Little Goffy

I see Tyson as being more damaging and attacking, but that might just be because of the hair. Alrighty, so, they both have 17 games, they both have 23.18 disposals a game, they both have 0.65 goals per game. Vince has more kicks and tackles, slightly more rebound 50s. Tyson has more marks, slightly more clearances, and better goal accuracy. Then things get messy - Vince has fewer clangers but Tyson has better overall disposal efficiency. Tyson has more goal assists despite Vince having more inside 50s. It's a shambles. Their stats don't spread in any consistent pattern, many of them are very close even where there is a difference, and some of them seem to contradict eachother. In summary, that stats give us all permission to go with our observations and gut feel, and be happy that both are good players, though they also share the same key weakness of relatively poor disposal efficiency. Tyson's hair does certainly seem to be that of a more dynamic player.

I can't resist it... I can't.... I know it is old, cliched and tired, but I can't resist. The Collingwood players weren't actually 'visiting' as such, they were there for their fifth attempt at Year 8...

Also, it was really nice of those Collingwood guys to praise the Demons in a context where they had absolutely no obligation to. From the sound of it, it was more than just 'it was a tougher game than last year', but a real 'they were better opponents than last year'. A subtle but edifying difference.

Now now, just because he systematically excludes the evidence bases for informed public policy, sees negotiation as an affront to his manhood, engages in gratuitous cruelty just to show who is in charge, and is setting out to cripple the medium-term national finances with a series of short-sighted interventions that rip apart programs which make a substantial net gain for government expenses... Well, ok, I'm for the chimpanzee. At least a chimpanzee understands that smashing a banana against a rock because you are too lazy to peel it is kind of dumb. Oh, hey, that was Picket Fence making those comments protecting Abbott. Lol, maybe he's a climate denier as well as an disposal efficiency denier?

Rampaging speculation - 1. Bomber Thompson didn't want to coach Essendon, he wanted a 'senior assistant' role supporting Hird. He fell into senior coach there because he was the only sane option at an insane time. 2. Roos is committed only to one or two more years as the 90+ hours a week senior coach, but is amenable to a subsequent role. He has also worked as, and enjoyed, being part of a youth-academy focus in the past. 3. Ling, Hayes and various other potential successor coaches seem to all be of the 'young, extremely promising but inexperienced' type. So, what if our coaching panel architecture was going to be built around Thompson as 'director of coaching/coach's coach', Roos as 'youth academy coach', and then the successor coach in the primary role. Freaky. Would take a very confident and ambitious person, with great relationships with both Roos and Thompson, to make it work. But damn that would be a lot of 'talent' on the coaching list.

It's just not practical. If Damian Barrett started apologising each time he was shown up as a clueless self-important git, he wouldn't have any time left to write his steady stream of new, completely off-the-mark, articles. His career would be over! Ahhhhh, yes please.

Overloading the training now so we can taper it off for September. Roos has done it in every full season he has coached...

We put a proper question mark on Port Adelaide by taking them right to the line this weekend, then against Brisbane finally enjoy dishing out a thumping for the first time in a long time. After dispatching GWS we sneak a surprise win over either West Coast (out west) or North to end the season, putting everybody in great mood to end the year and setting us up for a really positive pre-season. Jesse Hogan and Chris Dawes put on a clinic against GWS, giving us all a sweet, sweet taste of the future. Bernie Vince finishes a game, any game, with a disposal efficiency above 65%.

Jones shot first.

Oh, Mr Fence. Picket Picket Picket, what shall we do about Picket? Apparently he simply did not read any of the dozen or so posts from all sorts of people pointing out that on contested possessions, clearances, and tackles, Melbourne were barely shaded by Geelong. Apparently he just didn't have the patience to look at anyone's writing but his own. Left blissfully unaware of the dramatic disposal efficiency differences, the contrast of kicks vs handballs of the two clubs, the vast disparity of the inside-50 count. It doesn't matter what actually happens in reality, in Picket Fence Land the only thing that matters is sustaining as many ways as possible to be bitter about losing Moloney and Magner and missing out on Wines. I think I've just figured out the particular cart that is sitting in front of Picket Fence's dead horse. (Mixed metaphor WIN)

Final counts (Melbourne then Geelong Clearances - 34 to 42 Contested Possessions - 126 to 138 Tackles - 79 to 88 Hmm, they win on each count, but not by large margins. Kicks - 165 to 229 Handballs - 130 to 145 An indication of just how well Geelong used space and controlled the ball around the ground. Clangers - 48 to 36 Compounded by the fact that 3 of our top 6 disposal winners were delivering at 60% or less efficiency. Inside 50s - 30 to 57 Golly gee whiz. At this point I'm going to suggest that Stephen Motlop would be a handy addition to our team, eh. Add it all together with the fact that Melbourne have been routinely destroyed by turnovers from goals throughout the season, and it all points to Melbourne's top list priority being class, poise, decision making and good kicking. We need to get ourselves someone like Heppell or Fyfe a lot more than we need even a similarly rated gun like Rockliff or Hannebury. We'd be unlucky to be forced to use our early second round pick (early 20-something) on Stretch, but by the same token, he is PRECISELY the kind of player we need more of, so deal with it.

I agree with the original post - it is really, really important that our CEO, as head of corporate decision-making, involve himself more in the football-specific decision-making at the club. Because it has worked out so well in the recent past. Sigh.

What really fascinates me about Picket Fence's maniacal obsession with meat-bag midfielders is that if there is one area on the ground that the Demons are most deficient, it's the classy, good decision makers with good kicks who either have the vision to bring us cleanly out of half-back tangles, or the awareness to offer relieving leads and to run for hand-ball-receives. That and he fact that he keeps banging on despite having the evidence placed in front of him earlier, showing that there are five clubs whose top contested ballwinners are what he would call 'skinny, outside types who don't deserve to go before the third round'. Picket Fence's concept of recruiting and team balance might be seen as appropriate for suburban C-grade teams, and certainly it was the strategy used by Terry Wallace at Richmond, but it is a liability in multiple ways when you get to the top level.

My experiences with Geelong supporters haven't seen too much arrogance. But there's always that core of pricks, and they tend to accumulate on facebook sites and on forums. The trouble with arrogance is, it is usually loud. It would be interesting (but too much trouble) to assemble a ladder of 'arrogance v actual achievement' for the various clubs. Geelong would be a contrast with Brisbane, who even last year were still parading around and hanging s51t on Melbourne supporters.

Captain-coach of Casey, maybe? But yeah, nah.

I hope Toumpas and Trengove get along well, because they will be in very similar headspaces with very similar missions from now until the start of next season. Tapering form beforehand, and an injury layoff that ends their chance of putting things back together this season. I'm setting my mind to the idea that, come next season, we will have two fresh, motivated, determined midfielders ready to contribute. Not necessarily stars, but functional parts of the midfield mix that bring us that much closer to fielding a 'complete' team each week. I choose to be optimistic about it all.

Waiting for a GWS player to come out and say 'I won't be renewing my contract and look forward to entering a fair draft and accepting my fate the same as any other new player, just like I should have been able to 2 years ago."

People complaining about Tom McDonald are just lining themselves up for participation in the 2016 'humble pie' thread. Anyway, an overall disposal efficiency of 73% for Tom isn't horrendous, but there is definitely a clanger problem throughout our defence. Mcdonald 2.4 Garland 2.4 Dunn 2.3 On the other hand, for the 1%ers count - McDonald 9.7 Garland 4.9 Dunn 4.6 I think we can persevere with the young fella a bit longer.

Ow, and ow, and OW. Just thinking 'Docker's aren't Essendon, and we are kicking for goal like Essendon'. Strangely, I still don't feel like abandoning hope just yet. Is that the 'new Melbourne' way?

Amazing isn't it... it starts to feel like it is just... slowly... slipping away. We need that 'surge' that we've managed a few time lately, to bring us back into the game before it starts to feel like the game is too drab to be permitted to live.

[all figures are average per game] That Fyfe guy must be an absolute brick, to be leading the contested possessions count over at Freo... Roughnut Shaun Burgoyne must be disappointed in a way, because now he is it Hawthorn he is only second in the contested possession count there. Dyson Heppell, that ol' ball of muscle, must be the gruntiest grunt man from Gruntland to be ahead of the likes of Watson over at the bombers. I haven't heard much about this Gibbs fella that the Blues have just signed for a squilllion dollars, but he must be a proper freight train, to lead their contested possessions. And of course, we all know about Scott 'Brontosaurus' Pendlebury, and how he plays better in wet weather because it helps him float his massive body weight. Because, as anyone with footy knowledge knows...

I'm a mix of country Victoria, Sydney, Canberra and Hanoi! Hmm, Norwegian metal, Josh, do you know DethKlok?

Autocol, I try not to be rude but that comment is borderline Damian Barret quality. Who have been the significant players to move, and where did they go? I've made a little list of the ten most significant free agency moves to date, and to help, I've highlighted all the major players who went to a club that was not ether in the upper echelons of wealth/power. Franklin, to Sydney Mumford, to GWS Betts, to Adelaide Sylvia, to Fremantle Thomas, to Carlton Goddard, to Essendon Young, to Collingwood Rivers, to Geelong Moloney, to Brisbane. Dal Santo to North Melbourne Soooo, Sydney, Essendon, Carlton, Collingwood, Geelong, Fremantle, Adelaide. Only missing West Coast and you'd have the precise list of the top-8 'power and wealth' clubs. But hey, it's early days yet, I'm sure there will not be any cascading effect of gradually entrenched difference over time...

There are a looooot of assumptions being made about who can win what. The defining feature of this season has been variable form. Sydney lost to GWS, Adelaide lost to Melbourne but beat Port. Carlton have fallen just short of some power teams and then lost to Melbourne and other weak teams. North Melbourne is a week by week proposition. On the one hand, can't bank any wins and definitely can't feel secure about avoiding the spoon. On the other hand, we have to keep hunting for the upset wins that bring a cheer to everyone and will get us a game clear of that 'back-end pack'. The difference between pick 3 or 5 doesn't bother me. Traditoinally, the best pick in the draft is number 7 anyway!

To calm your nerves, remember that the new club gains nothing really by doing it. The compensation pick is pulled magically out of the "Andrew Demetriou Memorial Infinite 4rsecrack" at AFL Headquarters. They don't have to give up anything either way. The endless animosity of Melbourne may not count for much, but the other club would also gain a solid reputation among all clubs for total douchebaggery. It would be a collectively declared open season on any 'ploy' aimed at that club. Not also that the ability of clubs to acquire free agents without 'paying' any price in list terms also creates a super-incentive to use free agency to recruit, even if it is more expensive. As I describe it, what recruiter in the game would turn down a deal of "One additional first round draft pick, ready to go, definitely AFL level, but you have to pay an extra $100k on their salary'? How exactly the AFL failed to grasp the implications of that market failure, just boggles my mind.