rpfc

I think you are being slightly harsh on Petterd. I think you are being ridiculous toward Jones. Who will get the clearances? Oh, Scully and Trengove are going to be entrusted with that when they are 18 are they? Fantastic. Welcome to the club kids, now go and get the ball at the bottom of the packs... Moloney and Jones will be responsible for the 'in-and-under' stuff while these toddlers we picked up in the last few drafts have time to grow up.

What damage could Martin do? That's what they would be pondering in the Geelong box. Martin is in the square, and Jurrah leading up 30 out - if I was a mid I know which player I would go to; I would go to Jurrah. Jurrah attracts the pill from the mids and Geelong, or any team, will put their best defender on the opposition's focal point. So we have to start our best forward outside the 50 just so he doesn't get the attention?! Put the white flag down. He is our most dangerous tall forward and is the number one target of the footy that goes into the forward line. Of course, he won't spend all his time at FF, but he is our focal point for the foreseeable future and he will be played predominantly at FF. Where is our Neitz? Will Watts be solid enough to be a FF, or will he be a mobile (Riewoldt-like) CHF? Martin certainly isn't as talented as Neitz, he won't have the same affect on - the mids delivering the ball, and the attention of the defenders. I have little doubt that Martin will play a deep forward role in 2010 and be back-up ruck, but his presence in the forward line doesn't mean that he will get the best defender or that the midfielders will kick it to him more; both of which are needed to relegate Jurrah to 2nd or 3rd tall.

But you are implying that he agrees with RR all the time? Surely if he was to be himself with that implication, he would only agree with RR. You have to be on here a little longer if you want to be patronising...

This is where I get frustrated with posters who think like you do. Just because Martin is going to be a forward and he happens to be a few inches taller than Jurrah, it does not mean that he will become a 2nd or 1st forward, if Martin is down there and so is Jurrah, who do you think Scarlett is going to pick up? This is why we went for a 208cm ruckman/forward and a 201cm forward with speculative picks in the draft - if they do come on then they would be very handy 3rd forwards at a cheap price. Jurrah and Watts are near enough to each other in terms of talent that they will fight it out for the attention of the best defenders for the next decade. Anyone else is going to have to be a hell of a lot more talented than Martin (he is going to be a very good back-up ruck though) to make Jurrah a '3rd tall.'

Moot.

Why didn't we pick him up at 50 then? The MFC obviously rated Fitzpatrick as a better bet than any tall left, so there is your tall forward. And I have no idea how good MacDonald will be when he is thirty, but at 25, Pick 1 in the PSD is a good price for a pro with neat skills.

Angry towns people in South Park. Showing your age possibly? No. Ok, then.

That's great, but the 'hit rate' is as crap in the top 10 than it is outside the top 10. Molan, Fraser, Longmuir, Thorp, Brown, Livingston, McDougall, Hansen, Angwin, Polak, Walsh, and Bradley were all talls taken in the top 10. They are all failures. Talls are just harder to read when they are in their teens.

Rabble, rabble...had enough time...rabble, rabble...significant improvement or else...rabble, rabble...no rush to re-sign, nobody wants him...rabble, rabble.

Jurrah is 21 and he looks like that! But, he could never be a focal point. He should be a 3rd forward. Ugh.

Is 9 better than 28?! Neitz or Read? Come on, Nasher. Come on!

But, even with that change, if we don't win 8 games - Bailey's gone. 7 wins and it is sayonara. 8 and its yeah, ok, we will give you another 3 years. Ah, football fans, we are so ridiculously stupid.

I saw him beat up on players in the U/18s and then he becomes this Jeff White clone, without the fantastic ruckwork pre-rule, and is ineffective and just another useless link in midfield. Why did they get Jolly? The answer is Fraser isn't the player they thought he would become.

Wondering why Gysberts gets 28 and Tapscott gets 9? Firstly, they both should get numbers in the 40s, and, secondly, Gysberts is the higher rated player - he should get the 'better' number, no? 1 - JMac 5 - Trengove 13 - Strauss 17 - Blease 28 - McKenzie 31 - Scully 35 - Gawn 46 - Gysberts 47 - Tapscott 48 - Fitzpatrick Let someone earn 9 (If Scully or Trengove aren't given it).

There is another website called Demonology. For time, and because we are all MFC-obsessed losers, we have shortened the names to Land (for Demonland) and Ology for (Demonology). Aren't we clever?

Excuse me, you think that was bad. There were a number of posters spending all their time on here gloating about 'how they got Pick 11 right because BP went for best available over a mediocre tall.' Narcissistic losers... Oh, wait a sec... Nevermind.

Not the talk of the recently banned. They are all under pressure to not be the 4 or 5 we cut. Pointing out who are the vulnerable is not being 'a [censored],' it's being realistic.

Specious reasoning. Mids are easier to see than talls at a young age. Some good ones were overlooked: Tippett was pick 32. Goodes was 43. Fevola was 38. Nathan Thompson was 82. Anthony was 37. Some bad ones were chosen early: Fraser was pick 1. Justin Longmuir was 2. Leigh Brown was 5. Livingston was 4. McDougall was 5. Angwin was 7. Polak was 4. Walsh was 4. Bradley was 6. Hansen was 3. Thorp was 6. I would say that the best mids come from the pointy end of the draft (with notable exceptions) and the best talls come from all over the draft as their talent is harder to gauge at such a young age. (And Molan was a Pick 9)

I am assuming they just picked up jumpers for the presser. I wouldn't read too much into it.

You need a life, 45. And...thanks.

I learnt something today - AFL clubs recruit based on who is their most readily identifiable assistant coach. We have Scott West so we recruit midfielders. Did not know that...

The only problem with that is when Jamar is the only ruck, he also plays his best, and it happens to be better than PJ.

Yeah, contracts are made to be 'paid out'. We are 'going on' because it is not good business practice to show your stakeholders that a contract from the MFC isn't worth the toilet paper it is written on. We made our bed, with Newton and Meesen helping us get the sheets out of the closet by agreeing to go on the RL, and we should sleep in it soundly, knowing that Gawn and Fitzpatrick are on the list because of the club and those two clubmen.

Oh, yeah. He hasn't made the hard decisions in getting rid of players... I wonder if the posters on this site know that most of us remember the inane things you post. I still remember WattsHappening? stating that Petterd should be delisted mid way through last season. Just...think before you post.

I have liked your work in the last few days S. but that is a flawed assumption. The VL is designed to keep players like those two around if no other players qualify and we won't have anyone to push Bruce or Green of the VL until 2013 when Jamar becomes eligible and 2014 when Davey does the same (Miller for 2012 but I have made a judgement call there - that he won't be around). Bruce to play, if he is still doing what he is doing, for another 3 seasons and Green, injuries allowing, 4 more seasons.