old55

That's quite right, the more I've learn, the less I realise I know.

Agree he's definitely worth thinking about. Nick Riewoldt's not available for trade. He's got the physical attributes to play the fwd/ruck role and he's a good age. Just because he's not playing at WC doesn't faze me - they've got problems over there. The questions for me are: - Can he be the long target? My recollection is he got a lot of his footy on the lead, can he take an overhead mark? We don't need another PJ. - Can he fit in with other forwards and play the game plan and not just get his big frame in the way? We don't need another Miller. It's vital to keep a co-operative and open forward line where each forward has room to operate. I just don't know enough about him or how this works to know. In the news he knocked back $300K and he'd be looking for 3 years so he's no bargain basement - we'd have to be convinced he was valur.

We can only hope this happens. But I think Neale is busy helping West Coast.

What a relief - glad that's sorted!

Who are our stoppers?

Agree that Miller offers a great role model for leadership, preparation and commitment that GC would value. But I'd be surprised if they pick him up - Miller has the physical attributes to play the game as you point out but unfortunately for him he's just not a natural footballer - we'd be keeping him if he was. Yes he's got a big body, but it would be a big body getting in the way, there's not much Brad can teach the GC youth about how to play the game. It's similar for Belly, he can't play in the backline because his decision making lets him down - stopper or defensive forward are the only roles he can play and it would have to be for a contender looking to fill those roles, not as a teacher at a start-up club. I often thought that Belly followed instructions too literally - always looking to dispose to advantage as instructed and often got caught out - no intuition for the game. It's a testament to the character of both of them that they've been on the list for so long. Godders, Walshy, Nicho etc - they join a list remembered fondly.

As another poster pointed out in another thread - re Warnock: some of you guys could make use of those nasal sprays advertised on the billboards... I think McLean will be assisted by the interchange limitation too - at least he wont be spending half the quarter getting from the bench to the contest - I reckon he too can still make a contribution. I think Carlton are tracking nicely and are harshly judged - they're into their rebuild and they have the stars in place - the criticism that their bottom 6 is weak is over-cooked - it's a hell of a lot easier to fix your bottom six than your top six and they can do that with some trading and their early picks over the next few years. Geelong and St.Kilda are going to drop off and the Dogs will remain just off the flag pace (altho I think they're much better placed to stay up and contend than most peiople think). Carlton are going to be there-abouts when we hopefully start to challenge for a flag which will be great. Hawthorn and Collingwood have a few years in their window, Carlton aren't into theirs quite yet - maybe top 4 next year. It would be sensational to join those three in the top 4 in 2013.

What about other players who may be delisted? Do they deserve a farewell game if they're to be delisted? Where's the cut-off?

There's a small chance he'll make it but there's a small cost in keeping him as a rookie and there's a massive gain if he does make it.

Retiring Junior is a big decision and it's not black and white - but a decision had to be made one way or the other - doing nothing was doing something. Without Junior on the list another player like say Jordie will get to play 20 games in the midfield in a slot that would not have been available. On the other hand Junior's great recent form may have made the difference to playing finals and giving 21 players that experience. Without Junior on the list we get a pick in the draft - a pick that delivered Fitzpatrick last year and Bail the year before. Junior is on the vets list so only half is salary is counted in the cap but we still have to pay him - let's say he was on $300K+ whereas the draftee is on $50K - that's an extra $300K we have to invest in our footy department next year. For example part of that may be used as an extra $150K we can use to front-end contracts. A decisive approach has been taken - Travis, Robbo, Brock, Junior, maximising our draft position last year - we're not just letting it happen - we're making it happen.

Some breath-taking comments on Newton in this thread. Did anyone notice that the AFL is going to limit interchange next year? This means 2nd ruckman is D-E-A-D and forward/part-time ruckman stocks have just soared. As Rogue points out Newton has been playing this role well at Casey. PJ has shown over the journey he's poor in the forward line. Newton has skill, his problems are above the shoulders, he's still relatively young and could well come good with maturity if he begins to believe he belongs - look at Jamar. I'm all for playing him in the fwd-ruck role and I'm with E25 giving him an extended opportunity on the rookie list at least.

Demon great - going out on top. Captain, dual B&F, AA. He leaves big shoes to fill.

Agree with that. "it's the 10kg he lacks, that stops him crashing packs But I've got my doubts and what if I'm right?"

The good, the bad and the ugly!

Agree with that. But I think GC and trade will come before we need to make a final call on the hard re-contracting decisions and I think they start after Bell and Miller. A trade can be an effective delist of a contracted player for a late pick we have no intention of using. And while I agree that "demoting to rookie list" doesn't exist (as you say - if we do that we must be prepared to delist the player) - it is an option with contracted players to promise to re-draft them with our last rookie pick, so effectively we can delist contracted players without trashing our reputation - the point is we have to have rookie space to do it - which wont be a problem because we need that primary list space to promote rookies. I don't think I'm telling you anything you don't already know. Fascinating [© C.Wilson] time of year.

Agree that it complicates the issue but it can't be ignored in the calculation - if we lose a required uncontracted player to GC or trade out an unrequired contracted player it completely changes the equation. We probably need 5 senior list vacancees for 2 rookie promotions and 3 picks and some may come via these means.

Umpiring our game is very tough. There were some poor decisions that went against us yesterday but in other matches this year I've seen us get an equally beneficial ride. Umpiring is not something we can control so I don't worry about. I think it was very telling that Frawley had Buddy so well covered that he had to start staging for frees.

Agree, Bruce was very good and his kicking was good - I'm no big fan but he's been excellent the past month or so. James McDonald was really good also in the crunch. Our vets stood up which was pleasing for them. I'm not worried about the clearance difference - we'll fix that in due course as we mature. We do have a problem with physical presence in the forward line that I don't see an easy fix for. It's a great pity that PJ and Miller are not better players.

Following Melbourne for many years has given me plenty of perspective thanks. I'm not talking about Bate, I could see him in our flag team - the hypothetical is that he has left and you ask does that mean we should retain Miller. I agree teams have won flags in spite of some very ordinary players, however I'm pretty sure Miller wont be joining them.

I think you're on the right track with your take on the topic. But what's the depth for? Quite frankly for all Miller's endeavour he's never going to be a premiership player and if he had to come into our GF side as depth I'll be looking away. In the development years up to then I think it's more productive to improvise some variation in forward structure with a mix of better quality players than persist with known inadequacy. I note that this may seemingly contradict my previous case for retaining PJ on the list as depth for Jamar - but if you've got no ruckman it really does destroy structure - forward structure is more maleable. But to take the good essence of your argument and run with it I'd be inclined to think that if Bate left it may improve the chances of say Newton or Hughes being retained - with Miller WYSIWYG, the jury is ever so slightly out on Newton and if Hughes could get fit ...

FMD, that's a motley crue - if true they will get smashed week-in-week out in the first 2 years.

Corey's elite status in the premiership years is surely the relevant point. He's talking about the number of elites in flag winning teams. Michael Voss is not elite now either.

IMO Jones is in a group behind Trengove, Morton, Sylvia, Grimes, Scully and Davey in a future MFC premiership side. He's going to be competing for a position along with Gysberts, McKenzie, Moloney, Jetta, Bennell, Bail and Blease in the midfield rotation. He's a very likely candidate but he's no certainty - there's a balance of types required and Bennell, Bail and Blease offer different qualities. He's really in a sub-group with Gysberts, McKenzie and Moloney and it's quite possible they wont all fit.

I'm not in favour of an interchange cap. If less congestion is the aim then less players on the ground is the solution. It's not a big deal - cut the on field 18 to 15 and the total 22 to 20 (5 on the bench) and we'd have a more open and still high paced game. The AFLPA may not like it.

One thing about Nathan Jones is, like Cam Bruce, he plays every week - that improves his chances.