Ron Burgundy

I regard your comments above as lazy in the extreme. You essentially seem to be saying that "the same cheerleaders reckon we'll be great each pre-season, and yet we're useless every year and this year will be no different". Not a particularly compelling approach IMO. Speaking personally, my optimism is based on the changes to the list and the professional and disciplined approach that the new coaching department has implemented this pre-season (ie, it is based on some discernible evidence, not fanciful wish thinking). And, relevantly, my optimism is bench marked against a 186 point loss that occurred on 30 July 2011. At no stage have I said we'd win the flag this year, or even make the finals - I just think we may field a team that is consistently competitive and that plays hard, accountable football this year. Given where we've come from, this is the source of some optimism for me. So - rather than sit on the fence and adopt the flabby approach to this issue, which is tantamount to sitting on the sidelines and throwing spitballs, I'd be grateful if you would please provide clear reasons as to why this pre-season is simply no different to any other pre-season since 2006 and why our expectations shouldn't be adjusted accordingly. Absent this (ie, some clear analysis as to why this pre-season is no different from others previously), I propose to disregard your comments as fairly baseless, negative claims that aren't rooted in evidence or anything else especially clever. Here's a report on our pre-season to start with: http://www.melbournefc.com.au/video/2013-01-29/offseason-report-how-the-dees-are-tracking Cheers.

Don't worry Ben - I'm happy to take the blame firmly on my own shoulders. Given where I saw this list at, say, the mid point of 2011, everything's gravy for me at the moment. Whilst I don't expect us to make the finals in 2013, I do see us as consistently playing a harder, more disciplined, more accountable brand of football this year. I also see us beating a few teams other than the Suns and GWS in 2013. To my mind, there's upside in that. And, more generally, I reckon the trajectory is up rather than down under Neeld, Craig, Misson and Co in 2014 and beyond. So - given that: I've read some very encouraging, seemingly objective training reports during this pre-season, and the new 'restructured' list hasn't yet been belted by an opposition team, I'm enjoying my renewed sense of optimism about the MFC - if only for the time being. I will therefore be disappointed if we don't pump Port at the G in round one. And I reckon Neeld will be similarly p1ssed off. We need to regain the mindset that the G is our fortress, particularly against the weak interstate clubs.

I have never been as excited by a group of new draftees/recruits coming into the club as this year. And that's saying something - because, albeit being completely deluded at the time, I had thought we were building towards absolute greatness in 2010. Having seen what Neeld, Craig, Misson and Co have brought to the club in terms of professionalism makes my thinking in 2010 seem ridiculous now - I feel as though I've been on the same journey as Jack Watts under the new regime, albeit as a supporter. Barry strikes me as bringing a much needed extra dimension to the list. BH has worked me into an absolute lather about the kid - I just can't see how he won't succeed given his blend of skill, pace and, importantly, attitude. That said, each of Viney, Toumpas, Barry, Hogan, Kent, Matt Jones, Terlich, Dawes, Pedersen, Byrnes and Rodan excite me in some way. No idea about the rookies, or Gillies for that matter. Add to that Davey, Evans, Strauss and Jetta, each of whom seem to be the equivalent of new recruits this year given the training reports, and it's hard to see how we won't improve this year. Potentially markedly. I will be seriously p1ssed off we we don't absolutely pump Port in round one.

Great photos - thanks. Trengove looks about 15 years old in a couple of them.

Are they actually sponsoring us?

I hope not.

Flew down for the tennis on Saturday night. Bumped into Rivers at a nightclub afterwards and spoke to him for a while (at about 1.00am - I was pretty boozed; he didn't appear to be). Without trying to sound like too much of a sycophant, I said that virtually all passionate MFC supporters (ie, you guys) were disappointed he left the club, but, virtually without exception, we wished him well. In short, he was, and still is, a popular guy with the supporters. He seemed to suggest that he had no option. The club didn't offer him a particularly good contract and it was a bit of a no brainer for him to go to the Cats. In any event, he also seemed to be a bit over a few things at the MFC, but he didn't expand on what exactly. Just seemed to suggest that it was time for a change, and he seemed genuinely excited about the prospect of playing finals. Nothing particularly remarkable I suppose, but this was from the horse's mouth.

At the start of last season, I'd probably have swapped Tom McDonald for Daniel Talia if given the chance. Not sure that I would anymore. He's got to be one of our most important players now.

Does Toumpas win much of his own ball? I've always assumed he's a classy outsider, but it seems he's pretty decent around the stoppages. I'm really looking forward to seeing him play this year - along with Barry and Matt Jones. And Viney obviously. The NAB Cup can't come soon enough.

Slightly different angle, but it's arguably bordering on bringing the code into disrepute for a club not to adopt the AFL's methodology in relation to recruitment and the like at any given time. Clearly, the AFL sets the playing field for the clubs which participate in the competition. The clubs are obliged to respect this. And, in this regard, the draft pick methodology was designed by the AFL and it has always rewarded clubs that did not do particularly well the season beforehand. It is designed to make the competition an even competition. I would've thought for a club to unilaterally seek to buck the system and make public statements that it was not buying into the system for whatever reason would embarrass the administrators and would affect the standing of the code. It would also be irresponsible, indeed negligent, to that club's members. In short, what the hell did the AFL expect the clubs to do?

These training threads are just so damn good. Thanks everyone - great reports. Really appreciate it.

This investigation has become so bloody boring. In fact, it's always been boring.

And Frawley, surely.

Totally agree C&B. I was literally thinking just the same thing - hence, my post above. I think you articulated it better though.

I don't think it really matters what Barry weighs at this point in his career. He will put on weight. Misson will see to that. Barry clearly has enormous upside and seems to have the skills to compete at an elite level. That we used the compo picks we received for Scully on Toumpas and Dawes and managed to convice GWS to also allow us to draft Barry seems to have been quite a coup. I'm happy to defer to BH on this one - given what I've read to date, I reckon he'll play some senior games this year (despite weighing somewhere between 55 and 95 kgs).

I wonder if this has something to do with his basketball background. I expect he finds it far easier to read the game down back for this very reason. Given that he's quick, has very good hands, is still a bit shy when it comes to body contact, and, as I understand it, has much more of a basketball background than an Aussie Rules background, it seems to me that floating in defence and intercepting opposition forward entries is something he seems perfectly suited to at this point in his AFL development. Despite his obvious skills, he looks uncomfortable as a tall marking forward - whereas, down back, he looks natural. As he gets more confident, perhaps his role will evolve - but, right now, this is where I see Watts having the biggest impact.

When you think about it, with the exception of a couple of recent older recruits (ie, Byrnes and Rodan), and the likes of Davey and, possibly, Jamar - virtually every other player on the list has not yet reached their potential. Watts firmly fits into this category IMO. In fact, I reckon he'll make it. And this might be harsh on Davey, given that he seems to have finally found a new lease of life, and Jamar, who's still our number one ruck and who's contracted until 2015.

Another tidbit about Watts. I was at a corporate function about 18 months ago, which featured Garry Lyon interviewing Kevin Sheedy. Gubby Allen was also there. It was during the Bailey period, and the tension about Scully's departure was still red hot. Someone in the audience asked a question about recruiting 18 year old sportsmen, and whether the AFL had to compete with other codes to attract those players. Gubby Allen fielded the question. He said, words to the effect, "most definitely. A lot of these kids are really good at other sports, particularly cricket and basketball". "In fact, in 2009, the number one draft pick was a kid called Jack Watts. He was an elite basketballer, and Basketball Australia were putting heaps of pressure on him to pursue a basketball career. They even suggested he'd play for Australia at the Olympics. They told him not to pursue AFL. Ultimately he did, and most AFL clubs had him as the number one draft pick. Melbourne then picked him." It was all matter of fact. No sly comments about Melbourne or Watts. But I couldn't resist the temptation to set the record straight, so I noted that I was a Melbourne supporter and that Watts was the number one draft pick in 2008. Scully was the number one draft pick in 2009, "but I'm sure you're aware of that Gubby". He gave me a wry grin, as did Sheedy, and Lyon for that matter.

I find it bizarre the amount of negative press Watts has attracted as a number one draft pick in circumstances where others seem not to attract the same spotlight/criticism. This article has just been posted on the AFL website about Tom Scully: http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-01-19/scully-rising To be honest, this kid has done pretty well nothing to date, except accumulating a stack of cheap possessions against the Bulldogs in one game towards the end of 2010. A couple of mates of mine are in the GWS Captain's Club (essentially GWS's coterie group). They reckon GWS's B&F voting last year was heavily skewed in Scully's favour because GWS couldn't justify paying him so much dough and Scully featuring really poorly in their B&F. Bottom line is, according to them at least, Scully picked up a stack of votes in games where his performance didn't really justify it. Their opinion was wholly unprovoked/unsolicited by me - they just reckon he's massively over-payed and think GWS could've got a better player for that much dough. Yet, Scully doesn't seem to attract that much criticism as a number one pick in his year, a draft which also contained Martin, Fyfe and Trengove. And, for a player who'd shown so little at the time, his management team somehow negotiated for him the most insanely rewarding contract in the history of the code. I really don't get it. But I do get this: *Clark + Toumpas + Dawes + Barry > Scully. * We could only afford Clark because of the money we'd put aside to attempt to retain Scully. Thank you GWS on all fronts. I'd also take Watts over Scully for what it's worth.

This could be really off the mark, as I'm relying on the observations I read here, but Viney reminds me of Ben Cousins (sans the fever gear) - hard trainer, gut runner, good skills, nice reader of the game, wins own ball but is a decent user of it, fierce competitor, big tank, etc. I'm really excited about the mids we drafted during this post season, in particular Viney, Toumpas, Barry and Matt Jones. Probably Kent too. Viney and Toumpas could very well be elite in four years from now.

60

I'm often delusional when it comes to this club, but I reckon our list has much greater upside than that of Essendon.

Sound advice Old. Rationality descended upon me, and I didn't go to the TAB yesterday.

I agree with this WJ. Re: Neeld - I think his theory is correct. I have always believed that defence wins big football games, irrespective of the code: soccer, AFL, NRL, rugby, NFL. I liked Bailey's style when it worked, but it was virtually never. Those wins against the Crows, Freo, the Swans and the Lions in his period were great to watch. That said, I always felt it wasn't sustainable. And it proved not to be. There were many, many more losses, and they were generally pretty ugly. This would've been compounded had we actually made the finals during this period. Neeld's approach, which ironically seems to be the opposite of Bailey's, seems a much better model to me.

Terrific work - congratulations Pates. 4.31 - 4.36 = 10/10.