rpfc

We are a long way off getting this done but it is enticing for home games against interstate games. Stadium deals are the difference between the rich interstate clubs and us, NM, the Bulldogs, St.Kilda etc. Forget the draw, we are always going to get a [censored] one and Collingwood is always going to get a good one. But if we could get the funding together to get stadia for 25 000 at a Casey like ground we would be much better off and the AFL would have no argument about maximising attendances because we wouldn't get more than 20000 anyway (and if the MCC complain about taking away games from them then maybe they should have thought about that before this mess occurred). And if anyone says "yeah but we will only get 10000 at Casey anyway" i'll scream because: first - you're underestimating crowd expectations and secondly - we would do better than break even with 10000 when break even is the best we will do against interstate teams.

Warnock has not played a bad game all year. Garland was great today, he believes in himself and its hard not to yourself. Bate, McLean, McDonald, Bruce, Green are the real form reversals. Not getting cheap kicks across half back. But Davey today played a four qtr effort that was fantastic, just a shame about that tackle/push right at the death. These players are showing something and they are all 24 or younger: Buckley, Jones, Batram, McLean, Bate, Miller, Frawley, Morton, PJ, Garland, Bell, Moloney, Davey, Warnock, Wonaeamirri, and Valenti. And Jamar was ok.... Promising signs.

Very disappointing. Unlike most weeks, the boys showed more than the fans. How can you not come to a game like that? With Neita and the fallout from what Kennett said.

I'm more concerned about the 92.5 threshold... Might have to re-sign Bate for $750 000...

Opportunities and Problems Gardner saying 'MCC boutique stadium' implies that he thinks that the MCC should build (or at least help) a small 30 000 stadium for smaller games. The stadium idea is a fantastic way of financing our future, ala Geelong. BUT why would the MCC spend such money when the benefit is designed for the smaller clubs? IF the MCC build it, would not MCC members get in for free? Not going to maximise profits that way. These need to be cleared up. OTHERWISE, we should look into this with funding from Casey, State gov, Fed gov, sponsors, and/or the AFL. The MFC could play Freo, WCE, West Syd, Gold Coast, Adel, Port, Bris, North, Bulldogs, and Sydney at a venue that size, without hampering the AFL and its decree to maximise attendances. Looking at this years draw as a reference we would have the WB, Freo, Sydney, Bris, NM, and WCE games at the boutique stadium. The idea of 6 home games away from the G isn't appetising for many, and I am an MCC member (and yes I am an MFC member too), but it should be enough for a Casey or a Fed govt looking for votes in Casey to put some money into it.

Holland to play on Roughhead. Otherwise FF.

Just play with the same heart that Moloney plays with. And the same frustration and aggro when things aren't going well.... I reckon this game will be "on," most games generate their tension from the fans and we are tense aren't we.... The younger players will learn a few things on Sunday. They'll see some tough footy wether they want to or not. Hopefully Moloney, Brock, Jones, Miller, Batram, and Macca can inspire some toughness in the others.

We should also mention that Hawthorn's rosy picture includes the money from Tassie that will cease because they reckon they can get a franchise going down there. Pretty sure it's $2m a year, that's alot of coin to lose in a couple of years... At least the AFL will be there to help them out....

Gardner Reply Tasmanian Hawks is the best line of the article.

The AFL reckons that 18 teams will get them $1billion in the next deal. The AFL will help us but they don't want to be our buttress and we don't want them to be either. We will sign our new deals with the AFL and MCC soon, but the AFL is just trying to do what any good business does and that is look at all alternatives before throwing money at the problem. The AFL will get our back, when we get our act together.

Miller isn't a defender. CHF, HFF, or Wing. That is it. Rest of the season. Then decide wether we both should move on or keep going.

I could give a reasoned critique over why he is wrong and that we can in fact make it in Melbourne. But I think i'll just say "frack off, Jeff."

There are no easy answers. One that sticks out to me is the fact that the club is still divided after the merger in '96. Only 12 years ago, and it split the club and those wiling to work for the club. And, let's face it, Gutnick was not the saviour that we all thought. Plans are underway to bring people back into the fold and that is a good start. Other than consolidation of every aspect that you mentioned, we also need patience. Not just the fans, but sponsors and the AFL. I think we will get it. And I think we will get it right. Sooner or later...

IMO the key point of the article is the changed view of the AFL after we got rid of Harris. With turnover at around 90% the AFL were rightly coming to the board and saying, "we are paying for your pay outs and recruitment expenses, and its not even related to the football dept." Renegotiate, get some more sponsors on board and let's get moving. By the way, pretty disappointing about the gaffes in the article but it happens, I don't think malice was intended.

Yeah i'd like to see Warnock have a go on Franklin. He's 24 and if he wants to stick around he's gonna have to that kind of job. Outs are tough because everyone were as bad as each other. Ins are easier, just a matter of how many come in (in order and if fit) - Rivers, Johnson, Wheatley, Whelan, Carroll, Yze, Dunn, and Holland. Rivers, Carroll and Wheatley are injured I beleive so I predict Johnson and Whelan to come back for PJ and Buckley. Not saying I agree, just what I think will happen. Although I would prefer PJ played ruck at Sandy than BP for Melbourne. Franklin v Warnock, Roughhead v Frawley, and Bell v Williams.

Not saying they deserve to be dropped or should be dropped... I was merely trying to predict who would get dropped, if Yze was to come back who would go down?

Huge fan of our current youth policy myself but as I said in another thread 17 players last week were 24 or younger, so having Yze in the team is acceptable as long as the U/24 crowd stays at least at the 14 or 15 level. Vulnerable players: Frawley, PJ, and Buckley.

I have to question you on the claim that the Casey council is willing to build stadia, I haven't heard anything about that. 20000 is a lot of seats and it'll cost a lot of money.

Davey is short. Valenti is short. They are probably not short walking down Chapel St, but they are short walking down the race.

...and if you married your fathers sister, you'd be your own uncle.

Nicho ahead of Nath. Not an endorsement though. And Bizzell was fantastic from the time he came to us to when he smashed his head against Adam Simpsons' knee in Rd.9(?) 2005. Smart courageous player, loved him.

Tends to reveal how many tackles someone had. Just quietly. Valenti played just over an hour, went well. Quicker than he looks. Tiny though.

That was '05 and he was on fire. But he couldn't kick then and he can't kick now. All helicopters and such, not pretty. Still valuable though...

Yeah, give it to Nat or Rich or Hurley. No-one on the list demands the number.

Hate to spoil your fun but he missed that shot... Is it just me or are Cam Bruce's helicopter kicks getting less and less reliable? Anyway, back to topic - Morton is a gun, feed him and put him where Miller is. For all the Miller lovers out there he can play on a flank or a wing if he must.