praha

You guys seen this? I know it's only stats but Petracca Petracca Petracca. http://m.afl.com.au/news/2016-09-06/the-stats-files-rating-2016s-rising-star-contenders

I know for a fact that Clark did face mental demons. What I don't like is that I feel he used them to position himself for a better deal. To suggest he needed a "change" because of the demons he faced, only to nominate one of the most scrutinised teams in the land as his preferred destination, goes to show he used his mental health issues as a bargaining chip: it had nothing to do with wanting a change for the sake of his health, and everything to do with being at a winning club. I've had to deal with a colleague doing the same thing in recent months, where they've had to deal with confronting mental issues, only to then use these issues to leverage better business deals. It's sickening. So I sympathize with people who question the legitimacy of his issues. I know he was depressed. But I question the legitimacy of his reasoning for wanting to leave.

Precisely. He may have been able to handle it better -- he basically came in and said the players had shocking standards, which is an attack on the playing group -- but really, the entire environment was toxic. I still get furious thinking of 186. Neeld came in basically right after, and it was very clear that he faced an uphill battle. He had players battling management, and vice versa. Fans were and still have been kept in the dark about that day and ultimately whatever caused that continued throughout Neeld's tenure. Schwab and co. tried to correct it by hiring someone of Neeld's ilk, but it was never the coach or players that were the problem. I seriously think that had we got Roos in 2013 while Schwab was still in charge, Roos may have either been sacked or would have quit halfway through ala Blight at the Saints.

Neeld's time at Melbourne was underrated. He came in when Schwab and Connolly were still running rampant. He wanted to go the hardline and this was at odds with some players and management. He clearly didn't have support. He made tough list decisions and brought in experience, albeit low-tier talent. He landed us Hogan. His approach was no different to Roos': bring in experienced footballers, improve training standards, focus on defense and onfield accountability. He may have been a tough game-day coach but dare I say he set the team and club up for Roos to come in. Not much, but a little. I do think that with today's squad he'd have done a lot better. He had a shocking list and did what he could. Tried a quick turnaround but obviously didn't have the support. He also had the balls to hold guys like Moloney, Sylvia, Davey to their account for their lacking leadership and defensive accountability. People say Bailey was a scapegoat. He got out before it really went to [censored]. Neeld was the ultimate scapegoat for what was at the time a shocking professional environment.

Spencer has been re-signed until 2017 and I suspect that unless we bring in an experienced and proven ruckman of the Mumford ilk, Spencer will continue to sign one-year extensions. He's not going anywhere. It would be suicide to dump ruck stocks when your back-up ruckman on game day is Jack Watts.

This could work with a more experienced side, which I think was why he was so successful at Port. It was a "you're either with me or against me" approach and players had the experience to know that they had to go with the coach. Not as easy with the youngest team in the league. I'd say no, simply because I don't think he's ideal with a young team.

The AFL must be clamouring about trying to manage its PR game ahead of the inevitable bail-out package for Queensland footy. My bets on salary cap concessions, priority picks, and maybe exemption from anti-drug rules.

Hawthorn could have offered him 550k for 7 years and he wouldn't have taken it. Been saying it for ages. Richmond offered him a deal he was never going to turn down. Even if he wanted to stay in Queensland. His injuries and urgency to get home all played a role in accepting what is a very, very lucrative deal. Good luck to him.

Is marijuana classified as an illicit substance? I remember back in 2010 seeing two AFL footballers leave a coffeeshop in Amsterdam (also saw Andrew Bynum from the LA Lakers in the city around the same time, although not leaving a smoke shop).

I should apply for a gig with the Fox Footy team.

Cortana is better value. And she puts out... ...better responses.

Saw him at the Coles Express filling up his Holden Ute. Young footballers on hundreds of thousands a year, and this bogan buys a ute? No.

I agree but I don't see how getting Thompson at all compromises our ability to seek out those sorts of players.

Anyone who thinks we don't need experience and players with exceptional habits have rocks in their heads. Our "leaders" are mostly average players that go through the motions, rack up some B&F votes and are our "only performers" whenever we get smashed. Few players on our list go above and beyond where we need them to go considering their experience and position at the club. Thompson would be a valuable addition. Would you rather keep M. Jones and Terlich, or sign Thompson on a one year deal for the combined worth of both of those contracts? Ideally, if he comes in as a mentor and coaching assistant, even better.

We're undoubtedly the media's favourite team outside the 8. They've been better and more consistent than us in 2016, beaten us twice, yet I've barely heard anything about them "making the finals" or how great their rebuild has been or anything like that. We're definitely the media's love child and have been all year, but when we get smashed everyone goes back into their hole. After almost every win this year, everyone was talking us up (apart from a few wins where it was about the other team 'losing' and not us winning, ie. both Collingwood games). Sure, they're getting some love *this* week, but probably due to their low percentage and how relatively under-the-radar they've been, we've received the grunt of the positivity. When we play bad it's relatively quiet but there's the standard, "How bad were Melbourne, again!" article and coverage. It seems most people in the media want us to do well. Nothing sells better than a fairytale. I'm sure the media would have preferred us in the top 8 instead of North. They are the most uninspiring top 8 team I can remember.

Well you point out that "after all, Essendon played a bottom 5 team", which I interpret as meaning that being critical of Melbourne losing to a top 2 team isn't the same as having an easy final game against a bad team. Except we also lost to Carlton, which imo makes Connolly's critique here all the more relevant.

We lost to Carlton 8 days ago.

Disgusting comments in here. Played 21 games, averaged more marks, kicks, disposals than 2015. Had a bad last month but still averaged 2 goals a game (0.2 less than last year). Some of you need to get a grip.

I've certainly calmed down since yesterday. My pass mark was 10 wins and they reached that. Was the season a "success"? I think a few games, in particularly yesterday, make us less of a "destination" club. We have to work harder to attract free agents than the Richmond or Hawthorn or Collingwood teams of the world. That said, Bulldogs won 7 games in 2014 and played finals in 2015. Port won 5 games in 2012 and played finals in 2013. I think that we still have too large a gap between a young players and experienced leaders. Goodwin still has a lot of work to do in order to balance out this list.

I think today says less about how far we need to come than do our losses to Essendon, Carlton and Saints x2. Win those games and we're in the finals. We were favourites in all 4 of those games. As bad as today was, and as worried I am that next year will be another 2011, the next corner this club needs to turn is winning games it's supposed to, every time. Once we turn that corner we'll be a finals side. Compare that to the start of Roos' tenure, even the start of this year. We hadn't won two in a row, three in a row, couldnt beat top 8 teams, couldnt get close in WA, couldnt win in NT. We've made massive inroads this year. But we did in 2010 as well. 2017 could either be awesome, or a colossal failure. I'm betting on the former.

2016 overall feels way too much like 2010. This is what I'm worried about.

I expected a 50 point loss. I expected Geelong to come out aiming for top spot. I also expected us to send off Roos. You couldn't write a more Melbourne script. Send off the best coach you've had for a decade, with a 100-point loss. It's a total indictement on everything said during the week. From the media, to the players, to Roos himself, who all said the club was in a better position. We are 2 games out of a finals spot, and lose like that. Essendon had zero to play for, with last place stitched up, and they've smashed Carlton today. Fair to say that if we'd played Essendon today, it would have been a 10 goal loss.

Why play Pedo in a game like this when Weeds needs experience against top defenders? Perspective.

Or Prestia.

Hogan is very average.