rpfc

At their best - Johnstone (at intermittent times - to say the least), Bruce (2005 - pre-guerra), and Woewodin (2000). Overall careers - McDonald, Viney, and Yze. I cherish hardworkers like Viney, Woey, and Macca. But TJ at his best was orgasmic, Bruce unstoppable in 2005 (until stopped), and Yze was the best wingman in the game for about half a decade, with the sweetest delivery into our forward line.

I'm a big fan of the shock treatment for Colin. That roundhouse was the dumbest thing he has ever done, and that's saying something. Roost It is being more than a tad flippant, but I would be very suprised if DB and CC don't do similar things leading into the Richmond and NM games. And Jack The Ripper, Bailey seems to me to be very comfortable. Even before the WCE and PA return to some semblance of form, I wanted Bailey to have an extra year put on his contract at the end of this season to give him two years to bring the Demons up the ladder. He will try to do what's best for the club.

Yes, I love being horrible. It's fun to be torn apart by fortunate F/S selections Ablett and Scarlett. It makes me giddy. I love the fact that we have lost 48 games from the last 59 since 2007. I thought it was great when we lost 7 games last year by 10 goals or more. It is fantastic that the most exciting days for my club in the past two years have been in November. I have not jumped down throats, and I have been respectful to those who wish to win as many games as the club possibly can, but this is absurd. Frankly, I don't care about the No.1 pick - whatever WCE does is their business. What I care about is my club doing the right thing by its own future and getting it's 54th loss since 2007 against St Kilda, so that we can get 2 picks in the top 5. I have put up with too much crap from the 'Demons' not to see them standfast to the 'Bailey-era' policy of youth development and rebuilding throught the draft.

Player's don't tank. Those that want to ensure we finish on 4 wins NEVER expect the players to compromise the two hours they spend out on the field with the jumper on. Fevola, inadvertantly, described tanking very well while trying convince everyone that tanking doesn't happen. He said that he never went out there to lose in 2007, but he wasn't out there at all... They sent the pratthead out for surgery to get ready for 2008...

The club paying out Nathan Carroll made us less competitive. We got liam Jurrah with that extra spot on the list. Nathan Brown, Clint Bizzell, Jeff White, Adem Yze, and Ben Holland were sent to Sandringham even though they would have performed better than young players that replaced them. They were also moved on at the end of 07 and 08 with more to give, to create space for youth. Thus making us less competitive in 2008 and 2009 respectively. Jack Grimes, Colin Garland, Cale Morton, Neville Jetta, Jack Watts, Jamie Bennell, Jake Spencer, and Liam Jurrah arguably all got elevated to the seniors for unwarranted games in 2008/9. This also made the 22 weaker. The 'Bailey-era' has never been about winning games, instead it has revolved around developing players and building a list that will one day challenge for winning on the last day in September. Has the 'Bailey-era' been unprincipled? If not, why is continuing the policies of the last 18 months 'damaging to the club'?

Are motives are similar. He's only played 18 games, I question his committment because of the fact that he hasn't put the work in the gym that others have. Bate is bigger than him in the shoulders and arms and he spent his forst couple of years as a mid, while coming to the club in the same year, at the same age. Giving him opportunities at the end of this season is concurrent with 'tanking' though. Robbo is a better player but we are 3 and 12 and should be looking to the future. If you want to play him, you are a lot more tolerant of 'tanking' than you let on...

We have lost 48 of the past 59 games. What's another one against Richmond? The differences between losing 53 games over the past three seasons and 54 games are meaningless until you look at what the club's draft position will be in each instance - then it gets a hell of a lot of meaning. With that said, I don't blame Bruce or Green for our spectacular failure. They are great players for this footy club and I have, and will, enjoy watching 18 and 32 running around. Many milestones have been met with failure over the past three years (this weekend will see another) and Brad will get over it after the Richmond game.

That isn't an answer. If you condone them, and they bring us to 4 and 18 at the end of the year, is that 'tanking'? Is it wrong? If it is, tell me why. Should DB and CC use these techniques?

I wouldn't say great, but they have improved over summer. In fact, the whole team has improved their handballing compared to the awful displays of 2008 where every second handball was to ankles and hitting the deck. I have only seen a little of Scully but he has Scotty West type vision and execution with his hands. Would suit Bailey's gameplan to have the premier midfielder an excellent distributor by hand that's for sure.

I would like to think that I am one of the more restrained posters on here, and I always try to back up opinion with argument. With that said - I'm still waiting for someone to articulate why the above mentioned player development, giving of opportunities, and protection of players is so wrong. We have ended careers early in the past couple of years with an eye to the future, we have played people before they were ready, we have giving opportunities to an enormous percentage of our list. Was this 'tanking' for draft picks? Or building for the future? If we continue in the next 7 weeks with the policy of the 'Bailey era,' is that 'tanking'? And is it abhorrent?

BangkokDemon? Kat? MelbournePassion? Donny williams no 25? [censored]? Pipefitter? Rojik of the Arctic? Jackie moon? Akum? S T? Why are the above mentioned actions so abhorrent?

I try to keep track of contracts but if you and Jaded are right about Bell I have to say that one of Buckley, McNamara, Batram, PJ, and Dunn are gone. And Robbo, Wheels, Wheats, and Junior would be odds on to 'retire' at the end of this year. We'll see... We can wait to have this difficult conversation when we are finished with the other difficult conversation...

I agree with you, of course. I want those that disagree with this 'tanking' or 'disengenuous list management' or 'excessive list management' or whatever, to tell me why they don't want Bailey and CC to do the things we mentioned. Why is it so abhorrent? Please enlighten me. Anyone...

Play him now. We got the games, we can't make the finals, he is contracted for next season. Play him now.

You're talking about Richmond and NM. Go young, and experiment, and you still win... You blame the gods, your luck, and get on with it. You also blame Port Power and their 'leaders'...

Player's don't tank. Whitnall was that crap, guys, he didn't deliberately miss, he, by the end, was an awful football player. Brucey, or any other player, wouldn't say anything else. Nor should they, they should never be asked to compromise when it comes to the 2 hours they put on the jumper. It's up to Bailey and Connolly. They can do what has to be done. Will they? We will see on August the 2nd, the worst day of my life... The day I go to the footy and hope the Demons, my raison detre, lose... I wonder if 'Checker' Hughes thought we needed to be called the Demons for times like this - when you need to be intimidating, ruthless, and uncompromising - to do what needs to be done. And not be named after a flower...

Honestly, Harvey is under so much pressure if he held a piece of coal in his sweaty palms he would quickly have a diamond. He may want to win, but without Hasleby, Schammer, Pavlich, and Sandilands firing they are no chance against anyone.

With all due respect... I'm not getting straight answers from 'non-tankers,' please tell me if you agree with the following management ideas in this losing year: - Sylvia might not be straight back in for the Tigers game, he may play a few penance games for Casey. - Tom McNamara, Kyle Cheney, Jack Watts, Rohan Bail, Jordie McKenzie, Austin Wonaeamirri and Jake Spencer may get one or two games they don't deserve on form as a spur for the future (ala Jack Grimes' 1 game at the end of 2008). - Valenti, Newton, Dunn, Batram, Johnson, Miller, and Buckley might see extended runs so that Bailey and the development coaches can make a judgement on their futures. - Perrenially injured players - McLean, Moloney, Rivers, and Jamar - may be wrapped in cotton wool with an eye to 2010. - Grimes may play RR, Petterd a wing, Bate a FF, Jurrah a HFF, Jetta a HBF, Morton a CHF, or Bennell a FP to develop different aspects of their game, and increase their base knowledge in various positions. Is this not the way to go? Strategically done, it will mean 6 more losses. Please tell me why these actions are wrong?

Yes and we should be playing not only PA up in Darwin, but GC17 and WS18 when they come in. I would add Freo but 3 out of 12 home games is more than enough away from my MCC... And anyone who says "you can't play that many away, the G is our home!" - we would get around 14k for those three fixtures and would be ridiculed (and lose money). And after Jurrah, Davey, and Wonna are retired we will play 3 games a season at the new Casey Stadium (30k capacity). Off topic... Great kick is Liam...

The confidence is the thing I love about LJ. Whatever he does, he just turns and celebrates like he's not surprised at his own skill. His handball to Moloney and his setups for two Petterd goals were just as impressive as the goals he kicked himself. I, personally, think he will be too selfless to kick a hundred, but I know a bloke called Jack who would appreciate the gifts he shall receive for the next decade.

Players don't tank. Whitnall missing [censored] easy goals in 2007 wasn't him tanking, he was that crap. Matthew Lappin retiring with a round to go, and TJ not being tagged was tanking. Tanking is what I described, we are 6 losses away, and we should keep to the script. Play the kids, protect the injured, and develop the kids.

This thread has tanked...

I posted this in another thread, but I am really interested in people's views, and I don't know which thread people will be reading... I think this is where a lot of posters are butting heads: I only believe we should tank to this extent. Basically what you describe in point 2. Players don't know how to tank and should never be asked to compromise themselves. Skills32 on D'ology is against tanking but I have gleaned that he is not against 'point 2' at all. Therefore, he is not against tanking at all. For those who are still iffy on the subject - these are the tactics that the coaching staff will/should use to develop players, give opportunities, and plan for 2010. - Sylvia might not be straight back in for the Tigers game, he may play a few penance games for Casey. - Tom McNamara, Kyle Cheney, Jack Watts, Rohan Bail, Jordie McKenzie, Austin Wonaeamirri and Jake Spencer may get one or two games they don't deserve on form as a spur for the future (ala Jack Grimes' 1 game at the end of 2008). - Valenti, Newton, Dunn, Batram, Johnson, Miller, and Buckley might see extended runs so that Bailey and the development coaches can make a judgement on their futures. - Perrenially injured players - McLean, Moloney, Rivers, and Jamar - may be wrapped in cotton wool with an eye to 2010. - Grimes may play RR, Petterd a wing, Bate a FF, Jurrah a HFF, Jetta a HBF, Morton a CHF, or Bennell a FP to develop different aspects of their game, and increase their base knowledge in various positions. That is my idea of 'tanking,' I call it that because it is not trying to win a game and I think calling it 'list management,' like some people do, is being disengenuous. Would those that oppose tanking, oppose the above measures in this losing year?

I think this is where a lot of posters are butting heads: I only believe we should tank to this extent. Basically what you describe in point 2. Players don't know how to tank and should never be asked to compromise themselves. Skills32 on D'ology is against tanking but I have gleaned that he is not against 'point 2' at all. Therefore, he is not against tanking at all. For those who are still iffy on the subject - these are the tactics that the coaching staff will/should use to develop players, give opportunities, and plan for 2010. - Sylvia might not be straight back in for the Tigers game, he may play a few penance games for Casey. - Tom McNamara, Kyle Cheney, Jack Watts, Rohan Bail, Jordie McKenzie, Austin Wonaeamirri and Jake Spencer may get one or two games they don't deserve on form as a spur for the future (ala Jack Grimes' 1 game at the end of 2008). - Valenti, Newton, Dunn, Batram, Johnson, Miller, and Buckley might see extended runs so that Bailey and the development coaches can make a judgement on their futures. - Perrenially injured players - McLean, Moloney, Rivers, and Jamar - may be wrapped in cotton wool with an eye to 2010. - Grimes may play RR, Petterd a wing, Bate a FF, Jurrah a HFF, Jetta a HBF, Morton a CHF, or Bennell a FP to develop different aspects of their game, and increase their base knowledge in various positions. That is my idea of 'tanking,' I call it that because it is not trying to win a game and I think calling it 'list management,' like some people do, is being disengenuous. Would those that oppose tanking, oppose the above measures in this losing year?

Those who have the chance should watch the replay for Cometti's laughing at PA in the last qtr. He was just amazed at how pathetic PA could be and how our kids kept screwing up as well but PA was so bad they just handed the footy straight back. Humorous. How ferocious is Jetta? I was just thinking that his confidence is rising and rising, he already is about 5th at the club for scoring assists. Very pleasing. I wonder whether Jetta, Jurrah, Bennell, Wonaeamirri, and Davey can play together long term. Maybe Jetta and Wonna are fighting for a similar position but who knows? Very exciting.