Ron Burgundy

What exactly has he been charged with? On ABC's Radio National, a reporter just said the biographer of Liam's book and an MFC representative (not named) would be flying to Alice Springs today in order to pick up Liam and fly back with him to Melbourne immediately.

I have absolutely no concerns about Watts. I think he'll be a bloody good player for us. And comparing him with number one draft picks from other drafts is plainly ridiculous. Those players weren't ever in the mix with the pick we used on Watts. Comparing Watts to the likes of Nik Nat or Hurley is IMO more relevant. Why? Because we could actually have picked those players in that year. It might be that the sands have now shifted, but MOST clubs would've picked Watts had they had our number one pick in 2008. Surely comparisons with other number one draft picks is more relevant to ascertaining how good the respective draft years were.

Not only will he be in the team, he'll probably be in the votes in round one too.

Mark Neeld is the recruit of the century. I've had a fair bit to drink, but I reckon we could be top 4 this year.

http://www.heraldsun...f-1226076710819 Bastinac - 16 June 2011: Similarly, he suspects his mate at Melbourne, Scully, 20, also knows where his future lies. He is just not saying. "He's probably got his mind made up and knows what he's going to do," Bastinac, 19, said. "I do feel for him a little bit, but knowing him well I know it's not going to get to him at all. "He will definitely make the right decision for him and the footy club." Fine upstanding young pen pals these two. In fairness, Bastinac was 50% correct though - Scully did ultimately make the 'right decision for him'.

"After long-term injuries, midfielder Jordie McKenzie (achilles) and defender James Strauss (leg) are now only two weeks away from playing." I find this simply incredible. It looked like a horrible break at the time. This is really good news.

Clark aside, he was the best take out from last night IMO. Simply top pick up - especially as a rookie.

I have to defer to pretty well everyone on junior talent, but, that said, this kid was super impressive last night IMO. O'meara will also clearly be an elite player in due course - spoke well too when interviewed. Pity they're not both wearing the red and the blue in 2012.

I expect this will be a very, very hard decision for the club to make. Personally, I love Nicholson's pace. Equally Magner is a hard at it ball magnet, which we need. On the basis of last night's performance, definitely Magner. In terms of overall team needs, probably Magner too. But Nicholson brings a lot too.

My main take out from the night is what a pick Aaron Hall is likely to be. Was he on our radar? What pick did the Suns pick him up with? Super impressive first game.

I am unabashedly a huge fan of Neeld. I was very impressed with the first 10 minutes of the Suns game - especially for the bruise free approach to which you refer. Beyond that, I found last night's performance very frustrating. Some good signs, but our inability to win and then retain possession for big chunks of the games was annoying. That said, I felt that we would've won both games in the regular season. In short, I don't think too much can be read into either of those games. Magner and Nicholson looked good too IMO, as of course did Howe. And Mitch Clark is just what this list needed.

Was Beamer said to be unhappy about the direction the club was taking under Bailey's regime, or unhappy at Bailey's sacking and with the direction being put in place under the new regime (ie, Neeld, Craig and others)? I have to say, I still find it rather odd that Moloney hasn't been included in this year's leadership group.

I have absolutely no doubt that, in the years to come, Mark Neeld's appointment will prove itself to be a masterstroke. There's a professionalism that he seems to have imported into our coaching structures/approach that has unfortunately been lacking for too long. The club now has the feel of a truly progressive, highly professional, disciplined unit. In fact, it feels like Collingwood Mark 2. Whereas Collingwood now, under its new regime, no longer seems to project the same level of professionalism as it has in recent years (ie, through the departures of Malthouse, Neeld, Watters etc), and the way in which the succession planning has been handled. The recent article in which the Pies were complaining about Neeld raiding its ranks said it all to me. There's been a quantum shift in the relative power and approach of the MFC as against the likes of Collingwood. And a lot of that IMO is due to the influence and hard edged, yet clinically focussed, approach of Mark Neeld. If he had a number, I'd put it on my guernsey this year.

The simple reality is, it's highly unlikely we'll get him. Always was. Nonetheless, some of the wise men here thought that any offer less than one compo pick would secure him - if not, it would be too much to offer. Well, the reality is this folks: "Highlighting his potential, coach John Worsfold said he was not only optimistic the club would retain Gaff, but "confident he'll become one of our great players". "His athletic profile is elite and his football smarts look elite as well from what we've seen," Worsfold said. "So the talent, nous and the physical attributes to perform are all there." We'd be bloody lucky to get him with our two compo picks, let alone one of them. This is a science fact. No wonder the MFC is seen to have delusional supporters. And are Dr Who and Ben-Hur the same poster?

Who still maintains Neeld didn't already have someone in mind when Barry 'left' the club?

Yep, I'd be feeling pretty confident too. It's always fun negotiating with people who have a hand full of threes and fours, yet seem to think they've got a full house.

To the contrary, the above comparison doesn't in fact say anything about the respective draft depths. At all. It's far too small a sample. What it does say though, is that the order in which players are picked in the national draft doesn't necessarily reflect the order at which they should have been picked (ie, it's speculative). In the case you've highlighted above - time has shown that Judd should have been picked higher than pick 3 ; Masten lower. What follows from the above comparison is that Gaff, a proven pick 4 with a season under his belt, is a lot more valuable (and a lot less speculative) than spending picks 13 and 15 on two wholly unproven kids who may not even get a game in the seniors. In fact, I doubt WCE would be particularly impressed with an offer of pick 4 in this year's draft for Gaff, let alone some low teen pick. Why? Because Gaff's shown himself worthy of being pick 4. And there's value in that. And that's why no club would trade both compo picks for a Masten if push came to shove, but all most definitely would for a Judd. This is not a game of bingo - we're actually talking about parting with low end first round picks we received for ONE player to try and secure an equivalent player to the ONE player we lost. Your argument, to my mind, just doesn't stack up.

We had Tom Scully (as yet, an unproven pick 1 from 2009 IMO). He left. In return, it seems we will receive two fairly low first round draft picks. Some people here seem to think we'll unearth solid gold with those picks. We may, but the better view is probably that we'll get AFL standard players in three or four years from now, both of whom will be far from elite. If we have a good chance to land Gaff (IMO a proven pick 4 from 2010), we should be going at this like a bull at a gate. It is likely he will be a gun player - certainly this is not remotely as speculative as the alternative. In fact, I would be really happy with a straight swap of Scully for Gaff (particularly when one also factors in the character and potential 'love of club' issues), which is essentially what some of us are putting forward here in saying the MFC should be prepared to part with both compo picks to get him. We've got to be realistic. Pick 15 is not likely to get Gaff to this club next year.

I just listened to Col Garland's interview with Matt Burgan on the MFC website. Dead set, that guy was an inspired selection. I love him. If I could give Scully any advice, it would be to listen to that interview and then reflect on why someone like Col Garland is in the leadership group and why he will most likely go down as a really important player in this club's history. Garland strikes me as a considered thinker and a selfless individual. In short, a real team player.

Thank you Tom. Quite simply, you have left a massive legacy, for which we are truly indebted.

I'm glad I'm not in charge of our recruiting either, but it's not because of your pig ignorant comment above. I highly doubt we will be able to secure Gaff with much less than our two first round compo picks. By all means, if WCE were happy to trade, say, our 5th round draft pick for him that'd be great. But I don't expect they'd be very happy with pick 88 for a proven pick 4 taken just over a year ago. Perhaps I'm deluded though. Our "expert" recruiters may know better. Certainly it'd be interesting to see WCE's reaction to any such proposed trade. And - I actually understand the trade mechanics of the Mitch Clark deal. In fact, I expect everyone on this site does (some notable exceptions perhaps). It is my understanding that the reason we could throw a ridiculous amount of dough at Clark is essentially because we were able to call upon the nest egg of dough we had put aside for Tom Scully. The two compo picks we got for Scully also made it easier for us to give up pick 12 to the Lions. But for that, Clark would probably be wearing a purple and white guernsey right now.

I would absolutely love to see Gaff in the red and the blue. I'd be prepared to trade both compo picks for him (assuming we don't need one for Viney). In short, Mitch Clark plus Gaff > Scully. And, in effect, that's essentially what the net result of Scully going would be on the basis of that deal. As an aside, interesting to see that WCE has already locked Darling away until the end of 2014.

I don't think GWS has unlimited cap.

If you take the view that every club is vulnerable to losing one of their better players, I'm relieved that ours has been Scully - and that we got 2 compo picks (and, in a round about way, Mitch Clark) for him. We also now command the moral high ground on this issue, something that wasn't totally with us immediately following season 2009.

That we did. IMO Fyfe (pick 20, 2009) > Scully (pick 1, 2009). That's not to mention Martin and Rohan.