The Taciturn Demon

Reminds me a lot of late-career Jordan Lewis. If you look at the stats alone you can make a case for him. If you watch the game, it's much more difficult.

Well put. We know from bitter experience, you should never lie down during a season. But there's a massive difference between playing for draft picks and making sensible decisions to get players ready for next season, and using essentially dead rubbers to try new things.

I totally agree. Max said in a recent video he rates him as a ruck, but you can find adequate rucks elsewhere. Above average tall forwards are much rarer. One thing that frustrates me apart from the fact it must take a toll on his body is us getting the ball at half back and me thinking "OK, where's JVR?" And the answer is behind or near the player with the ball because he's playing in the ruck. When you kick the ball into the forward half of the ground as poorly as we do, it's so important to have someone who can compete in the air.

I totally agree. Max said in a recent video he rates him as a ruck, but you can find adequate rucks elsewhere. Above average tall forwards are much rarer. One thing that frustrates me apart from the fact it must take a toll on is body is us getting the ball at half back and me thinking "OK, where's JVR?" And the answer is behind or near the player with the ball because he's playing in the ruck.

You may well be right. I generally lean a bit pessimistic and have been way off in my predictions about the Demons many times before. But... ...I think coming 12th or 13th and having a percentage at least 10 points away from every team in the eight points to something more than being unlucky in a close season. I also think football supporters are generally good at pointing to bad luck and how blights their teams but completely overlooking bad luck that affects - and, more importantly, is overcome, by - opposition teams. I can absolutely see why our football department would be keen on Houston. But I think we also need: * A ruck we can confidently bring in when Max is unavailable. * A dependable, ready-made tall forward in the Ben Brown mould (I think the Petty experiment was well worth a try, but it hasn't worked and he is the clear Steven May replacement; van Rooyen is going nicely but needs help) * At least one, but preferably two or three, players who can in the next two years make a difference at centre bounces and in winning clearances generally - if this is McVee and Pickett, excellent, but they then leave holes * Any predominantly outside player with really good foot skills (Hunter and Billings haven't worked) * A player who does a similar job at a similar level to Tomlinson and McDonald Again, I'm erring on the side of pessimism, but I think a bounce (at least a big one) next year is unlikely. I'd prefer that we put plenty of eggs in the draft basket and aimed to fill these gaps over two or three years than go all in on 2025, a la 2007.

Always worth keeping in mind. But if there's any truth to the rumour at all, he won't be cheap.

You've argued for him really well, but I think the club is edging into the delusional if they think one (or even two) very good 28 year olds can help us return to the top 2 or 4. Yes, a lot has gone wrong this year. No, we no longer have an excellent list capable of winning the 15 to 19 games you need to guarantee a double chance, let alone win finals. We need to plug lots of holes, not one or two.

I'm not convinced on this likely bounce-back based on better pre-seasons and natural improvement in younger players. The problem I have is that, yes, Oliver may improve very significantly on 2024. Yes, Petracca may come back as good or better than ever. Yes, we'll have another chance to adjust the game plan so that it's neither predictable nor completely unsuited to our team. Yes, we have exciting players under 22. But if I'm being completely honest about our best team in 2025, taking into account retirements and even being optimistic with injuries, is it just... well... good enough?

Gosh that's stark when it's listed like that. I actually haven't given up on McAdam or Fullarton being playable, but even then, this is a worrying lack of depth.

I didn't know this. Was he not offered a contract at Melbourne?

Strongly agree with this.

I don't think we can, but I think we should still trade it.

Not anymore, I don't think.

I'm hoping we have two! Even if Clarry returns to his very best, I think we're crying out for new midfield talent. How would you describe the draft group this year in comparison to the last few?

His landlord is a soft touch. A skip with a working lid and a beautiful view of the concrete smoko area... $220 dollars a week... minimum.

Was I just imagining it, or was the centre square clearance work in the first quarter like watching a different team? I feel that not once but several times, the tap was aggressive and creative, and the resulting clearance was clean and incisive. After that, Max seemed to wane badly, but even when he did win taps, it was back to the same old same old: very conservative. And then the last quarter - what a disaster. I genuinely don't understand how THAT midfield can lose eight in a row. (I can't overstate how much I think we need to take the best midfielder we can with our first round pick this year, but that's a topic for another thread.) Better footy judges might be able to give their thoughts.

I go because I feel a sort of irrational obligation. I'm very lucky to be able to have such an indulgence... if you could call watching this team at this time an indulgence. I don't subscribe to the idea that sport is entertainment and we should talk about it as a "product" and refer to the way we play as a "brand". Actually, I find it offensive and embarrassing. But if you want to do that, you're living by the corporate sword and will die by it as well. Yes, weather, the economy, the opposition all played a part. But we are no longer enjoyable to watch. If we're a "product", we're not a particularly good one at the moment.

Hang on. People seem to be saying this is a long contract. This is two years on top of the mandatory two you sign as a National Draft choice, isn't it?

Two firsts seems like something you'd give when you know one player is the missing piece of a close-to-complete puzzle. I feel the midfield is too buggered for this to be true.

Exactly this. Jackson, Lever, Scully (and much earlier, Nathan Buckley) are still the exception, not the rule. And may that be the case for a good while longer. Petty seemed close to a certainty to leave less than a year ago. I think he's an exceptional tall defender - but even above average ones are hard to find.

Yes, exactly. I expected a goal-a-game speedster with little contested ability. A bit of a risk with such a high pick. What I've seen is a very quick but extremely tenacious player who sticks difficult tackles, chases hard and doesn't mind physical contact at all.

It was very close to being as bad as the NT game. Fifty points was not a true reflection at all.

And Tim Lamb is quoted as saying "Tom we’ve been tracking for a fair while". So it's not like they just decided at the last minute. But could this - and Billings and Hunter and others - simply be a case of taking the only option available? In other words, nobody else was interested in coming to Melbourne.

I think a couple of others on Demonland have mentioned that's exactly what we did and is why they scored so freely "out the back".

I think he's improved the way he talks publicly quite a bit. But I have zero interest in hearing corporate cliches. "Lean into it" - Sheryl Sandberg was passe a decade ago.