The Taciturn Demon

Had the misfortune of watching at the ground, and there is a LOT going wrong. Yep, the injury list is really bad, but that was a total collapse. The ultra-risky, ultra-attacking game plan is completely wrong for this list - and I say that as a fan of Stinear. And the lack of numbers around the ball and then wherever the ball went was... almost junior football-esque. I think the sadest part is even at our worst, this team has very rarely capitulated. It did today.

I don't hate him personally at all. I do hate what his recruitment and continued selection said about our list management and "cultural" standards.

That's an awful injury list. The midfield was looking thin even before the Beasley injury. I guess a small (obvious) silver lining is getting to try players we may not have had Beasley, Mackin, Purcell and Paxman been available.

Mean Jean Okerland turning away to hide his laughter.

Another very simple definition could be "hard to play against". We're not that at the moment. At all.

Not convinced he'll suddenly start doing that in his mid thirties.

Bloody hell. The fall came quickly. We're back to fossicking in the mullock heap for a particularly nice chunk of quartz.

Had a really good run of games at the start of this or last season (they all blend together to me these days). Outside that brief period, he's looked Oscar McDonald-esque to me. It's not a very nice thing to say but the word "hapless" comes to mind.

I look back now and realise I drastically underrated Hibberd. I always liked him, but never fully appreciated how important that whole never-give-up stuff was until he was gone. I never underrated Harmes, but I put him in a similar category - what he lacked in skills he made up for in toughness and team-oriented discipline. We lost something significant when his form dropped. One thing I always worried about after 2021 was how infrequently we crushed teams in games we dominated - I'm not sure if that's an 'edge' thing or just a system thing. I distinctly remember going into the Carlton Semi in 2023 confident we were a better team, but terrified we would let them stay in the game. I'm not much of a predictor of football, but that's exactly what happened. And being brutally honest, I also think there are one or two mainstays in the team - considered un-droppable by supporters, football department and media alike - that aren't really ruthless by any measure.

I know there's a thread on hopes for next year, but I'm wondering about what you expect to happen next year. I know we haven't even got to the end of this season, and so much can happen between September and March, but let's say we have an average run of luck with injuries, where do you think this list is - roughly? It could be a ladder range or it could simply be why we'll improve, go backwards or stay the same as this year.

I think Goodwin simply didn't rate him.

I think you're probably right. But if there's any chance of even moderate success next year, we need someone like Sparrow or at least one other 21 to 25 year old to improve significantly. Even Petracca and Oliver back at their absolute best doesn't guarantee much, I don't think.

Me too. Houston seemed like a really bad idea to me. Especially in this draft brimming with out-and-out onballers. I'm not sure how solid our under 22s are, though. Windsor looks excellent. McVee is really good. I think everyone is hopeful rather than certain about Jefferson. I'd rather bolster this area of the list than get another 28 year old "maybe" player.

He was. Unless he's really fallen off a cliff, Daniel is a far better footballer, but I'm not sure about his age. Is the idea that as long as we have Oliver, Viney, Petracca, May and Gawn, we're in the flag window and so somehow duty bound to top up with 28 year olds?

One and a half million refusals to acknowledge that Goodwin didn't rate him.

Hard to watch, not least because the Brisbane women are close to the most unlikeable team in all of football. I'd just like to add my name to the "What the eff was going on with holding the ball today?" gang. Having said all that, far too good in the end. We're short a really good centre bounce midfielder.

How often does a consensus draft designation - "deep", "shallow", "even", "lopsided" - match the reality. For example, was 2019 considered deep or generally good before hand? In now looks like an absolute beauty.

Did the quick maths on the MCC/MFC fee divided by the number of MCG games we play. Works out to nearly $70 a game. As someone who takes no interest in cricket, it's not great value. I'm doing it, but it's starting to feel like a wild extravagance.

Well, why stop at a Craig Bradley type? Why not Craig Bradley himself? Some would say "He's 60 - what are you talking about?" I'd say, "We're right in the Flag window. He's the mature and experienced final piece of the jigsaw puzzle we need. Start cutting massive arm holes in the number 21 jumper. Sorry, Jeffo, you're wearing number 30 now."

Good summary. Imagine going through the entire Petracca saga, ostensibly about an un-ignorable slip in standards, and then getting Stringer.

I think leaving Pearce out of my votes was bordering on scandalous. Chaplin seems hugely underrated to me.

I'd love Tom Sparrow to work on his agility and become a really strong midfielder who can hurt oppositions when resting forward.

My perfect player: - End of career - Played half a good season four to 12 years ago - I heard someone once say they were "clever with footy in hand" (I've seen no evidence of this, but it sounds good) - Studiously avoids contact

Has our handballing significantly improved or did our run out of defence and through the middle just make it look better than it has been before?