Dappa Dan

Why? All but the "within striking distance of a flag" part is fact... We do need cash, memberships, experience etc etc etc. At the end of 2002 the footy department decided we didn't have the list to make a flag, so that shows it does happen. The list is a good one, just very young. Nothing wrong with that. So why not get a bit of th competitive juices flowing? Teams like Sydney time themselves for a flag tilt, we are not in their position.

What came first, the chicken or the egg? Like you said, they are reviewing it because they realise Neita is the only fully fledged leader out there. The review is necessary only because the 26-30 brigade are weak leaders. They're not DEVOID of leadership (Robbo, Green), but they're certainly not nearly good enough. I'm pleased they're taking action, but it's about 2-3 years late and I don't know that it'll make any difference. The leaders just aren't there... Yet.

Eh? I don't know that Davey is quite a star. He really didn't have a great season this year. played a few blinders, but also went missing way too often to be called a star. Yes he had a few injuries and niggles, but he was out there. What worries me is that he was probably the second-best forward pocket after Didak when he got AA (Some say he was jibbed). Since then he's gradually drifted into the midfield and defence, even when we had glaring holes up forward beneath Neita's feet that needed to be filled. Since he moved there I've only seen him DOMINATE in one game, which is just plain not good enough for a player like him who's won so many off his own boot. If I was DB I'd only use him sporadically up the ground and in defence. He doesn't have the physical characteristics to go with the rough stuff. When he's nipping at the forwards' heels he doesn't seem to let defenders get under his skin as easily, he's REALLY hard to coach against, and he has that wonderful run-down trick that he does. He kicks goals at times when lesser players would be happy just to keep the opposition from possessing the ball. You can't buy that kind of X-factor (Unless you're Carltank), and I reckon it's redundant and ultimately wasted if he's more than 70 metres from goal. If I was an opposition coach I'd be THRILLED to see Aaron anywhere BUT near the goals. Otherwise you know you're going to have to craft a solution, and there aren't that many.

I was thinking about this the other day. Under Daniher they handled it as a year-by-year prospect. It depends on where your list is at, how many pre-season injuries there are, what the pre-season fitness is like, the age of your list with particular focus on the important members of your team and elongating their year... what the finances are like, memberships, what off-field misdemeanours have cropped up... If the club is DESPERATE for money, memberships, exposure, experience in a young list and most importantly if they're not within striking distance of a flag with their list, then absolutely... as it happens, we are that team. The only downsides would be: - Injuries to guys like Neita, either now or later in the year when his old legs start letting him down. - NAB cup glory only gets part-time fans excited, and if it doesn't translate into real H&A success or finals success it's more or less irrelevant. - The team tires quicker. If we DO have a shot later in the year, I'd be worried about the young guys holding up their form, particularly in finals. I hope DB takes the well worn path of keeping the under-done and older guys out until round 2 should we make it, which is more likely to be televised. I also hope he doesn't mess around with injuries like Bartram's last season.

Wow. Demonland's going all 'ology on us....

Ok... so hits then? I'm gonna say 3086

:D Ok. So there that is....

Since everyone needed a good laugh...

Who really cares what the pipsqueak thinks? I don't think even I could take him seriously as a coach... And if the interview process was so unprofessional why did ju$$ say it was?

I think it's 4 rookies isn't it? Hayes, Neaves and Huges delisted, and Bode promoted, with Ooze and Neita on the veterans list... that means 4 newies... Having said that they could re-rookie one or two of those guys. Maybe Neaves.

hits? Or the highest amount of members/guests logged on at any given moment on the day... Last year was in the hundreds from memory. I'm gonna say 203...

Mmm Hmm. It's a wonder it took us this long to suggest it.

Yeah. I remember him in 2002. GEE we looked dangerous that year. That's what made that loss in the semi so hard to stomach. But the sight of Vardy swinging around on his left, 55 metres out and calmly slotting it... it really got us going that day... and for a couple of quarters we were in one of those periods where it seemed like we were untouchable. But I don't know that Welsh would be similar. I mean, Vardy was an out and out gun with injuries. Welsh is "ok" with injuries AND 2 years older. The thing that suggests he won't make it is that we traded away a 28 year old, and it seems the right choice because by the time Bailey has an honest shot of making a flag chance, these 28 year olds will have at least started their decline. Welsh is no exception, and really, all it's going to do is deny Bate, Newton or one of these other guys time up forward. Welsh is a top-up player for a side going for a flag in the next 2-3 years. That's why Adelaide are offloading him.

Vardy was a gun who played at least a couple of sensational season with us. Also, was he 28 when we got him?

Is that the most annoying thing in the world or what? No offence to the people who make that mistake, I can understand it... but with the so-called footy experts, and especially the commentators they really should know better... Some of the worst offenders, S.O.S., Daicos and I think Healy has been guilty a few times... Almost makes you yearn for the days of McGuire... "Rrrrrrrrrrrrrrobertsooooooooooooon!!!!!!" ... Almost...

This is just Kent Kingsley mark 2.... Next.

Yep. But on the plus side, if you had to recruit a KP defender with a weakness in his game, spoiling would be the weakness I'd choose. You can't make them much quicker, you can't make them any taller, you can't really develop their football brain all that much, but in Frawley's case I reckon as soon as he gets a bit of bulk on him the spoiling will come naturally. I think people need to take a bit of a reality check here. How often does a KP player recruited in any given year come into the competition in his first season and star at the top level? Has it EVER happened? Look at Gumbleton, Leuenberger, Sellar, Brown etc etc... None of these guys have done anything. I would say if Chip has come into the side as early as he has and NOT had a serious career affecting injury, then he's just about exactly where you'd want him to be. He's had a taste for it, knows what the pace of it is like, and I'm sure that next season if he doesn't debut in the first round, our desire for KP defenders will force his inclusion within the first six... and if he still isn't pulling his weight, he'll get dropped again. Simple really, and certainly nothing to be ashamed of. Look, next season he's going to get smashed half a dozen times, and he's going to get beaten (but not disgraced) another half a dozen times, maybe more. But with a bit of luck he'll win a few games, and if we're REALLY lucky he might play a few really good ones against really good opposition and force his name into the spotlight at MFC and in the football world. We're not going to need him to play like a veteran defender YET. Rivers, Carroll and Holland are bigger mature bodies who despite obvious lacks in their games can be relied upon to pull their weight in the majority of matches in any given season. Nobody should be expecting Frawley to do as much as those blokes in 2008... Beyond that? Yes...

Oh... Bugger. That could have saved me 20 minutes of typing...

Oh noooooooo... Not Welsh...

Wow. Turned that one right around on me didn't you? I see your point. And that's certainly another aspect about CAC that I find fascinating. He gets so much out of some of hic picks in the sense that he'll get someone for a pick far lower than they should have gone... Petterd (went for 30, could have gone top 10), Bate (Many opposition supporters think he would have been top 3 if he went a year later), Bartram (Nuff said) are all good examples of this. But when he gets high picks there isn't really any room for them to be considered a "bargain." Interestingly, I'm comfortable with that strategy, assuming you get to have more than one dip at the barrell. PJ I think will still be a fantastic player, not sure why everyone's off his bandwagon. And Meesen is an unknown quantity. The thing I like about that strategy is that CAC is doing teh same thing as he would with smaller players, that is getting a player that is worth more than the selection we give up. I reckon if you're going to try to predict a star ruckman at the age of 18 you're a madman. Picking whether or not one will be good at the age of 22-24, that's another story. Though there are exceptions, like Spider and White. I totally see your point... But... Deanox makes a good point here as well... Perhaps this is a reason why CAC was so keen to pick up Frawley. Apparently he was one of the biggest bolters when draft day approached last year. His awkward kicking style may have played a part, but from memory he was ALWAYS going to be a defender or wingman when he was recruited. How often do you see "KP Defender" written beside the name of a top 10 draft pick? The closest you get is "KP player who can play both ends." If through the course of their career they have injuries, or are revealed to have a fault in their game that can't be rectified, such as no overhead mark (PJ) or lack of pace (Holland), then they are relegated to defence, often after a trade to a new club. So the ruck and KP defender recruiting has been a bit sus? I'm no nutcase football fan so I can't comment, but I'd be interested to see exactly which teams don't have the same problem. More interesting would be to look at, say, the best 3 or 4 defensive line-ups in the game and see how they were constructed. eg, Adelaide (a couple of good rookies and low picks that turned out to be stars. Good coaching?) West Coast (Just good/lucky recruiting, defenders were all highly rated high picks and KP players), Geelong (A F/S that's one of the all time great defenders, a whole host of good mid-size players) etc etc In the end, it seems to me that a good defence is often a hodge-podge of recruiting techniques even at the best of times. Creative coaching seems to be the only uniform aspect of them all. But hey, I'm not as worried as a lot of people. Yes we need one or two really classy guys to come in, but I love the look of Rivers, Bell, Frawley, Bartram, Petterd and a few others. there are young pinch hitters who have impressed there too, like PJ. Soon they'll all get the opportunity to p[lay out whole seasons with the retirements of Holland, Wrecker et al. Ward and Brown leaving also paves the way.

Fair enough, everyone's entitled to their opinion. Ok. I'm going to need more from you on this one to penetrate your reasoning. Why would 15 other clubs have a "better" idea than the MFC trainers and recruiters? Because we're not as good as the other clubs? Because we're not as wealthy? Because our influence doesn't reach as far being a poorer club with less members? On top of all this, consider that Mark Williams has coached him for a couple of seasons now, and was always very much a part of the inner sanctum at MFC. He is now our development coach and would have arguably a better idea of Valenti's abilities than ANYONE. Plus he is a proven VFL coach, which hints at his quality and footy knowledge. As far as I'm concerned, if I was a recruiter working for one of the other clubs and I was interested in Shane, I would be trying to get a hold of ANY of Williams' (or MFC's) thoughts on the kid as they'd be the most accurate and profound. Likewise if I wanted to know about a guy playing in his second year at East Fremantle, I would expect Chris Connolly to have a better idea of his worth than CAC... Do you see my point? And as a last point, consider that we have a head recruiter that is approaching a decade in the job and is generally regarded as one of the better ones going around. So much so other AFL clubs are headhunting him. Now why would MFC's opinion of this player be less reliable than all 15 clubs? I would have put us right at number 1 on that list. If I had to choose between the two, on the day, I would have taken Juice, but then everyone would have. He kicked 6 goals in one of the matches I saw, and you just don't release potential CHFs who have sticky hands, a huge leap, a bit of mongrel, a nicely shaped kick, a sharp turning circle and the ability to chase and win his own ball. Valenti outplayed him, was coming up to 30 touches on the day and was the most dominant midfielder, but then we already have good inside midfielders coming through. The choice to take Juice is based as much on his designation and position as his ability. But I think I see your point. If what you're talking about is a question of "class" or "upside" then yes, Juice had AFL player written all over him every time he went on the park, except for his god-awful intra-club match... Valenti also has class, but not as much. I remember debating the Juice phenomenon with RR earlier this year, and I think the general consensus was that Juice's skill set was always going to translate smoothly into the seniors. That is, his effect on the game would be similar. The tall blokes don't get any shorter. Mmm. And like I said, you're entitled to your opinion. And to be honest, I think the odds are against Valenti, even now. What he shows on the pitch, I love... that is the ability to deliver a laces-out pass under enormous pressure and the ability to win his own ball. Like you said, just because he can do it in the VFL, doesn't mean he can do it in the AFL. My point is he has shown that he has a precosious talent, and just because we think he won't doesn't mean he can't. As I've said before, his size will hurt him, and he may be a one-trick pony. Exactly. Under ND we followed the curve season after season, repeating the tactics and recruiting models of whatever club held the premiership that year. Doing that we were always going to be "ok" but were never going to beat the best 4 sides that year. CAC has recruited some hum-dingers in recent years precisely because he tore up the recruiting manual years ago. Inspiration and lateral thinking are what get you places. He rolls the dice and gets us the results... Really? I don't suppose you can elaborate on his profile. I don't know much about him... Ditto... You reckon? He played every game for the dees in his first season, and in his second he played 2 games when horrifically underdone (sorry, mentioned injury) and was BOG in the quarters he played (5 quarters out of a possible 8 from memory).

So back on topic in a calmer way, have you actually seen him play? Besides, recruiting is an inexact science. If it was ten years ago would you be saying the same thing about JMac? For my part if I go to the footy and see a player outplay the other 43 guys running around, I tend to begin to rate him... If we get wrapped up in what the other clubs recruiters do, like you just said, then we are certainly destined for mediocrity. Once players are recruited fans get awfully excited about where they are taken in the draft, but in the end one 18 year old midfielder is about the same as another 18 year old midfielder. Look at Brennan at Sydney, he was taken at 8 and has limped onto a rookie list after years in the system. More often than not recruiting is crystal-ball gazing, and in the end I'll recruit a player that bleeds on the field and wins games of footy over a player with a 3.0 beep test or 65cm vertical jump or whatever....

:D

Have you watched him play mate? This may come as a shock to some demonlanders, but I rate what a player does on the field as more important than phantom drafts, best and fairests etc etc... I watched Juice run around early this year and it only took me a game or two to desperately want him in the seniors, such was his talent... Valenti, pound for pound, had far more impact on those games than Juice did. With the exception of Summers and at times Gallagher, Valenti was the best player in the side when I went to see games. I can't comment on his late season form, but at least early on he looked to be a real footballer. Neaves' work has been patchy, Martin has done nothing and can't kick, and Hughes has impressed only sporadically... hence I put Valenti at the top of that list. Ok? Exactly. Though I should mention I'm not so sure about him. It could easily fail, the man is miniscule. But that's the thing with rookies I guess. It's always speculative.

Valenti, Neaves, Hughes and Martin... I'm excited about none of them, but Valenti could prove to be useful somewhat.