Fat Tony

The trade window is over. Let's wait 12 months and decide. I think he will be a good player in time. Tall with a good pair of hands. Skillful and makes good decisions. Just too skinny atm.

We would be mad not to try and get Ray. Only 25 and a proven finals performer.

I would play Frawley in the middle and Martin on the gorillas next season. I understand we are losing our best defender, but I still think we will be much better off. Rationale: Chip could be like Kouta in the clearances. He is big, strong, fast and tough and is also a good user of the ball on the run. Size/strength and pace off the mark matter most in the clearances. Chip has all these ingredients and is also an excellent tackler. His height and leap could also be used as third man up in some instances around the ground. We need to make sure we win the midfield given the evolution of the press. It is now so hard to defend from deep in the backline in modern AFL. You can have the best forward line and best backline in the competition, but it still doesn’t matter if you lose the contested ball. We have good depth in the KPD department. Martin, Rivers and Garland have the spoiling ability to nullify most forward lines. Grimes is not overly quick and needs to play on the third/fourth tall or slowest small. If Martin, Rivers, Garland and Frawley are all in defence, Grimes’ likely opponent will be too quick. I still think Rivers is in our best 22 and he should benefit from Martin being able to take the really tall, strong forwards. I think Martin is best suited to defence. (Although he showed he could also make it as a forward this year which surprised me.) If Martin plays forward, then Watts is likely to be pushed onto the wing. IMO this would be a bit of a waste, as Watts will get stronger again next year and with better supply could become a star as a CHF. He will also benefit from Clark taking the focus off him. Best 22 Rivers Martin Blease Bail Garland Grimes Trengove Frawley Davey Sylvia Watts Howe Green Clarke Jurrah Jamar Moloney McKenzie Jones Gysberts Petterd Tapscott I also don’t think Gawn and Jamar can really play in the same side unless big Max really starts to kick some bags for Casey. Both are number 1 ruckmen and need to be played there for 70% game time.

Should we consider packaging 12 with Bate for the Doggies compensation pick?

Mitch Clark plays his best footy in the ruck and is not quick enough to play as a permanent KPF. We should go for the best value permanent KPF. I would like to see us go for Ó hAilpín, Fevola and/or Walsh as they are much cheaper options and we get to keep our picks. We could also do well out of brokering a deal so Clark gets to Freo. We have the ruck well covered with Jamar and Martin. We also need to remember that Gawn and Cook will be good players. I doubt we will get Clark anyway given he wants to go to WA.

I am glad we went into the whole thing with a plan and stuck to it. Overpaying in an auction feels great until you have to pay the mortgage. Unless we can now attract a genuine star like Goddard we should be happy to be a bit player this year.

I think the minimum draft age should be abolished.

I agree it would be an advantage if we had our own VFL side. On the Jamar trade, not being a forced seller, we should only do it for fair value in return.

Dear Garry, We have now not won a flag for 47 years and we showed no real improvement in this year. Regardless of who we select as our new coach, in my opinion we need to think outside the box and make some hard decisions going forward. Here is my 10 point plan for the future: 1. Pay 100% of the salary cap – If our current players do not deserve any extra money at the moment we should use front-loaded contracts. Preferably this should be done with an option (which the club may exercise) so as to extend the players’ contracts on below market money in the later years of the contract. Effectively the players would be paid early, so they will not be disadvantaged by this type of arrangement. This contract should only be put in place for players that have a high chance of being in the system for an extended period of time (i.e. Watts, Trengove, Frawley, Garland, Sylvia). For example, we could strike a deal with Watts to play for $500K per season for the next two years with a club exercisable option to extend his contract for a further two years for $250K per season. 2. Increase our recruiting department even if it comes at the expense of reducing expenditure on player development – IMO the difference in the ability of clubs to develop players is minimal these days and the real gains to be made are in getting recruiting decisions correct. Does anyone really believe Bartram would be a better kick if he was drafted by Collingwood? Would Judd, Franklin or Martin be lesser players if they started their careers at Melbourne? If so, why has Frawley been able to develop so well at Melbourne? Genetics are the key determinate of a player’s ultimate ability, not the club that they are drafted to. This means we should focus on getting our recruiting decisions right and the rest will follow. While it would be nice to go to Arizona over preseason and have altitude training facilities etc, unfortunately we don’t have the money. IMO the balance in AFL footy has erred too far on the side of focusing on player development rather than on recruiting. 3. Only offer Scully what he is worth – I doubt Scully will stay, but I also doubt he will be the player he has been touted to be given his size, average disposal and not exceptional (but good) pace. His injury also makes the chances of him being a future top 10 AFL player less likely. Overpaying him would be a mistake given the compensation we are likely to receive is reasonable. 4. Pick our best side – We have not picked our best side every week since Daniher was our coach. IMO this is the most crucial ingredient to building a strong culture. We need to remember that players can also develop in the VFL and the weights room. 5. Trade Jamar – I doubt Jamar will be at his best when we are in contention to win a flag and he looks to me like he is probably on the decline. Only one dinosaur is needed in modern footy and you cannot have two, so I would therefore focus on developing the team with Gawn as our ruckman. Jamar is probably still worth a first round pick (or one of GWS’s 17 year old picks). 6. Trade/Delist Morton, Bate, Fitzpatrick, Jetta, Maric – IMO we need to make a judgement on players much earlier in their careers than we have been doing and then quickly move them on if we believe they are not going to make it. A player’s trade value drops dramatically after a third mediocre year. Bailey believed that he could turn develop players like Bate and Dunn into quality AFL players, but in my view this was always unrealistic and instead we should have traded them when they had value. Going forward, we should learn from this and be more ruthless on players after two years in the system, looking to trade them if we are not convinced that they will make it. Sometimes this approach will come back to bite us (and a late bloomer will develop at another club), but in the long run I think we will be better off with this approach. 7. Train Frawley as a midfielder over preseason – Centre clearances are more crucial with the modern press and large, strong, quick midfielders are the future. We should put our best clearance players in every centre bounce and Frawley could be a star in this area, as he strong in the contest and has the ability to burst away from the stoppages. I have considered the impact this will have on our backline and I still believe it is worth trialling. Next season we need to defend from the forward half and the only way to do that is to win the contested ball. 8. Look to acquire older players at bottom clubs and ‘bad eggs’ – Players such as Fevola, Lovett, Power, Cornes and Tuck will play on low money contracts and could potentially provide great value. While none of them will have long careers, they can always be replaced by the next batch of older players coming through. AFL clubs at the very bottom are incentivised to clear out their lists and go for youth, but we are now in a position where we need to look to improve. 9. Ascertain the worth of GWS’s 17 year old picks – Hawthorn supporters were in uproar over the Croad/Hodge deal but the decision was clearly the right one in hindsight, even though it did not look like right at the time. Essendon’s deal to get Lloyd was also a masterstroke in retrospect. While a difficult process, we need to clearly determine the value of these picks, remembering that Jaeger O'Meara could either be the next Judd or the next Banik. 10. Keep Green and Davey – There is no point losing players of their ilk for little return. The fabric of our footy club has been dented by the departure that many of our older players in recent years. Moreover, their current trade value makes them more valuable for us to keep given they are/will be on the veterans list. Go Demons, Fat Tony

I would look to trade Morton while he maintains some trade value. While I think he can become a serviceable player, his acceleration off the mark is not good enough and he is not a good enough kick to star as an outside midfielde. And I highly doubt he will ever gain the strength in the contest to play as either a key back or a forward. It is disappointing that none of the ‘best kicks in the draft’ that we have drafted in recent years have yet proven themselves to be quality kicks at AFL level (Morton, Strauss and Maric).

You are a broken record. Did he refuse to sign your jumper or something?

In: Jamar, Gysberts, Dunn Out: Gawn, Morton, Strauss Notes: • Gysberts to be the sub given he was out last week. • Tapscott needs a week in the VFL when he gets right. • Dunn to play on Deledio. Dunn is above Morton in my eyes. While Dunn does not get enough of the ball, he makes less simple skill errors than Morton. • Strauss has improved this year, but he is still well outside my best team. I think with Bartram, Nicholson and Bennell (plus Joel MacDonald and Garland if necessary) we have enough small defenders to cover Richmond’s small forwards. • While Bartram was hopeless last week I think he has enough credits in the bank to stay in the side. He should play on Dustin Martin when he goes forward. • Jamar for Gawn (who has already shown he will be a good player next year) as three ruckmen is one too many. • Jurrah is one of a handful of players in the AFL that can win a game off their own boot, so he has to play.

We are talking about the same Liam Jurrah that is seventh in the Coleman right?

Assuming Jamar does not come up. In: Petterd, Dunn, Garland Out: Jetta, Gawn, Evans • Petterd proved he is way too good for the VFL. • While Dunn doesn’t get enough of the ball, but he has all the tools to be a player and is one of our best skilled players. So I think he needs to be persevered with. He should play as the second ruck this week, as he gives much more than Gawn when as a forward. • Jurrah can win a game off his own boot, so there is no way I would drop him. • Tapscott should come back through the VFL and play limited game time. His hamstring injury looked a bad one. • Cook was excellent in the VFL but is still not physically ready to play AFL. • Blease was poor in the VFL and does not deserve promotion. On a side note, I would prefer to see Jamar play 60-70% in the ruck and only 10-20% forward once he is fit. As good as Martin has been recently, Jamar is crucial around the stoppages and he is not the solution as a KPF. I would prefer to see Martin in the backline when he is not playing in the ruck, as he is also not a great forward. But with potentially Garland, Rivers, Frawley, Martin and Macdonald in the backline we would be too big and slow. So I would like to see us experiment with Frawley in the midfield for some of the game. He is strong, hard, long and fast and is the most Judd-like player on our list. I think he could be great in the centre bounces and around the stoppages which are more important now with the press.

It’s a good idea if you barrack for Collingwood.

I would start him in that case and play Bennell as the sub.

Scully (sub) for Warnock Trengove for Evans Dunn for Petterd Bartram (if fit) for Morton (Strauss otherwise) Gawn for Newton Howe for Bate Points: • Martin to play the majority of the game as a defender Essendon are likely to have a player which needs a gorilla and Warnock is not up to it. We should get innovative with Martin and play him as a KPD/relieving ruckman • Morton’s disposal is not good enough for an outside midfielder. • Scully should play as the sub given it will be too big a risk to start with him and then intend to sub him off later. • Dunn should play on Watson if he plays. • Dunn’s only real problem as a footballer is that he does not find enough of the ball. This is partly due to our midfield being consistently beaten. Bartram Martin Frawley J.MacDonald Rivers Jones Green Trengove McKenzie Howe Watts Jetta Maric Jurrah Dunn Gawn Sylvia Moloney Nicholson Bennell Gysberts Scully

I have the same 21+1. The only issue is that Dunn would probably have to play as second ruck. Having three mids on the bench also leaves us a bit vulnerable if a KPP goes down.

I quite like the selection of Campbell as insurance, but I think we should play Dunn as our second ruckman. Barring injury the second ruckman only needs to be in the ruck role for around minutes per game. All the alternatives do not give enough during the rest of the game for mine.

I am not saying Bailey has lost the players. But it is naïve to think that this is not a danger for all coaches. It happens all the time. (Particularly to underperforming coaches with anonymous playing records. Look at Jeff Gieschen.) You are right on one thing though – the players are not stupid and the older ones in particular will remember playing for a coach who tanked and also how it ended for their mates White, Robertson and Bruce et al. They will not want to see this happen to them.

It doesn't sound like money is now the issue though. I think Bruce probably just wanted an assurance that as long as he is still in our best 22 he would continue to get a game. (I think this is a pretty justifiable stance to take given he only gets one crack at it.) I also think Bailey needs to consider the long-term impact on the club culture of continuing to build for the future. IMO most of the older MFC players will have a lot of sympathy for Bruce’s situation and taking this path could eventually see him eventually lose the players.

You could also argue that most of the older players on the MFC list have been overpaid in recent years given that we have been a basket case and we were forced to pay 92.5% of the salary cap. As such, I don’t think Bruce has been getting a massively disproportionate share of the MFC salary cap given his output. While he was on very good coin versus peers at other clubs, someone already at the MFC had to get the money (as no one from outside wanted to play for us).

I agree with this. I also think Bailey is walking a fine line in terms of doing considerable damage to our club culture. Tanking in late 2009 was very distasteful but had to be done. Retiring players while they were still clearly in our best 22 was unpleasant to witness but was also the right call. However, I think Bailey now needs to turn it around and show the players (particularly those that are getting long in the tooth) that he wants us to start winning. It is impossible to motivate the team on one hand and forever play for the future on the other. The older players are not stupid and are the key leaders of our young stars. Bailey needs to now demonstrate to them that he is trying for a premiership in their window. He needs to start doing this by now picking our best 22 each week. Moreover, I still think Bruce had a lot to offer as a player and is criminally underrated on this site. He was our leading possession winner last season, one of our best stoppers and was one of our key leaders. He was also costing us nothing in terms of a space on the list for two years. He was also one of our fittest players and, despite the rubbish written on here, he had not yet seen a major drop off in performance. While Bruce turned the ball over more often than most, he also got it 25 times per game and generally nullified his opponent. It would not surprise me if he plays another 50 games for his new club.

I could mount the same argument for a large number of players. It would have been better for the club to have tied Strauss and Blease to one-year deals this year. In previous years we have given longer-term deals to Cheney, Newton, Maric and Meeson. There is/was an element of risk in all of these deals. The risk with Bruce is that his form slips away and that he is being overpaid in the second year of the deal. There is no major risk in him clogging the list, as he is only taking the place of a rookie. Given his durability and consistency I think two years is a reasonable risk to take.

Please correct me if I am wrong, but I think Green and Bruce are the only players eligible for veteran status in 2011. On that basis, I don’t really understand the need for the club to hold a firm line and only offer Bruce a one year deal. Bruce has been a very consistent and durable player for a decade now. I also think he is a player who is unlikely to lose his pace. I can see him playing another two years easily.