Little Goffy

Survive the next three tough weeks (Freo at Subi, Hawthorn, and Collingwood), hold our nerve and not sack anyone during the bye, get the kids their much needed nap time. Reload and see how we go against the Dogs and Saints after the break, and launch a respectable second half of the season from there, particularly as we get a few core players back from injury. And the missing ingredients are confidence and initiative. And five quality midfielders. Restore the first two, we might have a shot at trading or drafting the five, or discovering we've had them all along.

While it is fun to see Gold Coast currently ahead of Collingwood, and threatening to put Richmond back in 9th (all it would take is for us to give the Tigers a good thrashing on sunday... haaa ha... hrmmm), I was particularly interest to take a closer looks at the Bulldogs' situation. Same wins as us, but against a slightly better overall standard of opponent and for the most part better margins, including a very 'plucky' effort against Geelong. Minson, Cooney, Griffin, Cross, Boyd, Giansiracusa, Murphy, and Goodes all had solid or good games against Gold Coast today. Or, perhaps more accurately, they were all among the Dogs' better players on the day. More experience there than the Demon's whole team on the field, and some genuine quality amongst it. I guess all I'm saying is, given a flat choice I'd rather be a Demon's supporter for the next few years than a Bulldog. One thing you can't say about the Demon's is that they are being held together by their good stock of veterans!

As for the comparison's with Port, our list does actually have a lot to offer. Frawley, Garland, McDonald and Watts could rapidly become a truly premium-quality ground of tall, mobile defenders. But right now they are mostly broken for confidence. Our forwards targets list is hardly shabby, with Clark, Dawes, Howe and Hogan to mix it from. But they are all injured, off-list or trying to assist our midfield. Jamar has been functionally barely adequate but like so many, clearly is shot for confidence and is capable of much better. Gawn is extremely promising, but is in the ruckman equivalent of adolescence still. But it is when you get under 190cm, things get very thin. We'd want 12 good players capable of running all day mixing midfield or agile forward/defender roles. We have... Sylvia, Jones, Grimes and Trengove and Mckenzie are all she wrote for midfielder's with any semblance of AFL experience. And McKenzie is considered by many to be right on the fringe of AFL vs VFL. Then, a bunch of 'maybe' or 'probably not' 20-22 year olds and a few long-term kids, Viney and Toumpas. So there it is - with confidence, our forwards and defenders could very quickly become promising. But, and here is my endless mantra - we need five more consistently AFL standard midfielders. Five. Ouch. No wonder there's so much angst about Toumpas and Viney not tearing the world apart in their first half-dozen games!

If he's so talented, maybe we can trade him in a deal to get, say, Zaharakis? Sylvia and a first round pick might do it. Or maybe someone should just point out to him that that is how far off 'genuine A-grader' he is and it's nobody's responsibility but his own.

All I know is that if Melbourne one day pass up a chance to have a 'Lauren Jackson' type, gifted agility, leadership, training ethic, for no better reason than them having a uterus, it'll make Barry Prendergast look smart. It could take ten or twenty years for women's participation in AFL to develop enough to produce the first AFL-standard player, but it'll be worth it in the permanent payoff after that. In the meantime, we can probably spare as much resources as one VFL team can access, to keep the progress going. Edit: 'We' being the AFL in general. Melbourne can barely develop a polaroid at the moment, never mind half the population's football culture.

As a point of reference, 33k is as high as Carlton's membership numbers got at any time during the 6-year misery period 2001-2006. One thing holds this club together. We are so awesome!

Surely even if we go the mid-season dismissal (I'm not a fan) we will wait until after the horror next 4 games - Richmond, Freo at Subi, Hawthorn and Collingwood. After that the marginally more reachable Bulldogs and Saints would give a new or stand-in coach a chance to look competitive and to refresh morale. I believe I get top points for ruthless thinking, there!

I read it as 'AAMI' being the South Australian football ground. Thought I was going to hear about some unseeemly crowd activity after GWS had their remarkably successful, bright future demonstration over there. But alas, it was merely another Demonland keyboard warrior riot.

I daresay with the AFL's approval, our only chance is to massively invest in bringing in the best available senior and assistant coaches. Fact is, if the next iteration of the rebuild doesn't work, we are a done club.

Um, he is contracted for another year already. Extending it would just be an entirely emotional act with no bearing on the situation except to increase our liability in the event that we do choose to dismiss him.

Don't want to downplay the potency of Geelong, but before anyone get's too scared of them long-term (by which I mean, worried that they will still be top when it should be our turn... haaaa ha ha) I think it is important to note that Of Geelong's ten highest ball-winners, 7 were aged 28 or over. Only Selwood, Motlop and Horlin-Smith were under 28. Five of those; Johnson, Enright, Kelly, Bartel and Mackie, between them have more games experience than the entire list Melbourne puts on the field each week. Geelong are an awesome team right now because they have covered enough of their retirements and current injuries to experienced players. But they are not, by any stretch, a young team. Without the most potent 'old guard' seen in any team for at least a decade, they would probably be middle of the road. That said, right now they are misssing Chapman, Corey, Varcoe, Josh Hunt, and recruits Rivers and McIntosh. All of whom I am sure will be carefully managed through their injuries (where possible) with a view to peaking for finals. Scary. Geelong going four from seven seems like the most likely result of this year. But don't worry, come 2017 (or whenever) we will only have to contend with GWS and Gold Coast.

I actually think Mark Neeld is our most improved since the start of the season. It's been a dramatic month and a half. I think something has changed. I'll not be looking at things 'clean slate', but I will be separating my perception of 'past Neeld' and 'present Neeld.

Oooh, I love a good club-destabilising rumour, especially when it is meta-rumored to come from a source which has been admonishing others for circulating club-destabilising rumours. If the AFL really have been planning to use their temporary leverage through Peter Jackson to seize control of our football department in fundamental ways, it is actually a breach of the fundamental articles of association of the Australian Football League as established between it and the existing clubs. (Not GWS, for example) THAT would be interesting times.

ha! I thought this was going to be about identifying who had said what lies about the Demons lately. "We are furious at the Demons for not informing us about their communications with Stephen Dank" "Liam Jurrah's drinking problem began on a Melbourne Football Club trip to China" "Mark Neeld racially discriminates among the players" Who wants to add some?

With the last five years of front ending and the simple fact that we have roughly TEN fewer established players than most clubs, we have salary cap space that would fit just about anyone, or anythree, really. Knowing that we could make multiple offers and still be able to cover them even if they all agreed at once, we should be putting good offers in front of every conceivably available quality midfielder in the league. Even if we don't manage to collect anyone, the worst that can happen is that we put salary cap pressure on every other team and increase our chances of shaking one loose at the end of 2014, by which time we will have even more salary cap space following more front-ending time. Imagine if in one hit, we acquired Thomas, Zaharakis, and Kennedy (Sydney's). Everything looks very different all of a sudden. That might be dreamonland, but we have to be hunting for all the quality we can get.

He's got a bit of Moloney-itis. Nathan Jones became a first-class player when he first learnt to not just slam into opponents when he had the ball, and then learnt to actively look for teammates in better positions. He tidied his skills a little too, but they aren't superb. He just plays smarter football than he did four years ago.

Those mature rookies and smokies are doing the job they were brought in to do - bring a fierce attitude, never mind whether it works perfectly or not. I do feel like the overall effort and intensity levels are slowly moving up. Fluctuating, but improving. Little worrying that the free agents and trade-ins from AFL level have mostly been pretty inconsistent and uninspiring. Ah well, keep churning through them looking for the extra players, it's all we can do. Also - Dawes, the main target, has obviously not been tested yet. Surely at least 8 delistings or trade-outs at end of year, again, and a few of those will be significant (though not stellar) salary cap chunks. By my count, we need five more 'consistent AFL-level players' to simply bring us to a competitive level, and we basically need them in the midfield first priority. Some will come from development of those already on our list. Maybe another solid performer will come from the late-draft 'attitude' selections that are the current Footy Dept's meat and potatoes. Surely we will get right into trading and free agency again. We might get lucky with a plug-and-play draft selection. Can we make it to five? We must.

Question is, for all that he is moderately tall, would Pederson actually have taken many marks up forward? I would guess that in the absence of basically all our key forward options the only way we could be competitive was to get as much running power out on the field as possible.

I'm really surprised by the Spencer-love on here. He was thoroughly beaten in ruck and around the ground. Did show some good endeavour and also some remarkable bursts of speed, but is not quite AFL yet. However, the view I got of him was enough to move him off the 'turkeys' list. He did alright for a young inexperienced ruckman who really should be fourth choice (Jamar, Clark, Gawn), but clearly not a No.1 ruck yet. Kind of the story of our team at the moment. He may do a bit better against Gold Coast than against Carlton's Warnock/Hampson pair. You'd assume he'd get another game and keep getting them until Jamar is 100% and has torn apart a VFL game. Anyway, Toumpas, Blease and Magner were apparently the standouts for Casey, and all three might have a spot against Gold Coast given how many of our guys struggle to get their hands on the ball. Ultimately the decision must be made on efforts - we will only turn things around when everyone on the field is making a full effort and confident that their teammates are as well. Terlich, for example, fluffed it a few times but damn he is good to see out there.

The stat I like to trot out once in a while - Tom Scully leads the AFL for clangers. And it's not like he gets near it a whole lot.

The contrast I find most telling is the one that illustrates your point, Pates. While our young players who have basically established themselves in the team only total about the same number of games as the other teams, we then have a huge number of games played by kids who, in any of the four mentioned above, would still be hoping for an opportunity to come up. Bringing in the more mature players I think is a sensible move, especially when you consider we actually only broke even on experience differences 2012/2013, but it only works if those players you bring in are going to actually be regular starters. At the moment, Gillies, Pederson and even Rodan look like being 'in and out' all season at most. You'd assume Dawes would be a regular if not for injury. Four years from now, we may well have 15+ experienced, hardened and legitimate best-22 players. But a waiting game that long is plainly not acceptable. I'd consider this year a 'development success' if we can get five more players to lift enough to be consistently AFL standard.

Honestly, David Schwartz's wife would probably be a better coach than him, anyway. What a trooper she must be, hauling him up out of a hole like that.

I'm pretty sure Denis Pagan was about the same at Carlton. Sigh.

I thought it might be interesting to have a quick look at how Melbourne's 'recruiting and development' has gone in the last few years, compared to the very top lclubs. I've made my own call on whether a player is a 'regular player' or not, and terms like that, but mostly I've tried to let the figures do the talking. I've picked out the handful of clubs often noted as being the very best at both recruitment and development as a comparison point. Geelong - Showed a particular pattern of players not getting even a game in their first season. A couple of young Geelong players have also been stalled a great deal by injury, so a bit hard to assess them. Mitch Duncan, Taylor Hunt, Stephen Motlop, Allen Christensen and trade-in Josh Caddy appear regulars in the 22, and have accumulated 199 games (for Geelong) between them. Dan Menzel, Billie Smedts, Cameron Guthrie, Nathan Vardy and now George Horlin-Smith have shown promise but for various reasons are yet to consistently hit AFL level despite all being in the system for a few years now. These young players not yet established in the best 22 have played a total of 119 games. None of Geelong's 2012 draftees have played a game yet, and the 'class of 2011' has played a total of 30 games, including 8 to mature recruit Orren Stephenson. Summary 318 games and five current best 22 players under 24 years old. 30 games played current total from 2011 or 2012 drafts. 16 100-game players, including 5 200-game players. Collingwood Four players, Beams, Reid, Sidebottom and Blair, share 315 games between them. The younger (20yr) Fasolo adds another 40 games and the entire rest of the Magpies under-24s add another 79 games. So in five years of drafts, Collingwood have produced four, maybe five 'best 22' players, with a couple of wait-and-see ruckmen in Grundy and Witts. Fair to say that while Sidebottom delivered right away, Beams, Reid, Blair and Fasolo owe a lot to the 'Pies development programs. But the latter three may also owe a lot to the fact that they could be role-players filling our a star-quality core. Jack Frost with two games joins Sam Dwyer (26yrs) and veteran Ben Hudson as the only players from the 2012 draft to play so far for Collingwood. From 2011, Jackson Paine, Marley Williams and Caoeln Mooney have played 6, 6, and 4 games. Summary - 398 games played and five best 22 players under 24. 25 games total so far from 2012 and 2011 drafts. 17 100-game players, including 4 200-game players. Sydney The extent to which Sydney has progressed recently without any input from recent drafts is significant. Dane Rampe, with 3 games, is the only Sydney 2012 draft selection to make a debut so far. From 2011, Harry Cunningham has played 1 game. Of players under 24 years of age, Lewis Jetta, Daniel Hannebery, Sam Reid, Alex Johnson, and Luke Parker appear to be regular 22 contributors, and have accumulated 275 games between them. Other under 24, including Gary Rohan with 22, have played a total of 52 games. Summary - 327 games played and 5 regular players under 24. 4 games played to date, from 2012 and 2011 drafts. 13 100-game players, including 4 200-game players. Hawthorn Cyril Rioli's instant impact has allowed him to accumulate 111 games to date, leading other young regular players Luke Bruest, Shane Savage, Ryan Shoenmakers, Brendan Whitecross, Liam Shiels and Jack Gunston. These seven players combine for a total of 444 games. Other players under 23, including trade-in Kyle Cheney who has played 14 games for Hawthorn, total 29 games. Summary - 473 games played, including 7 regular players. 13 games from 2011 and 2012 drafts, which does not include Luke Bruest, promoted rookie originally drafted in 2010 14 100-game players, including 4 200-game players. Melbourne So where does that leave Melbourne? Jack Grimes and Jack Trengove lead Melbourne's group of young regular players which includes Jeremy Howe, Tom McDonald, Jordie McKenzie and Jack Watts. Between the 6 of them, they share 305 games at Melbourne. Yes, I know a bunch of you hate x, y and z, but there they are 'regular 22' the same way Joel MacDonald is one of our '100-game plus' players. Muddying the waters is the pattern of injury delays (Strauss, Blease, Gawn, Tapscott) and intermittent presence of players not quite ready or not quite right. As a result, the number of games played by those not yet regular players is 180 games. This total from non-established players is greater than all four teams mentioned above, with Geelong the bulk of that due to their somewhat similar young injury mix. Trading of a high pick to acquire Mitch Clark and the use of a top pick to acquire Jesse Hogan also means that the Demon's use of new young recruits from the 2011-12 drafts is surprisingly light. (Sellar has not been included) Summary - 485 games played, including 6 confirmed regulars. 45 games from 2011 and 2012 drafts. 8 100-game players, including 0 200 game players. Melbourne have an nominal 14 positions to fill from their list of players with less than 100 games, compared to 8, 9, 5 and 6 for the four other teams mentioned. Despite the use of two first round picks to acquire Mitch Clark and then Jesse Hogan, Melbourne have put 50% more games into 2011/12year draftees than even Geelong, who have been forced by injuries to their 20-23 year olds to experiment with the next tier. Melbourne are the only club in this selection which has used 2012 draftees for a combined total of more than 2 games so far in 2013. Melbourne have produced 'regular 22' players at about the same rate as all four of the top clubs mentioned here. Unfortunately, while this leaves the other clubs with between two to four positions to fill with untried kids, Melbourne must still fill 8 or 9 positions in this way. More than a third of the players taking the field. In short, Melbourne need to add at least 5 extra players to the list of authentic 'regular 22' players in order to match the stability and baseline competence of the top 'development' clubs, let alone the overall performance. To grasp how different the experience levels are, and the point at which on-field responsibility comes in, imagine you only had to include just six players from our entire list of under-100 gamers, and that was what decided our quality. What if Geelong's under-100 gamers were Clarke, Howe, Grimes, Trengove, Viney, and Gawn? The rest of the kids would be playing VFL and focused completely on development, instead of having another five out there struggling.

My preferred outs - Pederson, Davey, Rodan Ins - Clark and Viney, if fit and fresh enough. We will also need speed. We can't match them for class but we have to be able to keep up. I'd have Nicholson come in, for example, to put the tightest tag possible on Yarran (stay goalside! Stay goalside dammit!). To achieve that it may even be wise to drop one of the slower talls, or bring in a small runner and let Clark rest another week. Having watched every Carlton game this year due to family/friend connections, I can only hope we can stop it becoming a hammering.