Johnny Karate

Melksham should be in trouble. We have plenty of mid sized forwards and he is in the worst form. Tom McDonald is in terrible nick but we are not doing him any favours by playing him as the sole key forward. Brown and/or Weideman should be considered. The likes of Bennell and Kolodjashnij (if fit) could at least offer some much needed run and polish. I’m not particularly pleased with the roles of Lockhart, Smith and Salem at the moment either. Viney and Oliver need to lift, they are offering little in terms of flexibility or accountability at the moment and if our form gets much worse I can see a Matt Crouch style selection statement being made. I know it won’t happen but the changes I would like to see would be - In: Bennell, Brown, Jetta, O Mac Out: Lockhart, Melksham, Salem, Smith. 

Objectively, the club needs all types of supporters to survive. Can you really blame people for getting frustrated, upset and emotional when the side is perennially embarrassing? 

As for the present state of affairs, the core of this side made it to the last four teams in 2018 and has since won 6 of 25 and is averaging less than 50 points per game in 2020. The coach is in his fourth season, this team has enough experience to be performing better. Is it any wonder there is some gnashing of teeth and instinctive coupling of this to umpteen years of mediocrity? 

Brayshaw has played his best footy on the ball. However, he has other talents that can make him useful elsewhere. Despite his best footy being as an inside mid can anybody hand on heart say he is better or more consistent than Oliver or Viney?Given the nature of the game and our bevy of inside mids he needs to learn to play other positions and be effective. If he was consistently our best inside mid the position would be his. 

There is a rot that has persisted with Goodwin as coach in the sense of being unable to stop the momentum of other teams for large periods. I doubt there’s another side in the league that looks as consistently ropey with a large lead. We got away with it on the weekend because Carlton did not have the weaponry to really make us pay. This is why supporters are frustrated and it is ultimately on Goodwin’s head that a cultural environment that allows such lapses continues to persist.

That said, on game day it is ultimately not Goodwin’s fault when the players stop tackling, slow to a crawl and make outrageously dumb decisions. He can’t get out on the field and do it for them. Unless he is as batscat crazy as some may think, it’s doubtful he’s telling the players to drop their intensity and standards.

Further, while there were some worrying signs and issues that seem to persist it is convenient for us to lump it in with our 2019 problems and the miasma of disappointment that has befallen the club since the 60’s. MFCSS 101. There’s plenty to work on as well as many valid concerns but there were plenty of other teams that played ordinary football this round, many of them being premiership fancies. A bigger 2020 sample size is needed. 

7 hours ago, titan_uranus said:

The problem with Lever isn't his ability. It's his role within our defensive unit overall.

Like almost every player in the league, he has weaknesses, and they get exploited when:

1. 2-3 of Smith, May, Jetta and Lever jump at the same ball;
2. May and others shank kicks coming outside of the back 50, opening us up on a quick rebound;
3. our mids/forwards don't put the requisite level of pressure on the opposition, meaning they get to pick and choose who they're kicking to.

Lever is essential to holding our defensive unit together but when the other cogs break down, he does too. He isn't very good one-on-one but if we're playing well, he doesn't end up one-on-one very often and the ball isn't coming in to our opposition forwards' advantage.

He can do better, but there are much more significant issues in our midfield and forward line than there is with Lever.

Love this post. It’s as much structure as anything. If everyone pulls their weight and we lock it inside 50 or slow the opposition’s ball movement, Lever repels everything by peeling off and spoiling/marking. Yet, when it breaks down badly it becomes like the early 2010s when good defenders such as Rivers and Frawley were standing hands on hips watching the opposition amass a cricket score against us. 

Not sure we’ve quite got the backline mix together yet to exploit Lever’s talents, however, it’s all moot until those up the ground put some pressure on. 

Regarding Yze, he’s popular as an ex-player and he has spent a long time in the Clarkson system. I agree that these are two very superficial elements which have little to no bearing on whether he would be a good coach. 

Richmond and Collingwood had poor seasons under their respective coaches, however, nowhere near the uncompetitive swill of 2019. It’s not a direct shot at the OP because there are plenty of others who use the Richmond/Collingwood example. What if we’re more like Freo? They were bundled out of a prelim, came back underdone and had their game plan found out, and spent the following season near the bottom. They stuck fat with a coach whose message wore thin with playing group and spent four meandering seasons  araldited to the bottom six before hiring a rookie coach and starting again. Or perhaps our situation is uniquely our own and deserves to be resolved using factors relevant to Melbourne in 2020  (not Richmond 2016, Collingwood 2017, Freo 2015 and so on)? 

Criticism of Goodwin and the broader football department is growing increasingly legitimate. We are no longer a developing side on the rebuild from oblivion. We have a core of players who are mature in an experience sense but they haven’t been able to shake off the horrible inconsistency and volatile performances despite many of them pushing into what should be prime realty. I struggle to think of a team in the league that has such a gaping chasm between their best and worst. Our performances at the MCG under Goodwin have also been poor. We have a structure that is easily exploited and a fragile playing group that is seemingly going backwards at a rate of knots. These are all things that (rightly or wrongly) get sheeted home to the coach. 

All that said, I hope I’m proven wrong by Goodwin but I fear I will not be. The reality is given our poor financial position off of the back of last year, rolled into COVID-19, rolled further into Gary Pert’s sweetheart deal for Goodwin that we won’t be sacking him unless there is a massive member/sponsor (possibly player) uprising. 

In summary: Yze is flavour of the month; our situation is pretty distant from that of Richmond/Collingwood; Goodwin deserves a lot of the criticism directed at him; and it’s only because we’re in a mess of our making that he isn’t under more pressure. 

About as flat as a win gets. Not a fan of Goodwin but the players continually drop their intensity and seem incapable of wresting back control of the game once it’s not on their terms. In the long term Goodwin will cop it in the neck for that. However, I doubt he’s instructing the players to not put any defensive pressure on for large patches of games.

Negativity aside, Clarry and Petracca were excellent. Rivers was highly impressive. Jackson showed some encouraging signs as the game wore on. Bennell got through unscathed. Finally, despite its ugly nature - a win is vital for any hope of getting a foothold in the season - still happy to take it rather than the L.

The context here is important. He is on a multimillion dollar contract and his employer has asked him to refrain from posting this kind of stuff on social media. I don’t have strong feelings about whether he should be sacked but am not surprised that it has come to pass.

15 hours ago, WERRIDEE said:

Too vanilla for me so it's a no.

I tend to agree. May as well keep Bugg.

A good player who deserves another crack at AFL imo, just not at the Dees.

Now it’s all over I hope on a human level he can find some peace and the club kicks on to bigger and better things. 

I find I am less sentimental as I get older but will always have a bit of a soft spot for Hogan. He was a key component in our rebuild towards becoming a force again. 

If we do reach the ultimate success sooner rather than later he will deserve some credit for taking an awful lot on his shoulders as a young man for our club and not breaking as others who came beforehand did. 

Good luck to him and he’ll always be welcome back in my eyes.

5 minutes ago, Leoncelli_36 said:

The fact May has just said he is happy to go to 'Any Victorian Club' means we are in competition for his services and will need to give up pick 5, should we receive it. 

Obviously. As has been said before why would Gold Coast not expect a top 5 pick? They are most likely to finish in the bottom 4 next year with or without May. As he is a FA next year they could expect band 1 compensation. If anything pick 5 could be them accepting ‘unders’ this year.

3 minutes ago, Cards13 said:

I thought he was Range Rover. 

The egotistical style is similar. stuie was more of a pedant. 

Didn’t mind either of their work. Small doses though.

I always wondered if RR was Yze_Magic resurrected.

I hope Hogan stays. In fact, I hope both he and May are playing for the MFC in 2019 but I just don’t see that happening. 

Riled up by Freo’s nakedly stupid actions I hope the club no longer indulges them at the trade table. Perhaps this is why I’m not employed in Josh Mahoney’s position - why let personal emotion get in the way of a business decision?

I feel for Hogan and his personal circumstances and personally hold no ill will toward him but can equally understand other posters frustrations about him exploring a trade/not committing to MFC.

Gut feel is that the deal will get done. Freo will crow about their negotiating tactics. Some, including myself will feel a bit disappointed that we didn’t get ‘Judd-like’ compensation for Hogan. However, our professional team will have achieved their objective: trading out a player who wanted to go, getting in Steven May who will improve team balance and wants to play for us, along with an improved draft hand.

Melbourne will look like a club that gets it done and cares for players welfare which will enhance our brand in the industry. Freo will be exposed for the anachronistic spivs they are.

1 minute ago, EnterTheDragon said:

Club supporters overrate their own players and undervalue those from other clubs. 

GWS will demand a first round pick for Lobb. 10  - 16 range.

I agree his value in trade terms would be higher than 23. I reckon he’s an average player though. 

All the noise aside, it was foolish of Freo to make that offer. 

I understand they don’t have pick 5 yet, however their conduct now looks nakedly stupid for all to see. I still think a deal will be done but this & the reports that they were the source of the rumour about Beams means that every club that sits down with them will see their officials as having the word ‘nuffy’ tattooed on their foreheads.

Some of their fans will cheer their ‘hardball’ tactics but in reality they’ve tarnished their brand and can’t be taken seriously.

8 minutes ago, P-man said:

I don’t think that’s the case anymore. I wouldn’t have described the Lever acquisition as reactive. Quite the opposite.

I don’t consider that deal to be reactive. I think our FD has been proactive circa 2013. The far too long comment is covering prior to that...

11 minutes ago, Robbie57 said:

I remain of the view Hogan is a special talent. The only reason he would be in play is because we asked him to sign for 4 more years and his agent has said no wants to keep options open. He is younger and far more talented than May. We should only be prepared to take an offer that is too good to refuse. 50 goal plus a season players are too hard to come by.  Everyone gets swept up in the trade fiasco where picks are simply speculative,Hogan is not speculative if fit. I hope he stays. 

I’d prefer to keep Hogan if I’m honest. However, reading between the lines, this situation has unfolded because he can’t commit to us. He has asked to explore a trade. Steven May is willing to join our club. Ideally, we keep Hogan, he re-signs and May is guaranteed as a FA in 12 months. But it’s a gamble. If we do nothing Hogan could request a trade when he’s OOC in 2019 and then Steven May has a lot more suitors and trade currency is irrelevant as he is a FA.

Put simply its the difference between being proactive and reactive. Melbourne has been reactive for far too long.

21 minutes ago, GCDee said:

How? 

Unrestricted free agent, if they do finish near the bottom the AFL will give them a top 5 compo pick. 

 

Yes. But will he still want to come to us in a years time? We won’t have trade currency advantage over Collingwood. Put it this way: if you were headhunted by another prospective employer and promised you’d be working for them in a month, you agree hand in your notice with your current employer and then all of a sudden they come back and say: “sorry, deals off, we’ll revisit in 12 months ok?” How would you feel about how that organisation was doing business?

2 minutes ago, Demons1858 said:

The danger in being consistently pragmatic and making guarantees to players, is that clubs know you will give in somewhat and therefore negotiate with you on that basis. With the Lever trade and other lesser trades, clubs now know our trading philosophy I'm not sure longer term if it won't hurt us

It’s unfortunate that Lever did his knee but I think time will prove it was a good deal. I like to think goodwill goes a long way. If we become infamous at playing ‘hardball’ it could make us a poor club. Let’s say a well known player comes out of contract and says to their manager: “Melbourne look a team on the rise, I’d love to look at joining them.” The manager may say “Look, they are a good team but Steve May who’s also my client wanted to go there last year. The Dees said all the right things but when push came to shove they couldn’t get it done because they rated their potential draft picks higher. It’s my professional opinion that they’re in a window and shouldn’t do that. Steve was unhappy and will be accepting Collingwood’s fa offer this year. I’ll make some calls to clubs other than Melbourne and see what’s around ok?”

Of course the above scenario is purely based on my suspicions about how these discussions may play out. However, I wouldn’t think that it is an impossible proposition. I think the way we currently operate is part of the reason players choose us because they know we don’t bs and will get it done.

I like the way our team has specifically targeted players, ignored the talking head tut tutting about ‘giving up too much’ and looked at obtaining the net gain in trade period.

4 minutes ago, GCDee said:

We cannot do a straight swap pick 5 for May... 

I understand GC will likely get a round 1 compo next year between pick 2-5 next year however IF we just waited until next year he could be ours for free.  Surely this needs to be taken into consideration? 

It's clear their captain wants out, why would you want him on your list next year if he clearly wants nothing to do with the joint? 

a pick between 10-15 is VERY fair for May. 

We will swap pick 5 or whatever we have to in order to get May.

We’ve expressed interest in the player, we appear to be willing to move one of our best players on in order to get him. This whole we could get him for free next year is BS.

How do you think it would look to May, his manager, GCS and the industry as a whole if we then turned around and effectively said “Steven, we made a commitment to you but please hang in there for a year, GCS want pick 5 we only want to give pick 11 so we can ‘win trade week’ and we reckon we won’t have to give up anything for you next year. So bigger win for us. K thx bye” ?

Perhaps Freo are simply trying to extract maximum value from Brisbane for Lachie Neale so they can meet Melbourne’s terms? I don’t see the point of getting wound up at Freo.

If we can get May + first round pick for Hogan, does anyone really care about the mechanations of the deal?

If it comes out publicly that Freo are offering a 3rd rounder only for Hogan, then it’s time to pick up the pitchforks.

If we trade Hogan and baulk at May because “we’ll get him as a free agent next year” it would be unprofessional and stupid in my opinion. If you’ve got a player of calibre wanting to join your club you shouldn’t look a gift horse in the mouth and should negotiate in good faith. MFC has taken this pragmatic approach in the past and I don’t see why it would change. 

Equally,  Freo would be stupid to not trade for Hogan because “he’ll be cheaper when he’s OOC”. 

I don’t think these “play hardball” approaches would ingratiate clubs to players, managers or the industry at large. It’s not about ‘winning’ a trade it’s about being pragmatic and mature.

I think it’s pretty clear Hogan will be playing for Freo and May for Melbourne in 2019. 

If we get KK, May, Preuss and improve our draft position for the loss of Hogan, Tyson and Kent it’s a good return.

Hogan for May + pick 11 is a good return. *Ducks*