old55

rather than "be part of something ordinary at MFC" eh Tom?

Not higher than both compo picks for Gaff. The only teams that can compete with that are the teams with a mid round compo + their 1st rounder i.e. Dogs and Cats. And the only ones who could trump it would be those clubs with a top 4 or 5 pick - and it's quite possible that none of them will be Victorian clubs with GWS and then GC, Port, Brisbane and Adelaide filling last year's bottom 4.

Many here think we were ripped off with Scully compensation. Gaff has shown his worth as a legitimate pick 4 with some years of development. If you won't pay both picks for Gaff, there's inconsistency.

Link to a post where you doubted we should draft Scully.

It could quite equally say - "I had no idea the place was run by the cleaning lady ubtil I actually got here"

It's not all over yet, none of those is a bust ... 2003 pick 3 Sylvia: he has been improving since he got his body right and could still realise his potential 2003 pick 5 McLean: that's Gysberts now 2007 pick 4 Morton: It's easy to forget he just turned 21 this year 2009 pick 1 Scully: that's 2 unsused compo picks 2009 pick 2 Trengove: Co-captain at 20.

and oranges at quarter time? It's very subjective because old-time positional play has long since disappeared. There's probably 6 "mids" in the starting 18 (plus 1 ruckman, 6 backs and 5 forwards) and 3 on the bench (including the sub) along with the 2nd ruckman, that makes 9 in the 22 - with injuries a capable dozen on the list is probably about right. Lutz struggled to name a dozen in the best teams.

Enjoyed this from Caro: I don't know how it will go this year I support the expansion into western NSW but I'm torn by my historical dislike of Sheedy and schadenfreude associated with Scully's exploiits. I liked these:

I like that Flanagan article, never a truer word than his closing paragrapgh:

I agree with that - kicking deficiencies are less destructive in the mid-field than the backline - ironically the further you move up the ground these days kicking becomes less important - it's got to be easier to steer it between two posts 7m apart than hit a team-mate from the same distance with 2 opponents 5 m away from him.

Bartram has kicking limitations. He's a smart player and a good decision maker and if he can chooses targets within his limitations and usually hits them (when he misses it does look extra bad). The big problem is when he's forced to kick to targets outside his comfort zone - it's turnover time and the better drilled opposition try to generate this situation, leave him unmarked to get ball and guard his short space targets.

Moved the pick activation posts to the relevant thread: http://demonland.com/forums/index.php?/topic/29282-pick-activation-for-the-draft/

They can't leave it until the end of the year and "see where you finish".

The decison on whether to activate the compo picks has to be made pre-season, please see this thread: http://demonland.com/forums/index.php?/topic/29282-pick-activation-for-the-draft/

It's a good discussion and it's going to be fascinating to see how Neeld uses Rivers. I'm struggling to think of a more interesting story in the new regime - Morton, Bate, Green, Sellar will all be very intersting too.

I'm no statistician but it's unlikely to be a normal distribution IMO. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_distribution More likely to be skewed to the right with a lot of ordinary players and very few elite players. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skewness More likley to be a log-nornal distribuion or Pareto distribution http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Log-normal_distribution http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_distribution

I agree with you to the extent that he may have unintentionally sabotaged the flag effort. His performance on TFS was absolutely disgraceful, but there is no way he deliberately sabotaged it - he's too selfish, that TFS performance proved it.

300 points is 50 goals - that's a stretch even for that game.

I fear you're serious! MM wanted to win B2B badly, there is NO WAY he would have sabotaged this - it was his flag at least as much as it was Collingwood's flag. If Neeld left with his blessing it was because he genuinely believed a distracted Neeld would harm the Pies flag chances more than help them. Bucks was supposed to step into the breach ...

I'm guessing it's part of the CBA - number of matches players can be required to play including intra-club practice matches. There's a standard number of weeks off and a defined day off per week.

Yes I do. You want to know who I think is mainly to blame for W186 - the Geelong Football Club. They are an extremely talented, ruthless unit playing on their home ground where they have a massive advantage. It doesn't take much for a team to be "off" and the Cats will pounce. Look at the R24 result against Collingwood the 2nd best team in the comp at Collingwood's home ground. The Cats are mainly to blame. That we were off our game is a big contributing factor - why? McLardy interviewing team leadership, Bailey rumoured to be reappointed - I agree it's up for conjecture.

There's hope. When hope is gone, I'm gone.

Not that I would encourage this sort of behaviour but ... http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?t=908378&page=1 Nice Nirvana photoshop work there

You seem to have blanked out the Balme and Daniher years, when despite not winning a flag we were one of the most consistently well performing clubs - regularly making finals despite far less resources than other clubs.

All reports are that the players liked working with Bailey - it's most likely that they were not upset by the news he would be re-appointed. Nope, I like my explanation a fair bit better thanks. And yes it does point to mental weakness in our leadership group - I think that's agreed.