sue

I'm naive enough to believe there would be a strategy behind re-signing them now. I'm sure if Roos et al agreed with those posters who think that some of those 3 are so bad, he would have re-signed someone else. We have to re-sign someone because as much as some of us would like to, you can't replace umpteen players in one go or you will have a team with too many novice draftees no matter how cunning your trading of picks etc is for older players from other clubs. Presumably Roos & co see more hope in these 3 than in others under a cloud. As to the argument that delisted players from other clubs will be significantly better, I doubt it, especially as they will have to be introduced to Roos' gameplan.

This may be of interest: http://thenewdaily.com.au/sport/2014/08/25/demons-priority-pick/?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=The+New+Daily+Tuesday+2682014+Aus+Super&utm_content=The+New+Daily+Tuesday+2682014+Aus+Super+CID_4312f0065d2fc401a936ead1840125e9&utm_source=&utm_term=Why%20the%20Demons%20cant%20be%20trusted%20with%20a%20priority%20pick

That article in the Guardian sums it up well. I enjoyed this line: "To paraphrase Steve Baker from The Footy Almanac, it was the work of a club that not only has its head up its own arse but thinks that the view is spectacular."

So it seems that Essendon's plan is to delay till after the finals through the legal action, then get a ban over summer. It will be a summer sport watching how the team doesn't do its pre-season program in those circumstances. Disgusted.

I'm intrigued. What is the basis of that statement? Heads too high for the roof? (serious question, not just poking fun)

Yes, which was why I'd say trade if you can get something good and said in the modern era sadly there are almost no players you'd 'keep forever and a day'. And compared to other players he is playing 'OK' though below our hopes. Except for the #1 tag which may attract a club which thinks it can do better than Roos with him, I'm not convinced that he is worth much more in a trade than others. I also doubt we'd have a thread on trading him in particular if he hadn't been picked at #1.

True, but is he worth that much more in a trade than some of the others? I don't mean the out and out duds, but some others who show promise. Is the #1 pick tag relevant to other clubs?

The bolded sentence may well be true, but when most of the rest of the team are below average it makes sense to get rid of them first.

In the voting options there was no good option to tick to explain why I voted 'keep unless a really good trade is offered'. I voted that way not because he has been hard done by (he has, but that in itself is not sufficient), or can be reprogrammed (no idea), or is playing well. But because he is far from being on a list of our worst players. (I'd accept he may have a better trade value than some of them however.) His detractors say he is not hard at the contest etc, but some good clubs have a player who is like that - they play outside and have good skills like he does. I see a lot of others ticked 'not applicable' and I wonder if it was for the same reason? Or because sadly in this modern era 'keep unless a really good trade is offered' is a position we'd take on almost every player bar some long serving hero.

Before getting stuck into our supporters, isn't the most obvious interpretation that it was ironic clapping from some disgruntled supporters.

For anyone who has time on their hands and is not as lazy as me - It would be interesting to see the combined numbers for all non-WA teams playing there.

Good to see something so positive from you OldDee. Roos points to tiredness which may well be true, but I reckon confidence should never be underestimated. Lack of it leads to second guessing in decisions which leads to dangerous delays or blunders. Also second guessing when executing things can appear as lack of skill. If you hesitate as to how hard to kick a ball just as you kick it, you are liable to produce a kick that has supporters groaning. That is not to say we don't lack skill. Just may help explain why we went from being reasonably competitive to what we've seen in the last few weeks.

umm, they may not want all the WA spectators to roll up 2 hours late for the match.

The usual. But on the question of the AFLs hands being tied by AFLPA and the threat of court action preventing them from restricting/banning free agency to level the playing field, the solution is simple. Find other ways of feeding good players into the weaker clubs. For example, everyone suspects GWS will be a powerhouse in a couple of years given all the early draft picks and other concessions the AFL gives them. How to spread that over 4 or 5 clubs? Abolish the draft for the top teams. They will have to rely on pick trades and FA. That will give them enough of an edge. Sure GWS will lose a few to FA, but they are in a lot better position than us, dogs etc.

You are right - I was being a bit tongue in cheek. Backdated bans with 3 weeks to go look ridiculous no matter how much cooperation was involved. Though I could imagine someone getting off extremely lightly if they had fingered a Mr Big as part of their cooperation. I haven't followed the Cronulla thing closely, but I don't recall a Mr Big being in trouble and in any case many fingers have got a light penalty.

May just be the difference between cooperating and stone-walling.

As was pointed out, without PP's bottom teams effectively only get one extra early pick which is no guarantee the player will be any better than one taken at 20. Couple that with the manipulated draws and timeslots, FA, etc and it is clear the AFL is facing a fork in the road with the EPL model on one fork. Sadly it is also clear that the AFL heavies and top clubs are comfortable with the EPL model. The financial wheeling and dealing and associated big salaries and strutting about on the stage is just as attractive to AFL heavies with an EPL as it is with an equitable competition, possibly more so since the money is more concentrated. The question for many of us is do we follow our Division 2 teams or just take up another sport.

I'm also amazed they can have a backdated penalty of not being able to play until this November. As rjay said, it makes sense if someone has been locked away on remand to have that count towards their sentence, but if there are no awards to strip the players of, what do they care (except the druggy lable). Is ASADA playing games with Essendon? Given what WJ posted above, we might see Essendon withdraw their current case to also get a backdated playing ban imposed - what a laugh that would be.

sorry, no prizes for the bleeding obvious - this week at least.

Quite right to repeat 'again and again'. We didn't get the PP last year because apparently we weren't punished enough for tanking earlier in the year. Logic, consistency, proper process, AFL. Spot the word out of place.

was tongue in cheek....

Is it tanking if we barrack for St Kilda?

All possible, but not probable. Would appeal to a desperate Essendon supporter.

Leaving aside naughty people voting multiple times, it shows a lot of unexpected support for it for the reasons a number of posters have mentioned.

difference being that they almost won a grand final a few years ago. A rebuild and the associated pain is appropriate timing for them, though they should get some help in some form from the AFL.