

What the [censored] are you people still doing here? He's a Hawthorn player now. I made another thread to put your thoughts in. Migrate.

I think it would be less than ideal to have to be in the position to turn an AA ruckman into a forward who rucks just because we don't have a back-up for him. I also think that expecting Gawn or Fitzpatrick to be ready to deliver in any fashion inside of 3 years in a very good team (I assume we are going to be very good?) as two-thirds of you do is incrediably unfair on a couple of speculative kids. We will have a busy monday, or we will be busy again in October 2011.

A sarcasm meter?! Oh, that's a real useful invention...

You can see yourself - it's a public poll. I wanted people to actually think. Evidently, it didn't work...

I couldn't disagree more. It might be forced upon us having PJ a regular, but our own FD has given up on him evidently (in about July) and I have too (in fact a couple years ago). The man cannot ruck, mark overhead and he thinks he is 2 feet and 20 kilos lighter than he is, and you can't get over that. Jamar never had that issue.