Skuit

I'm trying to recall if we've ever used Kent at the center-bounces? Not a suggestion, just curious.

Pretty sure we could spot Dee-L in the very first letter of a post.

It's funny you should say that. I split my index knuckle hitting someone playing in a match of footy. It was the last time I did either of those things. But the guy was unmarked. My throw was off and he ducked slightly and I caught some solid bone around the top off his head. I don't actually care if that's how Jack did it, but that the reporting seems a bit strange. Anyways, I'll move on.

Wait. The reporting and the responses on here re. the timing and circumstances of Viney's injury are all over the shop. AFL article says he hit Ebert in the third which is not true. Mahoney says Viney injured his hand early in the first. Someone said in a tweet it was just before the Ebert incident which was late in the first. And the footage showed attention to Viney's hand after the incident with Ebert. I'm not looking to call anyone a [censored] but just want to understand the truth of what happened. I know the boy is tough, but if he had popped a knuckle early, it's odd that he's then throwing punches with it not too long after. And would it be fair then to conclude he at least aggravated it with Ebert?

I actually cancelled my plans yesterday (my girlfriend has a birthday every year so it wasn't really an issue) and committed my entire Sunday to deciphering the encrypted message in the hope of cracking the key to allied victory. It appears the opposition forces may be targeting self-destructive weaknesses in our defense systems.

On initial assessment, I believe this idea has merit. Especially compared to other suggested remedies.

Tom McDonald often ignores the obvious safe choice in favour of a risky switch across half-back to a contest. It's not smart football because the opposition rebounds and goals. We have many dumb footballers in our team. Maybe some of the players like Tom McDonald are a little too arrogant for their own good?

I agree that Roos is often deflecting heat, but during the week he said this; 'At the moment, it’s a matter of, if you win last week, it’s hard to make changes.' Why at the moment? I think it may be an overlooked element of his managerial role particular to our especially young team and trying to develop a healthy culture. Do this, this, and this, and you'll be rewarded. Most of us felt that Omac probably wasn't up to it just yet, but it was maybe thought that pulling him and perhaps ANB when they'd fulfilled the role asked of them after a win would have been unfair or even contradictory. It's likely the young kids are holding their spots if they achieve internally-set KPI's. Some may disagree that this is the way to go in building a strong culture but it's just a reflection of where we're currently at. Kid-gloves for a kid-team.

Sweet poetry.

I agree. Paly manon manand you fricken force!

It's not that hard to spell entire words.

I know we say it every week, but . . .

So a bit like spinning the wheel of fortune. Can we buy a vowel?

Flanagan, as always, excellent.

Port. Followed by Hawthorn. Then Sydney. And Collingwood would probably be next on my list.

One thing that has always struck me - salary caps never appear to be as perilous as you'd expect. Top teams seem to keep adding big-money players without a great deal of concern. I understand that their players often sacrifice some income for success, but with Frawley to the Hawks for example, on the reported contract figure, you'd imagine that their senior players are still doing pretty well as otherwise it would likely breed a fair amount of resentment. It's probably not abnormal, but we seem to be locking in a core group of solid players till 2019, with I imagine an internally expected genuine tilt from 2018-?. Maybe the hope is that with some success by then, our group would be willing to take a pay-cut of some degree on their next signature. So do we spend big now on imports? Along with being a savvy move in terms of our projected trajectory, I think with us trading out of this year's first round it gives a pretty good indication that we're ready to lock down with the young talent base we have (I actually expected us to do it it last year - and I'm very glad they didn't in big blazing Oliver hindsight). While opting out draft-wise for immediate success always seems fraught with long-tern danger, we've assembled a sizeable brigade of potentially-elite youngsters by double-dipping at the top-end of the past few drafts. All in all, I think we're ready to throw our picks around, including next year's, in order to attract some serious talent. We're also in an unfamiliar position as supporters in that we need to get used to the idea that soon we'll probably be trading out genuinely good or performing players for a shot at an upgrade.

These strategies have done extremely well in delivering us to this point and we certainly have a lot of internal development to come - but now that we're here in a new phase of team development, is it time to implement another strategy? We're set to lose some draft currency for one thing, and the departing free agent bonuses that come with it. Will more Buggs, Kennedys, Vanders etc. along with lesser incoming elite talent see us simply hold ground rather than become serious challengers?

No point reverting to man on man in defence against Westhoff and Dixon. It will just confuse the McDonald boys trying to work out which hipster is which.

Jack, Jake, Jayden, James and now Jeff. Who's next on the alphabetical list?

Precisely why he won't be available. For cheap at least. Along with a couple others on that list.

So we've solved the Frost/Pedo conundrum.

The Paul Roos article makes me more uncertain not less. Paul talks through the media. Seems to me he's getting a message across to Tom.

Do three highlights constitute a package?

Was this intended to come across as some secret note from a Cold War spy thriller?

Matt Spangher seems like he's pretty handy to have around if we're looking to boost our premiership chances.