old55

He's not very bright?

I couldn't disagree more. There is absolutely nothing to be gained by accepting that he's going to GWS unless it's an undeniable fact. That isn't the case. There is everything to gain from accepting Tom at his word and absolutely nothing to lose. He said he hasn't signed anything with GWS and he can't sign anything now. He may be in the process of making up his mind what he's going to do. In that case all the support he gets from us is positive. rpfc's been saying this for ages. Do you think Paddy who was mentioned in the Sunday Age article is helping? http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/loyalty-must-have-rewards-20110611-1fyca.html

I'm with you there bub

I like Schwab's plan because of the inter division matches - that means blockbusters are retained. The idea I'd been considering just had the teams playing other teams within their divisions which would not be good if say WC and Freo were in separate divisions for 3 years in a row and never played each other - those derbies are great no mater the relative positions on the ladder. I think his plan could be tweaked regarding who gets relegated and promoted. I think the Div 2 top team should automatically be promoted and the 7th, 8th and 9th team in Div 1 and the 2nd, 3rd and 4th team in Div 2 should play off for a two further vacancies in Div 1 - the two best teams of that series gets them. That means a minimum of 1 up and 1 down and potentially 3 up and 3 down. I think it's better to give teams the opportunity to play for Div 1 postions. That finals series would be nearly as interesting as the flag battle. It's not exactly clear in the Schwab article how many teams (in addition to the 2 mandatory) go up and down as a result of the play-offs.

Yes the restricted FA only applies to the top 10 players who are the ones who count. I actually think it's a pretty fair deal and could've been much worse for us.

8-9 seasons restricted FA (26-27 year olds), 10+ seasons unrestricted FA (28+ year olds)

When was the last time a team went from 10th or lower to win the flag the next year? Sponsorship, TV audiences and crowds will be up for 2nd tier matches because there will be massive interest in the outcomes. There'll be 80K at the promotion-relegation play-offs between Melbourne clubs.

Restricted FA I agree, but IA will be big with unrestricted FA.

I'll go to two bucks Jaded but that's probably my limit considering your bung knee restricts the positions you can play in.

Yes, GC/GWS and free-agency are the reasons I think our window is tight. If you believe in our draft driven chances then you have to believe that GC and GWS will be even stronger because just on raw numbers they'll have a greater draft advantage - I did the numbers some time back - there's a post somewhere on here. Free-agency is going to favour the richer clubs.

I really like it and have been thinking the same for quite a while - it eliminates the all the dead-rubbers that we're going to have and really keeps the season alive for all 18 teams all the way through 25 rounds. There's no reason we shouldn't be in the top 9 with the salary cap and draft retained. There'll be more interest in games in teams down the ladder than ever. You'd get 70K to a Richmond-Melbourne round 25 game if relegation-promotion was at stake.

When all you've got is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. Season over eh? Maybe for you but not for me.

I don't think Collingwood are "making sound outside investment and being good at non-football related business" look at their pub ventures. They've leveraged a huge supporter base into big $s and Eddie has done a good job building membership and sponsorship. Collingwood have to spend the money on something and their football department benefits. If clubs like the Dogs, North or Melbourne can win a flag in this environment against the mega rich Colingwood, West Coast and Adelaide, and the AFL backed franchises Brisbane, Sydney, Gold Coast and GWS then it will be a minor miracle. I'd say the clubs which have maximised their opportunities the best are Geelong and Hawthorn - Geelong have got a unique stadium position and have really done it well, the Hawks have used Tassie beautifully. The Cats benefitted from great recruiting and the F/S and Hawthorn's list management has been very good too - they're the clubs I admire. FMD, if Collingwood, Essendon, WC and Adelaide don't win flags there's something seriously wrong with them.

I must've just dreamt that Judd is Visy environmental ambassador then eh?

You might be right, but that makes me nervous. I'm reminded of Belly v Didak nightmares. I think Didak might be finally getting over his pec injury and may be due for a very good game.

I don't see anyone taking criticism of Bailey personally - but I'm reminded of Ulysses and the Sirens. There's information that both affirms Bailey and raises questions about him and I'm sure those behind the scenes feel the same way - as I said there's insufficient information to know whether he's a flag coach. I've posted that simulating Collingwood's current gameplan wont win the 2014 flag, equally I'm unconvinced by our erratic performance - but even that can interpreted negatively or positively - flat-track bullies or when we finally get it consistently right we'll be very hard to beat. I'd certainly entertain Roos' and Malthouse's availability - I want a flag and I'm concerned that we have a tight window. A decision will have to made towards the end of the year - replacement by a coach who has won recent flags or an extension (maybe only for one year) are currently both open to me. Does that make me an apologist?

the $11 I saw for the Bombers at 3/4 time looked tempting

or 4 times a loser?

There's insufficient evidence for us to draw a conclusion on a Bailey flag. The fact is Bailey can't prove he can do it until he does it - he can provide indicators but good judges like Hannabal and Billy are interpreting the same indicators in opposite ways. The club has control in the Bailey decision and most people are saying we should wait and see - funny about that eh? In the end we'll have to make a decision and it will probably be without a whole lot more definitive information. Therefore I reckon a factor is who you think the replacement could be - if it's Malthouse or Roos that's a different story from say Sanderson or L.Cameron and different again from Eade or Laidley.

not me.

oldbet's line is +60 points for the Pies

Blease played on the west wing in the last qtr with a 40 knot NW blowing to the opposite pocket. The ball spent about 2 minutes out of 32 on his side of the ground so it made it hard to impact.

He looked OK. He's got a long way to go - look at the Ryder contest in the last, lion v deer. But he's got the tools - size, pace and a good kick. He's going to need a big investment in game time and he'll need everything to go right - no injuries. When Tapscott, Bartram and Garland come back there'll be a lot of pressure for spots in the back 6. The season injury to Grimes gives him a chance. Strauss vs Macdonald is the essence of development selection.

Agree, it was great how he really made himself an option and demanded the kick and he made good marking position and timing - if he'd stuck those extra 4-5 opportunities he got his hands on that he should have then he'd be up with early Schwarz in marking and it'd be knee deep on here. It's possible that he'll improve with more strength, his problem wasn't hard hands like Lyon and Neitz. Reckon I saw the shape of the final piece in his star jigsaw puzzle.

He has made progress, I agree. Biggest piece of progress is that he appears to have realised he's not the next Gary Ablett and plays his role within his limitations. Have a look at Pro-Stats - he still needs to work on his contested possessions, tackles, clearances and 1%s. He should be top 3 in all these.