Skuit

Oh. I missed the joke. I'll move on.

I would take Majak for nothing on a rookie deal. There, I said it. Come at me - I probably won't respond (as I have nothing to back this instinct up). We need some more tall players maybe? Surely he's an upgrade on someone on our list?

Lockhart supporter. Keep saying the same thing though: anyone who wants an insight into selection go and closely watch the replay of our Bulldogs match. Kid isn't ready yet. Major positioning issues. But I think another pre-season and he will be a main-stay. Hibberd for Jetta (who was injured as far as I can recall) is fair. Jay can take Jetta's spot next year.

Love Ben. Would take for 22. I don't watch much football.

Yes?

Essendon supposedly hard to deal with - but I don't think that has been our recent experience at all. I even recall something around those two deals where one or both of the clubs indicated that mid-table trades work according to rough pick-ranges and pragmatics rather than some minor sticking points. We paid 'overs' for one and 'unders' for the other. Who even remembers which one was which now? So much water under the bridge since then. Once a player in that range indicates an intention to leave and a desired club the deal will get done. And while some are bemoaning Mahoney it seems he hasn't ever burnt any bridges and seeks a fair outcome for all parties - that can come back as a benefit in the future. Saad = early second-rounder and maybe a small sweetener without giving the house away.

So bizarre. I can't see the AFL dramatically reducing list/cap sizes now. Not until next year. They must have given some sort indication to the clubs though. What's the hold-up? How are clubs supposed to deal with contracts and such without at least a guide? Feels like some sort of PR management exercise that I can't comprehend the motivation behind.

Don't ever recall such a clean-out on day one of post-season. Add in any retirements and wantaways (even more likely now) and trades and with reduced lists it could be a more than 50% list turnover in one year. That's insane. Where are they going to find enough replacements? It's not like they're an attractive destination (and even moreso now) and it could be a limited draft still. Seriously? What's the strategy? They have two first rounders and a second rounder (25). That's three potentially decent future players. Maybe downgrade 2 or package 2 & 10 for another first-round pick. Add a top speculative pick in the rookie draft (or pull a Carlton). They don't have any father-sons or academy's that I can recall. Five or six youngsters. Trade out Polec and Brown for a couple more second-rounders? Their remaining picks are junk. One evident free-agency player coming in. And then what? Fill the list with low-level castaways from other clubs? Build a war-chest to go for for top-level talent in the future lol. North's mid-term future looks bleaker than ours ever did even in the darkest hours. They are well and truly bottoming out and at a bad time and I can only see AFL intervention ahead.

I fear for the state of Demonland should Melbourne roll over against Essendon or not win by enough if the opportunity presents. With a probable late start next year that's a potential eight months of serious bad vibes on here. The period between round 1 and 2 was bad enough. We've had a tough year and we've also blown our chances - but we're also still in a development phase thanks to our seniors being shot. I think we'll get the win but narrowly miss out on other results.

I'm okay with that as a point of personal difference in opinion and enjoyed the chat Go Dees!

That we would be better off in the scheme of things without Jack. And even then I completely understand and mostly agree with your point of view re. the midfield. But by next year we should be good and flexible enough to fit them all in - and good clubs don't lose a player of Jack Viney's calibre and nature because of some positional issues. We need another outside mid/winger and we need better midfield coaching. But don't throw Jack out because we don't have those things. Fix those things first.

This. But does he have the potential to become an A-grader? I think the no DH rule needs to be carefully assessed on a case-by-case basis. Was for Bennell, but not Sam Murray. Don't know why - but an older guy with past problems is probably better than a younger guy with current ones. I trust our club to make the determination on the matter. Can't see it happening.

I agree with almost all of your points.

C'mon Wells. Tomald is done. The foot issues have all but finished his career. I think it's really evident but there's still some romanticism on here that he can come back. Agility was never his strong point and whatever he did have is now gone as well. At 28 he's not coming back. Would be steak-knives at best to the Bombers or in any other trade. I also think culturally he is an issue to our particular team. I get the sense that he looks down on our young'uns with a certain level or arrogance and disdain (and sure, they don't come across as culturally that bright). But he also can't recognise his own short-comings.

You need to let go of TMac. He's not going to fly again. And even if he does, it's at the detriment of our forward mix and development. I would prefer an overrated Saad running the ball out of half-back like no-one we currently have.

Yes. Forgot about that.

Have no idea where to put this and didn't want to start a 'Not Conner Blakely' thread. But it feeds in a little bit. There was a curious side-note that we weren't interested in Blakely buried deep down in an article on his potential move last week. We were the only team mentioned as not being interested - and it felt like the journo had rung around and only got any info out of us. Are we leaking or is our recruitment team on the attack? Anyway, for me it adds weight that if we're being mentioned it's serious news. In other news: anyone think that Saad could hold down a wing?

Holy [censored]. Would take a 22 and Tomald swap in a heart-beat and run away as fast as I can (nowhere near as fast as Saad can run though, also; all the best to TMac. Hope he kicks a bunch of goals for them against everyone but us). Or they can have 22 and a future third-rounder, or a pair of brothers if they want. Still priority want Williams as a free agent but would more than happily take both. They got Saad cheap from memory so the optics are okay if he wants out.

Kick one more goal against Geelong or Brisbane and the year is not 'wasted'. Results don't go our way (and results going a team's way is always a factor in the bottom half of the eight) and our year is apparently wasted. It's a seriously thin wedge.

I don't think this is fair AF. Everyone on here knows we have a midfield squeeze and a conundrum in that almost none of them are capable enough in other positions. But no one knows the clear solution without leaking some talent or messing with our culture. Harmes started out at half-back and Goody identified this as a potential 2020 fix (al a Brayshaw on the wing last year) - with Jones occupying the HFF slot as the only option left to accommodate him in the team. It hasn't worked out. And I agree that Goodwin holds onto experiments for too long (e.g. Fritsch in the back-line, yet I also like that he gives ideas room to grow). But Goodwin's and the fan's perception as to our arc and current level of development differ. We're not there just yet - but Simon has to juggle expectations and impatience with development. Why not send Fritsch to learn the half-back role for a year if it's not going to impact our immediate flag chances? That is the opposite of being stubborn. It's an attempt to build flexible players and develop the team. We want wins now - but I'd rather a truck-load of wins and dominance in the future. It's only been in recent weeks where his rhetoric has switched from training wheels to putting it back on the club and players. It's insanely frustrating but echoes what Buckley previously and now Worsfold have been trying to communicate to their respective fan-bases in recent years. Jones will be gone next year. That gives us an extra degree of flexibility. We all know that Harmes is better-suited to a defensive midfield role and then half forward as a secondary option. We all know that TMac and Jetta are cooked, and AVB, and soon Hibberd as well. It's extremely silly to think that Goodwin doesn't recognise this as well. He's doing a decent job of easing the transition, and it's a tricky one with our serious senior leadership and games' experience vacuum. Come next year and I think all the chips will start falling into the right places. Players in their best positions. Some other holes plugged through trading and drafting. On the topic at hand - I believe it would be absolute folly to let Viney go. We need better midfield coaching for sure but should be able to accommodate Jack, Oliver, Trac, Brayshaw and Harmes in the one midfield - and on paper, i.e what we know they are capable of - we will have assembled the best midfield in the league. For years to come.

This framing almost always bugs me when spoken about - as there's a difference between on-field leadership and game-changing ability and the two are often conflated in how we term and express them. And they are sometimes different again from general club leadership. Viney and Jones can drive training and cultural standards as our club leaders but are lacking the ability to change a match. Jordan Lewis could (but not always) contribute a cool head in a tight situation through on-field leadership. Petracca now has the footballing ability to potentially change the course of a match at the death. These are all different things - and we haven't had them in a single-player package for a long time. They are genuinely rare though. May, Trac and hopefully Oliver I believe will soon cover this void. You don't necessarily need a 'premiership player' to play this part, and nowadays this isn't just the captain. But we have a serious issue coming up - and it's already a problem (and a legacy problem). I keep banging on about the same thing but I think it needs repeating for any real perspective. Our most experienced players are all mostly shot - and we're on the verge of losing a truck-load of game-day experience. Jones 295 Melk 185 Tmac 170 Jetta 160 Hibberd 155 Tomlinson 150 ............ Viney 135 Gawn 135 These are our most experienced players - and three of them are more recent imports already. It's conceivable we will lose half of them from our list for next year, or they won't get much of a run anyway. Most of that remaining upper group aren't known for their serious leadership qualities in the categories described above. We can augment it however we like but the next group simply have to step up if we are any chance of success. After Gawn and Viney on the bottom of that experience list we have another real gap to (in order): Salem 105 Harmes 105 Petracca 100 Oliver 100 Brayshaw 95 Lever 90 Bennell 90 Langdon 85 But that's eight core players to absolutely get excited about, plus May and Gawn and maybe Viney as our drivers going forward. Together, one half of a team. Throw in some younger talent - guys under 60 games such as Fritsch, Weideman, and then last year's recruits in Jackson, Pickett and Rivers - and we are close to a seriously stacked first 18 in the coming years. The question then is: do you stay the course and add another couple 25/26 y/o's on the wing or at half-back or a KPF where we have the most serious needs, but suffer another year or so of inconsistency until all these players peak together, or do you get in some old hackers to fill those spots? I have the patience. We're in a very slow rebuild since 2012 but we're nearly there. The slowness is a factor of what came before. But I've waited for so long now that I want another dynasty rather than stealing a flag and going back to the pack. I would hate to be a Bulldogs supporter right now. Issac Smith or Jack Gunston shouldn't be the answer, but Zac Williams and Adam Saad and possibly Jeremy Cameron are. We are not in JoelMac territory anymore. We are now brimming with real potential leadership. We have no trade cookies for now but we should have salary-cap space.

According to everything I've read a Vic or any other 'home' team could choose either the Gabba, Metricon or AO as its venue - current Covid state regulations permitting and with the AFL reserving the right to final say. It's a safe offering however with Brisbane having secured second spot.

The scheduling of the coverage has been following a good news/bad news trend. A bad loss and the media goes up much faster with a positive spin on the scratch match.

It's a bit over-the-top IMO that interstate teams have had to cede home-ground advantage in the past due to contractual agreements with the MCG and now they're suddenly accommodating the Vic teams with this nomination process in this bizarro season. Anyway, completely hypothetical, but for example if we finished above and drew Brisbane do you think we'd nominate Adelaide Oval, where we do have a good record but would add even more travel, and would people on here want that to be the choice?