RalphiusMaximus

I have remarkably little respect for both major parties. My vote was based on who I least wanted in power.

Funny thing in the U18 highlights is Toumpas gets a mention. Kicks into Hogan on the mark.

I have my suspicions about Bontempelli based mainly on the descriptions and player comparisons I have seen on him. I actually like the look of Aish, but many people have raised valid concerns about his build and ability to put on enough muscle to play in an AFL midfield. Also, I don't like to see players who make a late run into contention for a high pick based on recent good form. I think it's easy to be conned into believing they are better than they really are based on a few good games at the end of the season. Better to go with someone who has looked the goods for a long time and consistently shown their ability.

I'm not sure about the length, but I think whatever is left after we match Frawley's FA offer and secure Hogan should be used to lure someone really good, be it Pendlebury or another top-line mid. We should have plenty of cash available for these goals given the current state of our list.

I do find the hate for Etihad to be interesting. I've been to quite a few games there and quite frankly it's facilities are light years ahead of those at the MCG. In terms of watching a game, you have better food vendors, better public toilets, a roof that can be closed so you don't freeze to death, better access to PT and the seats are about the same. Why then do we not want to play there? Two reasons. Firstly, as has been mentioned, the playing surface is sub-standard and causes injuries. Secondly, we always get beaten, so as fans we naturally don't want to show up and see a loss.

If you look at the chat on the AFL site, they have rated us 4th for cushy draw. Obviously this is focused more on the chances to win games than to make money, but it seems that from that perspective we have been given a gift. However we have been given far too many Sunday fixtures, including the totally dead time slot of Sunday Twilight, and no Friday fixtures at all. If they want to talk about equalisation n the competition then they need to give every team one home fixture on a Friday night and then reward the best performed sides with the extra six. As it stands, they gave Carlton (a mediocre side) four Friday home games while letting the teams that actually need to the financial assist to rot in purgatory. They can't even claim that the games are going to the better sides or the bigger crowds, because they have only given the reigning premiers one Friday home game as well. Meanwhile along with Carlton we see Geelong (who are fading) and Richmond (who might be on the rise) as the next best-loved with three each. Basically, while we can't complain about the draw in terms of winnable games, we are being clearly shown that the AFL are going to keep on helping their special buddies and shafting the rest when it comes to the best timeslots to pull crowds and make a few dollars.

THe notion that some clubs make handshake agreements on the draft isn't that far-fetched. We did something similar last year to get Viney into the second round. It would need to be more complicated with the number of players involved this time, but I can believe that there is a rough understanding between at least a few of the recruiters.

Didn't we win flights to the US for Altitude training in the Virgin Video thingy?

Not really. Frawley and McDonald are the big ones. The rest are either not that great or as yet unproven. While I wouldn't like to see any of our kids leave at the end of their first contract it wouldn't be a killer blow by any means. The rest have been around for a while and not set the world on fire or are mature-aged recruits who are solid but not top-line.

I think he'd be a huge win for us at 40. His kicking is a big feature and that's an area we really need to improve as a team.

Not happy about Taggert. The others I don't really care about, but he deserved a chance, especially given some of the crud we are keeping on the list in his place. I'm forced to revise my theory on him. He didn't run over Craig's cat, it was obviously Viney's.

He was having some nasty problems with his hamstrings that year. I know I'm not the only one who thought he was on his last legs and should make the call himself. If he had done that, or the club had handled things better with pushing him we might have kept him on as a development coach/mentor for the young group Bailey was bringing in, which would have been a huge advantage.

On the wing makes the best use of his abilities. He has the pace if possibly not the engine to go with whoever they put on him and his height and ball-use will be a huge bonus. If he can learn to be a bit more physical and hold his contested marks he can do the job Richo did for the Tigers in his last season or two, and he missed a Brownlow by 1 point in that role. It's a pretty big IF as to whether he can learn to play the role properly, but if he does he will be a massive weapon for us.

Very interesting thought. I think the reality for us is would be that we need a mix of a few stars having a good year and some of our lesser lights having an impact. The obvious one from the first category for me would be Clark. If he can play 20 games at something like his form from a couple of years ago we'd be off to a good start. If Blease were to get some consistency and hold down a spot in the side he'd be a huge benefit to us as well. Jones obviously to be midfield general. Viney to step up and play the whole season gives Jones more support and helps out the other new guys. Tyson likewise. IF Watts can rack up 20+ a game it would be huge. Add in your pick from Frawley, Garland and McDonald. We'd also need Grimes to have a big defensive impact of HB. I'm up to 10 here, which gives some idea of how much we need to go right to get into finals contention...

I think the thing people need to remember about Junior being axed and the angst that ensued is that we wouldn't have Tom McDonald if he'd stayed. Yes, it was handled very badly and led to a great deal of bad blood between the senior players and the management, but he was 33, he looked to be breaking down and we needed to clear space on the list for some young players. His spot was taken by our last live draft pick in Tom McDonald, who could be on his way to being an AA CHB. I still think it was the right call to make. It could have been done a lot better simply through better communication from all parties, but it was still the best call for the team.

I can kind of understand why they held on to him for so long. He had every physical attribute he needed to be a great player. It was only in the intangibles that he failed. You can see why they would have kept him around in the hope that things would click for him and he'd figure out how to put it all together.

That is just a totally unfounded call. The guy had his career destroyed by injuries before it even started. How is that anything but bad luck? For all we know he could have been a 300 game forward for us without those injuries. This is one case where you can't just list off the players taken after him as evidence of a recruiting failure. We will never know how good he could have been had he not broken down, so there is no basis for comparison with any of the players who managed to stay on the park.

Just watched the draft ratings on that video. Barrett really is an idiot. Based on the ratings they gave other clubs we'd have to be a solid B. C at the worst if they really didn't rate our pickups. By any reasonable assessment we broke even on Vince and won on Michie (giving up nothing). The question is whether pick 2 for Tyson and pick 9 is worth it. Personally I think it's a pretty good deal. Given the evenness of the top 10, downgrading to 9 will get us a player of about the same ability, so little real loss.

While I haven't watched that much women's AFL, I can say with certainty that women's soccer used to be a hell of a lot rougher than men's before they reigned it in. They had this lovely little rule that said that the women were allowed to use their arms to protect their breasts from forceful contact. As in any sport, this quickly translated to "I'm allowed to charge into opponents with my arm raised at chest height and hit them as hard as I like in the name of protecting my breasts from harm." A couple of the international sides had their own team techniques to get the most bang for their buck out of this, including at least one side who would lead with the elbow.

While I love the Dees, footy has never been my game. I played a couple of other sports at a pretty decent level including state rep squads as a teen. I never had the level of commitment to take it further. I have no idea how many games I played for my school. Not that many.

I'd be very cautious in dropping the captaincy on one of our best performers. Some people don't handle it well (me for one), and you could wind up screwing up one of our few top-line players. Roos is bringing in Leading Teams. I know very little about the mechanics of their process, but presumably the usual suspects will still come out on the top. I would guess our leadership group will feature Jones, Grimes Trengove Dawes and a couple of others. Who will be put in the captains role I have no idea.

Not true. We can delist them, we simply have to pay them out. Given our TPP at the moment, it shouldn't be all that difficult to fit a payout or two into the cap if we need to. While many would say that it is a poor option to take given the club's fragile finances, I would say that carrying a complete and utter dud for another year is just as bad as it reduces our chances of success and the current admin are adamant that only with on-field success can the financial side become viable again.

Had this discussion on another thread. I am a fan of a good small forward, but I can't see us getting one. Roos just doesn't seem to go that direction.

My wishlist for late picks (from very limited information) would be Cain, Garlett or Jones. If any of them were to fall to us i'd be thrilled.

We've seen this attitude from quite a few of our players. They all seem to be waiting for somone else to make them better players. Similar to Watts on the footy show saying the club was supposed to be improving three years ago. They seem unable to make the connection in their minds that it is up to them to make it happen. The club 's job is to give them the best tools to use, but it is still up to the players to improve themselves.