Fat Tony

Dwyer would provide us a bit of outside run and polish, which is what we lack. He is a better player than Matt Jones IMO. I would hope to also get Taylor Adams, but it sounds a bit like he might be keen on getting to Geelong.

Sam Dwyer should be a target for us at the end of the year in the PSD. He is Rookie listed at Collingwood and would be on the edge of selection in the Pies best 22. He is aged 26, so he still has a reasonable amount of footy in him. We could offer him much more money and a longer contract than Collingwood given their salary cap is undoubtedly tight.

I see your point, but I would prefer the cycle to be much faster. It will take us a decade to become competitive again and that is too long. If our recent history becomes the norm, players who luck out in the draft (like James Frawley) will have no chance of success at the club they are drafted to.

Second round priority picks would not be enough to even up the competition. The reasons why they are that it is too hard to predict the best future footballers when they are 18 years old with any real certainty and the limited impact that one player can have on a game of football. Using Supercoach averages as a guide, Garry Ablett is worth about two players on the field, which is not highly significant given there are 17 other players on the field. This is why draft picks are less important in AFL than basketball or NFL (where position is more relevant).

While I understand the reasons for of other clubs’ self interest, any equalisation measure to the Melbourne Football Club excluding priority pick #1 would be window dressing and a disappointment in my eyes. Not including our wins against the expansion clubs, we have won only two games in the last season and a half – both by a goal or less. Our percentage so far this year is 54%. Our record over the last seven years has also been dismal, with yearly wins ranging between 3 and 8.5 since 2007. (Furthermore, our success as measured by wins/losses has been inflated by soft fixtures, particularly in recent years.) If the tanking issue did not resurface again last year there would be little doubt of receiving a priority pick #1 based on the secret formula. As we have been cleared of tanking by the AFL (but fined for poor corporate governance) I don’t see how this can be a deciding factor. Since the priority pick system was first changed, the gap between the top and bottom teams has become more uneven. This can be seen by looking at the trend in the difference in both games won and in the percentage differential between the top and bottom sides. It can also be seen in the betting markets, with more favourites are starting games at $1.01 than ever before. This unevenness poses a real risk for two key pillars of the competition – being the draft and the salary cap. (This is particularly so given the recent adoption of free agency.) These aspects of the competition could be challenged in the courts as restraint of trade and could result in a situation akin to John Elway/Baltimore Colts in the NFL. An uneven competition also reduces interest, which will impact revenues and TV rights. The argument that our plight is self inflicted is also extremely weak. Of course we have made mistakes in the recent past, but it is the same with every club at the bottom of the ladder and no club would willingly go through what we have for draft picks. Moreover, it needs to be remembered that mistakes are not made by clubs – but by the individuals who are in charge of those clubs at the time. Demon fans are suffering because of the mistakes of Stynes, Schwab, McLardy, Bailey, Neeld, Prendegast and Cameron, all of whom have now departed the club. It is the loyal supporters, who continue to put their hands in their pockets that are left suffering for the mistakes. I doubt that the AFL is naive enough to think that financial support is the sole answer to our problem. The Melbourne Football Club will continue to be an impediment to the league and our support will dwindle if we don’t start winning soon. IMO we should be given priority picks both #1 and at the end of the first round. Longer term, I think that a better system needs to be put in place to create a level playing field. The best structure would be to give incremental additional salary cap space to clubs based on ladder positions in the previous year. This is the most important equalisation measure in an age of free agency. The draft should also be revamped so that each club outside the Final 8 has two picks before the finalists, but with a weighted lottery system that favours clubs with fewer wins/lower percentage. This would ensure that pick 1 is not guaranteed to the bottom club. These measures should be put in place with the aim that there is equal chance of each club winning the premiership in three years time, but not guaranteed to so as to reduce the incentive to lose matches. I also think that poor and recently unsuccessful clubs like the Bulldogs, St Kilda, Brisbane and Port are making an error of judgement in campaigning against a MFC priority pick. If the AFL does not give us a priority pick there will be a precedent set and these clubs are doing themselves out of a chance at a priority pick if they continue to be unsuccessful. There is probably a greater cost in this than the cost of any dilution in this year’s draft. For the record, I put our chance at a priority pick #1 at 75%.

Beamer was great tonight against a top side.

I don't completely disagree with your analysis, but I doubt we would get a fair trade for Watts and we will have difficulty attracting anyone good.

You may be right, but Hawthorn are lucky that Franklin plays like a small forward and Roughead and Gunstan are good on the deck also. Gunstan started on the wing on Friday and Roughead had spells on the ball. (Bailey often gets subbed out also.) Our tall forwards are better in the air but not as mobile. I think we need to use pinch hitters on the ball often. And Watts and Howe will need to play in the midfield for team balance.

He is trying to get close enough to kick a goal.

Apart from the midfield, another big question our next coach will face is coming up with a functioning forward line and ruck set up. We clearly have too many key forwards (and this excludes the potential drafting of Tom Boyd) and I have doubts about a forward set up with any more than three talls at any one time given the way the game is played today. Assuming we can keep all our players, this thread poses the question of how we deal with this issue. Points: Assuming Mitch Clark comes back to fitness, it will be interesting if he can play in the ruck. If he can, finding a solution to this dilemma will be much easier. A fully fit Clark might also be able to play a pinch-hitting role as a midfielder. Chris Dawes struggled when asked to be the second ruckman at Collingwood, so I think he is the least versatile of our key forwards. Jack Watts looks better in the forward line than in the back line, but I think he could also play on the wing. Jesse Hogan looks ready made. He runs a 14.4 beep test, so he also possibly has the potential to pinch hit in the midfield ala Roughead. Jeremy Howe has shown he can play both forward and midfield. I think he looks a perfect third tall, but might need to play elsewhere for team balance. Max Gawn has shown more as a deep forward than a ruckman in my opinion and doesn’t look like he has the engine to play significant minutes on the ball. Mark Jamar clearly looks like he nearing the end of his career but he has a three-year contract. He is also a veteran, which is beneficial from a Salary Cap perspective (although this is a moot point). He could be worth something in terms of a trade, but that could have a negative impact on the player group. It is difficult to know what to do with Jamar without being inside the tent. Jack Fitzpatrick will need to show something in the second half of this year and should be given a real opportunity. He looks more comfortable up forward than in the ruck, but still has the athletic ability to compete as a second ruckman. If we get a priority pick (or finish last) and Boyd is the clear No. 1, we need to trade the pick down (for instance to the Bulldogs or Saints for pick 4 or 5 plus sweetners) or for a gun midfielder (although I doubt anyone worthy of pick 1 would agree to come). Fat Tony’s 2014 set up assuming Clark is able to play in the ruck: Centres: Watts xxx Howe Half Forwards: Sylvia Dawes Hogan Forwards: Small (Byrnes) Clark (45/40) Small (Davey) Fol: Gawn (60/25) xxx xxx

Mark Williams was a great coach. His Port Adelaide teams always played with a good balance of attack and defence and toughness and skill. The question is whether he can reproduce it in this day and age. Like Mark Neeld, Williams was a teacher before becoming a coach. However, I see their approaches as being total different. One thing I remember Williams saying about 10 years ago which stuck in my mind was that he wanted to make every player feel as though they were the most important player on the list. I think this is a good quality in a coach and I doubt that any players ever felt that under Neeld. In saying this, the feeling out of GWS was that he was too hard on the players. I would definitely have him as a preferred candidate. He has many appealing qualities: a reasonably attacking mindset, an ultra competitive personality, a willingness to work with players, experience coaching at a club with limited resources, a good sense of humour and the ability to sell the club.

Choco would be initial preference, but we should explore all options this time around and consider another first time coach. We need someone who is positive, willing to take risks and willing work with a smaller coaching team. (We would be better spending the money on recruiting.) It would be good to have a decision made before September.

The cost to develop Casey makes it economically unviable. I also doubt a partial move would have a significant impact in attracting any real support for the MFC and there would be no benefit in attracting people to the code. People are more inclined to support the teams of their families or who is winning, not where they live. Whilst I can see why comparisons with Geelong are made, it should be remembered that Geelong FC began 100 years before TV and 50 years before cars. The truth is that we won’t attract supporters unless we start winning. The AFL either needs to support us out of the MCG or (if we remain a basket case on the field) IMO they will look to merge us with GWS or GCS just like they did Brisbane and Fitzroy.

Bailey failed because he was let down by poor recruiting. Neeld failed because he turned the senior players offside, implemented an obsolete game plan and wasn’t willing to work with what he was given.

Only Nathan Jones, Tom McDonald and Max Gawn (who would have improved anyway), as well as Mitch Clark. Lynden Dunn is another who has possibly improved.

Surely we could build a forward line around Hogan, Dawes, Howe, Watts etc

If we get Pick #1 (likely as a PP) and Boyd is a clear standout, we should look to trade down the draft. The one thing we don't need is another KPF and I would rather have (say) the second, sixth and eighth best mids in the draft rather than just the best two. I would even consider trading down Pick #2/3 for two picks later in the first round.

Neither should be elevated IMO. We would be better of getting games into younger players like Strauss, Toumpas, Viney, Taggart and Gawn.

Whilst we lack talent, this is being exacerbated by Neeld’s game plan and team selection. The key issue is our lack of purpose when we have the ball. We don’t look to attack with ball in hand – our players do not run forward anywhere near hard enough or with any confidence and we are afraid to use the corridor. This makes it hard to retain possession, as it gives time for the opposition to set the press. In addition to his defensive game plan, we are also being handicapped by Neeld’s bias towards ‘grunt’ and size, rather than skill. Blease should be played in the backline and Davey in the midfield to give us some drive. Tom McDonald, Mark Jamar, Jordan McKenzie and Luke Tapscott are not skilled enough (and athletic enough in Jamar’s and Tapscott’s case) and should all be moved on at year’s end. Whilst I like McDonald’s athleticism and his courage, I feel he is not skilled enough by hand or foot or especially good at reading the ball off the boot. With these deficiencies, I can only ever see him being an ordinary player. Although I don’t blame Neeld when individual players miss targets, I blame him for setting up a system which sees poorly skilled players exposed week after week.

Surely nobody thought we could go backwards on one 'real' win when the opposition kicked 6.16. Neeld is the worst coach in the history of football.

Your analogy is deeply flawed for two reasons: The club is backstopped by the AFL. Unless we start winning the club will lose supporters and sponsors and are dead anyway. Fitzroy were the last club to pay well under the cap and look where they are now.

I respect North too, but the reality is we have entered a period of free agency and the club is in a tailspin. I also have respect for the way in which Brisbane were able to win the first three-peat since the 50s and how Sydney have won two flags in the last decade. Don't you? Don't kid yourself that the competition is even. Free agency assists the bigger clubs at the top of the ladder and the franchise clubs have a bigger cap.

Leach talks about ‘moral hazard’ and his views are similar to those of a vast number of football followers. But Leach and others are ignorant and completely miss the point. Mistakes are not made by clubs – but by the individuals who are in charge of those clubs. Our fans are suffering because of the mistakes of Stynes, Schwab, Bailey, Neeld, Prendegast and Cameron, who have all since departed the club (or will do soon). If the AFL does not support the poorer clubs they will dwindle and die. Eventually passionate football people like me will be without teams and the game’s following will shrink. We aren’t ever going to jump on board and support another club. And there will always be relatively poor clubs and teams at the bottom of the ladder, so where does it end? Anyone who has played Monopoly before can tell you the answer to that.

Casey is not the answer. It would be akin to Fitzroy playing its games at the Western Oval. Our home is the MCG and it is highly accessible to greater Melbourne. Building something that is remotely close to AFL standard would cost millions and would diminish our crowds. Moreover, locality has become much less important to which clubs people support in the TV age and winning has become more important.

I am no Schwab supporter, but I would say it is easy for any new leader to blame the previous person in charge. They do this to give themselves time to ‘fix the mess’ and because they have a different philosophy about the way things should be done. Moreover, there is no perfect structure and Schwab’s structure would have been fine had we picked correctly in the draft.