old55

It's an interesting idea. I had a look at rpfc's 2011 measurements - particularly contested possessions and clearances, the mainstays of Neeld's gameplan: http://demonland.com/forums/index.php?/topic/25041-rpfcs-measurement-of-2011/page__view__findpost__p__472599 In 186 the differential was -48 and -21 and yet according to your theory we "play a "Geelong" style of footy"? I think whoever took over as Melbourne coach needs to address these issues. It so happens that's Neeld's style requires us to address them head-on. If Sanderson had taken over he would have faced the same challenge. The questions are: Does Neeld have anything else up his sleeve once he gets these fundamentals squared away? We should see an answer in time. Could Sanderson have got these fundamentals sqaured away while retaining Bailey's corridor attacking based style or would he too have had to strip back to a contested style? This is the core of your argument I believe. Maybe Essendon provides a supporting case - they played an attacking corridor style under Knights and have been able to translate that succesfully under Hird-Thompson.

Amongst other good creative play, Watts missed 2 contested marks - one in the backline in the 3rd which he should have taken (a stretch to even call it contested) and cost a goal and one in the forward line within range in the 4th which was harder but I'd expect him to ultimately clunk - if he takes them, we quite possibly win with the associated momentum shift and he's the match-winner. I'm thinking glass half full - it was a move in the right direction. If we try to spot up Davey in a contested marking situation against an opponent who is 15cm taller again I will spew up, we continue to do this - and yes I'm talking to you Chip amongst others. FFS if he's the only option (which he wasn't in the Chip case) then kick it along the ground and give him a better than 50-50 chance.

best outcome from my perspective would be an Opel patch that the shop can put on with their number applicataion machine - jumper says "no iron"

Spencer!

So many daleks and cybermen

Maybe they got the list management sheet mixed up with the team sheet?

That shot is not from Base Camp, we have made some progress since it was taken, even through the Bailey years, although some find it hard to believe.

Hodge, Ball and Judd were unanimous top 3 in 2001 and the Eagles had pick 3 - yeah they backed themselves to pick the one that was left. Or he took one look at the Junction Oval facilities ... well done Einstein! Next it'll be Napoleon and Hitler invaded Russia because of their love of biathlon.

No the eagles pounced because he was still there at 3. Next you'll say they would've taken him at 1.

With free agency, the opposition analyst position does have an overlap with recruiting and list management. A million monkeys and a million typewriters ....

Port Adelaide?

Quite a few of the expedition leaders fell in a crevasse on the Khumbu glacier - we're back at base camp again with new leaders, yes.

Drama queen.

Better tell Jake Niall ...

It's quite clear you're hangon007 resurrected - no-one else could post so "distinctively"

Hang on a minute - speaking of monkeys - I think the penny might have dropped!

TGVITHODL

A million cynical monkeys and a million typewriters later ... You're going to spend Tom's $6M dining out on the fact that you called it early - I reckon you've only got about $31 left.

FFS, they've got back stock with Energy Watch on them and they're not going to sell them until they have a suitable replacement - how hard is that to understand. Have a look at this thread - they don't want more of this trouble: http://demonland.com/forums/index.php?/topic/29939-for-those-with-reach-jumpers/

The 1st sentence of the post was simply to point out that stevethemanjordan was talking crap in between insulting people. The 2nd part was my conjecture - that BP wouldn't have left if he was satisfied with his job, particularly when it's incomplete (see Scully picks) - there's a number of reasons with he may have been unsatisfied though. You'll note that the paragraph starts with "I don't think". Can I make it any clearer to you that I'm not presenting it as fact? When I'm presenting a fact I'll say some like "I know for a fact that BP didn't leave because Mark Neeld forced him out" but I didn't say that did I?

That's simply not true - he was opposition analyst for us before he became head recruiter, now he has gone back to that role with the Blues. I don't think BP would have left if was satisfied in his role - he had the Scully compo picks to use and I imagine he would have been keen to use them. Unlike others I don't blame him for picking Scully - he was the unanimous #1 pick for 2 years prior. But there's no telling what made him unsatisfied - one conclusion is that he didn't like the change of FD or they didn't like him, another is that there was discontent prior to the arrival of the new FD - it's ambitious to speculate without some concrete knowledge.

Yes please post updates as you hear them - I have 2 jumpers that need fixing. Jaded suggested I could get an iron-on patch from Spotlight or Lincraft but the jumper label says "100% Polyester - No Iron". The best solution would be a new BOJ sponsor patch that goes on like the numbers, that they can put on in the shop if you take your jumper in. A replacement jumper is too expensive for the club IMO and I'd rahther live with the pain.

As posted by someone wise - desperately searching for "Dislike this" button again

Well that's just not going to happen under the current plan - have a read of Mick Malthouse's assessment of the Collingwood game plan changes and think about Melbourne under Neeld in that context. I was disappointed to see Watts not even contest one particular marking opportunity along the boundary line. He needs to be a major marking presence there with the way we play.

I realise that the midfield is the problem but it's strange that McDonald trained all pre-season with the forwards and is playing back and Sellar all pre-season with the backs and is now a ruckman-forward. I don't actually have a problem with these roles for these players, in fact I though McDonald was really good back last year under Viney. I guess they realised that Martin and Clark aren't contested marking threats, Watts forward has been abandoned for now and McDonald is just not ready for that forward role so they've had to try Sellar there. A lot of plans have turned to ash. I think Moloney is a very big out against teams like Richmond.