Adam The God

Guess who owns most of the the Victorian debt? The RBA. It could be written off tomorrow.

If we can manage 3 picks in the top 25, you could in theory land Jagga Smith at 5, Taj Hotton at 14 and Cooper Hynes 20.

Hope so. Jagga Smith and Cooper Hynes with Rivers, Kozzy, McVee and Kolt would transform our midfield.

I'm not suggesting we'd have finance locked in, I'm suggesting we should have a finance plan in place. ie. we think we could get x amount from the AFL, x from MCC, etc etc. And in order to have a good idea of how much, you'd need to have preliminary conversations based on an idea. ie, if we get the go ahead with Caulfield, how much support could we hope to get from you, AFL? etc etc

So who do you think was our preferred target last year?

Two very unlikeable sides, but at least it doesn't involve Geelong or a Victorian side.

Again, surely you'd have a finance plan at this stage.

That's fine. Believe what you want. A poster I trust already confirmed what I've said on the same pages of Demonland a few days ago.

Indeed. It'd be a weak draft if he was anywhere near the best 5 players.

It was both. We didn't want to pay what they were asking, so CSM through us under the bus and used Trac as the excuse.

You don't think the initial feasibility study should have covered financials?

That's true. I meant Spargo more in that he struggles to kick over 30m and chips the ball a lot. I admit Jagga Smith, who I have as my number 1 target, lacks a bit of penetration in his kicking too, but Smith has pace and agility.

Our supposed poor trading is overstated as Demonland opinions tend to swing to the extremes. The clubs that are often compared to Melbourne more favourably like Hawthorn were bottom 4 and have not just won a flag. That fact needs to be acknowledged vis a vis TPP and available draft capital. Hunter was a win in 2023. Billings was a low cost contributor in 2024. McAdam was a fail for 2024, but still has a year and another pre season to turn that around. Schache was cheap cover for Weideman. Not a great trade, but you win some, you lose some, and sometimes you get the strategy wrong. Schache may well have helped Turner develop at VFL by providing additional KPF cover - it's a little hard to measure as we don't know the behind the scenes strategy. While Fullarton was another cheap gamble, but that hasn't paid off. If you look at what we've had to play with, we haven't lost much except for list spots. Would players like Chol and Meek have solved issues and list holes for us? Probably, but TPP comes into it, as does opportunity. Meek would have been coming to play VFL for 22 games this year. There is also the Grundy experience that was worth exploring and was moved on from quickly, but this would make it tougher to attract a Meek. I'd be hoping JT and co would be able to pluck more McVee and Turner's, but their record is still pretty damn good. I hear we're going pretty aggressively for certain players that I think would make us better, but not necessarily cost the world, so we'll just have to see how we go.

I don't see the pace from stoppage that Parish can offer, but we'll see in 5 years who was right. 😉

I see the quick hands. I think his ceiling is Sidebottom and his floor is perhaps Spargo. Sidebottom has been a terrific player, but I'd prefer others and I wouldn't have him in the top 5, and if some talls go early, he may slip outside of the top 10.

You could argue 2023 was the season Scott also needed to have. He failed to make finals having just won a flag. This is the thing, it's incredibly difficult to do what Goody did and back up three years in a row and finish top 4. McRae has just failed to make finals after winning a flag too. Yeah, I think we did lack composure in front of goal in the finals last year, but that's not on Goody. We generated enough opportunities and in the QF, guys like McDonald and Fritta who are usually beautiful kicks, missed sitters they would normally dob, and would certainly dob on dry nights. The Carlton match saw a lack of composure and execution from many of our leaders, including Max and Lever. Again, not on Goody IMV. It just didn't go our way, but Goody has shown he likes continuity, because that is how you form cohesion in elite sport. It took half way through 2022 for Collingwood's new game style to click, before that they were a rabble. Likewise, Carlton in 2023. And there are numerous other examples. I think missing finals after being top 4 three years in a row will drive the playing group and light a fire under them. Healthy stuff. So better pre seasons for all our key players, get some more youthful exuberance and talent in the door, and pair it all with a new look game style that still focuses on contest, but brings something different offensively or defensively (or both), and we're cooking IMO. We'll also have a softer draw.

Reid could be a handy player, but I wouldn't have him anywhere near the top 5. I don't see it, but each to their own.

And had we won the flag last year, 'the trend' might have gone in a different direction, but since it was successful for Collingwood, faster ball movement and transition footy became the 2024 norm. Whoever wins this year will be similarly picked apart and influential heading into 2025. I think the trick from a coaching and strategy stand point is being able to predict the upcoming trend and be ahead of the curve. Goody has been there before. In 2017-2018 (era 1) and again in 2021-2023 (era 2). It almost won us two flags in the latest era. Mitchell has talked a bit about this 'playing a game style that stands up in 5 years time' or whatever since he took over. I'm not that convinced he's as good strategically as others seem to think, but time will tell. As you imply, you can't predict the game in 5 years time and if he has predicted it, he seems to be playing a contemporary style now. I think we need new ideas around Goody though, new strategy, but he's shown that he can constantly reshape the way we play, based around the fundamental pillar of contest. I feel adding 'the defence' to 'contest' happened in era 2. Now that footy is going towards offence and offensive power, Goody era 3 will likely use contest and ideally more attack. 2024 was spent working out exactly who could play the faster transition turnover game from the back half and ironically, it actually seemed to have less emphasis on contest and stoppage, and more on intercept and defence. I'm sure we've learned a lot from 2024 though. If we can add in the ball winning power of a fit Clarry and Trac to 2025, plus some unknown x factor from the draft (I'm hoping we get 3 picks inside 25), we can completely transform our style next year to offence and contest. If we want to. This bit's probably for another thread, but I'd be looking for speed (Jagga Smith and Connor Hynes), power (Sam Lalor and Hynes) and ball use (Smith, Lalor and Langford). These alongside Windsor, Kolt, McVee and even AMW is a different Melbourne with Clarry and Viney extracting with chop outs from Trac and Trac inside 50. And finally, all of this is not to say that Goody shouldn't or won't value defence, but I think blind Freddy can see the scales have tipped in the offensive direction (from midway through 2022 onwards), so if we're going to be a more defensive team, he's going to have to work out what that next trend is in the game and use it to stop the ball movement of the faster transition sides. I actually think a key to this is what we do at stoppages with our numbers. What would our game style look like if we added numbers to the stoppage to outnumber? Doesn't mean we can't use our wingers creatively to sure up defence or provide cover for more advanced half backs. If we can get more chances from dangerous areas than our opponent and convert them, will that be the winning formula? Anyway, in case it wasn't obvious, I back Goody.

You're right, you don't understand where I'm coming from mate. I do not trust Pert or the board. They've given too many reasons not to trust them, which have been provided ad nuseum by myself and others on Demonland. Pert and co have had a major job to do over 5+ years and have managed a 12 month feasibility study that doesn't even apparently include the financials and the business case. It's not good enough. It's not MFCSS to suggest by their own markers, the progress has been treacle slow.

I love how those who have lost trust in the admin are being painted. Oh, you're just suffering from MFCSS if you don't sit around clapping a dressed up update. Pert's been in the job five years and we've managed a 12 month feasibility study. It's not MFCSS, it's MFCFMD.

The holes are that it might not go ahead, and that's already the murmurs. Meanwhile, the feasibility study now gives way to a business case phase, which surely should have been apart of the last 12 months of [censored] around on the feasibility study...

That's the problem though. Pert's given himself another year by releasing a statement that has potentially had holes poked in it within 12 hours.

I like Draper, I just unfairly don't consider him as he's a South Aussie, so let's go for the Victorian kid. That's my thinking anyway.

What can Reid do that Smith can't?

I don't see it, but we all see it differently.