Fat Tony

The thing is that all the players won't benefit though. Only the top players will. Eventually the competition will become so inequitable that poor clubs will fold. The AFLPA, like all unions, will cut off their nose despite their face.

I am firmly in the camp that our recent woes are almost solely due to bad drafting. Development can be broken down into three components, two of which are individual based and one of which is team based. Firstly, there is individual physical development. That is, making our players stronger, faster, fitter and more skilful. This largely comes down to training (running, weights and skills) and diet. IMO there are negligible differences between the top and bottom AFL clubs in terms of physical development. This view reflects the number of assistant and senior coaches continually migrating from successful clubs and that the science of exercise is not all that complicated (injections aside) or sophisticated. It also reflects the inability of most players to ‘change their spots’ when they change clubs. Second is the individual mental component. This involves teaching players where to run and position themselves and decision making (most importantly with ball in hand but also otherwise). These aspects can be taught to some extent but are largely instinctive. The mental side of things also includes training players to be at peak aggression while maintaining discipline. This is complex and coaches will use different techniques for different players. (i.e. for some players the coach will use the carrot and for some they will use the stick.) The third component is team development. This involves teaching the team to play together to its strengths and to negate the strengths of the opposition. I actually believed Dean Bailey was quite good at this aspect of development and we looked really good on a handful of occasions. He was let down by a lack of cattle. Mark Neeld was terrible at this aspect because he wanted to implement an outdated philosophy.

The key disadvantages of Frawley being an UFA rather than a RFA are 1) that the AFL may scrap the compensation for UFAs over the next year and 2) that he could go to a club chasing a flag on a below market salary which then reduces our compensation.

The AFL website has had a go at our 22 for round 1. I think it is a pretty good effort. I would use Watts forward when Spencer, Fitz or Howe are off the ground FWIW. I would also consider playing Dunn forward, although he is in good form in defence. http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-03-09/your-clubs-best-22-hawthorn-to-west-coast MelbourneB: Lynden Dunn, James Frawley, Dean Terlich HB: Jack Grimes, Tom McDonald, Alex Georgiou C: Bernie Vince, Nathan Jones, Jack Watts HF: Jack Viney, Jeremy Howe, Jack Trengove F: Jay Kennedy-Harris, Jack Fitzpatrick, Jimmy Toumpas FOLL: Jake Spencer, Daniel Cross, Dom Tyson INT: Viv Michie, Jordie McKenzie, Matt Jones SUB: Sam Blease The loss of Jesse Hogan because of a back injury is disappointing but it is silly to think he was critical to the Demons winning in round one. After all, he has not played an AFL game yet. The absence of Mitch Clark and Chris Dawes makes Jack Fitzpatrick and Jeremy Howe the key talls up forward. Both are in good form and will test the Saints' defence. Max Gawn, Dean Kent and Mark Jamar will not be match fit and Alex Georgiou deserves his chance although Mitch Clisby and James Strauss will be considered. Jay Kennedy-Harris should get his chance although Sam Blease and Rohan Bail could easily win a spot as a small forward. Luke Tapscott had an interrupted pre-season and Christian Salem won't be ready although he is certainly talented. - Peter Ryan

This was a pretty weak draft overall and we should have gone hard at O'Meara in hindsight. GC got him for a steal.

It was 27 scoring shots to 15 and one of the best players in the game was injured early. Geelong had 62 inside 50s to 31.

IMO we need to be more aggressive in playing on immediately after a turnover. Our game plan is good when the opposition defensive structures are set, but we go too safe and are too slow to shift the ball early on when we first get possession. I am also not convinced our slow ball movement will work all that well with a very top heavy forward line. I also think we are too willing to go backwards from a stoppage to maintain possession rather than just go with a quick kick forward. I thought Nicholson was pretty good and it wouldn't surprise me if he was picked in the backline in round one. I like his willingness to run but his kicking is always a worry. Michie showed he will be a good pick up. Tyson will be a good inside mid and is exactly what we need. Watts found the ball well and has lovely poise, but needs to improve his tackling and intensity. I think he will benefit from playing on bigger grounds. Hogan did well given the limited supply. Fitzpatrick was pretty ordinary. Dunn has been excellent so far this year. Based on the two games and what we know, and assuming Clark and Garland aren’t fit, the Round 1 team is shaping up something as below. The bolded players are locked in. Dunn Frawley Nicholson Terlich McDonald Grimes Trengove Cross Watts Howe Hogan Tyson Bail Dawes Kennedy-Harris Spencer N Jones Vince Fitzpatrick Michie Viney Blease

I don't think Blease will make it as a forward because he doesn't read the play well enough, doesn't have the engine, can't kick left foot and is useless in the air. Down back, he will have more space and be able to use his blistering pace to break a line (or two). I share concern that his defensive side is inadequate, but I think we need to get some pace into the side. I also think Blease played his best footy in backline under Viney.

My thoughts: An impressive performance overall. The way we controlled the ball was excellent and Roos showed in one quarter how diabolical Neeld was as a coach. I would like us to attack a bit more aggressively immediately after receiving a turnover, but this may be Stage 2 of Roos’s game plan. Howe is really well suited to being the main man up forward. It will be interesting to see if he can adapt and have the same or greater influence when we get our key forwards back and he gets a lesser opponent but has less space to operate. Vince is a better pick up than I thought. Our midfield still lacks pace, but we should be able to win a more reasonable share of clearances this year. Hopefully Watts going into the midfield and Viney returning will help in this area. Dunn was fantastic and is a certainty for Round 1. Bail was also very good and has penciled himself in to the side. It was good to see Trengove get so much ball, but he is still slow and we need to be tactical in finding him the right match up. (i.e. not Deledio) Spencer lacks the requisite skill to make it as an AFL player. If he gets a game in Round 1 it is because Gawn hasn’t developed an engine, Clark is not fit and Jamar is past it. A fit Clark would be ideally played as a first ruck given our weakness in the ruck and our strength up forward. Kennedy-Harris is an exciting pick up. He isn’t all that quick but reads the game very well and uses the ball effectively. Michie was a bit quiet and doesn't help our pace issues in the midfield. He will need to have good games against Geelong and Hawthorn to be certain of a game in Round 1. Tyson is also slow and his kicking was rusty. His work in centre square was pretty good. Frawley was dominant at the start of the game and is a lock in my Supercoach team given our change in game style. We still have one or two small defender spots up for grabs. I would like to see Blease trialed down back next week. Based on what we know, and assuming Clark and Garland aren’t fit, the Round 1 team is shaping up as below. The bolded players are locked in. Dunn Frawley ??? ??? McDonald Grimes Trengove Cross Watts Howe Hogan Bail Fitzpatrick Dawes Kennedy-Harris ??? N Jones Vince Tyson M Jones Viney ???

I like the move of Watts into the midfield. He is well skilled (particularly by foot), athletic enough to run both ways and he reads the play well. Watts should also have an advantage in marking contests over most midfield opponents. While Watts is well composed in traffic, he will be predominately ‘outside’ and won’t be a big contested ball winner in the clearances. But we have others who can do that and he should be positioned outside the centre square to mitigate this weaknesses. I don’t see the best comparison as a Pendlebury, Mundy or Fyfe type, rather I see him being more outside like Gibbs, Goddard and Embley. However, for Watts to make it, he definitely needs to improve his tackling. Later in his career I see Watts evolving into a forward, but he needs to get stronger first. (Besides, we have plenty of key forwards on our list.)

The poor children.

I quite like both Kent and Jones. But what is effectively three years for two relatively unproven players is very generous IMO. Both may prove to be good enough to make this decision not hurt MFC but IMO it would have been better to wait and/or only offer one extra year.

Great to hear Toumpas is running well. Where was he placed in the running drills last preseason?

Either we sign up Chip and target for other free agents or we cop his loss and take the compensation. It could be worth as much as pick 2.

I don’t see Toumpas ever developing into a big contested ball winner, so he needs to be quick and skillful. It is the pace element that worries me, so it is good to hear he is moving well.

I agree that small forwards need to be able to get up and down the ground, but Milne kicked more goals than any Demon bar Neitz. I still think there is a role for a lightly built goal sneak, albeit they can't just park inside the forward 50 and they have to tackle. If someone like Rioli couldn't go through the midfield he would still be a valuable player. And Garlett and Walters are very important to their sides.

‘Certainly Best 22’: Garland, McDonald, Grimes, Clark, N Jones, Frawley, Watts, Vince, Cross, Dawes, Hogan, Howe ‘Likely Best 22’: Trengove, Viney, Tyson ‘Possibly Best 22’: Dunn, Terlich, Clisby, Blease, Strauss, Toumpas, Salem, Pedersen, Gawn, Jamar, Spencer, Kent, Fitzpatrick, Nicholson, Bail, Tapscott, Byrnes, Evans, Barry, McKenzie, Michie, M Jones, Kennedy-Harris, Hunt Fat Tony’s 22 for R1 2014 (as at Nov 2013) Backs: Garland, McDonald, Hogan, Grimes, Clisby, Blease Midfield: Clark^, N Jones, Frawley, Cross, Watts, Vince, Trengove, Tyson, Viney, Michie, M Jones, Toumpas (sub) Forwards: Dawes, Howe, Fitzpatrick^, Kent Notes Despite off-season additions to the midfield including some young talent and some more mature blue collar mids, I still believe our midfield will struggle against most sides. And with the modern press making it so difficult to get the ball out of defence, winning the midfield battle is more important than ever before. Further, our midfield is relatively slow and none of the new additions will change that in a big way in 2013. Size is a big advantage in winning inside ball IMO (and the opinion of Roos it seems). Look at the impact of Watson, Mundy and Kennedy. Even Roughead was extremely effective when playing as a midfielder. I would like to see us load up the centre square with our best ball winners at every centre bounce. This would require experimentation to determine who these players are and IMO this would probably result in N Jones and Frawley being standouts. Hogan might also be a good centre clearance player, as might Clark if used as a midfielder. Set ups/match ups after the bounce can be planned and could potentially result in us orchestrating mis-matches in our favour. Frawley is big, tough, strong and fast and IMO could be a real weapon in the midfield contests. While I would agree with those that say he would be a big loss to the backline, IMO addressing the Inside 50 differential is more important as it lessens the need for a strong backline and allows us to put on our own press. Moreover, Garland has shown the ability to play on the number one forwards and he plays his best footy as a tall defender IMO because it gives him the advantage over his man in terms of agility. Tom McDonald is also better suited to the bigger forwards. Grimes is best suited to playing in the backline as the fourth tall/midfield small where he can drop off when required. He is too slow to play on the really fast small forwards. I have been calling for Watts to play on a wing for a while and hopefully Roos uses him as an outside mid. Unless Gawn comes on in a big way over the preseason, Clark is our best ruckman if he is fit enough to play there. I would prefer to go with a Clark/Fitzpatrick tandem than a lumbering ruckman unless they can dominate the ruck. I have my doubts whether an especially large forward line will work without us dominating in the midfield. IMO our best structure would be with two big forwards and Howe or Watts playing as the third tall. Posters pointing to the 2013 Hawthorn side as evidence as to a tall forward line working are underestimating the mobility of their talls. Buddy really plays a small forward and Gunstan and Roughead are particularly mobile. Other than possibly Howe, none of our tall forwards are that mobile or good when the ball hits the ground. Two small defender spots are up for grabs with possible candidates including Dunn, Terlich, Clisby, Blease, Strauss, Toumpas, Salem, M Jones and Michie. I could have nominated any two of these, but I would really like to see Blease and Toumpas get an opportunity to win a position in the preseason. IMO Blease played his best games in the backline under Viney and his pace gives us the ability to quickly counter attack. Fitzpatrick deserves a position on last year’s form and, as unlikely as it seemed a year ago, with his pace he could become a star. I would keep him clear of the centre bounces and then use him as a ruckman around the ground and have Clark pushing forward. We could do with an AFL standard small forward in the rookie draft. I went for Kent as the one permanent small forward, but he needs to step up on last year, and even so we could do with another. I don’t see Hogan playing as a defender in the long term, but he may be the most flexible of our key forwards to go back and I think it could be better for his development to play back rather than sitting in the forward 50 with the ball at the other end.

Salem looks a bit like Bachar Houli and he might develop into a small defender based on his profile (average speed, 183cm, good ability in the air, good skills and hard edge). I preferred the look of the eight selected before him, so I was hoping one would slide to us. In saying that, Salem’s numbers in the TAC competition indicate he was a pretty safe choice.

MIchie is totally unproven at AFL level but the MIchie thread on the Freo board of bigfooty is worth reading and gives us hope we have found a solid player.

I think Gawn could develop into a really good ruckman with an injury-free preseason or two, so long as he can put on size and build a bigger tank. Still, I am not sure he will be in our best side next year. I think Jamar is past his best and his lack of mobility leaves us short in the clearances after the ruck contest. He will only deserve a spot in the best 22 if he can dominate the ruck contests again. Spencer needs to get stronger to dominate the hit outs to make it to AFL standard. He is behind Gawn and probably Jamar IMO. I would go for Clark as the first ruck with Fitzpatrick as his back up. I don’t rate Fitzpatrick as a centre square ruckman, but I think he could be very effective around the ground. So I would have Clark do all the centre bounces when he is on field and then push forward soon after. This plan obviously assumes Clark is fit to ruck. This plan is also the only viable plan where Fitzpatrick makes the 22, which I think he deserves.

I think Matt Jones will struggle to get a spot in an AFL standard midfield. I would like to see Roos trial Jones at half back, because I am not sold on Clisby, Strauss, Blease, Terlich, Toumpas, Jetta etc as small defenders and we have two positions to fill.

The AFL and AFLPA are greedy in wanting to maximise TV revenue and it gives the TV broadcaster too big say in who plays when. It means the big clubs play in prime time and leads to huge inequality in revenues between the clubs. At the same time, the rich clubs are up in arms at the prospects of greater revenue sharing and the AFL has introduced free agency at the behest of the AFLPA. The current path will see clubs like Melbourne will become feeder clubs to the big clubs and eventually cease to exist in the current form unless we are exceptionally well managed. IMO the AFLPA should be willing for the AFL to take less money from the TV rights and commit to a more equitable fixture from both a commercial and football point of view. Otherwise a big chunk of the AFLPA’s members will be out of a job. Moreover, in the interest of fairness, the draw should be set to give each team a roughly even chance of making the finals.

The OP is right. In the age of free agency, the AFL is incredibly short sighted in continually giving poor sides easy, but uncommercial fixtures. The current plan will just see the poor clubs continue to decline and widen the gap.

He might not ever have the engine (to be a true mid), but he sure looks a good player.

Best available, best available, best available. No exceptions.