rpfc

Right... Getting back to the thread topic; Dunn might be worth a go, not sure about the blokes they got last year (must be issues) but Haddrill is the intriguing one. So good a couple of years ago and the same age as our current full back. I don't believe we will go for him, but I am not entirely sure the coaching staff have much of an idea who will start full back next year. Carroll, Miller, Holland, Frawley, Bell would probably round the options. Each have questions.

I am abrupt when I type, I get that. But I just want the supporters to know the importance of the new push to brand ourselves as MelbourneFC. We are down to 220 000 supporters and we need to attract new Australians and new Victorians and the best way to do that is embrace the city...and not the spawn of satan. Apologies for any dismissiveness, I know the 'Demons' are close to everyone here. I just don't see the connect between marketing branding and the death of a clubs' moniker.

Without getting into a verbal two and fro, I did read it. You gave your opinion, stated what you would decide and then abdicated to the coaching staff. Implying you would expect a more informed decision from them, and that you would accept it. But how could you possibly accept a decision you think is 'ridiculous.' Apologies for the pretentiousness, I'm an MCC member. It's ingrained.

Selective quote considering the last thing mentioned before it is that it would be 'ridiculous' to pick up Haddrill. Therefore implying that their judgement can only travel one course. You have made that rational assessment and then stated that these assessments should be left to CC, DB, and CAC, even if the 'rational assessment' they make is 'ridiculous.' I stand by the implication that many people see rational decisions as only those that parallel their own prejudices and preconceived notions.

What is more of a pull: 'Demons' or 'Melbourne'? The fortunate happenstance of our name is what will save the 'Demons.' So, ironically, if we wish to remain the 'Demons' we have to stop marketing ourselves as the 'Demons.' And away jumpers...meh. If Man Utd can wear royal blue, and Arsenal gold, and Chelsea fluro green, and Juventus pink, and Barca tan, etc. then we should wear whatever if we are the away team.

And by "sensible assessment" do you mean agree with you. We have their coach from last year on our staff, if we pick any of them up it will be for good reason.

The club is trying to establish MelbourneFC as a brand. The single most important thing for this club is to strengthen the identification of home of footy and our club - Melbourne. As a supporter, I don't think the logo is that inspiring. But, if it helps people identify the city with us then I say, 'who gives a flying F if we have a bad logo for a couple of years'.

Isn't it amazing when you can go 5 years ahead of the draft and pick the best kids. Oh wait... This discussion has been done to death, all I need to know is that CAC is one of the best, we have him, and let's fix other areas of the club before we blame CAC for all our failings.

What rubbish. The club has finally come to the realisation that Melbourne (the name) is the best thing we have got going. We will not attract any new members with some marketing ploy surrounding "Demons." We will always be the demons, but we need to establish ourselves as Melbourne. And, as I said before, there will always be a Melbourne in the AFL (Melbourne-Collingwood Magpies anyone?). Who gives a sh!t if the merchandise doesn't show a demon, or hellfire etc. Honestly, some people need to think clearly before they post.

Not sure Bell has the awareness for a midfield role, but you never know. Green is pointless as a HBF, Wing at the least but I prefer FP - make him work for his touches. Dunn should play anywhere and everywhere, as should any young player, don't develop when they are doing the same thing every week. Slight exception may be Newton at CHF, but the way he played that role (especially under Riley) was FF, FP, and time on the wing, so he got to play a variety of roles. If Miller thinks concentrating on one position (I heard he would like this) will serve him better, he is kidding himself. He has to be versatile or it's hit and miss for one position.

Works with that charity that helps kids get back on track after they get into trouble. Name escapes me at the moment, but he's got a footy brain, obviously a footy player and not an athlete. Good to see. A Cam Bruce who can kick would be nice, but remember what Cam started out as, a tagger, HFF, HBF. In other words he was all over the place, so don't get frustrated when Dunn plays some role that you may think doesn't suit him. I want him to play a Paul Chapman type role. Not the same build but a flanker that can kick goals and also find some footy in the middle.

Just to get this thread back on track, since every thread tends to devolve to discussion over the recent re-signing of a particular player... Bailey looking very optimistic, good to see. He's taking over a club with a very good young list and will be coach as we celebrate 150, and move into new offices and facilities. Probably can't believe his luck. Usually new coaches inherit some very ordinary lists: Essendon - Knights, Richmond - Wallace, WB - Eade, Carlton - Ratten. Maybe you could add Fremantle - Harvey (or are they underachievers like Gerrard and Walls think?), and St.Kilda - Lyon (A few stars, but what surrounds them?) aswell...this year will probably answer those questions. Who knows, maybe Melbourne - Bailey will be added.

There is nothing wrong with trying to brand the club as 'Melbourne FC' as opposed to 'The Demons.' They're not going to change the nickname, but making 'Melbourne' more prominent is a way of trying to cement ourselves with a name that will always play in the AFL. Melbourne is the home of footy and there will always be a Melbourne, we just have to make sure they are called the Demons (however prominent the moniker) and wear the red and the blue. There was a side argument on Demonology that we should identify ourselves more as Demons to give ourselves the option of relocation, like the Kangaroos have done. What a load of bullsh!t. If we did that it would be the beginning of the end, if we haven't begun already. The club, however, knows that the name 'Melbourne' is our insurance and are working to strengthen that.

Miller is a very lucky boy to get another 2 years, that being said (to death) I believe we can get some value out of him, but as a CHF? Not sure, it's very difficult to say 'Brad we want you to play...(insert CHF, CHB, FB, HFF, Wing)' because at the minute we would have better, more deserving, options ahead of him. Anyway, putting him in one spot could be the end of him if he doesn't work it out quickly. Maybe FB would be where we have few options beyond Carroll. Apart from that, get him learning CHF, HFF, Wing, HBF. Something that suits his style; endurance running, presenting, able to quickly move it on, and not in a position where it is necessary to read the play well.

Miller has to be willing to play anywhere or else he won't play anywhere. IMO and in order to our needs, not exactly what suits him: FB - Just mark a bloke and beat him. CHF - Has to be towards a wing and tell him to stop, turn around and kick the sh!t out of it. HFF - Probably suited best to this, but a worry defensively. Wing - Left field one, but value scaring people off the square and bulocking his way through, good endurance, but has to learn to kick straight.

Amazing. We are arguing about an aspect of the club (CAC's recruiting) that has been (as we all agree) successful. Only Melbourne supporters can have such disagreement over the extent to which we agree. Let's look at our other problems before we get to recruiting: maturity of our 'senior' players, lack of development coaching, training facilities etc I understand some of these are being rectified so we are heading in the right direction. When these are fixed we can complain again about CAC's recruiting.

I expect to make the 8. I don't think we will achieve to the extent to which YM seems to think we will, but we have enough talent; showed it 2004/5/6. ND shouldn't be the scapegoat that he is made out to be; the club never spent any money on recruitment or development during his tenure. That is going to be rectified apparently and hopefully we will see a little more testicular fortitude and maturity out of players like Bruce, Green, White, Robertson, and Yze. This will get us back on track. But as with every team, it all comes down to INJURIES. Depth mean nothing when your best, most important players aren't there.

Half-back flank? What a waste, he was a champion centreman as a kid and now he is another wasting his talent. His indiscriminate kicks, his indisputable desire never to be tackled (he'll get rid of it as quick as he can to avoid contact), his disapperaing acts in August 04, 05, 06. Put him in the forward pocket and tell him to get it himself. I don't want to see him running off the back of Jared and Daniel and getting cheap, pointless touches out of defensive 50. He's a beautiful kick, but who needs that when you're kicking to a bloke on his own on the defensive side of the wing.

My point has been that most Demonland posters would say that CAC has been a success and you've rebutted by saying he is a moderate success. In recruitment, success is success. Especially for a cash strapped outfit like us. We already have massive turnover of staff at the club (due to Steve Harris, who is a challenge to work with) and I hardly think that it is necessary to remove a successful part of footy department. The club did a thorough review after ND resigned and came to the conclusion that CAC has been successful with moderate spending in recruiting and no spending on development. You also cannot give the argument that other recruiters have been more successful by pointing out Pendlebury and Thomas when you yourself have excused the 2004/5/6 drafts for CAC's judgement because 'it is too early' to assess those players. And my pointing out of the ladder positions deep into the season is to point out that we had/have a skilled enough team to achieve a top 4 position (well done CAC) only to be undone by things, surely, out of the control of Recruitment and List Mananger: the lack of testicular fortitude of the senior players.

This is pure Melbourne. Talking down our chances so that we can live in the cocoon of predictable failure. If you set the bar low enough you won't disappoint and you won't get your hopes up. We are not bottom three material, we are not beginning to rebuild, we started rebuilding in 2003 and are well into it. I expect to finish in the top 8, I believe that we have only improved on the sides that, in 2004/5/6, have been in the top 4 deep into the season. CAC has had to deal with a tight MFC budget and doesn't have the resources that the bigger clubs enjoy. And he is regarded as one of the best recruitment managers out there. And that comment about this years draft picks making an impact in the first year is utter nonsense, their just boys when clubs get them and they rarely do anything of significance in the first couple of years. Daniher has been such a scape goat over the years, things aren't that simple. Blame the senior players that have imploded in the past as they headed toward september in an excellent position.

Only delisted players can nominate for the national draft on Nov 24, otherwise out of contract players can walk into the PSD, name a price and get that price. Unless you're Whitnall, and then you'd take anything.

Defence doesn't win you anything. You need a good midfield, an avenue to goal, and minimal injuries. Premiership defences are always protected by great midfields.

So you think he's a success and you're complaining that we think he's a success. CAC was chased hard last year by Collingwood, and is highly respected. And if performance is the measure of a recruiting manager then: 1st on the ladder at Rd.18 2004, 2nd Rd.12 2005, and 3rd Rd.18 2006, is not bad at all. You cannot blame CAC for the weak minds and lack of maturity in our senior players, that has seen us blow great chances of a top 4 finish three years in a row. When you complain about everything, you're not going to persuade anyone.

Certainly was promising; he finished 4th in B&F in 2005 as a 21 yr old. I don't think it is a matter of absence making the heart grow fonder, i think it's the opposite: many are forgetting how good he was before he was cruelled by OP. If we don't see our charge for 2 or 3 yrs, we can afford to persist with him and get his body right.

He showed glimpses of great form, but he needs to work on his fitness and his attitude.