Ron Burgundy

Funny.

11th. Whilst I have absolute confidence in the new crew in the football department, it seems we are about to embark on another rebuild this season, which is absolutely devastating given that the rebuild officially commenced in 2007 and we're now having to once again revise our structure, personnel and on field culture. Barring injury, Mitch Clark will prove himself to be the recruit of the year. If we get to a good start (ie, capitalise on our good draw), we could have an okay season, because I think Neeld's influence will increasingly pay dividends throughout the year. Make no mistake, we now have an absolute elite football department - it's the quality of the list that still raises concerns. Some say it's really good, but I'm not so sure. I think with some smart, effective tweaking over the next couple of years, it could become really good. That said, it's sure to be an interesting season - so many variables. For instance, I think the tragic loss of Jim Stynes may actually harden the resolve of the playing group. I hope it will - Jim deserves that. The first game against the Lions will be as interesting as any we've watched in the last decade IMO. I want to see real, no nonsense Magner-like hardness out there for the entire game. If we do, we will win the game and it could define our season.

Other clubs were definitely onto Martin at the time (ie, prior to the draft). The Swans in particular was one such club - and, cop a tip, they know how to identify hard, effective, loyal types. It was simply a massive opportunity having picks 1 & 2. The club had an obligation to absolutely nail them - and part of that involves following a process (ie, interview all players who might be in the mix for those picks - don't assume anything). If, after following the process, the club makes a judgement call in good faith and ultimately gets it wrong, then so be it - that happens. But, to NOT even interview Martin in the circumstances - well, that's bordering on criminal recklessness IMO. It's also amateur in the extreme. I still find it hard to come to terms with Richmond having a better midfield than us, particularly given our focus in recent years on building an elite midfield. And, to think, we heaped so much praise on Jordan McMahon at the time. There's more than a bit of irony in that. Martin and Trengove would've transformed our midfield. Here are the articles. They're not a pretty read. http://www.heraldsun...f-1226045887508 http://www.heraldsun...f-1225795211997 http://www.foxsports...3-1226080357418

This is good news. Seemed clear after about 10 minutes of the first quarter of the NAB Cup that this was going to happen. Barring injury, I reckon he could play all 22 games this year.

A very sad day. Jim's legacy will live on. The simple fact is, he made a genuinely meaningful and significant contribution to a society otherwise obsessed with the superficial (and often negative) contributions made by self obsessed celebrities and sports stars, religious fanatics and unthinking politicians. In an age where heroes don't really exist anymore - he was one. RIP Jim. Your life will always be celebrated - it goes without saying by family and friends, but also by every single supporter of this club. You almost single handedly saved it - and for that I personally feel absolutely indebted.

I will be disappointed if we don't make the eight, but realistically I think our range is between 8 and 12. As to where we ultimately finish will probably be set up in the first 8 to 10 weeks of the season proper (good draw), and I don't feel we have heaps of momentum coming out of the NAB Cup (unlike some other teams in our band, eg, Adelaide and Richmond, even Essendon despite missing a game). Sylvia's injury is not what we needed. Our midfield still lacks the blend of class and grunt enjoyed by many other teams. Neeld, Misson Craig and others (ie, the new football department), even though I think it's been absolute coup to get them, can only do so much. I'm hoping for 7th or 8th. Realistically, 10th or 11th (with less big beltings than we suffered last year).

I am not worried about Watts. I think he was the obvious pick at the time, and we picked him. Hurley's definitely in front now, but I reckon Watts will be a very good servant for this club in the years to come. I just cannot believe the club didn't even speak to Dustin Martin. Now, that was an error.

Recruiting Mitch Clark was an inspired play IMO. Neeld recognised it and made it happen. As much as I like Tapscott, I think we erred in not going harder at getting Luke Ball (pick 18 could've done the deal). He didn't want to come to the Dees, though nor did Mitch Clark - not initially at least. Ball was the type of senior player we needed at the time. I also don't believe Neeld and co would've cut James McDonald a season prematurely for much the same reason (particularly with Cameron Bruce skipping the coop that year). Our recruiting and development strategy at the time all seemed a bit too cute to me - it's footy, and every team needs a core of really hard men to get things moving. It seems to me that we now have a football department that means business. It inspires confidence and seems to be one that will make things happen. It has a hard edge and a practical focus to it. As much as I wish this list was more advanced on its journey than it is, the pre-season just past (but for the Jurrah and Sylvia incidents) has been absolutely awesome for this club. Neeld and the others will turn this list into a well functioning machine IMO. The 186 loss provided the wake up call we needed at the time.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/more-news/richmond-cub-dustin-martins-all-out-attack-on-elite-status/story-e6frf9jf-1226045887508 "Roos, who was still coach of the Swans at the 2009, said he was hoping Martin would slip down the pecking order so he could nab him at No.6. "Everyone was hoping," Roos said."

With the benefit of hindsight, I think the recruiting strategy adopted by Bailey/Prendergast was slightly naive. Recruiting very young, skinny players and putting 'game time' into them largely at the expense of some of our older, experienced players (all of whom were in our best 22 at the time) doesn't ensure they will become great players. Looking at the way the new regime has approached last year's draft and this year's pre-season, it's clear to me they recognised this immediately and then recruited some mature, hard bodied players to give us a better mix on the field. It seems a more practical, realistic approach. Some here say the problem was not so much the players selected in the last few years, but the club's inability to develop them because of a lack of resources. Well, surely a recruiting strategy needs to take that into account. If it is true that we are not as good as developing players as some other clubs, we should have recognised this and then recruited players who are hungrier and who are determined to succeed irrespective of any deficiencies in resourcing. Moneyball provides a good example of how a 'poorer' club tailored its recruitment strategy to its more limited resources. And it seems in that instance the coach dictated to the recruiters who to select, not the other way around. As to not interviewing Dustin Martin - if true, that's really disappointing. We were gifted picks 1 and 2 in a good draft pool. That's an unbelievably rare opportunity. And we stuffed it. Losing a number one draft pick two years after being selected is not good - and the signs were there almost immediately. Tapscott and Trengove signed up for an extension almost immediately - Scully did not. I was nervous about him right from the start - just through observing his reactions to being drafted by the MFC and his general demeanour. How some of this didn't come out in the interviews still amazes me. I remember the Swans (and a few other clubs) expressed a very strong interest in Martin prior to that draft. I think they had pick 6 which they ultimately used on Rohan (another player the club should've looked at IMO). I remember thinking at the time, if a club like the Swans is really interested in Martin (and I'm pretty confident they were full bore on him), I really hope we check him out because they are good at identifying hard, loyal, effective types. I find it absolutely bizarre that we didn't at least chat to him. It just seems amateur in the extreme. Martin and Trengove would have been a midfield transforming masterstroke - the thing is, for a dedicated recruitment team it shouldn't have been that hard. And it seems to me that the Swans would probably not have picked Scully had they had pick one, so it simply cannot be the case that Scully was so clearly the number one pick that the club didn't need to speak to other talented kids (eg, Martin). The following articles are quite interesting IMO. I still find it hard to come to terms with Richmond having a better midfield than us given the picks we've had in recent years - particularly given that we appeared to have a 'midfield' focus for several of those drafts. http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/more-news/tiger-tough/story-e6frf9jf-1225795211997 http://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-premiership/fox-sports-afl-expert-wayne-schwass-compares-richmonds-dustin-martin-to-all-time-great-leigh-matthews/story-e6frf3e3-1226080357418

I was already frustrated that Sylvia wasn't playing in round one (good decision by the club IMO though). This is horrendous.

Excellent post, fire engine. I'm surprised you didn't highlight Gary Rohan or Steele Sidebottom though - both great players.

I suspect because the new football department recognised that Bate was a good, honest, hard at it "footballer" - a rare commodity on our list, and they didn't want to see him traded. IMO we have picked too many good "athletes" rather than good "footballers" in recent times. For instance, I reckon we'd have Zaharakis or Shuey on our list rather than Strauss, and Darling rather than Cook, had the current football department been in charge at the relevant time. Pure speculation of course, but it seems to me that they now like decent, hard at it "footballers". I often feel that Bailey (whom I like and respect) and Prendergast got too clever about it all and seemed almost determined not to select the obvious choices.

You serious?! Are you really saying it is not possible to assess the quality of our list? I reckon the new football department can, and has, and I don't reckon they think it is quite as good as many of the cheerleaders on this site think it is. And that's why they've decided to get the best VFL players they can to bolster the list. A simply damning indictment on our recruiting over the past few years, given the number of top 20 picks we had over that period of time.

I have no doubt the list would look radically different had the current football department personnel been in charge from 2007. We have wasted many great picks IMO. As they say to young surgeons, if you hear hooves beating, think horses not zebras. In much the same way, the club seems to have ignored several obvious choices over the years and gambled on slightly left field players - a risky and potentially reckless strategy in the circumstances.

I'm really surprised to have read some of the negativity about the night here - not necessarily on this thread, but on other threads. I flew down from Sydney to attend the function and was fortunate enough to speak to Cameron on the night. Without wishing to sound like a complete sycophant, I was very impressed with Cameron and the views he expressed about where the club is at (practical and realistic) and his clear vision for where the club will be in the future (again, practical and realistic). In short, I thought the function was absolutely top tier. It was very well organised and had an appropriate focus on our history without being overly sentimental in a cliched or saccharin way. A few things I took out of the night: 1. Mark Neeld is a super impressive bloke. This guy will transform the club. Of that, I am absolutely convinced. I simply cannot believe Collingwood allowed a situation to occur such that we were able to grab him. He'll create a dynasty at the MFC, although we need to give him time - it's not his fault we've been spinning our wheels for the past few years, and it's not yet a list he's built or had an opportunity to develop. 2. This off season has been the most significant period for the club in decades. Securing the likes of Neeld, Craig, Misson, Rawlings, Brown, Mitch Clark and others has literally transformed this club. We now have real momentum. 3. The point of differentiation that the MFC enjoys relative to all other clubs (perhaps excluding Geelong) is our history. It's not IMO backward looking to celebrate it and try and imbue the significance of our history and the contributions of players past in our current players. 4. To illustrate this, the evening focused on Harold Ball - a story which is sad in the extreme. Obviously a good natured, impressive country kid who shone as a young player in the 1940 finals series - particularly in the semi final against Essendon and then the grand final against Richmond - he elected to enlist in the army as an ambulance officer (a decision influenced it seems by the club doctor). In short, he wanted to help other Aussies. His life ended terribly when he was captured by the Japanese, tortured horribly and then executed. For me at least, prior to hearing this account, Harold Ball was just a name. But to hear his story and then see former club legends hold this guy's blazer and talk about his life was truly meaningful. I can't imagine any of the players didn't discover some respect for the blazer after hearing this account. In short, it's possible that, prior to the night, many players and supporters thought the blazer presentation would be the reincarnation of some lame 'old school' tradition - however, I don't believe many people left the function with that mindset. 5. The club is committed to making our list the most aerobically fit in the competition. This was good to hear, and with Neil Craig and Dave Misson overseeing it, I've no doubt it will be achieved. Our players will not be losing games due to lack of fitness in the years to come. 6. I'm not convinced our recruiting in the past few years is as good as it could have been. Time will tell though, and I expect Neeld will get the most out of what he's been given. I'm also pleased that the contributions of players such as Bartram and Bate seem to be appreciated once again - the current focus appears to reward effort and dedication more than mere natural ability, which is sure to create a good football culture at the club. As I said, a really good night - positive and unifying for the club and its past and current players.

Russian has the ability to take strong contested marks in ANY pack. In fact, I reckon he's one of the best contested marks in the league. Despite what C-F-H says above, I also think his set shot kicking is reasonable. It's not fantastic, but it's not that bad either.

Neeld and Craig hardly strike me as people who would oppose tertiary education. After all, Neeld is a former school teacher. That article seems only to put the case against their proposal. I would like to know the methodology underlying the proposal - I'm sure it's not as irresponsible as The Age/AFL characterised it as in that article/their response to it.

I heard that too. If true, Eddie McGuire is an unethical, headline seeking, scumbag.

Unlike Watts and Scully, Strauss before Zaharakis seemed a genuine surprise to most posters on this forum (and Demonology) at the time.

Apologies. It was a fairly undisciplined post by me. Like everyone else though, I am genuinely interested to read any updates on his progress.

Anyone seriously still maintain he was a better pick than Jack Darling? That said, I sincerely hope he comes good. But, from the sidelines, it's pretty disappointing that he's not managed a single game in this year's NAB Cup if he's not injured. It also concerns me that few, if any, here are talking about him knocking down the door for selection in the seniors in 2012.

I expect Malthouse and Neeld would talk a lot. And, not unsurprisingly, Malthouse's views on Watts seem to mirror Neeld's initial impressions of him. And before everyone puts the knife into Malthouse, I understand he was very supportive of Mark Neeld in his application for the MFC gig and that he thought the Dees would be a great place for Neeld to end up. Personally, I'm strongly of the view that Mark Neeld is the best thing that's happened to the Dees for many years. And, at least in part, that is due to Mick Malthouse. So, he can keep tearing strips off us - our performances in recent years don't deserve anything better than that IMO. If we're going to succeed as a club, it's by facing facts - not by burying our head in the sand. On field, we've been soft - and this needs to change. Success won't otherwise come to us, and Malthouse simply seems to be pointing this out. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if Mick would love to see the Dees flourish this year under Mark Neeld. And that's not going to happen without players like Jack Watts developing a killer focus and ambition on wanting to succeed.

I am so relieved we managed to land Mitch Clark. Without him, and Neeld's other new hard, mature-age recruits (not to forget Neeld himself and his new assistants), we would definitely be looking at another 2011 this year. And the Hawks' Matt Suckling, a low end rookie draft pick, is the type of player I think we have been hoping Jamie Bennell would/will become. Buddy Franklin is also the arsiest player I have ever watched play the game.

It was also reported that the dispute seems to involve 'two sides' of Jurrah's family. The policeman interviewed refused to confirm whether it related to an episode (I think last year) where a man was stabbed to death. He also confirmed that the victim had very serious lacerations to his head that would involve emergency reconstructive surgery in either Alice Springs or Darwin later today.