Dappa Dan

Yup. Mmm Hmm.

Correct. If I see much more of this misinformation I might just start a thread and ask for it to be stickied.

WHOA! Just a TOUCH harsh... Mcdonald - Could at any time start to slide... But my feeling is he'll keep going a while yet. He's not scary enough for opposition teams to hunt him, and there's no reason, given his career arc, why he couldn't keep playing the way he's playing into his early-mid thirties... But yes... odds are he'll wane sooner rather than later. Robbo is still young enough to smash teams, and could easily win our goal-kicking. Green and Bruce are not past their best. Bruce can continue at a high rate for another 2-3 years, especially given his late start. Green hasn't even peaked yet I reckon. Moloney, if he got his body right, is MILES from his best footy. His problem isn't that he's played his best year, it's just injury. Carroll is fine... He won't get a whole lot better, but he won't get worse either. He's tough as old boots. harsh on Frawley too. He showed a bit, and will be useful next year while not dominating... he is young... Other than that I agree. I'm pretty sure we won't win the spoon unless we have a horror run with injury again. If we DO have a year like last year, I reckon we could give it a shake... Depth is a problem at this stage witrh such a young list.

Absolutely. Just as I said... BEHIND the coach, the recruiter is up there with the most important etc. etc. I think, given our disagreement here, that it really does come down to the difference between how highly you and I rate CAC. You evidently believe he wasn't that good. Or at least that he's replaceable. I don't. And that's where all of the above stems from. I DON'T believe he was replaceable. I think we would have to be VERY lucky to end up with someone as good as him in the all important next 5 years. What I think is more likely is this. The club is in a fairly similar financial position to that when we hired CAC (perhaps marginally better under PG, but we're still in the red with the CBF), so as far as I'm concerned what is MUCH more likely is that we'll have to "blood" another recruiter. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe I'm so wrong I'll end up looking ridiculous... all I'm saying is ODDS ARE I'm right. THAT'S what's a shame. We had an experienced campaigner (Maybe you disagree) with 10 years experience... now we don't. I still can't see how any MFC lover could dismiss this, but then I'm not every MFC lover. I think if you want to dot every i and cross every t and not leave any stone unturned then it HAS to matter. What if this continues to happen with recruiters, and assistants and people in sensitive positions? We may look back to the CAC situation and in years to come see a pattern of behaviour that we need to eliminate. I'll ask you this. What if you're right, and DB ends up landing us in the top 4 three years running? What if we can't afford to keep him? Or what if he wants to go somewhere with a stronger culture like going back to Port, or the Dons, or god forbid the Pies when MM finally dies of that coronary that's been catching up with him? THEN it will matter how our staff have been leaving. MFC seems to me to be the place for coaches early in their careers to come and try out the big time. If they have marginal success, they'll move on to a richer club with the resources to win a flag. If they fail, the only ones that hurt are all those concerned with MFC. You see my point? You can be as blaze about CAC's departure as you like... and in the end I think you have grounds to let it go... He went to a club he previously loved, after 10 years of solid service, he owes us nothing... A departure of a quality football person is never pleasant, but hey, it's not like his leaving was up there with Barrassi's in terms of pain... For mine, CAC's departure leaves me concerned. That's all. But anyway. We've wasted enough bytes on this. I'll see you on the boards when the season starts and I'll join in with your optimism. We'll look at this in 3-5 years if we remember, are still around, and could be bothered.

Thinking Miller was a liability. Aggressive Miller at least had some weapons at his disposal and was able to be the sacrificial anode for all the crap that goes on on a footy field. If he comes back and makes errors that cause problems for the club, then what have we lost?

Ok. You're going to have to look up the word evolution. Evolution and change are not the same thing. Evolution implies improvement, change can be good or bad. Yes and no. In this case from what little we can tell the move, as I said, came at a good time for CAC, what with the new coach and huge intake in the footy department. Does it matter why he left? OF COURSE! Do you think it matters to WCE why Judd left? Or would they have the same blaze attitude with that as well? One more time... IF CAC left solely for the money, then that is of ENORMOUS concern to the club. To say "who cares" is naive and childish. WHAT?! Who ever said his efforts won't be felt?!!! We can all see these draftees will come under his flag in the coming years... so what!!! For the third time, what I'm worried about is the next few years. How can you not see that another few years like the one we drafted Molan and Rogers in, and all these prize recruits will be worth exactly nothing. We have half a list for god's sake!!! Yes. All positive points. How lovely. I'm not talking about them... Like I've said before, I'm pleased so far with what DB's done.... but what exactly HAS he done. Until he starts stringing together premiership points his talk is exactly that... talk. Just recruiting new guys with development in their titles doesn't fix the problem. I agree wholeheartedly that it's a step in the right direction, but again, I'm not talking about the other departments... I was just talking about CAC, as the thread's title suggests. Why so? I'd say behind the coach the recruiting manager has to be up there with the most important people at the club. The coach and the players we let go had done all they could do at MFC. Agreed!!! For the thinking MFC supporter, we could see that many of the people we've lost over the last 6 months were borderline at best as assets to the MFC. CAC WAS an asset. Even you aren't arguing that. But yes. Should the new recruiter come in and be a huge success (or in other words, get lucky) then luck is obviously on our side. If we're promoting a guy from an assistant recruiting role to replace CAC then it's simple Bub... We have LOST experience!!! I'm all for a bit of enthusiasm, even blind Y_M enthusiasm, but you have to look at the bare facts don't you? In the end... as always... I hope you're optimism is well founded.

If that's the only reason he left, then what can you say? Good luck to him. I guess his leaving could have been under worse circumstances in that light... Nope. Not going to fall apart. It fell apart years ago. What I'm talking about is holding onto someone in this VERY important time where we have the core of a good strong hard midfield. But the job is half done. In my estimation, while we could come crashing back into the 8 next season I don't know that we have the list for sustained success. The next 3 years (2 of which he was contracted for) could prove HUGELY crucial for our recruiting department. It may be in this time that we bottom out again while looking to replace all our tall timber that's on the way out (White, Neitz, Holland, Robbo). CAC, or ANY experienced recruiter will be important. But then that's just my opinion that we're not past the worst... Conjecture? Um... No. the club is not financially stable. Fact. We are not in a position to go around hiring LOTS of different people for different roles, and even if it seems we are (we have hired lots of R&D people) the CAC situation has proven that it's only a season by season state of affairs. Just because we've hired all these people now doesn't mean they'll still be there in a year's time, and it doesn't mean we'll be able to afford them. And here's a newsflash for you, I'm not concerned with surviving. I don't want MFC to just SURVIVE. I want us to thrive. Now maybe CAC wasn't the way to do that, but he certainly could have been. In 5 years we'll have half a team of gun young guys hired by him, and half a team of guys hired by someone else. It's a MORE flimsy position to be in that had we kapt CAC. Rubbish. His input on the rookie and PSD drafts yes, but after that? I'm talking immediate in the sense of the next 3 years of youngsters coming through. That is, the kids 15-18 right now. CAC will take his knowledge to the next team, but more importantly his nous in selecting a smoky. What's there to get? The point is not the knowing... WHICHEVER recruiter ends up being responsible for us winning our long awaited flag will be the one we "know" about. Until we actually snaffle one, it'll be crystal-ball gazing. My point is that CAC wasn't in the same boat as Daniher, Ward, Godfrey et. al. General opinion was that these guys were never going to win a flag at MFC. We had not come to that conclusion with CAC. Not yet. So it would have been nice to hold onto him... we were the ones that had our hands on him in the first place... We don't yet know it has to do with money. We may never. And if it did, I say do whatever it takes to keep him. If we weren't willing to pay top dollar, then the point I make still stands... We couldn't afford him. Simple right? I never said CAC had no right to leave, I'm saying it's sad and unfortunate for us that he does. You're jumping to conclusions. Like anyone really cares about that. It's very romantic that he wants to be a part of the Black and Yellow, but it's not something wer can control. And no-one has said that. You're jumping to conclusions again. ALL I said was that if you have to have a head of recruiting, CAC is a good one. Or at least that in the last 5 years he has developed (as we all do) into a man who is very good at his job. Some success? Exactly. And WHAT legitimate questions. Look at it plainly. If a guy coaches the team for ten years, and in his most recent year, or maybe his most recent 3-5 years he hasn't looked like he could win us a flag, then it's an appropriate time to let him go. If another man learns the trade over five years, then spends the next 5 recruiting gems with the MAJORITY of his picks, then THAT'S the guy you want to hold onto. CAC's best work has been with these last few recruiting years where he's gotten players other teams would love to have on their lists. And this is where I disagree. Actually, maybe disagree is a strong word. I think we MAY be evolving... Hell we may get lucky and have recruited the next supercoach. The point is we had a disastrous season, and we responded by swinging the axe. I see no reason YET to be overjoyed about our future. So far we've continued to go backwards and I for one won't be convinced we're "evolving" or that we've taken the right path until I see some food on my plate. CAC leaving is not a "good" sign of evolution. Like I said before, if we were evolving we would have gotten rid of the negative problems in the club and kept a hold of the positive ones. CAC was a positive. Fair enough. I'm not trying to be TOO pessimistic, but I'm still waiting for the sign that will make me look at the cup half full, as you do. CAC leaving after ten years is not unreasonable. In all likelihood as you say we may look back on it as something that happened for a good reason. I hope you're right, but I'm not seeing any evidence to convince me just yet.

WJ I could go into all sorts of detail, but I'm certain within a day or two it would be completely redundant... Basically, I don't like your idea on any level. We are the Melbourne Demons. It's as simple as that. I LOVE that we have a mascot that's rare in the world, and while I'm certain change is the way to go, I'm certain big blanket changes like this one that only serve to weaken our cause are not the best idea. If, as what happened decades ago, a certain coach or player coins a phrase that takes over by it's own right (fuschias-demons), then we'll have the debate then. Edit: I just read over that and it seemed a little cold... I didn't mean to criticise you or the effort you make, but just thought I'd throw my 5 cents in. Nice effort, but it's a no for mine.

Yeah, that's all well and good, but I'm more concerned with the immediate ramifications. We got CAC when he was relatively green and eager. You could argue he probably wanted the job more then, and in the last 10 years many agree he's improved immesurably. So what happens now? We get another green and eager bloke in and we get 5 or so seasons of Molans, Rogers etc. etc before he comes good? We're in a similar position now when it comes to appointing his replacement in that we can't afford to spend big bucks like the toigs can. So ultimately we're the training ground for one of the league's best recruiters, and we'll be that again. Your point about a new start is relevant only when the outgoing team-members are not achieving any more. Daniher, Ward, Brown, Godfrey, Fagan, Riley... these guys were finished, or in the case of the footy department guys, they probably felt they had done all they could at Melbourne. CAC, as far as I'm concerned, still had a lot to offer the club, and unlike many of the list above my point has been proven by the fact that he was head-hunted by our opposition. In order to go all the way we need to cut out the parts that are no longer serving our ultimate goals, but MORE IMPORTANTLY keep those that are, or that at least COULD serve our ultimate goals. As it is we have an entirely new footy department pretty much. Not just the coach. How many flags have you seen won by a bunch of green guys like that? They have so much to learn, and by the time they come good (in 5 years say) who's to say the same thing won't happen again? I guess in the end the point is moot. Clearly he wanted to leave, and there's no sense in trying to make him stay when his heart's not in it... I think the thing that upsets me the most is the "money" side of things. When we missed out on Judd, we were consoled with some other top picks that we're already excited about. He would have been great, but then there was the salary cap to consider, and the Blues did pay a hefty price for the guy in ANYONE'S language. At least when players choose a club because of money, then the club will inevitably feel the squeeze in other areas... But in CAC's case, if it really was just a case of him getting paid more, then basically it's as simple as this... CAC left because Melbourne doesn't have the resources to keep him. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer... again. Jarka, I'm finding it hard to see the sunny side here...

Demons moniker isn't going anywhere... other than that a pretty well summed up little article...

Not gonna be a popular question this... I still can't get past Jones' limitations... But then with the doubts I've had since he joined the club, he should never have achieved the things he already has, so I'm not sure he'll be the kind of player defined by his limitations, rather he will be defined by his strengths... ie Rob Harvey won't be remembered as a short-arse player with a bad kick, he'll be remembered as a TRUE champion because of his brain, longevity, hard work etc etc... I'm not saying Jones will reach those heights (not saying he won't either ), but hopefully he'll not be known for a shortish up-and-under kick and his small size... But I digress. I put Brock ahead because of marking ability, ability to stand up in a tackle, kicking penetration, general hardness in the clinches (though I do realise nathan is always the last to get up at the stoppages, always at the bottom of the pack) and mostly the amount he has achieved thus far. McLean's young but has monstered more games than Chunk... But yes, by gee you wouldn't want to lose either. Would stroll comfortably onto any list in the AFL both of them...

Yeah... can we get confirmation on this? It's like last year when they were going to take Petterd in the first round, and somehow he was still there by the second round...

Wow. Number one with a bullet.

We would have gotten a PP, but after the first round... Then we would have been eligible for the next year assuming we didn't get 18 or more premiership points... So had we lost to the Blues in round 22 we would have had picks 2, 18 and 20 as opposed to 4 and 21... Then what'll really melt your melon is the question of whether the footy department would have felt the need to trade Trav with 3 selections already inside the first 20... Carltank have earned a lifetime of ire from me this year...

You made me laugh...

Not bad. I'd have Bruce at one, then Rivers, then Davey... Bartram higher, buut that's about it...

It's that irritating thing where he played almost exactly half his career before the turn of the century, and almost exactly half AFTER and thus may never fit in either. I would like to see him, as our greatest goal-kicker, as a forward and in the SECOND team of the century. There's no arguement from me that he should be in at least one, and if I had to take 1900-2000 or nothing, I'd find a place for him over one or two on that list.

Aaaah. I see. And no I didn't know that... I was trying to use my imagination there... I was thinking it was another way of saying he's moving better or something... But clearly it's just my lack of knowledge... Kids today...

Am I showing my age here.... What does this mean? HA!!! HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!! Someone called Y_M normal!!!

In footy people over-use the word tragedy... but this is the worst news I've heard in a long time. I could stand losing Daniher after 10 years, I thought it was sad, a shame, but ultimately the best for all parties. I could handle losing his assistants, as that made a lot of sense... But all die-hard demons fans knew CAC was our best-kept non-secret. We have, as fans, been very pleased on the whole. He's picked up some gems, secured players like Brock and Jones who are almost universally adored. In his tenure, which I think clocked up 10 years, or nearly 10... he made some mistakes that were ultimately learning experiences. We got him when he was relatively green and straight out of Fremantle, and while we have CERTAINLY benefitted from his expertise, we have earned it in a sense too, as he is NOW considered one of the top recruiters, if not THE top recruiter in the land. And all that experience goes to Punt road and again the demons are left with a coaching panel, footy department and recruiter that are all new faces... It pleases me, however, to hear that his father played for Richmond, and that he was in fact a Tigers supporter as a kid. Craig, of all the delistings and sackings, this one hurts the most... Not only are you leaving, but you're leaving to my most hated club... That said, I wish you all the best. You, like Daniher, have earned our respect and gratitude... Your impact on this club will be seen for a few more years yet, and I hope while the Red and Blue thrash your team up and down the park there's a small twinkle of pride as your selections run riot over the AFL... No offence, but I hope you select some absolute TURKEYS over the next few years and the Tigers fire you!! ... You're always welcome back here...

It's funny. I went to a Sandy pre-season game this year which he attended. He stood next to me at the huddle, and he seemed shorter than me somehow. He was barefoot, but it wasn't like I was wearing Cuban heels or anything... I'm only 183cm... I'm CERTAIN it was just my perception of him, and the fact that he stoops a little. But what's weird is when I met Neita I felt like he was a clear foot taller than me.

Yeah... i think ultimately we could have taken yet another mediocre tall to go with about 4 other mediocre talls we already have... and that player would have taken yonks to develop... OR we could take the best available. If worst comes to worst we can trade a promising young in and under player for tall timber down the track if necessary... the most important thing is that we draft quality, and I think CAC is more comfortable predicting quality with the players around the 180-185cm mark...

Where does everyone get the idea we have heaps of small forwards? You couldn't possibly imagine Maric will play his best footy within months of being drafted, Davey is wandering all over the ground, even if Yze does play he won't necessarily play in the forward line, Sylvia may be on the little side, but he plays like a bustling CHF, Pickett's gone, ditto Hayes and Hughes, Petterd could end up anywhere but plays like a leading flanker when forward... Sampi is a dyed in the wool forward. I admit it could be a risk allowing him on the list, but I doubt as a 23 year old player with oodles of talent in his footballing prime, that he'll be keeping anyone out of the side that was going to make any headway ANYWAY. Also, who else were we going to take with the valuable pick 3?

When is the PSD and rookie drafts again?

If you're going to ask a question like that, I guess you can only really mark the recruiters based on what was on offer in the draft, and what they passed on compared to what they took... In that sense, I'm thrilled... would be maybe a 9/10. - I was hoping firstly that we wouldn't take a lesser tall man just because we were desperate. We all know why that is, but I just felt like none of those players looked like they were going to solve our problems. We don't need all that many tall forwards... We need GOOD key defenders, but we actually have plenty of tall timber down there. The LAST thing we needed was more mediocrity to go with the Warnock/Holland/Miller types... Let's say for a minute that McEvoy had slipped to 14 and we took him, we would have had another slow ruckman to go with Jamar, but worst of all we would have missed out on Grimes... - Looking at the first 21 picks in order, we missed out on Cotchin and Kreuzer because we weren't the worst team in 2007. We missed out on pick 3 because of the priority rule... In the end we picked at 4 the player we would have taken at 3... so as far as that's concerned I'm thrilled. - I was hoping for Vezspremi or Rioli at 14, but they were taken before that. Nothing we can do about that. The players taken after Grimes were considered to be surprise early selections... Personally I didn't want ANY of the players after Grimes to be selected in his place... So that's another tick there for CAC. - Maric at 21 has some VERY good wraps for a kid taken that late. He is sort of a career FP, which limits him, but that kind of kick is solid gold... But most importantly, the players taken between 14 and 21 are pretty damn boring as far as I'm concerned. I think if we had pick 15, Maric would have been a good selection there as well! Then when you consider the players taken AFTER 21, the list thins out directly after Maric... So in the end, those all-important 3 picks were just about as good as I could have hoped for given the depth this year.. Hence, 9/10.