Dappa Dan

I'll put up a cardboard cut-out of your Avatar on your seat. You'll be there in spirit.

Just noticed your new signature and profile Y_M... Nothing if not entertaining... BTW is it you that keeps posting all those match videos on youtube? If so... Do more. Maybe rounds 20 and 21 of 2005 if you're bored.

I had a look through some old threads and I can't see anything on there being a footy tipping league for demonlanders or 'ologists. Last year I had my name in both, will it be done again this year?

Could you elaborate on this if you catch this reply? I'm not sure what that means. Only Sylvia played on Sunday, so the others should be cherry ripe. But did that quote mean that since they were approved to play last Sunday they can't play on Friday? Seems odd to me. Thanks.

I wouldn't say that. I dunno. According to reports he didn't exactly have the opportunity to hit the weights this pre-season. In an interview he said he'd been doing a lot of aerobic stuff. Like swimming.

Worst. Post. Ever.

On the net it says the game is on from 8:30 on channel 7... As live as it has been in recent years. This is it. The big time. Season opener, Friday night football, 2006 finalists, one list of generation now, one list of generation next. MFC can hit the big time again. Smash the highly rated Saints, on the first match of the year that EVERYONE will be watching and they'll stand up and take notice. The demons of today are no longer soft, no longer incompetent. Now is the time to follow this club. I'll be there. For MFC. For Neitz. For demontime.

Yeah, I agree with that. He has a habit of shanking kicks slightly more regularly than you'd prefer, but the way he's been crucified for it is a touch out of whack for me. I reckon last year was one of his worst by foot, but one of his best otherwise. I remember thinking in his 3-vote bame against the Bulldogs where he stopped Johnson that barely a kick went where it was supposed to. There are a handful of better kicks in the team, and he'll certainly never be a TJ, but he kicked some important difficult ones last year. A good example is one I just watched then in the Saints final in the third quarter where Miller found him deep in the pocket. The commentators, including Darcy, wrote him off and were disappointed Miller didn't kick to Neitz one out close to the square. Bruce proceeded to calmly slot the goal and run back to his mark. I think you'll find he's done this quite regularly in his career. IMO bad kicks are guys like Godfrey, and to a lesser extent (slightly) Ward, who almost never deliver the ball in scintillating fashion. Bruce makes mistakes by foot, some of them horrendous, but then has proven time and time again that he CAN do the incredible. Not a bad kick, just inconsistent.

- I can tell because that's the report I recall seeing. Sadly it was some time ago so I can't recall where or when for a quote, but I distinctly remember reading that shortly after his operation was completed early this pre-season his OP returned. From many reports I've heard he's had an enormously interrupted pre-season and has been in recovery along with PJ, Bartram and various others for bulk time. Add to that the fact that he's been listed as having a "groin" injury for the entire pre-season and I'd say I'm satisfied to say his OP has at least been a factor. If you can offer proof I'm wrong then I'm sure I'm not the only one who'd be delighted to hear it. - All the above aside, Sylvia was NOT fine today. He was rusty, yes. He was slow compared with what he can do. He didn't jump high or often. He had a grimace on his face for an ENTIRE quarter (I was watching him very intently as you can tell). He has starred at this level a hell of a lot more in the past than he did in his half today. Lack of match practice and fitness was not the ONLY factor for him today, but keep in mind that was just how I read his game. Now you've got me sounding like I'm stringing the guy up. If Bell can return from these problems to have the impact he did last year, then I'll give Col every chance to come back soon, and come back well. I reckon your idea of 4 rounds or so is about right assuming nothing else derails him... - Yeah Bartram was good today, and if he was better last week, it wasn't by all that much, if by anything at all. The only difference was, as you say, he got caught a few times. Nothing to worry about. I said about round 4 I think for him last week, now I reckon that might be a touch pessimistic. Round 4 would probably be the latest he'd return going on the last 2 weeks viewing. - I couldn't help thinking this too. My group of friends all agreed too. He seemed to play like a Robert Harvey-type ball magnet. My one problem with how he played last year was that I didn't see any footy from him that another team would characterise as dangerous. Seems to me he could be exactly that, given the room and the role. Having said that, it's early days. - Warnock looked ok I thought, but I'm still far from convinced for exactly the reason you highlight. Seems solid at this level, and lost at the top level. One thing though... he has very good pace for a guy his height. If I had to guess I'd say that would be one of the major reasons for his retention and promotion. - Too right. Oh, and I had a look at Stefan Martin today, and he looked so good in the ruck and up forward, until the ball met his foot. I didn't feel so bad about not picking him up when it came to his shots on goal.

You need to stop posting so much. You're going to catch my total posts if I'm not careful... And we can't have that can we?

Kick - Brock Handball - Jones FF - JMac FA - Godfrey. I mean Carroll Goal - Green

Naaah. He looked WELL short of a run to me. 4 weeks at least, and then you have to be sure the OP is gone before you can expect him to make a huge difference. Took Bell until the last 4 rounds to make an impact last year. MFC is a hard 22 to break into at the moment, even for Sylvia. That's my thoughts anyway. OP was still a huge factor today I thought. He didn't get out of 2nd gear when I watched. Pace is a strength fo him, and even though he wasn't able to use it, he got in the guts and had an impact by just being talented and strong. He's always been pretty darn good at VFL level. And we don't have our whole list up and running do we? Dunn and Frawley were on the cusp weren't they? I won't add to others' comments really. Sylvia looked like an underdone champion today. Had impact and was good, but was a fair way off his best. Warnock is pretty quick, and took a few strong marks and kicked pretty well for a guy who isn't supposed to be able to, but he wasn't really among the best. Is a bit mistake prone. Bartram wasn't quite as sparkling as last week, but was still a cut above. He was pinged for taking guys on, and while I encourage a bit of confidence, he was doing it a little bit too much on the day. But that's ok, when he plays that well he can do a few bad things. Pretty heated match really, but there weren't too many AFL players as suggested. On the day I saw Williams walking around and Belly, CJ, Weetra and Bode looked like they were there to see Col play. Then again, Belly and CJ just live down the road, so that's to be expected. Lovely day for it, but besides seeing Sylvia I didn't get much out of the game. I'm sick of praccy matches. Oh, and Valenti is a gun. Love watching him play footy. He's little, but a rookie spot would have gone further for him than it would have for Hayes at this stage.

Yeah, but even though he's not played much, apparently he played pretty well. I rate Hayes enormously. In fact, I'd just about go as far as to say he's the Saint I'd be most worried about on match day if I was MFC coach.

Excellent Alpha. Thanks for that.

Aaaah Y_M. For some reason your optimism never gets old for me. Regardless of why or how you come to your conclusions they always put a smile on my face.

It's not going to cost us in 2007, as he probably wasn't going to play much anyway, or at all. Now I don't mean to jump the gun, but let's just say his behaviour and dedication doesn't improve... Are we still duty-bound to retain him on the rookie list next year? If he chooses to quit footy, can we just drop him off and recruit someone else? I don't mean to dismiss him immediately. For all we know he could come good.

Oh dear. First. Green better than Bruce last year? No-one said that, least of all me. I said Green went a long way to convincing me he was captain material. Read posts before you blaze away passing comment. This is the worst kind of stat counting. First of all, it's completely beside the point as neither player fulfills the same role, and neither are anywhere NEAR the same age. But worst of all, you're counting stats comparing players in a debate that has been, to this point, entirely devoted to the subject of captaincy. There's no stat for how effectively a player leads. And none of this "let's just agree" malarkey. I'll agree when I agree.

I was thinking that the other day. If Kangaroos, Hawks or Blues players talk about winning a premiership, they look like idiots, despite being entitled to have hope. All their captains can only come out and say "we hope to make the finals." Thank god we're spared that, at least for the time being.

Said it all JJC. I would've taken 4 paragraphs to get that out...

Agreed. He went a LONG way to convincing me he was a lot more than a flashy frontrunner in 2006. Absolutely spot on, me old matey... though I work on a contract basis, so work can be fairly seasonal with me. (excuses, excuses) Hey Tim. Don't recall you posting here too much, though obviously you have. Nice of you to offer your thoughts. Ok, I'll try and make this quick as our posts are probably putting people to sleep. Well, mine anyway. You make a pretty persuasive argument, and you make it well... However (there's always a however). "Maturity relates to age", yes, but maturity is far from being DEFINED by age. Going by this theory we should put ALL the oldest players in the leadership group and make them captains (extremist, I know). I reckon, first see if he's up to it, then look at his D.O.B. Otherwise we're just selling ourselves short. I'm not saying he's as good as Judd, but I will say there's a fair amount of evidence to say he could LEAD just as well, if not better. And how old is Judd? When was he placed in the leadership group? Brock's there at the end of his third year. "We cannot judge his maturity." Correct, as I pointed out. So what? We're not here to make the final decision. From what little I can see, he's clearly a cut above the rest. If the club goes with the decision to promote him, I have no grounds to disagree. He's not failed at anything yet, and he's been as responsible as you could possibly expect a player to be. "It's very hard for a 21-year old to tell a 26 year old what to do." I can see how someone would say this, but I have to say from experince that this is just a rule that's born to be broken. A total generalisation. It's fair enough to assume a teenager can't push around the older guys, but if he's PROVEN that he can call the shots with 200 game players then what more do you need to know? For what it's worth, I'm 27 and I don't mind being told what to do by a young bloke if he's CLEARLY got everyone's respect and is a better candidate for leadership than me. If the older players at MFC can't follow orders from a MFC sanctioned leader, then THEY are at fault. Now one of the bigger things. It's a very easy thing to say the evidence of Reiwoldt, Hayes and Ball as captains suggests we shouldn't give young guys a go for fear of the same syndrome repeating itself. But I'll say this... I'll never compare a potential future demon leader to ANYONE at St. Kilda, especially their so-called leaders. Great players all, and as skilled, tough and talented as you'd ever want a single player to be, but just because they failed, or were unlucky enough to be injured during their tenures doesn't mean Brock will be. There's any number of reason NOT to select ANY of the players that lend themselves to leadership roles at MFC, but IMO the excuses not to promote Brock come from one place, and one place alone... fear. I'm utterly convinced, albeit on a fair amount of faith, that Brock will take whatever confidence the club shows in him and run with it. There will be no timidity, and no tears if he injures a shoulder. Call me a fantasist, but that's what I BELIEVE, not think. "Need we risk that?" that's the crux of our debate. IMO there's no-one coming through that could mean as much as a leader as Neita does, save Brock. No, we don't NEED to risk it, but it's an acceptable risk, as it was for St.Kilda. When has he struggled? I mean, when recently? Obviously we can't apply his first couple of years, anyone would struggle a bit then. You're spot on when you say a comparison to Judd is flattering. It's also pointless, so I'll stop from pursuing that from here on in. "Winning games off his own boot" is clearly the wrong phrase to use. What I meant was that there's no dees in and under player who's made his impact in recent years, and who even when not on song, can still get you clearances in a way no other current demon can, besides maybe JMac and perhaps Jones and Bate in a few years. Off his own boot? Maybe not so much, but he's more than done his job on all but only a few occassions. "WHAT? - you'll risk increasing his profile.......that's all it takes?" (big paragraph) Absolutely. Absolutely I'd risk it, and you're missing the upside. The fact that the demons would finally have an A-Grade leader, in a confirmed captaincy role IN THE CENTRE for the first time in god knows how long, probably since Flower, or maybe Viney. That's as enormous an upside I can think of, just about. I can tell you (and I expect you to take this only for what it's worth) from many close friends who know him personally that this will not come as a surprise for him. His family, and those close to him had him pencilled in as future skipper WHEN HE WAS DRAFTED. He KNOWS this is coming, and he'll be as prepared as any 21 year old could possibly be. This will not be thrust upon him without his knowing. Make no mistake, the rumours of his being bred for leadership are NOT exaggerated. Having said all that, I'm not going to be terribly upset if he's not put forward straight away. Like I said, there are a number of players I'd be satidfied with (some more than others), so there'll be no kicking and screaming from me if he's not named at the next opportunity. Oh, and your prediction is right on about Jones, but it doesn't detract from my point. I'LL still be campaigning for Brock, I'm sure. Maybe I'll be having this debate with you in reverse. Wouldn't that be a pleasant dilemma. To sum up, there's plenty of reasons NOT to select Brock, Bruce, Robbo or Green. And many of them rely on speculation from BOTH our sides of the arguement. For what it's worth, if Brock is selected I'll celebrate, and if he cops a knee in week one, I'll still say it was the right choice. IMO we can't NOT select a captain because of what can go wrong. I hope we pick one based on what he CAN become. I hope the demons heirarchy shows some faith and rolls the dice, as in short, I reckon he's worth the "risk." But that's just me, I'm happy to be proven wrong, as long as we're trying SOMETHING daring.

Well done Jaded. Thanks for that.

That must be backwards. PJ has his faults, but is wonderfully fast, enormous and sensational below his knees. Jamar averages around 4 possessions a game, which even given his game-time is very low. Whole halves would go by last year where he'd get either one or no touches whatsoever. The one problem with PJ as a ruckman is that he doesn't ruck. He is actually a liability there. Jamar is an ever-improving tap-man who never finds the footy once the bouce-down is completed.

Wow. You've thought about this before, and it clearly gets you going there. (I'm assuming you're Tim from demonology, but correct me if I'm wrong) I'd like to offer what by now must be just another opposing view to add to the long list in both parties. As you say, age, playing regularity and whether or not he deserves it are big issues, but I think he's pretty close in all those areas. Firstly, age shouldn't be as big a consideration as maturity. From the outside at least, he appears to have a more mature head on his shoulders than many of our players up to and including some of the 28-year-olds. Now this is just from my perspective, and I admit it's a limited one. But should the club choose to go with him, I'd imagine they'll look at this aspect a HELL of a lot more than we do, and if they find that he's grown-up enough, then I'll back them. There's no evidence to the contrary in the public eye at this stage. In terms of earning a captaincy, fair enough. Even Buckley, who is a long-time captain, and one of the better ones going around had to wait a bit longer than Brock. An interesting point was made on SEN today though. Often the captain of a club isn't their best player. The role of captain can often go to a guy the players will rally around when the going gets tough. It appears as though they are ALREADY doing this, and for a number of reasons. His good form, toughness, the type of footy he plays and the fact that he's already starting to call the shots. These are just a few of the "captain-like" things he does. In this sense he does more than some of his seniors. Now I understand Bruce leads when he's out there, as does Green and co. But none of those guys were anywhere near rating themselves highly enough to lead at the age Brock is, which suggests that in a few years he'll be streets ahead of anyone else as a leader. Why not promote him early to get the learning done? Well there's plenty of reasons why not to as you've raised, but there's also plenty of reasons to get him in the role as soon as possible. Just because he's been fairly regularly injured doesn't mean he shouldn't do the job. Particularly with players like Bruce and green ready to step in for the matches he misses. Personally I don't believe there's any reason to think from now on we can expect, at best, only 18 games from the guy. When he reaches 24 I'll be more convinced about whether or not he's prone to injury. Have to disagree about your point about being BOG in only a few matches. A few BOGs a year with solid leading footy in the others is fine too. He's only going to expand on this. Also your last point about "form that is far from consistant." I'm stunned at this. His form has been pretty darn good as far as I can tell. Has anyone else played more consistantly besides, obviously, Neitz and McDonald? Don't go down the path of playfully suggesting JMac for the role temporarily as you'll get shot down, trust me. I can't for the life of me see how anyone on this site over-rates what he's done. He absolutely bloody deserves our adulation. He's played footy at the highest level, has won a number of matches off his own boot, including a final. And I'm floored by the fact that you believe we're so used to mediocrity. I would have said our canonisation of Brock (which is only in its embryonic stages) is exactly the opposite. We've had almost no players come through and do so much in so little an amount of time. Surely pushing this guy into a position of power at the club is a GOOD thing? The captaincy debate is not a popularity contest, as you say. It's a question of rewarding all the aspects that make him so highly rated (so that younger players will follow suit) such as training and match-day work-rate, and selecting a player who can inspire his team-mates when the going gets rough. He's proven, at least to me, that providing a good example is something he does without exception. Look, there's no question it's early for him to be captain. But that shouldn't necessarily be SUCH a big deterrent. Even you would have to agree that in a few years he WILL be the best candidate. In my view, Brock is exceptional enough to be skipper now. If you compare him to Neita, it raises an interesting dilemma. As long as Neitz is playing, he should be captain of Melbourne. But IMO he is not a captain that LEADS per ce. By default, when he's playing well he PASSIVELY inspres his team-mates. But when he goes missing, they go missing. Players like Primus could have rotten days like that and somehow convince the younger guys to put in by barking instructions and waving and pointing like a crazy person. In a sense ACTIVELY leading his squad. I reckon Brock has shown a propensity already to do this, and most importantly, DO IT IN THE MIDDLE, where he can make a difference when the going gets rough, unlike Neitz who can only run into defence, leaving us down a player in the forward line. For what it's worth I'd like to see Neita in the role this year and next, but I'm starting to believe this will be his last, unfortunately. - If, in this season or next, DURING his captaincy he was to get hurt, I'd be behind the appointment of EITHER Bruce or Green as season-long stand-in skippers, as I reckon without Neitz on the park, you'd need the leadership to stay with players 27 and up. - Pending the form of all 3 in 2007, I'm behind any one of Green, Bruce or Brock as captain for 2008, but Green and Bruce can only be considered caretaker captains should they be given the job. This is also providing Neitz is still playing and has handed back the captaincy. Sorry about the long reply.

The Ox on SEN has claimed Brock will be the next skipper, and as soon as next year. When Pickering asked about his age and whether or not he was a bit young, the Ox became even more determined to shove it down his throat... Now I know we keep hearing about how everyone reckons he'll be the skipper, but it's still nice when it crops up. In the same sgement he spoke about how Gaddy was one of the most extraordinary captains he'd ever come across with his work ethic... When Pickers probed him about how he felt being overlooked for Neita, he quickly changed the topic, and when Pickers pushed him he ignored the question... oooooooh.....

Yup.