Adam The God

Lloyd definitely deserves to have his name spelt incorrectly in this thread title. He's irrelevant.

I reckon we'll get there. I'm in fundraising mode myself and it just takes time. It was always going to be a race for the EOFY and we got half of what we wanted by then, which was a great effort by our supporters. Reckon at the very least we'll be $150-100k out.

It's funny. I don't think I'm going to have much anxiety for the rest of this year. We either make the finals or Goodwin's gone. Let's see how we play.

So the reduction in soft cap and any likely pay out could easily be covered with a restructuring of the FD and the number of line coaches...

So there was no need to point it out, I would have thought. Seemed a strange post, but each to their own.

They'd certainly be holding it off until tomorrow afternoon when the sides are named. Don't want to give Adelaide's MC too much a chair ride.

LH's gender has nothing to do with her posting.

I thought it was a deep dive in comparison to what we get from the HUN / Fox Footy.

I like Christian, but he's not tough enough to play midfield IMO. That's why we play him behind the ball and use his kicking.

I presume Mathews is as he was the stoppage coach. Plapp didn't mention the midfield. Given the photos on the Melbourne website correspond with different positions, I can only assume they've had another unofficial reshuffle after the Richmond game.

I love your posting mate, but I feel like a single (potential) injury to Gawn is a cop out for our ordinary showing. Okay, the Port game may not be emblematic of the rest of our season, I certainly hope not, but at the moment, we haven't got the job done this year and it has less to do with fixturing and more to do with coaching and decision making IMO.

Absolutely, good point. Ratings, given the TV deal. We usually deliver absolute tripe in prime time, even in our stronger years.

It's funny how quickly you can look structured when your mids and forwards bring pressure and you can move the ball quickly.

Good post. As a supporter, for what that's worth (very little), I'm prepared to give Goodwin at least the next month. But if within the next month there is another display like the Port game, it will be very hard to give him much longer. Many said last year that by the middle of the 2020 campaign we'd know whether Goodwin had turned the ship. As you point out here, we've had one of the stranger and tougher hands dealt us (draw and circumstances), so maybe a little bit of patience is required, however I don't hold much hope.

I'd bring in Tomlinson to play it with Jackson. Weideman needs to stay forward, so we retain our forward structure IMO.

At the start of Before the Bounce, the new web series on the MFC website, Plapp was interviewed and introduced as the forward coach prior to the Port game. I have a feeling they might have changed things up with coaching personnel since the Richmond loss.

Plapp is the forward coach.

I think the next three games will be telling as a whole. Just coming out and beating a pathetic Adelaide and very ordinary North will not tell us enough. You could actually argue that the next three are a bit classic MFC lose/lose situations given we should win all of them, but Collingwood will at least probably play finals, so are more of a test, even being injury-impacted. Win them all comfortably and then we can reassess IMV.

Disagree about the list comment. It's pretty well known that our list is highly rated amongst AFL circles. I'll back the industry's perception over fans. Agree that it's extremely unlikely he turns it around from here.

IMO, they won't be merging clubs when there's still a TV deal in place. I think they'll put strict conditions on the money, which is usually how money works in most places anyway. I think they'll want a say on future contracts and roles within the club, but if it goes this way, they can't afford not to support the club.

What's done is done. Let's accept we made mistakes and move forward properly. Review the FD now, so that we know how to act come the end of the season. If we end up turning it around, great, if not, we know which triggers need to be pulled.

The game's economics are based on membership and winning, brand value etc. If we finish outside the 8, the board would argue to the AFL that results under Goodwin are untenable and that if change is not made, the economic repercussions are far worse. We're talking about a multi-billion dollar industry that has the security of two big banks that it can leverage loans and funds from. In this situation, the AFL will cough up the cash under certain conditions.

Great post as usual mate. The Hardwick example in particular was the administrative arm taking action and changing things up and four years on they could have 3 flags in the bag. Obviously, the Collingwood review was pushed by the administrative arm too, but hasn't reaped the reward yet / may not. Clearly the club backed Goodwin and Mahoney's internal review last season, and I'd argued have already stuck by the coach when they could have flicked him at the end of last year given the horrendous nature of the season. Instead, it backed him with a new fitness boss and said let's see you give it your best shot. So far, it would be an understatement to say our performance hasn't been up to standard in 2020.

Interesting. Didn't realise he was a former poster or that he was Melbourne. No wonder he was so balanced. I think a bottom 2 finish and another season where we miss finals altogether is untenable, from where we were two years ago. It's completely unacceptable and I think the board would be well within its rights to sack, unless there is a significant turnaround in performance and coaching.

Great post. Our midfield doesn't work as one. They don't block enough for each other. I think this is because they've been trained to be contested, see ball, get ball and the fact that Viney's style is robust and unpredictable. I think some posters are getting me wrong here and the thesis in terms of not rating Viney. I rate Jack, I just think our midfield as a whole would function better without him, and there's a significant body of evidence that supports this theory.