Ungarie boy

Not sure about Norm Smith approach, but a simple underlying basic principle has always existed in football ...... 'you have to get the ball before you can use the ball'

Okay some perspective on trade value, it would seem: * Multiple all Australian players still in there prime = 2 first rounders, at least one pre-teen * Likely multiple all Australian players approaching their prime * 2 first rounders * All Australian - 1 first rounder * Club top 5 player - mid first rounder * regular top 10 player - late first rounder * Walkup starting 18 - early second rounder * starting 22 player - second rounder * fringe 22 player - late second round / third round rounder * ressie player with AFL gametime - third rounder * Ressie player with potential - late third rounder * Approaching retirement leadership player - fourth round rounder * Career resurrection player - packet of chips * Risk players - peanuts Of course this is a generalisation as injury, game role (key position, ruck, outside/inside,), team requirements, age, etc, can all shift things a little; but as a guide where would Watts fit in. Also note the guide is based on current years form, with previous years normally only taken into account when injury, trauma, etc need to be considered. Well at the end of this season you could not honestly state that Watts was a walkup starting 18 player; so that's a starting point. Add to this his current career trajectory which has flatlined (or started going the other way); the question then gets asked how many more years are likely left in him at his best output (this would probably at best equal a "walkup starting 18 player") Now like others I don't like getting pick 31. As I feel, believe and even think that he is a better player; but the reality is he is not, he might be, but history also suggest he will not be. I also know, like Travis Johnstone at Brisbane, he will win Port some games, and be applauded; but in all likelihood finish his onfield career in a similar pattern. I hope not, as I want to see him succeed; even if it is at Port. Still on analysis, the reality is 31 is not wide of the mark!!!! A question that is not being asked though, is why after8 years of averageness; he got such a good contact. P.s Don't judge him and this trade on his silky skills, charisma and "what could be"; Other clubs have not. Judge this on where he currently is at,and what he has demonstrated - again it is what other clubs are doing. This will help understand and possibly placate the trade outcome.

Could this be more about positioning ourselves to retain much of our future stars beyond next season, who will all be looking for substantial pay increases. What if his current contract is backloaded and years 2 and 3 could be become a millstone. What if bringing 3 kids in this year on minimum wages buys us some time to build a war chest for beyond this season. The way this has played out, it feels a little about setting standards and a lot about salary cap positioning.

This reeks of him wanting the bumbers only, and is manipulating the trade situation to them being the only suitor - making it harder for the Bulldongs to negotiate from a position of strength (and likely forcing them to take Dodo's weaker offer)!

What the Bulldogs experienced and the Tigers will experience is the significantly more difficult draw that is given to the top 4 teams, but in particular the premiers. They also go from slipping under the radar of other teams, to being the "hunted". Their game style will be analysed to death over the summer (more-so than other teams), with at least one club working them out. Pressure of expectations also comes into play. Lastly when all these things are taking an affect; comes the flow-on effect with an increase in injuries or fatigue (drop in form). So I expect the pattern to continue, ninth seems about right! Conversely teams like GWS, Sydney and Adelaide who all performed strongly with tough draws can be expected to continue to be there. Watch for Hawthorn who in theory should have a lot better draw, while possessing a coach who can beat the "premiership trend" rather than follow it.

That won't happen. Red and Blue through and through. Though I know many who are taking out GWS membership, as it pretty much guarantees a Grand Final ticket should GWS make it - as when ballots are held for the two grand final team members, they have about a 99 in 100 chance of getting selected!

My boy was involved in the GWS academy this year and consequently I have had a lot more exposure to them. I'll be cheering loudly for them now, for they have done more for the Canberra and Southern NSW region in the last couple of years than the AFL and all other fly by clubs (North, Sydney, Dee's) put together. If this then equates to more AFL players in the region, meaning more teams, stronger competitions and then greater opportunity for our kids (hopefully my youngest would benefit from all this) to develop, then that's an even better reason. Being involved in coaching and I can categorically state it is so much more difficult for talented players in the Canberra/NSW Region (excluding Murray) to make it - for you don't develop the necessary AFL skills my beating up on consistently weaker opponents. As to the money, well the AFL will only find another way to spend it. Probably by help building a summer training centre for the Magpies; or maybe taking over the Netball competition; or maybe giving it to the clubs who will promptly spend it all on one elite player, another dozen coaches and (for some) a suspect medical program harvesting cows!!!! Besides seeing the tigers get there with there easy draw, or having any team coached by a Scott being involved; is more gut churdling than Coke mixed with 10 day old milk that has been left in the Queensland sun on a fly infested pig farm.

Actually Jack Watts would probably suit Adelaide expansive, hard running open forward line! If I was them getting Watts, Gibbs and a draft pick into the team for the expense of lever (plus change) may be quite appealing. Especially if they have a young KPB developing (as rumoured) or a tall forward who could go back. If I was them I would be sounding out Port's Trengove or Carlton's Jones as cheap insurance. They could actually could do very well out of this trade period. and the Lever article is just PR spin to position themselves (Adelaide) into a strong starting negotiating position - Unlike Gibbs last year, Lever is uncontracted and can force (well at least bend) the Crows hand.

Ffs the sense of entitlement on here is sickening; expecting apologies, ruthleness, compensation because as a supporter things didnt go your way. Note nor did it for over half the comps teams. Be dissapointed, be sad, but be realistic; injuries, a bad umpiring decision, an inexperienced decision, an unlucky bounce, fixturing inexuities, flu, any little innocuous moment was the one little thing that contributed to the very minor petcentage difference and consquent happiness of finals. If just one of theses things went a little more in our favour then all this teeth gnashing and wrist slashing wouldn't exist (well at least not for this week, some people would still go down this path even if it was after a gallant but failed effort in the last week of September.

Yep I think she has just about nailed it, though 3 talls in the forward line does not reflect modern trend (particularly pressure), so Daniher should be shifted to the bench, where someone like Fantasia would probably find a spot in the pocket at the expense of Sloane! Though for me I would go with Dangerfield or Martin in the pocket (they would be very quickly rotated into the midfield as needed) and start with Kennedy or Sloane in the middle. Daniher from the bench also provides ruck relief. The one potential weakness in both lineups would be an injury to a tall back, so in reflection I would drop Kennedy, shift Daniher to Full Forward and bring in someone like McGovern. Noting Ryder can also play forward.

For those looking for more positives, it's still a strong Adelaide side who are also a high scoring team, and with a possible low intensity contest likely, then this could equate to a high scoring game meaning the Eagles need to win by more

Geez talk about mfcss, Adelaide do not want to go into a final series with two losses in row (particularly to fellow final contenders); and will play accordingly, with winning their primary focus. Come finals confidence is a huge advantage. Though of course if there are a couple of players that have niggling injuries or in need freshening up for the finals campaign well yes they will do it. We likely did it with Viney, and in an ironic twist Watts (giving him a run to blow out the cobwebs) and no-one here was screaming conspiracy theories. Even to the point of running some depth players through the team in a leadup to the final series to allow them to slot in when the inevitable injuries occur (again think what we have done with Stretch, Maynard, Wagner, etc) but to put it bluntly, if you want to persist with this frame of thought (managing a result specifically to exclude the Dee's from the finals), then meeting a Melbourne team (that struggled to beat the wooden spooners, and in reality was never in the contest against the Pies) would probably be your preferred finals opponent. Unfortunately the way we are playing at the moment means we are not even on the radar of other teams. Again we may be at the mercy of Adelaide loosing to the Eagles (who will probably play with the most venom they have all year), but it is not because they want to loose. Actually a few fringe players in the crows side may help us, as they will be desperate to win a finals spot, while the regulars are more likely to go through the motions (lacking intensity) which would be far more damaging to their chances of winning. For the record we blew our finals chance when we allowed Brisbane to come back from 5+ goals, and of course not beating Collingwood just confirmed we don't deserve it (though ironically nor do the eagles, saints, or dogs) If you want to persist with conspiracy theories, then here's one: The crows will do what they can to manufacture a loss, not because the fear meeting the Dee's in the finals, but because they don't want to see a bottom 8 side gaining a huge confidence boost (and easy path) beating up on an insipid 8th place Demons. Reality is we lost; and now will likely suffer the consequences because, we lost Go the Crows, or even more satisfying Go the Dockers!!!!

Depending on distance but in general Jordan Lewis Salem is a good option. Note "on the run" is not an option, as its after the siren!!!

1 game in 3 weeks for your best players leading into a prelim courtesy of throwing a game (and introducing bad habits to do so) just to manoeuvre a perceived weaker team into the 8, who in all likelihood, won't last long enough to meet them. Not going to happen. In fact it would be in their interests to have a combative Melbourne in the bottom half of the 8 so that the Crows other potential rivals will have to survive a real contested final game(s) (and with associated injuries, soreness, etc, likely to come with it) and not have an easy path through the finals. For similar reasons Sydney finishing 5-8 also suits the top teams (noting that they will be in the 8).

Very, Very unlikely to happen since the bye afterwards and then a win, would equate to these players only playing 1 game in 3 weeks leading up to a Prelim final!!!! No coach would be happy with that

Its not the ins, but the outs

Note I'm not potting Watt's, just commenting on what I observed and I agree that when he's in the contest he doesn't shirk it (though he could improve his tackling technique to stick them better). And yes he does a lot of running and often it is at pace, but on the weekend it was mostly done at three quarter pace. It may be a team role to run to space all the time, but note while he is doing this then the opposition will normally have an extra number at the contest (which they use to win the ball and then run away / break the lines with). Also running to space is even more effective when done from a contest and not existing space (not the spread from congestion, but the long 70-100 metre runs to get on the end of a chain of possessions) as it first maintains the advantage of numbers at the contest, burns unfit opponents who get caught out wasting a lot of energy fruitlessly chasing, and disrupts opponents own set plays and defensive structures as they need to be reactive to this free-wheeling running ...... But ...... it is no good running to the wrong space (requiring a difficult pass, often high risk, under pressure, through congestion; or to non dangerous areas where the defence can bottle up the next kick - in this circumstance they will let you run all day with a token effort of making you accountable) and most importantly when not used SPRINTING to and into the actual contest (running with intent is figurative). Also if a player is to smart for his teammates and is passing (kicking/handballing) the ball where he believes they are supposed to be but are not; then this in reality is "not smart"! This can be extrapolated to giving it off to players who are in a supposed better position for opening up the game, but in reality actually covered by the opposition - which a lot of our players are guilty off. As for teammates not being where they are supposed to be, well this can and often will be an effect of the opposition play; a simple bump, shepherd, extra player blocking space, etc (unfortunately they do have an effect on the game, otherwise it's called training). Great players consistently find the best option of the available options; not what is supposed to be the best option when all the stars align. Lastly running to where you want the ball to be, not to where it will be .... is lazy. I'm not saying Watt's is guilty of all this (I'm not into criticising players) just responding to a couple of points. Watts does play many good games, but this was not one of them; and my original observation is in my opinion part of what contributed to this; as to was the gale force conditions and a game style that did not suit the conditions (and his role).

I havn't read all this thread but watching the game live, I did make an effort to watch Watts as noting the way the game was going, I expected he may be an outlet of criticism for some fans. From what I could see he was guilty of what I tell my older kids as "running everywhere but being nowhere" which is essentially a lot of three quarter pace running in open space (often running from space to space), and yes it does require a lot of effort and gut running; unfortunately it rarely impacts the contest. What I try to teach older kids is "running with intent" which requires a lot of sprinting to get to the actual contest and importantly involved in the contest (at pace) or failing this sprinting to where the next actual contest is going to be - not space where anticipating an easy kick (from teammate or opposition). This running with intent also then flows through to spread. On Saturday I did not notice Watts run with intent!!!!! Note this is not to say he doesn't in other games, or perhaps he is even instructed to play this way; it's just what I observed.

Posted 42 minutes ago From the Jack Watts thread and a pretty good summary. We either had dumb players or dumb coaches, but essentially we played dumb football. Another aspect of GWS's play was that they went long, very long with the wind (even mongrel kicks) and then applied maniac pressure when the ball inevietably hit the ground; resulting in a rushed kick into the wind. Now this is not rocket science; as the following morning I had my U10's playing in similar gale force conditions and instructed them to kick the ball long with the wind, informing them that marking a ball in those conditions was not likely, and therefore we had to follow the long kick up with numbers at the contest. If the opposition got it, we then had to force them to rush a kick into the wind, with our defenders playing in front (our last line being 5 metres in front). When we were going into the wind we kicked to the dead side of the ground, and pushed numbers to the contest daring them to switch into the open side were a fumble (likely in the conditions) could be exploited by our pace. The kids implemented this easily and we went on to comfortably beat a top 2 side doing this. After the Hobart experience, how cold the Dee's not have learnt and adapted just 7 days later.

From watching the game in tbe freezing cold: Omac Gawn Jetta Lewis ANB Tmac

Goodwin just confirmed he will be playing this weekend through the midfield (on Fox)

Stevie J is no longer the "skilled forward" to be feared and is often a liability for GWS (no pressure, selfish, slow, and can be fumbly), Lewis would do well on him, Hunt/Hibberd would get leather poisoning. Lewis can also easily cope with De Boer / Perryman.

Kingston is the best option to stay, with a couple of pubs, many restaurants/cafes and a short walk to the oval or Manuka (more dining/drinking venues - perhaps a little more upmarket) and the oval. Accommodation here though is predominately apartments and my travel agency is now finding it harder to meet demand for Saturday night. The other option nearby (walking distance) is Barton where there are some quality hotels with very good onsite restaurants. This is probably a 20-30 min walk to Kingston/Manuka (note the oval is on the way). Barton though is quiet, with little night life.

Hi all, I own a travel agency here in Canberra and am happy to arrange "cost price" accommodation and transport for any Dee supporters making the trip. Be good to have a Demon presence here. Just PM me. Note: it will be cold!!!!

Pretty much nailed it. Our obvious first target is the tall defender, for should injury or even drop in form happens to Omac or Frost - the flow-on effects becomes quite disastrous (no capable direct replacement, or rejigging the team to allow Tmac to move back equating to a gap in the forward/ruck role; okay maybe Pederson could help out here. Now think what would happen if there was an injury and drop in form to these 2 players. Also a tall back would effectively be taking an unlucky Garland spot in the squad (is he out of contract). Failing a tall back a medium who plays tall would be useful. Need to look at where the decline is likely to start occur and it's impact on the teame; with the obvious candidates being (Lewis, Vince, Jones, Pederson and possibly Watts). The impact here is two fold 1) leadership 2) kicking. Leadership seems to be well covered by the next generation. Another excellent to elite kick would be very useful (think of the improvement to the side Hibberd has made). I like the idea of Lever, and drafting for speed. I also wonder if there it is worth trialling Frost on the wing, where he could use his speed to get over the back or his height to create a mismatch in a marking contest. It would also allow Gawn to sneak back and forward sometimes knowing there is a rucking option that can take the contest. Would love Z Jones as well, Vince and Lewis also brings some mongrel to the teams which all tops sides (Dynasty's) need.