Little Goffy

Or, we can just stop trying to tinker with the game and creating contrived results in order to please TV ratings and join in the 'everyone gets a gold star' mood. If you're season sucked and you've got 'nothing' to play for in the last five rounds, get yourself some dignity and play on. As for 17-5, well, obviously every club plays every other club at least once a year. The remainder can be rolled around however you like it. Some clubs really ought to play eachother twice a year, state derbies and the like. Other clubs it may be a good idea based on recent rivalry and interest levels. The rest can just be a general mish-mash of whatever suits, as negotiated each year in the great AFL-bunfight* session. (*official title of a venerable tradition, though unlike trade week and draft, the dates and venues aren't officially announced) Which is what happens now, with the only real problem being the disproportionate influence of some clubs and commercial interests.

Enough to at least be basically respectful, but low enough that the perpetually offended men's privilege club can't get an effective sook going. It'll do for now.

So you charge your customers less if they are poor? Very commendable of you. AND you don't pay employees working on new projects and expansion plans until after the expansion plan has succeeded? "Hi yeah, we're making a bid for a major contract, I need you to work overtime for the next couple of weeks. Also, you will only get paid for that time if we are the successful bidder." Business analogies. They pretty much apply to... nothing.

Part 1 - Fair Cut Let's argue that the women players should get about the same share of total league revenue as the male players for the men's game, adjusted for their relative impact on that revenue. So about 1/3rd ($180m salary cap, of $500m game revenue) of the value of the extra sponsorship, merchandising, advertising, TV rights, ticketing, memberships and so on that is generated by the women's league, should go to women players salaries. Total number of women player's = about 250, if I recall correctly. So, for every $1m the women's game is worth to revenue, there should be an average $1,250 pay per player. That's nice and simple. As mentioned, the AFL is operating on a $500m/year revenue stream, so each 1% contribution of the women's game = $6,250 pay per player. That's after discounting costs like insurance, physio, rehab, boots and all that jazz which women currently must cover from their own pocket. Part 2 - Revenue real impact Well, this part is hard to measure. We have the example of the women's exhibition matches, including one of the most watched and most talked about free-to-air games of the 2016 season. The trouble being, it did have a very clear broadcast run on an otherwise football-free weekend. I'm not sure that can really tell us much. So, let's just set some benchmarks and see what people's gut tells them. A 1% increase in memberships is approximately 8,000 total, or slightly under 450 per club. (minus however many direct women's league memberships) A 1% increase in attendances is approximately 68,000 for the year, or slightly under 350 per game. (again, minus women's league attendances) A 1% increase in match viewership (combining free-to-air and Foxtel) is approximately 1 million total over the season. (ditto, " ", see above) (note: this is less than the viewer total for the pre-finals bye exhibition match) To determine the women's league impact, obviously you'd have to combine the direct memberships/attendance/viewership for the women's league, and also estimate the flow-on effects of greater engagement and participation in the AFL overall, from people turning up to games right through to participation in Auskick. Interestingly, the biggest impact could be up in Queensland and NSW, where Rugby League's noxious status for women could make the AFL's more welcoming culture and marquee women's league quite important for opening doors (and markets). The final problem of course is that this is all at the point of 'start-up' and the investment could take some time to mature. Maybe the first-season women's league players should have a kind of 'stock option' as part of their pay. If their good work now sees the game climb, then they'll be able to cash in their 'share' three years from now when it is worth several times what it is now. Or, more simply, just paid a bit ahead of the curve for now. That's a 'game investment' policy debate, though. Anyway, I've tried not to reach a conclusion in this post. Just tried to sort through what would be an absolutely ruthless commercial assessment, without considering any 'moral missions' that so upset the permanently offended types.

Stretch - I'm not expecting a star but I think he is steadily improving and becoming more well-rounded. I just have a feeling like he could have an exceptionally long career.Salem - The only real doubt I get is because of his injury pattern. Bugg - Handy to have, may or may not be best 22. Could be one of those unfortunate players who clock 100+ games without even being sure of their spot.Kennedy - Uncannily similar situation to BuggHarmes - Uncannily similar situation to Bugg and KennedyAVB - Uncannily... ok, you get the idea.I feel like he has the most potential upside out of this group. Kind of reminds me of Aaron Hamill.ANB - As I understanding it, he's got particular deficiencies that keep him out of AFL, and if they are corrected he's right in.Trengrove - fingers crossed that the legs uncross.JKH - I was excited by his early career form but have been gradually losing confidence that it'll come together.Wagner - Honestly, I don't know enough to comment. Which I believe the pundits replace with 'He's a wait-and-see type player at the moment'.

Poor man's Garland. Pass.

Just a quick trip down the Yarra to raze a rival castle. And I do mean raze. Win the game, then burn the place to the ground.

Yeah, fair call, 'reliably' was probably the wrong word for including Garlett.

Just on Hibberd. I've had the 'pleasure' of seeing a lot of Essendon games with Essendon supporters over the last 5 years and the main thing we need to know about him can be conveyed in the following, almost ritualised sequence of exclamations; "Aaargh, someone kick the bloody thing. Nnnaaargh, stop just handballing in circles until you get caught! Somebody take responsibility, someone, please, kick the bloody thing!" "Ah, Hibberd, finally, thank you!" After the wunderkind Heppell, Hibberd was probably their most effective player for getting them out of those awful 'ever-decreasing-spiral' plays on half-back. And you can never have too much of that.

Who knows, maybe SOS will get more out of them the second time around. Kristian Jaksch, Mark Wiley, Jed Lamb, Lachie Plowman, Liam Sumner, Andrew Phillips, Jarod Pickett, Caleb Marchbank, Rhys Palmer. I'm gonna suggest that SOS may be chasing his losses a bit, still trying to prove he got it right the first time.

I think it is fair to say that St Kilda did a good job meeting needs and trying to cover their depth problems. But in terms of what we've given up compared to what we've gained, what a huge win we've had. Meanwhile.. I do believe we can now officially make the call on the actual, unmistakable, definite, indisputable WORST DRAFT HAUL EVER. Pick 4 - Jarod Pickett. pick 6 - Caleb Marchbank. Pick 7 - Paul Ahern. Pick 23 - Patrick McKenna. Pick 24 - Jack Steele. Pick 85 - Jeremey Finlayson. A total of 24 games played for the club that drafted them, and now only on of them still on their list (Finlayson, yet to play). And the trade return has been what? A second round pick and a bag of late draft lollies?

So, our full list of players 26 or older is - Lewis, Vince, Lumumba, Pederson, N. Jones, Garland, Garlett, Jetta, Spencer. Just 9 players. 5 of them reliably in our best 22, a couple of fringe/mature depth, and an crisis-only ruckman. Of the entire rest of the list, every player is either able to contribute at AFL level, or a kid worth monitoring their progress. Oh, plus Trengove on a one-year contract to see how he comes back from injury after finally doing a pre-season. How did this happen, we have become a club with basically close to no dead wood, no list clogging waste of salary cap players. Some clubs have almost nothing but dead wood!

The baton has passed. Clayton Oliver, with 7 wins from 13 games, replaces Dunn (8 wins from 11 games, 2006) as the only player on our list to have completed a season for Melbourne having played in more wins than losses. There's an optimistic yet sickening symmetry there.

Well, clearly the Magpies have banked absolutely everything on making the finals in 2017. I genuinely, really hope Dunny gets to play in a couple of finals and win one. Even if it's with the Magpies. As long as it isn't against us, of course. As for Collingwod, remember, if they do well next season they'll extend Buckley's contract and then have to sack him at great expense when all their 'new' players retire in a couple of years and they have been completely absent from a couple of drafts in a row. So, all good.

Growing possibility of the most complex single trade day in the history of the game tomorrow. Deledio, O'Meara, Lyons, Gibbs, Tuohy. Suns have plenty to of draft picks to offer to get Lyons, and of course would prefer to use picks given their surplus. Hawthorn may want to turn that into a 3-party deal where Adelaide get stuff from Hawthorn AND Gold Coast so that Hawthorn can facilitate 'a player' (Lyons) as part of getting O'Meara from Gold Coast. But of course, what Adelaide really want is Gibbs, so Carlton needs to be brought in as part of the deal. They have a taste for 'adequate' young players, and this might also make the proposed Hawthorn trade-bait players more willing to move if they get to stay in Melbourne. Deledio to GWS is just... whaaaaat? But Carlton want GWS players so maybe GWS can acquire a reasonable pick deal from them in order to acquire Deledio without giving up the very top picks they want to hold on to. Possibly one that Carlton get for Gibbs. Herp a derp.

Ha ha. I'm glad someone brought this up. I thought I was going crazy thinking that Lewis' head was not connected to his body in some way. Glued on, South Park quality stuff.

Smacks of Brisbane's attempt at a last surge of glory before their older champions retired. I don't hate Geelong enough to wish that future on them, though.

Dunn is the current player who has had the longest career without playing any finals. Best of luck to him whether he is with us or, even, if he is with 'them'.

We just got Jordan Lewis for an 8 place draft downgrade in the fourth and fifth rounds, anything is possible!

AHHHH HA HA HA HA HA HA HAAAAAAA Oh gee. I think I'm going to have to visit the bigfooty Hawthorn board to see how the smug army are taking it.

It's fun picking a side with Lewis, Hibberd and Melksham included, because it means our entire forward line, midfield and flanks will all be unequivocally at or above 'good AFL' standard, and it is just a matter of who gets in on form and development. Bugg, Kennedy, Stretch, Salem, Harmes, Wagner, Vandenberg, Trengove, Weideman and Melksham will all have to show improved form (or fitness/injury relief) to be included. So, there it is, on paper the only part of the list we might not be confident about going into 2017 is tall defenders. And obviously ruck depth, but that isn't a best 22 debate. I've got no emotional problems at all with having to find spots for Hibberd and Lewis!

Oooh, I'll get into the speculation. Hartlett out. Rockliff in, Tippett in. Ryder and Monfries available again. Would explain also explain why they think (hope) their 2017 pick will be poor value!

As a side note... Lewis gets more hitouts than Vickery. Come to think of it, he also kicked 27 goals one season, which is only just shy of Vickery's best (36, back in 2011). So maybe Lewis is the forward-ruck we've been missing?

Interesting seeing people making these pretty passionate arguments for closing down the Melbourne Football Club.

Ayce Cordy. Will be rookie-listed by Melbourne as a back-up forward/ruck.