Dappa Dan

Genius...

I know exactly what you mean. What you get is not what player the club will pick up, but what the author thinks the club NEEDS... ie if some so-called football expert looks at Richmond and says to himself "jeez their talls are rubbish" he will then just go ahead and assume that they will pick the best KP player available. It's amateur stuff... But then what do you expect from the football media? I was thinking that when I saw that Henderson was "likened" to Pavlich. ALL the best KP players were "speculative" picks (OR F/S). Now that we look at it, Pavlich and Franklin SHOULD have been taken higher. The same may indeed be said of Juice in the coming years. We rolled the dice once and it all went HORRIBLY wrong for us with Molan. And because of that tragedy, CAC will now probably only go for smaller players with picks 1-5... or at least lean towards them. Because of this black mark he has against his name we may NEVER get a Franklin/Pav type player simply because you can't tell at 18 that they're going to be as good as they are... Now I'm not saying he should go about his selections any differently, but today was the first time I considered that the Molan thing is probably STILL doing damage...

Good on you WJ... AFL is heading rapidly towards Grid-Iron in reputation...

Member 2001 no less.... Demonland on the up and up! Seems like onlya few months ago I rang in the big #1000 with joy... Maybe make a thread mods? Or is that a self gratifying waste of time?

Deanox... You're a card.

Yeah, exactly.... NFL? Good riddance. From the look of things he'll be right at home.

Smartest post yet... Basically those dot points (not the cousin stuff) are why we are seriously looking at him. 23? That makes him a target for ANYONE. I was VERY skeptical at first, as I see any player with a chequered past as suspect... but I'm slowly being won over. And it has NOTHING to do with his mark... where he should have given Yze the car.

Good post. Feva, I still love him. I think at the moment he is without peer as a full forward. I think sometimes we try too hard to look at the off field stuff. Yes, your point is entirely valid, and rightly so Carey is not talked about... but when the purists get together over a beer, I like to think what these blokes did and do to get the pill and to use it takes up 95% of what we talk about... otherwise we're a bunch of old nannas aren't we? I think what makes Feva the interesting case is that he IS a TOTAL tool, and VERY often he retains that behaviour on the field, but he still gets results... Agreed on Carey and Pike. Pike is fascinating. Like you said he seemed to rob the game BLIND by taking home four flags, considering the talented players who were not journeymen who will never play in a flag. Can you put him up there with Neitz? Surely not... and yet like you say, even with his success he could still have given so much more back to the football world. His identity in the media is almost non-existent. His work on SEN is VERY dull... If he was smart about it, he could have a golden parachute the magnitude of which mean his feet will never touch the ground... but as it is we're left with one of the games most decorated players in recent years (in terms of medallions) who we prefer not to talk about... Ditto Carey in many senses. And in the wider sense, will this keep happening to football? Is it part and parcel with the pressure and egotistical nature that so many seem to take a wrecking ball to societies rules? Has this always been the case? Is it secretly why so many LOVE these men? Their success and pure brilliance despite their weaknesses? This is why I love the Neitz, Harvey, Archer types. Selfless genuine grown men who even when they misbehave are GENUINELY sorry for it and work to make up for their mistakes, in the end becoming better citizens for it. And even the Schwartz types who continue to enrich the game beyond measure by remaining in the public eye and making us all proud to be associated with the game. Good discussion.

That's a good point about the off-field/on field stuff. However... I don't rate Pagan as a coach. Not anymore. I think the game went past him, and his methods and stubbornness caught up with him. Maybe his pride in being a previous champion coach as well. Maybe what he saw as pride and iron will, others believed were just pride and pig-headedness... Regardless of this I can see how you may think I was in Pagan's corner. I can scarcely think of a coach I'd was LESS than Pagan. But I cannot help but admire what he did with Fevola. Not only was it impressive to see him turn him into an effective player, but to snag him a coleman in a side like that is almost a miracle. It's not the fact that he made him play well, it's that he made him play in such a way that I NEVER thought he was capable of playing. As good as this effect was, I still wouldn't want PAGAN, but I would want the effect he brought out of a player like this. Whatever it was. Bottle it. And unlike you, I don't believe on field and off field harmony is even possible. In fact, all I want is a flag, and West Coast proved that you can win one with some of the WORST cancers going around in modern footy. It's the way these spot fires are handled that gives me faith. It's a dicey game I'll agree... On one hand you could recruit a nutcase and he could contribute to 3 flags for you (Pike) and on the other hand you could retain an addict who embarrasses your club and leaves in disgrace (who else?). All I'm saying is I would like to see these players, and they WILL be there, our huge list turnover will assure of that, are handled in such a way that they can do good things on the field. This is true. Like I said, Pagan aint my man... Jesus, I'd recruit myself to coach before him. Here's hoping that DB has that little bit of mongrel, that level of understanding where he can keep a player on track without spending too much time with him at the detriment of the rest of the list. So much is up in the air, and this is a CRITICAL time for MFC. There's only so many body-blows you can take when you're not winning any games. DB will need an iron resolve in the early years...

Jesus... Ok. I never said Pagan was going to fix anyone's problems off-field. What I'm saying is that if there's a player with social issues that become public, and become a drain on the club, Pagan was still able to AT LEAST get them to play good footy while they were at it. And I'm not Robinson crusoe. I couldn't count the amount of times Carlton supporter mates (and I have WAY too many of them) looked at a player that had discipline problems and found them an attractive prospect because they believed Dennis had shown a propensity to be able to unearth gold. In my book, that's a good thing, especially for our club. We seem to have had a couple of little things in recent years, rumours of drugs (where AREN'T there rumours of drugs), a player with weight and discipline problems and also some with gambling issues. Granted many of these aren't at the club anymore, but I'm not naive enough to suggest there won't be further problems in the years to come. The point is, I'd like to see DB be able to get the most out of these players ON THE FIELD. In other words, to have the Pagan "touch." What I've seen is that Melbourne is not strong, or vast enough to apply the pressure to these players to at least get them to do their jobs. Perhaps it's a focus issue, ie a coach can INSPIRE the unruly on gameday, or maybe cater to their egos, tell them off when they need it, sit them down and talk to them when they need it etc etc

Ok. The three you mentioned, Carey - arguably the best of all time. Pike, a lazy four premierships (though I give you that one, Pagan, it seems, didn't have a WHOLE lot to do with his success) and Fevola, who whether you agree or not, I think should be proud of his career thus far. He was all but gone according to MANY Blues fans I know, and when Pagan arrived much has been said of his effect on Fevola's career. That's 2 from 3 as far as I'm concerned, as well as Pike being a player who DID come around eventually. But you're entitled to your opinion. As far as I'm concerned I'll remember Pagan as a coach that was a disciplinarian, and an old-fashioned hard at it type who was able to control players who were previously regarded difficult, and turn them into premiership players, coleman medallists etc etc. And I'm not the only one that thinks so. The Sheedy example was referencing the fact that he had a lot of rough players, particularly around 2000 when they were by miles the most reported team in the AFL. He was able to channel their violence usefully, and again got the most out of them, and Matthews got HEAPS out of a guy like Pike, and equally got the most out of his tough nuts...

Yeah. All good points Chook. One thing I DO like is that it's all well and good to get rid of your dead wood, and replace it with young players in the draft... but you're going to have to suffer badly before they hit their prime. It makes sense to throw in a few 21-24 year olds, and in that way at least, Sampi fits the bill.

The thing that gets me with the Sampi thing is the same thing that got me with the Pickett thing... I don't mean to make this about "aboriginality" and apologise in advance for any offence this may cause, but I'm not sure Aaron Davey is the answer to Aboriginal footballers' woes. Just because he's such an upstanding citizen, and such a family man doesn't mean he's going to be able to magically make a 23 year old with application problems suddenly come over all professional. Let's say for a minute Sampi does a Pickett, and comes over and has a sensational year what with all the freshness of it all. What's to say in 2 or 3 or 4 years he won't start going downhill again? Give me a hardworking player who improves consistently over his career to evolve into a solid AFL contributor over a freak of a talent who waxes and wanes anyday. We just got rid of one freakish talent for having application problems, why do we need another? I guess we're not missing out on much, assuming there's no-one else is the PS draft at pick 3...

Click on the link. It says, fairly officially, that Hughes has been delisted.

Are they allowed to do that? I was under the impression if a player has been a rookie for 2 years the only way they can continue to be on a list is as a senior listed player. Don't get me wrong, I reckon it would be GREAT if they could somehow allow ruckmen longer periods on rookie lists, or maybe create a special category within the draft for them as it seems to me many of them don't become anywhere near good enough for the AFL until they're at least 22. But I doubt they'd change the rules just for that... In Neaves' case, I'd love to see him have another year or two on the rookie list, but given the way we delisted him, doesn't that enable other clubs to draft him if they see fit? Also, if we DID take Neaves again, that would mean we have 1 soon to retire ruckman in White, then 2 guys in roughly the same place going for the backup ruck spot in Jamar and PJ, and then Meesen hot on their heels, as quick as PJ and as good a ruckman as Jamar from all accounts... not to mention taller. Even assuming White goes in 2 years (maybe less, maybe more), that leaves us with 3 ruckmen AND Neaves.

Yeah. I had him written RIGHT off about 18 months ago, and was even more sure halfway through this season. Then all these glowing reports started trickling in from Sandy. Then it all started to snowball in a mini-juice kind of way, and before you know it he's all but secured his spot. Sensational to see him come from so far behind to have another couple of years to have a crack at it. Now I've not been round for a while now, but Danny Hughes' delisting is news to me. I knew Hayes and Neaves were out, but I thought Hughes was still a chance. I saw a picture today of Neaves at training too... Hughes showed some promise, albeit a fair while ago now... Anyone with any news, inside info, or just their own impressions?

Have I missed something in the last six or so months? (Not a rehtorical question, I did actually miss the last 4 rounds)... Why is it people are thinking of Dunn as a midfielder? Yes he CAN play there, on a wing ONLY but he's not exactly suited to it. I see him more as a roaming marking target, like a HFF that comes up past the centre of the ground, though he may need a bit more time to develop his overhead work.

I can't believe it took me this long to notice.... In the picture just before they're about to take off where they're all about to start their wristwatches, is that Shane Neaves at the front? Perhaps a chance of being selected again with a lte pick? Though that would defy logic... In the same photo, just behind DB, is that Josh Mahoney? He looks young enough to kit up... Also, I have a feeling that's Bartram in the main group shot, roughly nine from the right holding the footy in front of his crotch. It's a LONG way away, but still... I think he's also the one about to kick it to Davey in the middle.

Just taking a different tangent with this discussion about Robbo and Neitz's sense of humour... I couldn't help but think of the time Neita was getting towelled, got into a scuffle, the half time siren blew and he went on with it. In the huddle Robbo walked over and poured water on his neck to calm him down, and the big skipper all but took his head off... Good times... HA!!!!!!!!! Nice BB.

Yeah well done guys... getting a head start on the poster of the year awards for next year. Interesting to see Meesen going so hard for a big bloke. Maybe trying to make a good impression at a new club with new people? Whether or not that's the case it's a good sign... And by god what's going on with Jones? I don't remember knowing anyone that size at 19.

Yeah. Ok. Well, I didn't say I'd want a Pagan clone, just someone with the Pagan touch... I could have said the Matthews touch, or the Sheedy touch... Being good with misbehaving footballers is all I was talking about. You could be a good development coach, a clever match-day tactician AND good with the basket-case players...

No for me... Maybe he IS worth rehabilitating, but we would need a coach and footy department that had the "Pagan" touch. That is, turning basket-case footballers into hard-working players. We couldn't do it with Pickett, but then maybe the new coaching panel could. the point is, are you willing to role the dice and find out later that DB and his men aren't in the Pagan mould? I reckon wait a few years and let's see what they're made of. Also, I'm not sure Sampi was ever all that good. Yes he took a screamer with Adem's help, but what's he really ever done? Really... There has to be better players to take a risk on hasn't there?

I was thinking that... No worries. Didn't mean any offense. Like I said, good topic, and I DO understand the spirit in which it was begun... However, you claim you didn't say it was the perfect midfield. Then why the title of the thread? Yeah. I have that habit. But that's part of the fun isn't it? The truth is I've been mulling over our midfield for some time now. For a while I thought it was pretty good, but I'm not so sure anymore. We have to replace JMac, we need silky outsiders (never thought THAT would be the case, Green, Bruce, Trav) and we could even do with a bit more torque in the clinches, as Moloney is starting to waver a bit. I could have started another thread, but it would have clashed with yours on what was essentially the same topic. Mmm. I dunno about height being THAT important. And yes I've seen some things as well that have made me get excited. Some of his passages in the NAB cup debut he had this year were riveting. But it's all too little. My point is, Judd, who is a star, was at the same age doing incredible things. To be a star, I think you have to be effective, regularly, from a young age. Buckley is taking time, and his form hasn't been all that good. Ultimately he's DEFINITELY worth pursuing, but I'd say he's a way off being a regular just yet. But, hope springs eternal... Those two visions are the same ones everyone has seen. I saw him dominate a bit through the midfield last year. I had him pencilled in as a midfielder/winger or running defender that was a part-time forward. Lo and behold he got dropped, then came in as an emergency and was EXACTLY as dominant as a CHF. Weird eh? How often do you see that? Who can tell where he'll settle? Maybe his work as a KP forward will mirror the work he did as a midfielder. Maybe he'll plateau and get found out by opposition defenders. Maybe he'll try defence and become TRULY versatile. Who knows? After all is said and done I go for the David Parkin methodology. When you find a good Centre Half Forward, you play him at Centre Half Forward. I never said you don't need a genuine star. I reckon that's what we've been missing. And I never said Sylvia WOULDN'T be a star, just that it was unlikely. Still possible, but unlikely. And yes, it would be good to have someone to rally behind. But you know what? Even if Judd had been at MFC from the beginning, no-one would rate him. No-one ever rates the Red and Blue players. If McLean was playing with West Coast, or Collingwood he'd be regarded as a star. He's just not high profile enough, in a club that's not high profile enough. Maybe we already have the next Benny Cousins. And maybe the world will be none the wiser throughout his whole career. Maybe we had the next best player to Wayne Carey all along, and his low profile and knee injuries condemned him to media oblivion. Maybe we had the best defender Carey had played on, and he was the captain of a mickey-mouse club... Maybe, maybe, maybe... maybe stars would do us no good at all even if they WERE recruited to the club. Maybe if we build the premiership team, the star will rise naturally. Who would do it? (apart from DB) I dont have the time either. I was just making the point that a perfect midfield was a theory, and is an impractical one. Nothing personal. And as I said, I can see what you are trying to do. Hence the comments I made on specific players. I tell you what, I'm fascinated by a STARTING midfield. And I mean a ruckman, rover, ruck-rover and centre. I reckon we have the Rover (Jones) Ruck-Rover (McLean) and possibly the centre all sorted for the next 6-8 years (Moloney, Bartram, pick 4). the ruckman concerns me as always... But yeah, my point is, it was a good topic...

Kudos on two things... The topic, and the name... First of all, I think this is a fraction off. If you're going to claim this is the perfect midfield, and then never change it on match day, you're going to get beaten a lot. If you ask me, you have to look at your opposition's list, and then at who is likely to line up for them, THEN pick your perfect midfield. A good idea would have been to allocate the 40 list spots, plus maybe the 4 rookie spots to what category they must fill. But if you are going for a good GENERAL midfield, that is just the midfielders on the field and on the bench, NOT including players like Bell who can pinch hit in the guts, but including our starting wingers... then yeah, that list isn't too bad. But I see weaknesses... - Bate aint a gun, or career midfielder. I like him bursting the lines, but this year he showed he had form issues there, and was FAR more useful as a forward. Maybe as an occassional winger, in the Goodes mould. - Buckley hasn't shown THAT much just yet. I'd like to see us recruit a gun outsider with searing pace. He still could be good, but not a star. - Sylvia... I just don't know. I love it when he plays forward, and seriously think we're going to need him there in coming years. And I don't think he could be the genuine star you talk of. This category is the most pressing, has been for a LONG while. Otherwise, not too bad...

Dunno about that logic DD. I mean, some players would make USELESS taggers. Trav for example couldn't be relied upon to have the mongrel and work-rate required to run with a Ben Cousins (circa 05 or before). Having said that I do agree that tagging is just another aspect of a footballer's game. There are players who are SO good at it, that they become career tagger, like Jared Crouch. Then there are those that are multi-dimensional who can be damaging OR play a game out as a tagger, like Bruce. Or there are those who can do both simultaneously, like Ling. The last model would be the guys who for whatever reason, be it the direction the game takes, or their lack of skills or height or pace or whatever, are FORCED to become career taggers, like Godders. Anyway, the point is, perhaps you hit on something with the delisting of Godfrey. We all knew we didn't like his football, that's a given. But I was SURE he'd earned a place on our list, particularly given he was only 26 and is regarded as very popular among the players. His 2007 was a fantastic year. I think the point here is that DB may think, particularly at this stage, that to either retain, or RECRUIT a pure tagger is very negative recruiting. If a player you draft at 18 fails to fill the gap you need filled, (hard-ball getter, receiver, winger, running defender, small forward etc etc) the longer he plays, then it only makes sense to bring the negative game into their footy to expand your options on game day... But to retain a guy who opposition coaches LOVE to see on a team sheet, or to recruit a guy who can only ever be a tagger... that's a sure fire way to fail.