Adam The God

That's about pressure at the ball carrier though. Get that right and teams start kicking it back to our interceptors. including potentially Max.

This is about the best post on this thread. Max behind the ball frees up May, Lever and Petty significantly and brings their intercept into the game, as teams will need to avoid Max at all costs. It could also mean we could afford to shift Petty forward and play Turner in his place. If Grundy is fit, it could be a master stroke.

FWIW, I wouldn't have re-contracted Melksham either, but I guess let's wait and see the rest of the list changes and whether he plays again much next year. I agree, unless he reinvents himself, if he's playing next year, we're in a bit of trouble IMO.

I disagree the game plan is outdated. It's just whether you have a) the talent to carry it out (ie win CP - they do) and b) the fitness to implement it for 24-25 weeks. Freo's forward problems are just about as dire as ours. Jackson will help them around stoppages and up forward. They need to target some good forwards though and hope Amis comes on.

I agree with the sentiment, but surely Melksham is merely insurance next year.

So Jackson, the ruckman in all those situations had no part in them? FMD. It's nuffy season.

The idea that Perth is a fishbowl and Melbourne isn't shows a complete detachment from reality. Depends who they'd be willing to give up. If we could get a mid first rounder off them and our medical staff believe Oscar Allen is all good to go, and the West Aussie is willing to come over to us, that'd be a very different discussion.

I don't know enough about Cadman unfortunately mate.

Yeah, probably. It'd be nice to have both and another Brown.

It seems likely Cadman will be an answer to the TMac type forward that gets up the ground and allows a Brown-type to play deep.

GWS will.

Some will think this is a strange thing to say, but I wouldn't be surprised if our FD are fine with almost pushing out LJ, providing we can plug multiple deficiencies on our list with the capital his trade will hopefully provide.

He's a turnover merchant. Harmes is better.

Jeepers. You can do this? Wowee. Interesting, but dangerous.

Yes, but you have to acknowledge that this is a delicate balancing act. Bring more dare and you may no longer have a defensive half considered the best in the business, but rather one that leaks too many soft goals on slingshot or turnover.

I guess it doesn't necessarily mean Freo couldn't push him out the door, it does give them the whip hand with Sturt and I wouldn't put it past that nuffy Bell to think in these terms.

I reckon it's either Salem, Bowey or Laurie, or all of them. More speed off half back wouldn't hurt us either, so maybe Bowey needs to stay behind the ball.

I just hope we don't go for Williams, because he is the sort of player off half back (on a smaller contract, with more consistency and younger) that would make us better.

Nonsense. Have you been paying attention? We're about to do this with a player called Luke Jackson.

Salem to the wing in my book too. We had Charlie and Harmes running through there this year. We can exploit Salem's kicking up the ground, freeing up Langdon on the opposite wing.

I think it also depends what other trades and recruiting we want to do as well. If doing a deal quickly for Grundy enables us to move quickly for someone else that is going to be best 22, then maybe we need to look at the whole picture post trade week. I'd prefer we didn't go Grundy at all, but I can see if we compliment him with other best 22 walk ups (I have no idea if we will - just spitballing here), we get deals done quickly and don't risk holding up trade week and not optimising our list as best we can during an important time in our window.

See my post above. No goal posts changed. Only those inside the club know how much of an impact the loading had on those games. The claim from TU seems to be that since we didn't see an uptick in performance (like last year - although R23 was pretty good evidence of it) and our coaches haven't come out and said we were loading, it didn't happen. This is a ridiculous position IMV.

TU said "there is no evidence to support the argument that we lost those mid-season games because we were loading." I disagree with this. They're not mutually exclusive positions. We were loading during those games *and* the loading didn't pay off... I'm not saying they were the only reasons for the losses. Losing personnel in key moments IMV had huge impacts in the losses to Freo, Sydney and Collingwood. But loading was a key factor too. It's not a myth. It doesn't need the club to come out and admit it. Loading is a well known industry practice.

The marketing department was constantly telling Melbourne fans they weren't loud enough...

You really don't understand what loading is though do you? Just because we didn't see an uptick in performance doesn't mean we didn't load... You're one of the best posters on here, TU, but this is a strange position to take. Loading didn't happen because we were banged up. What?