Skuit

I either feel really sorry for you or blame you entirely.

I agree to all of the above. But I don't think NAB inclusion or not gives us an idea of pecking order. Although positional differences, you wouldn't expect Wagner, Hunt etc. to be ahead. I imagine a case of season player management. And I love that these younguns' have shown genuine promise, been blooded, and will have the opportunity to develop.

Minor point. Stretch did have a run in NAB 1. Although very limited ground time. Billy and ANB remain a mystery. I think in past because of the uncanny parallels in career trajectory. You could swap their career bios to date and likely no-one would really notice. And now they're both in the exact same unexplained pre/early-season wilderness/management boat.

We should poach Basset from enemy territory (Norwood - Port) to takes Goodwin's spot when Goodwin takes Roos.'s. Not forgetting that Bass was an AA defender alongside Simon. He might even get some use out of Terlich.

I just had look back at the highlights of our round 2 defeat against them (don't do it) and their use of speed was downright contemptuous. M. Jones, Frost, Harry and maybe even Stretch could get a decent look-in at the table.

I suppose Grimes and Gawn do look somewhat alike. Similar game-day fashion sense.

According to the commentary Grimes actually picked up a couple of disposals in that passage within six seconds and 60m apart.

Their midfield stomped us and we haven't grown much taller. After Mumford it was their speed and tackling intensity. We've improved on the latter but the former might shape selections. I also recall them not really needing a forward line that day if we're thinking the absence of Cameron will give us some sort of massive edge. The game to be won in the middle and hopefully Jones rocks up this time.

I went to one T/20 fixture and don't think I'll ever go again. They need the hoopla to disguise the emptiness of the contest.

'For a time, he called Jordan McKenzie and Sam Blease by the same name'. The Max & Marty Show.

I've never said this because it's simply inviting ridicule but he reminds me of a young Buddy Franklin . . .

?

Along the lane-ways. Down the streets. Two colours flash. Red and blue.

GWS and the Dogs have stunning lists. I may be biased towards ours (but I think it's just as impressive although a smidge behind in development) and I may also be a bit blinded by living with a Filth supporter - but they have a different spread to the others and will have a very solid midfield and backbone in the coming years. Brisbane a year or so behind us in development and so far less certain if it will click or come to fruition. The Suns. . . I seriously think they'll be starting again next year and there won't be much the AFL can do to boost them up in the short-term. West Coast I believe will need very good continued management and coaching to overcome an aging top-end.

Bad-ass P-man? It's like a police advert for RBT's.

Eye of the Tiger? With a compilation of inspirational Maric footage on the big screen. Works for me.

The expectation that GCS lose players is too strong to confidently pick them for near future success. They should get decent returns on losses but it delays their progress. The first three and the MFC was just my opinion on young talent and development cycles. I don't think anyone else sits in this bracket (some may argue the Saints but I don't see it and their top end will be out the door in one clump). So the last spot excluded those teams that I don't think will quite make it with their reasonably progressed development (Port Rich Adel etc) and looked at the current top teams with the greatest mix of young talent and the potential to top-up with astute list management. I wouldn't exclude say Geelong or the Hawks in this regard - but the timing of the three year projection left Sydney best placed in my mind (i.e. it might be right around the time the Hawks are in transition). SOS is hard to call for me. The twisted nature of the 2011 draft brings to the fore questions regarding development v talent. But I'm pretty he'll sure screw Carlton as well. And I absolutely see the parallels to Melbourne. Picking randomly rather than to a carefully considered model over several years. Who would you have as your five contenders circa '18-19?

The other team is generally from interstate (non-Vic) and playing an away game and so at a neutral venue gets to avoid a disadvantage.

I don't think you understand the NT government or politics in general. I don't think you understand economics. And I don't think you understand critical thinking and reading between the lines. Note every one one of our press conferences with the NT tourism logo in the background.

Yeah, the Country Libs up there like to keep it squeaky clean. Think for a minute. How many people do you think will cancel their planned trip to Kakadu because the NT chooses to associate itself with the EFC? How many more supporters does the NT reach who might choose to come to Darwin for a holiday? Potentially 500,000 more.

NT provide sponsorship looking for a return in game-day tourism and longer-term exposure. 50,000 v 30,000 members and an estimated 700,000 to 200,000 supporters. Why would they renew with us if they had that opportunity for the same outlay?

If Port or Essendon really wanted it, on the same terms, then the NT wouldn't be extending with us.

Neither had Hogan this time last year. Maybe we should also suspend selling No.5 guernseys until he plays a game so we don't end up with a bunch of bell-end kids hanging out at our games.

They need a longer beat between 'two colours beat' and 'red and blue' as it sounds a little like 'two colours beat red and blue'. Oh, and it doesn't make much sense either way.

GWS, Bulldogs, Collingwood, Sydney and the mighty MFC. We'll be right among it.