old55

I'm a cold-blooded fish but this makes it boil!

Machaya is a real talent, he was great in the wet in shocking conditions vs North earlier this year.

I can make an argument that the skills or lack of skills of the bottom 6 is possibly less important in the modern game. It more important that they can follow team rules and execute their defined role. In a tight GF finish, luck - Milne's bounce; and skill - Scarlett's toe poke can make the difference. I plead guilty of saying earlier this year that ANB's skill errors could cost us a GF but really that's not right, he plays his role very well and will be hit and miss with his finishing. List management and the salary cap means every team will have an ANB in it. Ultimately it's a combination of every team member adhering to a successful team system and whether enough the top echelon can deliver excellence on the day that matters. I agree it's not just about the top 6. I'm confident we'll be good against Geelong this week and it's reasonably clear their top 6 players are superior to ours. We lost at Geelong this year because Ablett and Hawkins got a hold of us in the last quarter. Dangerfield, Ablett, Selwood, Hawkins, Duncan and Stewart are probably better than the best 6 we will field - that's partly because some of our best players are still young and have not reached their peak and partly because Hogan and Lever are out. I do think Geelong's quality drops off faster than ours. But I think it's our contested game style and attacking power that will make us competitive and Max and Clarry will need to fire.

Yes that's a realistic line-up. The 3 talls forwards are holding out AVB, Hannan and Kent The 3 tall backs are holding out J.Smith and Hunt

And you only had to go back 47 years to find an example? The Dogs won the flag in 2016 - weird outliers can happen.

If they do that they push someone else out of the midfield rotation - that's why the 22 in the 3 sets IS relevant.

I'm surprised that you can't see the distinction between being rated in the top 6 and actually bringing that on GF day - it's not circular. 8/10 of those NSMs are best 6 with probably only Lake and O'Keefe as outliers and some may even argue that they were top 6. Across those "best" lists there's only Graham, Langford, Ellis and Osborne who are bottom 6. That's 4 out of 70+. They just don't make an impact.

The team breaks up into the forwards, mids and backs at the game breaks - these categories do exist even if "forward pocket" no longer exists. It is meaningful to group the players into each area and see what type of team balance you get and who misses out.

Both those sides are missing Fritsch

Keen to see some best 22s and the associated forward lines with Hogan, Weid and TMac all in that forward line.

It's a myth that it's the bottom 6 who matter in finals, it's the top 6 that have to be capable and fire in big finals. Here's a list of the "best" from Wikipedia for the last 10 GFs with the Norm Smith Medallist highlighted. The lists are dominated by the best 6 players at each winning club. 2017: Martin (NSM), Rance, Houli, Astbury, Prestia, Edwards, Graham, Grimes 2016: Johannisen (NSM), Picken, T. Boyd, Macrae, M. Boyd, Dahlhaus 2015: Rioli (NSM), Mitchell, Smith, Hodge, Gunston, Burgoyne, Frawley 2014: Hodge (NSM), Lewis, Mitchell, Roughead, Hill, Lake, Langford, Burgoyne 2013: Lake (NSM), Gunston, Lewis, Rioli, Hodge, Birchall 2012: Hannebery, O'Keefe (NSM), Kennedy, McVeigh, Jetta, Goodes 2011: Bartel (NSM), Selwood, Hawkins, Ling, Johnson, Chapman, Ottens, Varcoe 2010: Ball, N. Brown, Jolly, Pendlebury (NSM), Shaw, Sidebottom, D. Thomas, Wellingham 2009: Chapman (NSM), Rooke, Milburn, Taylor, Selwood, Ablett, Corey, Bartel, Ling, Scarlett 2008: Hodge (NSM), Brown, Ellis, Sewell, Crawford, Dew, Rioli, Osborne, Williams The reason MFC has failed to win flags in our competitive years in the 80s, 90s and 2000s was because our top 6 was not elte. That's different now - our top 6 is developing to be as good as anyone's and that's why we're a real threat.

It's the top 6 that win finals.

So some Geelong neanderthal can king hit him?

A lot of MFC defensive depth in that side: Petty, Keilty, J.Smith, Hunt and Johnstone selected back with J.Wagner and McKenna selected elsewhere.

Dave's not here man.

We played all 3 in R 6, 7 & 8 this year and then abandoned that plan. Weed is a improved since then and can be expected to improve more next year, and there will be rule changes - but is that enough to make it work?

It's a great problem to have, but it will be tricky to manage. I think only 2 of Hogan, TMac and Weed fit forward - we tried the 3 tall fwds earlier in the year and it worked briefly but then failed. We've got it at both ends. I think also probably only 2 KPBs fit too - that's currently out of Lever, Frost and OMac. We've got Keilty and Petty developing there nicely too - although they will be more patient. The added curve ball is that Hogan and Weed could play great football back too, so that may be a solution to the forward problem but add to the defence problem. It will come to the crunch in 2019.

Thread definitely should not be closed - there are too many revealing posts.

Selwood's clapping a "nice" touch too.

I just want to post this here to acknowledge what is at stake, this is the Geelong way ...

Heard a bit of "WEED" call going up last Sunday. It would be good it that took off.

I think they alternate the bays - except for directly behind the goals I've got a Level 1 aisle seat - expect Cats bay next to me.

Richmond member at work got 2 tix at 11:20, i.e. 20 mins. Ended up going "Best Available" and they are in the nose-bleed Northern Stand Level 4.

You've got a very long list of favourite commodities there.

IMO that's not correct. Weed is a beautiful kick, I watched it on "all the goals" and that spun as a perfect drop-punt with late fade - only the best can kick that kick. http://www.melbournefc.com.au/video/2018-08-27/rd-23-all-the-goals 4:50