Bonkers

Out of curiosity what is your knock on Jagga? From what I have seen he has some of the most natural ability and skills in the draft? He is a player profile we don't currently have as he uses the ball wall in short, runs hard, accumulates and links up play? He may not have the size or top line athletic attributes of others perhaps? Edit: Just noticed he ran a 6:27min 2km time trial.

Surely you get an indication of what the other party is willing to pay before you go and tell a player to have a look around. I'm not having a go at you by the way, just that this whole process and the way it has been orchestrated by the club is an absolute [censored] show. I'm all for having honest discussions with players and so forth, but how could the club allow Clarry to go and have a chat to Geelong knowing they had sweet F All to offer? The stupidity and incompetence is bewildering.

Like I said, you should consider editing or removing your post. He is currently head of the board of said, City on a Hill. The church isn't right wing, it is just a church like other churches. He didn't write an article as you have mentioned. He hasn't given any sermons. No worries, you can leave your post but, I think it's quite ironic you are willing to character assassinate someone for something you don't seem to know much about and have listed factually incorrect information.

That's not an accurate assessment of the situation or Thorburn's character. You should consider deleting your post.

Potentially low risk with high reward if the price and terms are right. Not sure if we would have any more luck getting him fit than what Carlton has though.

I wonder if there is any chance the club may consider trading next years first rounder into this year to have another pick in the first round? Probably depends a little bit on what we would require to draft Kalani White next year I presume.

She is his commercial and brand manager since April, not just his partner. As people have mentioned his player manager advised against this course of action in terms of seeking a trade, they went ahead anyway.

For the naysayers who mentioned it was all media noise, Jon Ralph reported on Fox that Petracca and his fiancé both personally approached other clubs to find a trade solution to get out of Melbourne in the last few weeks. They also exhaustively approached pro scouts etc to find a potential trade route. Don’t shoot the messenger.

John Ralph has mentioned that Smith has been asked by the board to fill the vacant position on the board at the end of the year. He also mentioned that he won’t considering sitting on the board just to be a board member and that if he accepts he is likely to be the next president and will replace Roffey. edit: spelling

I'm pretty sure we traded our second rounder for McAdam? We may have got a second rounder back in the Grundy trade?

Reminds me of the Billings and Hunter trades, washed up and past their best. Can’t say I’m excited about this or the current direction of the club and overall recruitment strategy at the moment. Bring on the external review, accountability and transparency at all levels of the club.

With pick 5 we will hypothetically get a 200 game player of elite talent who we can shape the team around, most probably a midfielder to replace Brayshaw. If we trade for Houston and get 13 back, we get an AA half back flanker for another 70-100 games and a speculative mid teens pick. I’m not sure having Houston is really going to evolve our team that much that it will move the needle and put us back into contention. If we are looking to trade pick 5 I think we’d be better going for a Key Position player or an elite midfield talent if available as it is more likely to have a greater impact on our team. One of our best finishers going inside 50 at times was Windsor, if we can find a midfielder in the draft with footy smarts and is a good kick that should compliment our existing midfield.

Yeh it’s a good foundation or footing for our game. But that can be built upon in other areas when we have the ball.

What do those stats prove about winning games when you have more territory and more I50s than your opponent but don’t win the game?

I don’t see much difference in our deficiencies from last year. In a finals type game where the game was contested, tight and hard to score our forwards apart from Petracca struggled to impact the game until the last quarter. We had enough I50s last night and territory over the whole game to kick a winning score. That has been our issue now for 3 years. I can see that Goodwin and co. are trying to adapt and create different methods to create scoring opportunities. But overall our forward entries at times are still to often long bombs rather than using skills to hit up a free option inside 50. It’s a work in progress. The difference maker would be a reliable marking target I50 and some more efficient ball use going inside 50. Out of last nights game there are a few more concerns for me, we allowed Carlton to score 5 goals from Centre Clearance which used to be a strong part of our game. Another concern was the way that Carlton messed with our zone defence in the first quarter and were able to take 3 marks for goals. Their ability to take inside 50 marks in that period was the game difference in my opinion. Following that the game was an arm wrestle and we had to push Petracca forward to generate scores which moves him out of the midfield. We’d get some momentum but then Carlton would score out of the centre bounce again. The loss of Brayshaw is a big blow as he could cover many positions for us tactically. I may change my opinion if McAdam and Melksham can start making a difference for us in the forward line when they come in. At the moment we seem too reliant on our defence to win games for us.