old55

18/5/12: MCG Collingwood 96 d. Geelong 84 26/5/12: AAMI Collingwood 75 d Adelaide 49 14/7/12: MCG Collingwood 110 d Geelong 79 So far this year the "barely ever successful gameplan" is 3-0 over the "proven gameplan", are you predicting a change of fortune come September?

I've agreed CAC's results are below par, but better development may have given a better result. There's a reasonable chance that Sylvia and McLean would have been A-graders if they were recruited by Collingwood, Geelong, West Coast or Hawthorn. I agree Morton, Petterd, Dunn and Bate wouldn't be A-grade anywhere but at least some of them would be players. Add optimum results above to Jones, Grimes, Frawley, Garland, Rivers, Jamar etc and he might crack a pass. Do you reckon Thompson and Jolly would've become the players they are if they stayed at Melbourne?

Lucas Cook, All-Australian CHF a couple of years back and 1st round pick. 196cm tall - at a club who has had notoriously poor development program and has had some injuries. Is currently not being given a go in one of the worst AFL forward lines, is out of contract and could be available.

Overall CAC is below par but our poor development, heavily influenced by poor facilities and poor staffing levels is a factor. It would be interesting to see the results if Bate, Dunn, Morton or Petterd had been drafted by good clubs. I reckon some of them would be good regular players - there's actually still a chance that will happen, I expect some interest to be shown in them. If half of them had made it CAC would be in the positive. I think BP is getting a premature rap. It might be right, but it also might be wrong. I have no problems with the Watts, Scully and Trengove selections. For a variety of reasons we haven't seen enough of Gysberts, Tapscott, Blease, Strauss and Cook to be definitive. He's made very good selections later in the draft with Howe and McDonald. Bennell, Jetta, Gawn, Fitzpatrick - you get a mixed bag at that level in the draft. In 12 months the outcome will be be clear - if Neeld dumps 2 or 3 of Gysberts, Tapscott, Blease, Strauss and Cook at the end of this year then it'll be sooner.

18/5/12: MCG Collingwood 96 d. Geelong 84 26/5/12: AAMI Collingwood 75 d Adelaide 49 14/7/12: MCG Collingwood 110 d Geelong 79

Prosecutor says defendant did bad things.

I'm very active in that thread advocating a one-year extension for Bailey at the start of 2010 to the end of 2011 and I'm fine with that. The argument then and now was that after requiring Bailey to tank for 2 years in 2008-9 it was going to be hard to tell whether he could coach in the first half of 2010, but we'd probably have a fair idea by the end of 2011. The Board and CEO seemed to think the same way. Sometime in that period the CEO came to the firm conclusion that he wasn't up to it and that was the basis of the fractured relations at the club at the time - pro-Bailey vs anti-Bailey. The Board was unable to get on top of this issue primarily because Jimmy took on a job he was unable to complete because of his health. Eventually after 186 almost everyone had come to the same conclusion Schwab had somewhat earlier. I reckon on a similar timeline - by the end of 2013 we'll have a fair idea whether Neeld is on the right track.

I'll take the "barely successful" 2010 flag and 2011 GF thanks. It'll be interesting this September to see how the "barely successful gameplan" goes against the "proven gameplan" - who knows maybe the Crows will manage more than 6 goals at home next time? Yes fair analysis: Neeld inherited a poorly drilled, poorly conditioned outfit and has to strip it back to move forward, Sanderson has done very well on the back of a well drilled, well conditioned outfit and his real test is to come in the finals - flag or exit in straight sets from a home final?

Yeah Sanderson is riding high on the coat-tails of Craig's good work over many years.

Care to explain how Fan's post supports your position that Neeld and Craig are duds and should be sacked?

My "quadrella" looks something like this - and as is known I don't follow U18 footy so my selections are representative: 3: Jack Martin - there has to be quality in the U17 draft and it ensures GWS pass on Viney 4: Toumpas - or whoever is best mid 13: Boak or Caddy - I don't want 4 x 18yos, B&C want to leave, we can overpay them to convince them come to us and 13 is unders 25: Viney That gives a balance of star potential and immediate improvement.

List management will be fascinating this year - to see who we persist with and who we part company with. Without inside information it's very hard to predict what might happen. Selection is not really a guide because the FD is likley to be playing some players to see if they can cut it, fit players not getting selected ought to be worried. Who is in and out of contract does have a bearing on the final decisions. Only a very limited number of players are GUARANTEED to be on our list next year - that's what makes it so interesting. The only players I'd bet my house on being at the club next year are: Frawley, Trengove, Clark, McKenzie*, Grimes, Garland*, T.McDonald*, Jamar*, Tynan**, Taggert** - * because they were just re-contracted, **because they get 2 years. Jones and Howe can be added to the list when we contract them. That leaves 34 players who are candidates to be elsewhere.

Yeah I saw that, a few on his list could be traded and a few are out of contract but they're not necessarily the same few.

That's an entertaining list - Davey, Fitzpatrick and Gysberts are contracted beyond this year so they'd have to be traded.

Why not - it's only money, if we've got the space in our cap because we've heavily front-loaded in the past and the general nature of our list we should spend it even if we pay overs to get a good player to the club. As discussed earlier in the thread - it's a better deal for us to get Boak to the club with big $s and pick 13 because he wants to come here than pick 4 and have Port force him here.

What part of the U17 draft track is that?

10 - 12 senior list players? That would be some slash - everyone who is a candidate would have to go. 5-6 mature players? Including rookie promotions?

Things might have been so different - if we hadn't pushed Junior at the end of 2010, he would've stayed on as captain, Cam would've re-signed, 186 wouldn't have happened, Bailey would've been re-signed, Scully would still have left, Cam and Junior would've retired with honour at the end of 2011, Beamer would be captain and we'd be 14th with 4 or 5 wins now ...

Just shows a complete lack of understanding - have you ever listened to Malthouse on the radio? He's very good to listen to but he defends his proteges like there's no tomorrow.

He's shot but he's got trade value, OK. You must have been to tonatopia's school of logic.

When are you going to answer Bob's question?

Must be mayoress of Port Adelaide if she can't move too.

One reason is because we can. Trade is not like a normal marketplace - if our 1st pick last year had been 4 then that's what we would've needed to use in the Clark deal, we would've got something back, but that's what would have happened.

Right. We'll sack Neeld and Malthouse will take his place. That's pretty consistent with your reasoning capability.

Tell James McDonald that.