Nasher

No wholesale changes to the list for mine. Clear off the players who are clearly a long way outside the best 22 as per normal; give the rest the benefit of the doubt. I don't know how you could possibly make objective decisions on these players at the moment; they are all playing with so little energy that you just couldn't tell where they are really at. It's all in the players' brains IMO. It may be that Neeld can coach - doubtful - but it looks to me that there is just no getting them out of this hole they are in, and it will take a major shake up to do so. I expect a new coach to have a big psychological boosting effect on our players, increase the moral and get them playing with spirit again. From there we can truly start the rebuild, without going back to ground zero yet again.

Technically true, but the wait feels like forever on these late afternoon games.

Does Gillies still have one? I noticed that Watts, Terlich et al have given it the flick.

Not that I would expect a boy like you to understand the finer points of... well, anything, but technically speaking we didn't spend a pick on him individually, he was part of the Dawes Hogan package.

I think he will be the biggest, strongest man on the field when he plays; he was damn close to being so during his games in the NAB.

We really don't need to rehash this yet again.

What are we offering that will make him want to come?

It is a shame that this young girl had to learn her lesson by public humiliation and shaming. Let's just hope she does actually learn something from it.

Byrnes is, right this minute, comfortably in our best 22.

Yes, him. He was pretty handy at evading bans, and as mods we hardly had the energy to keep up with him. I took a fairly heavy handed approach last time which has either worked, or he's just laying very, very low now. Given his propencity for not just dying gracefully in the past, I'm guessing the latter.

Apparently this was the third time he offered his resignation over this issue.

Amazing topic, thanks for that.

^ As above. They're assuming that you watched the game, so you probably know how the players went.

Fair enough, but honestly those flags - and the MFC ones - were such a long time ago that it's hardly worth comparing modern teams against them anyway. Who can honestly actually remember Collingwood's golden era of the 20s?

Byrnes was brought to the club in the expectation that he would be best 22. His leadership was certainly a huge drawcard, but it's not *the* reason. It's patently false to claim that games played are just a "bonus" - FCS he's a player, his primary role is to play. As for how he has actually played - I agree with rpfc. He's our best (only) small forward and I'm not too unhappy thus far given that he plays in starvation corner.

How many of them are going to tell you that they hate it, really? Surely when talking to a player, you would expect some degree of towing the line. Most players aren't going to be 100% candid when asked on their opinion of things.

Probably because nobody can remember that far back. People always tend to weigh more heavily towards things more fresh in their memory; we see this phenomenon on the forum all the time when people claim that "that loss was even worse than 186!" when no loss will ever, ever be worse than 186.

How come Watts is suddenly a forward again in everyone's mind? He's only ever been poor and timid as a forward, he has had some success as a defender. I'm wondering what it is that I've missed that everyone else has seen. The coach has only ever said that he sees Watts as a defender. I know everyone wants as many reasons as possible to bag Neeld, but his view on Watts has been the same for a long time now. This is hardly new.

I highly doubt all that much focus has been put on this tbh. Point kick in strategy seems like fine tuning to me, and given that our players need reminding to run hard at the ball I struggle to work out how there would be time to go in to monumental levels of detail on this. Edit: missed the master's post who said the same thing but way better.

One first year player isn't struggling, therefore none of them should. Duh ;-)

Can't bring in Blease *and* Kent; too many little tanks in one side. I am of the belief that Davey and Blease are playing for the one place in the side and at the moment that one is a no-brainer. I'd keep it fairly simple: Watts in for Toumpas. I am happy to drop Bail if there is an adequate replacement; but I remain to be convinced that there is a suitable swap waiting in the wings at Casey. Any change to players like Bail, Nicholson et al has to be "run neutral" at worst IMO; we can not afford to cover net less ground than we currently are.

http://demonland.com/forums/index.php?/topic/33907-mckenzie-and-nicholson/

No, we wouldn't. We just wouldn't. Playing kids who aren't ready just doesn't work.

If he's in our best 22, then no matter how regrettable that fact may be, there's no way he will be delisted.

Minor correction: Rich actually went at 7 in that draft. Hill, Hartlett, Hurley and Yarran all went before him.