beelzebub

For a bloke whose team has only one cup in the last 50 years youve an awful lot to say !!!

We will have made a small profit.. thats the fact. If you dont like the course to getting to it...thats your stance. You can trapse out all your negativity ...i dont really care for it. it not putting any head in sand to admire the position we now find our selves in. we are trading better. Yes we still get handouts...as you have often pointed out...all teams do. Doesnt change that instead of another loss...we got some black ink instead.

lol...you conspire a poll to provide a result you wanted to justify an opinion you have,,,nothing more...nothing less. You cant say that Rivers position is safe purely off the back of this. if Joel plays well as there may be a push from the FD to change the style of play in the back end . Rivers is currently only just making the grade in effectivelness. He is also rather one dimensional . When fully fit and in the right frame of mind thats ok., but his form is up and down. A player of a different style may offer more. Now that too is only an opinion.. Weve been over most of this before...so wont bother repeating it all.. Suffice to say... your justification of arguments based upon this poll are a big stretch

despite your customary misgivings Im no so silly to think this is the salvation itself. its a small 'working' profit.. That is still far more preferable to a large working LOSS !! it represents a much healthier bottom line and a massive reduction in debt and associated costs. Just for a brief moent RR ...just share the joy....it wont hurt...truly !!

Well i'll take this with a grain of salt...and I dont recall any updates from the club announcing thtis as yet...but seems that we may have turned the corner and actually have a small working profit for this year. Tucked away in the article by Caro (24/11) about Ball was this: "Melbourne's financial constraints are more relaxed than in recent years. The club - under the one-year stewardship of chief executive Cameron Schwab - expected to announce a small profit for 2009. Having eradicated a further $1 million from its debt, the club remains beholden to the AFL and the MCG but has managed a positive result and has been buoyed by the new AFL stadium deal - worth $1 million to Melbourne retrospectively - along with a commercially much-improved 2010 fixture." That bit in particular got my curiosity as I dont recall any retrospective component mentioned before...only going forwards. What an amazing result. I was amongst the sceptics at first as to whether the Stynes brigade had the where-withall. After speaking with him I definitely got a distinctly different impression. Plaudits to Jim and Scwabby and their crew and the stewardship they have brought back to the club. We'll look back one day and call these our rennaissance years !! Its been a long time since I felt this positve...and really positve...not just a self deluding fanciful type, about this club. Timing is great...if we werent on our way now...well...lets not think about that Go Dees

and no line under it either

Here in lies the folly of some arguments.. its not about taking the best tall..its about getting the best tall at an available juncture.. Absolute rubbish to suggest 1 and2 need to be defended as that was never the premise of the ask.. it was purported that 11 be taken for best available.. not particularly the best tall . Or as was put...tall for talls sake. Some of us have leanings towards just that , taking the best Tall at that pick.., ( not the best tall period ). we need Tall stocks just as much as any other varietal.

Will be interesting to see if the added investment into our fd, esp wrt fitness will provide dividends in more players seeing ot the season with legs I wont even dare mention the 'i' word but that will play its part as usual. I think 9-10....with almost 8 at worst for next season.

Its all speculative in some fashion.. No guarantees.. Some bring young thing could get the dreaded Op and so on. Theres an element or two of godd fortune ( or not ) associated with all picks. On a even field though I thin we will be remiss not to take a tall at 11 given that there will be suat of the same cailbre come 34 assuming we do take Ball at 18.. if no Ball.. then why not look at another mid there.. as there are more mids than talls..

I didnt pick the sqawkers in one.. but still managed 10.. aww ok I picked us agaisnt the filth both times..lol.. not without possibility though I dont rate them much. I agree Hawks will rebound from Hangover.. but wont wipe us either

No doubt the papers and such will colour this black every which way from sunday...if it sells a paper.. But there is much amunition with which to play. if a deal could be struck to allow AFl games outside of a peripheral of ..say40 k( hmm where's casey again ..lol ) if teh AFL ( and other sports) were accomodated with compensation.. if the exclusion period could be more rationally sorted ( abridged ) If a reasonable fixture could be worked around it without any great disadvantage to any stakeholders then you have a blueprint for all concerned...All win..all happy if you cant...then bunfight !!

This the whole point...as per your sig ( ) its a weakend selection. The value somewhat doubly dilluted by numbers and the overrall quality of talls. There is say for instance no Watts this year. KPP are in essence all speculative so consider it in itself any more so at 11 or otherwise. This is more about available opportunites in this draft and when we can make use of them. . What say you take you mids til 34 and we take Daw

so RPFC,just when would you be trying to find any talls ?

try noting your own order of reply hey !!..A poster mentioned teh disruption to season and sponsoorship.. you countered about they didnt with repsect to olympics.. I counterd. its not that hard Some of the same companies that sponsor these big events.. also sponsor local teams...all things fall to budgets. where are you slotting the TV rights into any of this ?/ just for clarity I agree signage can be done in days

dont think the FD would have botheerd at all with him had they thought it not insurmountable. Think its more physical now

hardly beside it.. it might be part of it. ...and you raised the Olympics after the sponsorhip was put there(post)..lol I think teh idea of a potential world cup here and some watering down of AFL team sponsors might well happen. Easily percieved as more bang for WC especially if the sponsor has money invested in both...Might rob Peter ( AFL ) to bump up Paul ( WC )

before or since his training stint ?

Still think this is about conning Essendon...they need more Mid strength. Ball would suit them very well. Will they consider him a better pick at 10...thats the real question. Whatever they pick at 10 may effect our 11. If there at 18 I suppose youd have to take Ball...if the best offering

exactly.. still very much on the youth side.. hardly the seasoned player. I think Thorpe is purely a fitness case.. If sound.. then a likely pickup latter in ND if not.. we wont.

come on youre better than that.... dont give any one here crap about using either 1 or two on a KPP as you know yourself thats spurious. Those two are the stand out in the draft..for any criteria. You yourself are focussing on 11. Im addressing that too. Theres a basket load of mids at or around the same mark that could go anywhere from say 6 to 20. Our first opportunity to get a non mid is ...11. . its doubful that the same quality of tall compared to mid will be around at 18. Thats where the issue lays.

The Olympics ( nor for that matter the C Games ) disrupted the footy season by dividing it or excluding it.

No its not...its a recipe for just that...finding decent talls. A team is made up of more than just requirements for mids etc. You do need talls. "perceived need that may change over time" how is it either percieved..its real...you need them.. Change over time.. you always need talls. You go shopping with a basket of components needed. There arent that many decent ones this year. But youd overlook them..for why. As is a possible scenario... first two picks are locked on mids. Quire possible Ball may be taken with 18..... so if not some sort of promising tall at 11...when ?

Bugger...am going in May....

I quite enjoy watching most sports...when I have the opportunity. Some sports are better live than on telly..Baseball comes to mind. I have only the mildest of passing interests in Soccer and really only if OZ is in a game...but I could still give it a big miss. Im quite happy to say Im not a soccer fan. There are many people like myself who couldnt give two razoos whether it was here or not. As explained elsewhere the US got it through its lobbying and money. It also had no real conflict for the most part and FIFA own-centric paranoia was easily catered to because of the spread of American venues. There are certainly some decent spinoffs that could be had...emphasis on could be had. what clout will the AFL have in any of this. Upgrade to regional grounds look more likely than Casey getting a leg up. Watchout for any infighting amongst our own clubs if unfair advantages are perceived. Soccer doesnt need our size of ground.. just the capacity for those matches for the WC. Soccer and Rugby will in all likely hood come out smiling.. I dont see it so for AFL. There will be NO byes..or breaks throughout the CUP from their perspective. They will not allow any other sport on those pitches quarantined for their games. Without a preseason cup there is some room to move... and have said from the outset I have no qualms with compromise . Just FIFA dont...show me where they have. So much crap is espoused about standing aside for some apparent greater cause in allowing the 'game' to be held here. Voice dissent and your labeled a ranting pariah. Not everyone cares for that game.. Not everyone buys into the rolled out recycled myth that there are always benefits from these events. Half a Billion bums on seats around the world does nothing for me personally. I also dont understand why holding it here would take as long as is being reported as nearly all recent ones have only take a month. If you could reduce the pre cup exclusion to two weeks for venue then 6 weeks becomes tenable. we seem to be able to caretake our grounds and host every other sport in this country ..I dont see why soccer is anything special...its boots on grass.. after all.!!.... maybe they like comfy grass for all their diving !! If FIFA is unwilling to compromise i dont see why anyo else ought to

An issue for mine in al of this is time and availability. Going forward ( npi ) there , as result of compromised drafts, will be fewer picks with which to pick up any talls ( or anyone for that matter). Talls, and inparticular KPP take longer to getup and going to the best efforts so you need to get them whilst you can, when you can. We have quite a few players who are either mids of mods in waiting. We need to seriously look at teh best avail talls with 11 and 18 ( th eBall thing aside )