rpfc

Not a big fan of this attitude. I applauded the TJ trade, and the Jolly trade, and was pulled apart but understood the Woey trade, but the reaping of the sowing includes what player you received from the pick you received. Chamberlain getting reassurances from Hitler was seen as a success at the time, but we all know how that went... (What an extreme example, sorry about that. I was watching the History Channel yesterday.)

Yes, but a debacle that will end tank talk for the year. We will not lose to Freo. It will be simply out of the realms of possibility and happenstance. Bailey must thrust TMac and Bail into the fray as much as possible this Sunday and give big roles to Newton, Valenti, and Frawley in defence, midfield, and the forward line respectively. Brent Harvey has hard an up and down year, it would be good, from a 'football lover' point of view, to see him have a good game and collect the four points as Captain. It'll make us all feel good inside.

The only club that will benefit from the MFC having good depth is the Casey Scorpions. Having depth is such a misnomer. Sure it's handy to have the 25th player on your list easily replace the 18th player but what was that 18th player doing that was so great? Not a great deal. Your better players, as Geelong are finding out, are impossible to replace. Get stars and keep them fit. That would be my advice.

His rucking has improved but the one weakness he has always had is that he is a 200cm winger. He doesn't impose himself in contests and is constantly pushed off the ball by players he has 15-20kgs on. He, if he is OOC, should look to move on at the end of the year. He has been dropped in favour of a 19 year old bean pole and a bloke who is still a better basketballer than footballer. With Jamar as first ruck ahead of him aswell.

The idiot loves Fox & Friends?! Being a political junkie I can categorically tell you that the people that like that show like to do so while sitting on the front porch of their ramshackle house somewhere in the south of the US polishing their pet shotgun while muttering racial epithets whenever the discussion on the screen moves to the mistakes that the current President is making. Steve Doocy and Brian Kilmeade are two of the biggest douchebags in the world and are the stars of the show. I couldn't have a lower opinion of the people that would enjoy that show. That is all.

And, I believe, if no-one bids, we can take a F/S at pick 82 if we wanted to. Really looking forward to Viney.

The lottery should to be weighted to how many wins a team have. And PPs should be doled out by the commission. If every team outside the 8 finishes on 7 wins their chances should be the same. Two teams on 4 wins, Three teams on 6 and, two on 8 and one on 10 would engender a complicated scenario (someone with a mathematics background could think of an algarthm, I can not) but... 10 wins - 2 8 wins - 6 8 wins - 6 6 wins - 12 6 wins - 12 6 wins - 12 4 wins - 25 4 wins - 25 Or on the strange occurence of: 11 wins - 1 10 wins - 2 9 wins - 4 8 wins - 7 7 wins - 10 6 wins - 16 5 wins - 25 4 wins - 35 I think it works well. And the team(s) balls go the team with the lowest number of wins when there number is called. Example: If the team on 6 wins gets the first pick the team on 4 wins will get another 15 balls to have a better than 50% chance for pick 2.

I agree that number 1 has been overshadowed as many times as not by those picked from 2-7 but with that said, the tactics that we are employing are exactly what we would be doing even without the PP.

It really all depends on when we challenge. I think that Brad will be in the awful position that Ben Dixon found himself in when he retired just before Hawthorn became a top 4 team, and a flag chance. I see us in that position when Watts has had 3 proper pre-seasons, as he will have to kick 60 goals for us to push into top 4 territory. That will mean 2012/2013 is when we make the fateful step from top 8 team to flag chance. Green will be 31/32 and very near the end.

I think that was Pickering and Colbert. They are at the shallow end of a pretty superficial pool that is AFL commentators. You know what... Those two are in the adjacent kiddies pool. Lucky to get their toenails wet in there...

The following players have, in my view, shown enough (or had good enough junior wraps) to be considered apart of our flag winning future: Watts, Blease, Strauss, Bennell, Maric, Jetta, Morton, Cheney, Grimes, Wonaeamirri, Jurrah, Frawley, Petterd, Garland, Jones, Bate, Martin, McLean, Sylvia, Rivers, Warnock, Moloney, Davey, and Jamar. That is 24 with an extra two or three in the coming draft. The following players I have major, or minor, queries but are still a chance: McNamara, Spencer, Bail, Batram, Dunn, Buckley, Valenti, Meesen, and Miller. The last few are players I see playing no part in that flag tilt: Newton, Bell, Johnson, Green, Bruce, Wheatley, Whelan, Robertson, and McDonald. There are plenty of holes to fill when 16 on your primary list (and two rookies) have serious question marks on them. Rivers Warnock Cheney Garland Frawley Bennell Davey McLean Morton Sylvia Watts Petterd Bate Jurrah Wonaeamirri Jamar, Grimes, Moloney Martin Maric Jetta Jones Strauss Blease With that team, while looking very promising, the midfield is still slow, but I am a believer that a quick mind can be just a dangerous as some quick feet. The forward line is a bit small, but again, a lot will rest on delivery into the forward line. But, I understand the allure of a tall target to create a contest. Is Jurrah that player? I'm not sure. Rucks are fine in my opinion; Jamar has not played a bad game agianst anyone this year and Martin could be a fantastically versatile back-up rukman until he's 30 (also has impressive HO-to-advantage levels). Meesen and Spencer have a good chance of coming on. Impressive backline, possibly requiring a bit of depth. My idea of what the club needs in terms of urgency - speed with good delivery in midfield, depth in backline smalls, and another forward target.

Very true. But just on this Frawley on the wing idea. Anyone else think that James - with his speed, attack on the footy and man, and defensive capabilities - could be a decent run-with player in the future? If Pavlich goes into the midfield next week, I know who I would be trialling on him.

The team that 'is' has won 11 games out of the last 62. And no-one is being forced to lose. We are minimising our chances of winning using the same practices we would be using if the PP was not an issue; at the end of another losing season - injury sensitivity, youth opportunity, and player development - become more important than winning meaningless games. Befroe this year, I could struggle to name anyone other than Bruce who could play multiple positions on the field. Why shouldn't we experiment. Why look at Richmond? Yes, they are awful and got to win a game at the expense of us, but this experimentation is exactly what we would be doing no matter who we played in Rd 18, 2009 with a 3 and 14 losing record. An example of why this is valuable - it gives a chance for Newton, Dunn, Milller, Johnson, and Valenti to attempt other roles at AFL level to extend their stalling careers. Why shouldn't we give them that opportunity, considering the position we are in?

No, but I believe this year the AFL is trialling FA by allowing Rookie Listed players to go anywhere they want provided they are given a place on the primary list of a club. That doesn't really help you decide anything, I just thought it was an interesting aside... Not interesting? Hell, I haven't even heard it had been confirmed yet... In that case, don't worry about it. Can't help you 45HG16.

Jeff is not concerned with the win/loss ratio, he is disappointed because he thinks Bailey is a cheat. I, personally, have no time for this kind of crap but he can say what he wants. He holds a view that a few on here have too. But, I reiterate, thank Jebus that those that think 'Bailey is killing the club' are not in a position of authority at the club that is the reigning wooden spoon winner and are 16th once again. And that bloke he was twittering with is a [censored]. He is obviously a lowlife sh!t stirrer. If he gave a sh!t about Jeff he wouldn't ask him those questions.

My very educated guess - Int - Sylvia Dunn Bail Petterd But Dunn and Petterd being listed on the bench after good games indicates they might be carrying something, so it may finish like this - Int - McNamara Sylvia Bail Buckley. Johnson may have played his last game in Red and Blue...

Let them, and then DB or CC will explain why he didn't play for Casey last week and that'll put them back in their box.

Yes and no. That much tinkering would not happen in one game unless you are at the end of another losing season, your players are ridiculously one dimensional, you have an injury plagued list (and team on the day), and your talent is young. But wait... Those things apply to us. We would be doing this even without the PP.

Doesn't turn 22 till June next year. Always a speculative pick, I believe recruited because of athletic prowess. Those types, late in the draft, are always low risk/high reward. So disappointment is a strong word, for a project like Bail.

And what were they doing in the second half... Freo are awful, it is at the G, we will win.

We're crap, but come on BBP... Give us a little credit. Lose to Freo? At the G? Some people... We turned up at HT last year 50 points down and still beat them. It was like the Stawell Gift - gave them a head start and they still lost. If we win this Sunday it's done...

Warnock got a goal assist from CHF. That is a sentence I didn't see coming... We tried things out because winning isn't a priority and some see winning every game, no matter the circumstances, as something worth prioritising. We played unusually... Nuff said. Looking forward to the next unusual game this Sunday at the worst stadium in the world. It promises to be atypical.

I'm afraid not my friend. The things that would need to be done to lose to Freo involve the MFC asking members of the coterie to kidnap players on the eve of the match... We will not lose to Freo. This ends Sunday the 9th of August, one way or another...

Couldn't care less anymore... As long someone doesn't say it exists to exist... Oh, yes. 1 more week of intense experimentation to go, Dean. And if Newton gets 8 rebound 50s, Valenti 9 clearances, Warnock 5 goals, and Petterd and Grimes 35 touches all over the ground and we win. Well... Que sera, sera...

You're right in the sense that there was more experimentation than usual but why wouldn't there be? Playing an average side with little chance of a blowout, it would be the perfect time to do as many 'experiments' as possible. And CTD should recall about a month ago when people on here were whinging about DB playing Petterd out of position and his last few games have completely vindicated the time Petterd spent struggling to get the footy in the forward line. Davey on the HBF last year has helped improve his engine to the point where he was completely spent late in the second qtr yesterday with King tailing him and then he gave a great second half that nearly helped us pinch the game. Morton played his best game against WB off a HBF, Martin was a FB being pushed out of the best 22 until DB told him to try his hand at Ruck and he hasn't looked back. And Bruce and Macca should be nowhere near our centre bounces if we are serious about rebuilding our midfield. Miller and Bate deserve some freedom in the middle, as our forward line can be like the Sahara at times. My view on the situation - These are the tactics of tanking, but they are tactics that Bailey has been using since he started. The rhetorical question is - Why would he abandon those policies now?