RalphiusMaximus

I think the whole model needs to be overhauled. Once again looking to the more successful sports around the world, they tend to have senior coaches who are more managers than hands-on coaches and who are often older than the average AFL coach. A few clubs in the AFL have moved in that direction with roles like Eade is playing with the Pies or Bomber Thompson was supposed to play at Essendon where a senior figure is overseeing the entire football department, but it could be fr better arranged. Yet another area where the AFL is well below the standards set by the big leagues.

Melissa Breen. Australian 100m record holder.

So we finish bottom, campaign for a PP again on the basis of the worst run in the history of the game (I suspect we'll have surpassed Fitzroy by then), possibly have Frawley walk out on us for a long-term contract and where does that leave us? We have PP#1, pick 2 for finishing last and possibly pick 3 for Frawley (pick after our first round pick). Trade pick 2 or 3 for more quality experience, draft another tall and a quality mid prospect and off we go.

We should have a shorter season with at most a single bye round. I wouldn't mind scheduling a state of origin match for the bye, but that is another argument all together.

I think based on their respective careers to date and the reputation they carried in to the season Vince would have been expected to have a significantly better year than Tyson. On that basis I would say that Tyson has performed better in relations to expectations than Vince, although both have been very very good for us. If you're looking for absolutes then it becomes much harder to separate them. You'd probably have to do a rundown of everything they've done all season to get a real idea. Something like THIS in fact, which shows Vince to be just ahead although it is remarkably close.

Nope. Have a look at the lead-up. Grimes is running side-by side with his man from the square. They can both clearly see that Viney is getting there first. He has a good 20-30m if not more to put some body on and help his teammate out. He finally makes a half-assed effort a few steps short of the ball which does nothing. Still pathetic. Still unworthy of a leader.

Having got the rant off my chest, there was actually quite a bit to like about the game overall. I thought Tappy produced the best minute of his football career and in general was pretty solid. He should be spending most of his time forward in my opinion. Blease gave us a bit in attack and much to my amazement actually put in defensively. JKH was back and looking good. Jetta was superb. Some of his evasive work was insane to watch, just the awareness and agility to avoid tackles until he could dish off. Tyson still ogt caught a couple of times, but it was a very handy game. Riley looks like he could be a real find once he gets back to full fitness. He really has slotted in nicely. Kent really threw himself in as the substitute. I've seen a lot of people say he should have played the whole game, but I'm not sure I agree. He was ideal in that role where his burst of speed and attack on the ball wrought havoc and created a lot of opportunities when we needed them. Probably more I could throw out, but I just got back from work and it was late when I watched it last night. The point is that we looked like a decent side last night. Our tall forwards were average, but we had a rock solid defence, we did well in clearances, we had a few quick players in there to break lines and create, and they all worked as advertised. It was actually a good game from us, we just failed to finish it off (again). A little more composure and awareness and we'd have added Port to the list of scalps this year.

Well, I finally got around to watching that game and I have to get something off my chest. I can't believe the selfish play I saw from the two captains. Obviously everyone has already mentioned Jones taking the advantage and running himself into trouble when we needed him to show leadership and settle the play down, but I haven't seen any mention of Grimes' role in the HB call on Jack Viney. With Viney clearly first man to the ball and Grimes running in alongside his own man, did he put on any sort of block or bump to allow his younger teammate a little room and time to take the ball and move it on? HELL NO. He peeled off his man and ran past looking for a handball and a cheap stat, leaving Viney to cop the contact and ultimately costing us a free kick on the PA HFF. What should have been the most basic play to put a bit of body on his man and take him out of the contest became a 1 vs 2 win for the opposition because he wasn't willing to do the team thing and play for someone else to get the ball. That is not leadership. I was furious when I saw it last night and I'm equally [censored] off right now writing about it. That was as poor an effort as I have seen this year, both as a player and a leader. Pathetic.

"Nobody gives a flying [censored] what you call as long as you do it consistently for every player on the ground."

I was working today, so no idea of what really happened, but we came back from five goals down to regain the lead, and that's pretty special. I look forward to the replay.

I think at this point we'd be better off turning our attention elsewhere. I would love for the fairy story to happen, but reality says that, as OD says, he will struggle to stay clean. I say if we want to go down the path of freak talent we look fora younger model.

There have been a few reports from the club about working on Gawn's game as a forward, so it's really good to see he's getting plenty of time down there and doing a good job. If he can make himself a legitimate threat then he's going to be hell to match up on in a year or two.

So does anyone want to know about Waylon Manson's latest article then?

After seven disastrous losses to finish the season in 18th, Frawley walks for <400k/year meaning we only get third round compo for him, Jackson quits and the board sacks Roos.

Roos isn't a fan of one game in and then back to the reserves. I doubt Tappy will be dropped. He's given Riley time and chances to get his act together and look how well that paid off on the weekend.

I agree with all of that, but it's only the last bit that really concerns me right now.

I'm struggling this week. Aside from Riley and Viney, who do I reward?

Up until today I was wondering what all the fuss was about Riley. He'd produced a couple of pretty average performances, laid a couple of good tackles and really looked like a VFL player. If today is what he can produce when he's fit and firing, and he can do it consistently then I am finally on the bandwagon. Aside from those two poor moments, I had him BOG for us today. Loved his inside work at stoppages.

Why not both? A player need not be one or the other, they can in fact be able to win their own ball and run well on the outside depending on the situation. Our problem is that for the last six or seven years we've been recruiting players who only have one of these traits when there were plenty out there with both. Even better would be to forget all about the perceived traits of the players and just recruit the best footballers, but that notion hasn't been in fashion since the 90s.

I know he's being talked up a lot, but do we really want a guy who has never coached? Surely we'd be better off going for someone who has served some sort of apprenticeship with a quality side. Look what happened at the Bombers when they appointed a novice coach fresh from the media.

I fairness to Watts, he did take a contested mark and get involved with a few ground balls today. He wasn't terribly good at it but at least he tried a few.

I agree 100% with the OP. I think it can be summed up with a singe word, UNPROFESSIONAL. As I've said before, there is no real oversight or governance in place to ensure that they are doing the job to the highest possible standard, there's no penalty if they stuff up and because of the point raised above by Nutbean, the AFL is terrified to even try to impose some sort of order on them. Heaven forbid that the poor precious flowers are actually exposed to justified criticism and dropped to a lower league if their performance isn't up to scratch.

No. Rookies don't need to nominate for the draft to be upgraded, and as such other clubs don't have access to them. Also we don't need to nominate him until draft day. Of course, there would have to be some sort of agreement in place between the club and the Jetta, otherwise he would almost certainly have to put his name in the draft, but that doesn't need to be public to the best of my knowledge. Also, we wouldn't have to nominate a specific pick for him. As long as we have room on our list we can use a pick to upgrade him during the main draft.

This has been mentioned from a few sources about the place. I don't know how likely it is that he'll walk, but I think everyone knew they'd gone one too many high picks on key forwards. I have heard a whisper that the Bulldogs are very much into him. I wouldn't be surprised if the Saints were also putting out feelers in his direction. As for us, I think we have other needs that trump spending our first pick on another young tall forward. The loss of Clark has left a bit of a hole, but Dawes has years left in him and Hogan is coming along. We can pick up another developing tall in this draft and work on them for a few years like the good clubs do before needing to put them in the firsts.

I do like Kent. While he is inconsistent at the moment, he has set the standard from his first game for courage, repeatedly taking options that many others on our list have shirked such as flying for a mark in front of leading players and getting hammered. He is also not afraid of taking on an opponent and doesn't seem to care how big a name they are. One of his early games saw him play on and step around Sam Mitchell. All we need to see from him is to consistently get 20+ touches and a goal or two and we'll all be happy I think.