Key Deefender

Moloney is now 28. He turns 29 next February before the start of next season. This is his last chance at negotiating a decent contract because when players tick over 30, their value diminishes rapidly, particularly if changing clubs. His preference may be to stay and his heart may be with the Dees but if this is his last opportunity to obtain a decent contract for himself, then he would be mad not to compare his market value with us to what he may get elsewhere. He is very much an old fashioned footballer and the modern way may see his decline accelerate quicker than others. He has the remainder of this season to maintain or increase his value to either stay, and have the club want him to stay, or go and maybe help a club to a flag - even as depth, just to taste finals, which he may feel won't happen in his time at Melbourne. And for him that may be especially important given he was traded by Geelong just before their golden run.

Despite the fact Moloney and Sylvia have both been around for years, under Neeld's tutelage it is too early a call for trade talk regarding these two. One a demoted leader certainly and the other an unfulfilled talent, but players can blossom under a new coach. Who do we trade for - even more draft picks and make our list, already crying out for more mature hard bodies even younger and more inexperienced? How Moloney is responding to his demotion will be having an impact internally and he has been regarded as a great clubman off-field to this point. A flat track bully perhaps, but until he is depth at best, he has a role to play. Sylvia has had an interrupted pre-season and his season coming off a bad injury has only just begun. An inconsistent and overall a disappointing career to date, however under a new coach, his undoubted talents may still be realised. The tools are there. Again a strong body with some burst speed, and a thumping kick with potential to be a game changer should under a new coach be given a further opportunity to shine. He will never be a genuine leader but I think he still has some precocious unharnessed talent to unleash. This is not to say either are indispensible, but I reckon they have this season to show the new coach they can play his way and shine - and it is still only upcoming Round 7 in a struggling team still learning the new way. Our team is suffering badly due to a dearth of good leadership in the 25-30 age bracket. With Green and Davey flagging badly at this stage, we need the remainder to stand up. Trading for good leaders in this age bracket is not easy because they are either in their prime and giving their current club everything, and therefore likely unobtainable or over the odds unaffordable. Or they are borderline best 22, like Brad Miller was, and will add nothing on-field in terms of ability, although I do think Miller was a good leader off-field. There are signs that some players are turning the corner under Neeld - Jones has been our most consistent player and has gone up a cog, Morton may be just starting to get it, even Matthew Bate, still no worldbeater, is a bit better this year than last in a different role. Neeld is making players earn their place and not gifting games which can be a challenge without making wholesale changes every week. Even Sylvia, straight into the ones sure, was still made to serve his club suspension after injury and was the sub in his first game back. We are all impatient - but I don't think anyone's cards are marked yet and all still have the opportunity to show enough by season's end that they can operate under the Neeld mandate which is still well and truly in class. And that includes Brent Moloney and Colin Sylvia.

If it's all about getting him into the play, just give him a licence to roam a la Adam Goodes. Playing on the wing virtually gives him that licence anyway and he already moves between the lines, The odd need to compete in the ruck at a boundary throw in may be required where injury is less likely compared to a centre bounce contest. As has been stated before, Nick Riewoldt started as a wingman/backman before settling into the forward line. I think what we are all suggesting bar centre hitouts is almost being done anyway. Toughening him up I'm sure will continue to evolve as he grows into his body and some astute coaching/messaging/feedback is delivered as expectations increase.

What seems to have been missed here is that he is already contracted to us till 2015 according to this article and from memory this occurred when he was originally declared as ours a year or so ago as a father-son nomination to thwart any attempt from Adelaide to trump us. Therefore any thoughts of smoke screening our intentions are a waste of time with the benefit that we have been able to integrate him into the club early. We are not going to throw that away now by breaking his contract and causing all sorts of internal angst.

I was quite happy with Mark Neeld's speech last night - a little bit of insight, a little bit of humour (even at himself for being told to lighten up), his amiable targetting of a young supporter and making him feel important on the night, no false or rash promises (top 8 too low for some, top 4 too high?), the promise only of not dying wondering - and to leave no stone unturned - about all we can reasonably ask at this stage, the introduction of the 8 new players and a broad overview of the pre-season under a new regime. Anything that might have been offered about specific players other than the draftees - form, injuries, expectations, positional changes etc could have been asked during question time. No questions were forthcoming.

I actually thought the opposite regarding this question. I thought he was referring to a losing culture derived from years without a flag and I felt he was unnecessarily aggressive in asking the question. The reply was OK- albeit on the run - to me the changes over the last few months indicate a big change in club culture and Don McLardy offered to debate this question one to one with anyone. I later saw the guy in an animated discussion with Cameron Schwab over this question but was not privvy to what was said by either party - and to be honest, didn't feel inclined to listen. If this guy treads these boards perhaps he would like to enlighten us, although I am aware we all pen our words here in anonymity. However the lack of that anonymity did not seem to concern him last night.

I agree BRFE. I can see logistical issues if say a poster is debating the merits of Jetta or Bennell or Strauss or Tapscott as the preferred running half back. Do we put this in the thread for each of the four with a copy and paste which would then possibly cause several threads to start on the same issue. If someone then wants to add Grimes or Bartram to the debate does this then get spread even further under their names? Or are we indeed better off just leaving this under the single thread titled for example "Who Is Your Preferred Running Half Back?"

As much as I find this whole saga distasteful and the feeling we've all been conned - club and supporter alike, the reality is that the culture of the AFL does not allow for any player to announce to the world they are leaving for greener pastures before or during a season. It happens in rugby and we all find it strange that a player can play alongside his teammates and before his fans with everyone knowing and accepting that he won't be there for the following season. In the AFL all these announcements are pretty much made after a player's or club's season is completed, be it after home and away or finals. Leon Davis flagged some possible intent to return to the west for family reasons coming off his best year while Collingwood's season was still alive, but he is 30, most of career well behind him, and this was perhaps viewed as more of a swansong. So what was Tom Scully to do? The upshot of any pre-season 2011 honesty would have been what - rot in hell playing for Casey (most would have been happy with that I'm sure), play for the seniors if picked and be booed by his own "fans" (placing the club in an awkward position as to whether to play him at all), sit the season out on full pay (getting money for nothing would grate even more) or get his knee fixed for the benefit of GWS (under some false injury pretext when he was clearly able to play games)? Maybe the scenario that played out was the only one that could have played out - and while he, his dad, and GWS will forever be stained with what has transpired, until or unless the culture shift aligns itself to that of the ARL (and I hope it never does), then this will likely happen again, particularly while new fledgling clubs are given an open cheque book to entice away young players who will only have $$ signs in their eyes. My lingering question still remains - did the MFC really know and just kept up public appearances of denial because it seemed the only way at the time? And for what it's worth I wouldn't have blamed them for doing so - a very difficult situation with no opportunity for a win-win, particularly if there was always an opportunity for Scully to withdraw from the initial Heads Of Agreement at any time until the end of Season 2011. Personally I think the club has come out of this really well, both from a PR point of view, as well as the 2 compensation picks to be accessed at our choosing, over a guy who has a dodgy knee, is maybe severely overrated on what we have seen to date and who clearly didn't want to be here once he saw the size of the pay cheque on offer. He gets the money and we get to try again with two first round picks under a new regime of coaches - now that is a win-win - and from purely a football point of view, we win hands down!

He backed himself for a second year at the Hawks when he could have done the same with the Dees. The possible difference - and I guess we will never know what was really said behind closed doors that seemed to spark the acrimonious split (was it the message or the way it was delivered?) - was the last chance to play finals and even a Grand Final at his age given he felt the Demons weren't going to get there in his time. The fact was in the end, that the Hawks fell one game short of a Grand Final berth and his own lack of form and fitness also fell short and he wasn't selected anyway for any of their finals' appearances. The Hawks were in their window to include a seasoned veteran on their list that might add something to their mix. We were looking to get games into kids and he would have been taking the spot on one of them. Was it worth the punt? Only Cameron Bruce would know the answer to that.

The good news from his observation of the players' lack of fitness is there is plenty to work with and plenty of scope for improvement. How quickly he can "change" them will make for interesting times as he works with predominantly young bodies that will need careful programming to minimise the risk of injury and burnout. His record seems to suggest he knows what he's doing.

I saw a news bulletin on Channel 7 a few weeks ago that said they have a new fitness centre in the Western Suburbs - can't remember whether it was at the Whitten Oval or another elite training centre. In it, it was asserted that the "Arizona experience" can be replicated by having players train inside an oxygen and heat controlled chamber on exercise bikes, treadmills etc. This would surely be a far cheaper option and whether all clubs could be allocated sessions there, no doubt at some cost, would help again to level the playing field. Collingwood do the Arizona thing to gain an advantage. If everyone was doing something similar, then this advantage would be negated and I suppose the main benefit would be player recovery from which all clubs and the competition as a whole could reap the rewards. And whether something like this could be incorporated at AAMI Park to benefit all the codes that train there and to share the cost, maybe worth exploring also.

I agree with the premise of this thread that somehow he needs to be re-invented to become someone who can offer something other than OK depth. He is a confidence player who notoriously starts seasons slowly, be it through injury or lack of touch. He was supposed to have a huge engine when drafted and whether or not having had him stagnate in the forward line has curtailed this I don't know. My thoughts are to put him on the ball at Casey, let him run loose, be a link player, run through the middle of the ground and allow his bigger frame to create opportunitie at stoppages. Hopefully a successful go at this may translate to a build in touch, confidence and stamina and facilitate a similar role in the seniors, whether as a run with or as a creative linkman. A major problem of ours is creating enough opportunities for the forwards. Maybe Bate can re-invent himself into the above. If not, then apart from providing depth, which every side needs, his time may be nearly nigh - a tough call when only one game into the season.

I have so far resisted posting anything on this topic because it's been such a speculative "dog chasing its tail" argument that will go nowhere until something concrete is delivered by way of a re-sign or resign outcome. There has also been much said about Tom wanting to be the best player he can possibly be - measured by quality and quantity of kicks, handballs, marks and tackles, the ability to pressure, dominate games, influence results and so on. These are measurements that lead to Brownlows, best and fairests, premierships and countless accolades. I wonder if he has ever given thought about how he would like to be remembered in football history (a big ask for a 19 year old I know). Are champion players who play out their careers as one club players remembered with greater reverence than those who changed clubs at any stage of their careers? Chris Judd, Nathan Buckley, Gary Ablett (both of them), Wayne Carey, Stan Alves, Greg Wells, Ron Barassi and countless others all left clubs for various reasons. New challenges at the back end of a career, the chance to play finals and win a flag, homesickness, club fallout, poor club culture and no doubt money, all played a part in them ultimately making the big move. For Tom Scully, he has the opportunity to help take a once poorly, but now well run club, starved of a premiership for nearly 50 years, led by a peerlessly inspiring president and create a potential dynasty with his best mates, many with whom he played junior footy, and take a team from basketcase to glory. How perfect a scenario for a player striving to be the best he can be. He will be well remunerated for this and will also be well remembered for what he helped to achieve for the AFL's oldest club. The alternative is to help pioneer a new team in an AFL backwater, largely devoid of Aussie Rules culture, live in a foreign city far from family (albeit two hours away by plane and car) and help achieve the AFL's dream of two competitive teams in a non AFL landscape - a dream that may take far longer than his own career. To help them achieve this he will be paid a king's ransom but the price to do this is to desert all his mates, the fans and club who believed in him, as well as the unfinished and barely begun job for which he was originally chosen (not his choice granted -but earmarked because of all he would bring). Will the new fans at the new club fan the same passion for the new entity and by extension its players whether in victory or defeat as those at existing clubs and how do you manufacture a soul and a culture to which one can readily identify, if no such culture or history exists and its shape and form moving forward is largely unknown? In short - the devil you know, or the devil you don't. At this point there is no answer. Does Tom Scully take the money and run and set himself up financially for life, risking his very football credibilty and professionalism for which he seems so focused? Where does that start and end? Or does he stay and help complete the job which has been assigned to him from Day One in his AFL life, with all the goodwill and support, hope and faith - and yes as much money as this not overly financial club can currently afford to pay him under the guidelines in place and yet knowing that over the journey, financially he will be well looked after. Romantic idealism or ruthless business? Tom - your concience is yours - the decision is yours. And for the years to come, history also awaits your decision - and history will determine how you are remembered.

I agree Gippy, but would not surprise if Moloney and Davey are co-vice captains for the different aspects of leadership they bring to the table. However I think on and off the field Brad Green is the most rounded of all the aspirants - reliable, consistent, versatile, courageous, durable, classy, great finisher, leads by example, polished media performer and now club senior statesman (the last not being a pre-requisite for captaincy though). Davey and Moloney for mine don't tick ALL these boxes (not counting the last). Green does. The fact he won the Leadership award and Heart and Soul for this year, not only demonstrates this, but also shows how far he has come after his demotion from the leadership group several years ago. He took that disappointment on the chin, learnt from it and has grown and developed both as a person and leader as a result. Taking in all the above, I just believe he deserves it and has earned it. I also expect Jack Grimes to step up to the plate when Green retires in 3-4 years. The only box he needs to tick above that isn't already, is "durable".

If you mean the bald guy with his hands on his hips, I'm 99% sure it's Darryl Cox - ex Fitzroy.

Brad Miller's previous best football was played 4-5 years ago when we were last contesting finals. He is perhaps a handy player only, but he can also be a leader and a presence. Tonight he also proved that a forward who is even just a reasonable footballer can be something of a matchwinner when some good delivery comes his way. In the last 2-3 years, all our forwards have been on the end of some shocking and haphazard forays into the inside 50. Franklin and Roughead were unstoppable in 2008 but now since the Hawk midfield has become just a relic of that time, they too have been reduced to mere mortals. If our midfield continues to develop and deliver, then repeats of Miller's performance tonight is not out of the question. His role as an enforcer and leader down there is also important to pave the way for a developing Watts and the indigenous mosquito fleet to do their magic. In this regard he is better than a Bate or Dunn. With Liam Jurrah to return at some stage, hopefully this year, Bate to come back soon and Dunn thereabouts, pressure will be on for any incumbent to perform. Miller performed at Casey and was rewarded when an opening came. He performed well tonight and will obviously hold his place. Matthew Bate, if fit, will need to replace someone else without upsetting team balance or play for Casey next week. It's a great situation to be in, in an area of the ground that has long been our achilles heel, underpinned by adding much needed class to what had been a second rate midfield. The team is now capable of executing the game plan that Bailey has been introducing for the past two years. We now just need to do it consistently. Bring on the Cats!

I just go the same text - as no doubt have many others. Great news on a number of fronts. While we can argue the length of the contract - 4 years is a bit (or very) excessive for this day and age, he is at, or near his peak and is looking to shore up some stability for his family and footballing future. He is playing great football, has been pretty resilient injury wise over the past couple of seasons, and is a leader of the club. More than that, he is the mentor to our young indigenous group, with more likely to join in the coming years, and he will set a club loyalty benchmark for them with the signing of this contract. It will not only demonstrate loyalty, it will also publicly display to them and to the football world that he feels the club is heading in the right direction. As has been said on these boards, his role at the club goes well beyond the playing field, and if the worst happens and he sustains long term injuries, then his off-field role will become even more important, even to the point of helping further identify burgeoning aboriginal talent, that Bailey and the club are obviously keen to explore. He has already helped bring in Pearce Liddle (sp?) from the NT, who we could rookie in the coming drafts and there are sure to be others to follow. Is four years too long? Maybe, but unlike pretty much any other player we could have signed to a four year deal, his is one of cultural significance - and this fact probably shouldn't be under-estimated.

Agree. I think he is definitely worth a run up forward. There is something James Hird-like about the way he moves, similar frame and long arms and he may have a largely untapped creative streak in him that could allow him to be dangerous closer to our goal. With an ability to read the play, can play tall or small, has some speed and height and with those long arms, he could become a difficult matchup. He can also kick a goal which Miller and Newton can't with any certainty. Remember we are in a development phase - and Bailey has definitely flagged flexibility in players - even to the point of having already nominated Garland as likely to have a run up forward. Why not? History is littered with players who have switched ends and become a success in a new role. Even if it doesn't always work -or he becomes a genuine swingman - then our game plan and matchups become just that little bit harder for the opposition to read. He has a class about him that Miller and Newton don't have, Robbo's gone and vacancies are there. Nothing wrong with some more tall class on the forward line alongside Jurrah and Watts (when he's ready).

I think Brad Green was also Pick 19 in 2000 and recently retired Paul Wheatley was Pick 20 in the same year.

I agree and with a young list there is no one else to lead the forward line. With Robbo gone, Miller is the next most experienced down there. No world beater I know, but a leader nonetheless, and if things get a little willing, he's a guy you would like to have around. I would give him another year to enable the forward line to mature a bit. I would like to think that by year's end he may be there purely for depth unless he has been able to take his game to another level. One more year on his contract will coincide with Gold Coast entering the comp which may then allow for a trade. In the meantime, hang onto him until the forward line develops a bit more. He has been dropped before and can be dropped again, so the rest is up to him. Only if he says no to a year's extension, do we do the trade now.

If Bartram isn't there next year, I'm warming to No. 3, Gary Lyon's old number, which is a number and person Scully could perhaps more readily relate to. Give him the number next to Jack Watts and watch as No. 3 continually rams the ball down the throat of No. 4! It was also Chris Judd's number at the Eagles where he made his name.

Don't all new draftees get a 2 year contract? So they would have to trade him (no trade value) or pay him out to remove him from the list. I have been disappointed with his lack of progress, but he has had injuries. I think any new player is entitled to do two pre-seasons and then 2 seasons to show what they have. BBBP saw something he liked when he drafted him and Brisbane were apparently going to take him after us. I agree that Casey Twos is not a ringing endorsement at the moment, but if he is on a two year contract then we have to give him every chance.

Agree with Rhino on this. I don't boo opposition players anyway and would rather expend positive energy towards my own. That said, any booing or jeering should be kept to on-field matters. Off-field indiscretions will be dealt with appropriately by whoever. It's virtually a lynch mob mentality to be the judge, jury and executioner under the relative anonymity and cowardice of being in a football crowd. I actually feel sorry for Bock. I do not condone his actions for a moment but apart from getting whatever may come his way legally, if it goes that far, he also needs help and support to rehabilitate himself on a number of fronts. And yes, I do feel sorry for his girlfriend. She is possibly blameless in all of this and likely very uncomfortable about having the whole thing played out both in the media and at games by uninformed opposition football fans. I would also imagine that we would never boo one of our own for a simlar misdemeanor although we would condemn their actions privately. To then boo an opposition player for this, reduces us pretty much to the level of the lowest common denominator supporter, whom we also like to condemn. (Think the Collingwood anti-cheer squad and that Gary Ablett Snr chant and Richmond supporters spitting on their own under Danny Frawley.) Are some of us Demon supporters also like that? I would like to think not, but we all get tarred regardless. Just keep it to the on-field stuff if we have to vent our spleens. There is always more than enough good material there for the chronic boo-er anyway!

Couldn't agree more Old - which is why I'm a bit nervous about the game. That said, a bad loss tomorrow doesn't necessarily make for a bad season. We all know that things can change quickly, and clubs use these games to trial players/positions, set plays, injury/match conditioning management etc so a true evaluation is sometimes difficult - win or lose. But - we do need a good first up performance, however that unfolds - just something to build on.

Normally I'm in the "the NAB Cup doesn't matter" camp because of the hybrid rules that can hamper true match simulation in these pre season games. Bailing out early allows for testing under the "real rules." However the rule trialling in the NAB Cup has it place though because there is no other genuine forum to do this under public scrutiny. This year for us though, we need to make every post a winner. While even winning the NAB Cup doesn't guarantee proper season success (Carlton won it and finished last a couple of years ago), the early season buzz is what lowly clubs need - and we are definitely as low as lowly can get at present. You can't tell me that if we knock off Hawthorn by 10 goals or even 10 points tomorrow, these boards won't be jumping, tempered though they will be by the wise old sages who will rightly point out it is still February and the Nothing Cup and the Hawks had a third of their flag team in the stands. Whether this encourages would-be sponsorship suitors to sit up and take note is anyone's guess. It can't hurt. Whether it encourages fence sitting would-be members to sign up, who knows? It can't hurt. Whether it begins to give us some small regained crediblity in the football world, I can't say. But again - it can't hurt. Similar follow up performances in the following weeks would hurt even less. For us as a club, any small step forward is just that - a small step forward, not a half step back or a shuffle sideways. We need to demonstrate that the light at the end of the tunnel is not the light from an on-coming train. The best way to do that is by improved on-field performance in whatever competition we are told to play. And at some point, the rest - in random order - will follow.