Little Goffy

Alex Rance-194cm, 87kg-Swan Districts. ( CHB/FB). Top 15 pick. Ben McEvoy-199cm, 90kg-Murray Bushrangers. (Ruck, fwd) Pick 10 to 30 Addam Maric-179cm, 80kg-Calder Cannons. Pick 20 to 60 Jay Bowden-184cm, 74kg-Glenorchy TAS Pick 30 to 60 Rory Sloane-180cm, 75kg-Eastern Rangers. Pick 50 plus Based only on what has been said about them in the blurbs here, and where they are predicted to go, this is a vague picture of what I'd want to see. Switch Ebert for Rance if you like, though something just sat right with me about Rance's write-up. My top priority is to minimise turnovers from poor skills, and to get us some extra pace. I think it's a disaster for team morale and confidence to have so many turnovers, and with the number of young players we'll be playing next year and 09, confidence will be particularly important. Meanwhile, the quest for a star Key Defender is eternal. Every one of these selection had comments about 'good kicking skills', 'good decisions', 'hits targets by foot'. Most have 'good pace'. Assuming five picks (plus Bode elevation) I'd by very happy with this collection. Meanwhile- Dave Gourdis-193cm, 88kg-Subiaco. (CHF) Impressed for WA at CHF during the champs. Good sized kid who was very mobile and a good shot at gaol. If he's headed for gaol, I'd assume Collingwood or a WA club will pick him up...

Jones McDonald Green Bell White ...and after that it gets very hard. That's pretty much all of our list that has played more than 18 games this year. 'Shame on you' to everyone who excluded Bell.

I thought the Sydney song started something like - "We are all fair-weather fans, losing a game will empty the stands..." and ended with - "switch back to the rugby league the Swannies are history!" But I might be mistaken. Anyway, my tip is that the Collingwood/Sydney game will end up a lot like the Melbourne/Freo final last year. Hate to bring back memories, but at least we'll know that the Pies fans are really suffering, which is a bonus. The best part is, even if Collingwood win this week, even if they win again next week, at some point, inexorably, unstoppably, their unshakable fate is to fall short. Again.

This is fantastic, really good team being put together here. I think it's worth taking a moment to reflect that the reason very few of us were keen on Connolly as coach was more a case of 'it's not a step up from Daniher' than 'he's terrible'. Plenty of respect for Connolly and absolutely stoked to see him back in the red and blue and playing an important part that I believe he is well suited to. And as much as he has been saying clearly that he is not 'a back-up option' or anything like that, I think it would be very useful to have recent top-level coaching experience when you're building a relationship with a new coach. Ahhh... the future is just starting to look a little brighter. I still want Viney for midfield coach...

Yep, it's hard to get AA selection when you've played 17 games or less... and since that covers all but half a dozen of our team, I guess that's the way it goes. With a clean injury run Bell might have been a run at it in the back pocket. Definately one of the better players in the position. Then again, with a clean injury run, I'm sure Rivers would have had CHB sewn up weeks ago

Yep, I'm rapidly warming to him too. I've stopped even thinking about Sheedy (my original preferred coach) and I'm just taking a look at the Melbourne Coach, and I'm liking each thing I see/hear. Particularly enjoyed his comments about 'not putting hurdles in front of young players' and so on. If I had a major gripe about our past coaching, then the apparent attitide that 'a kid can do this, a kid can do that, but a kid can't do the other thing' would be the one. Any time a new guy shows some special promise, enough to get ahead of the conveyor belt, they are touted as next captain, leadership material, superstar today, all the hype. A change in attitude there could be very rewarding, both on results for the kids (less constrained = more initiative) and for the senior players (loss of 'automatic' status relative to kids = greater competitiveness) And the guy looks much better in a Demons guernsey than a Port one, I swear he looks less bald all the time...

Trade Bate? I really hope that was only ever suggested so you could make a (terrible) pun.

I'm starting to get really annoyed with the bru-ha-ha on drugs. Not because I think it's a minor issue, not because I don't think it should be discussed/reported. But because the way it is being dealt with in the public sphere is just hopeless. Channel Seven has proven it really has eradicated 'Journalism' from it's news service - never mind the blatant ethical issues, what a real Journalist would have done with that information (after establishing that it was confidential and should not be made public) is follow up, conduct a serious investigative report and try to actually nut out what was going on. But no, DRUGS and CELEBRITY make great headlines, so why bother developing quality material under it? And that's pretty much how the whole thing has panned out for a couple of years now. There's an awful lot of pontificating, very little credibility and almost no clear facts. So, to get things rolling and simply because I hate the lack of information, here's a useful reality check which I think could do with maximum exposure - Young Victorians and drug and alcohol use, 2002 The Victorian Youth Alcohol and Drug Survey in 2003 reported the following statistics after surveying 3,084 young people aged 16–24. Alcohol 96% of males had tried alcohol at least once and 91% had consumed alcohol in the previous 12 months. 96% of females had ever tried alcohol and 92% had consumed alcohol in the previous 12 months. Of respondents who had drunk alcohol in the previous 12 months, 54% of males and 55% of females perceived themselves to be social drinkers. Illicit Drugs The most commonly reported reason for trying illicit drugs was curiosity (69%), followed by a friend using or offering a drug (38%). Of those respondents who had not tried any illicit drugs, the most commonly reported reason for not trying was worry about health problems (39%), followed by not being interested (37%). Cannabis 57% of males had used cannabis at least once and 37% had used cannabis in the previous 12 months. 49% of females had used cannabis at least once and 27% had used cannabis in the previous 12 months. Amphetamines 17% of males had tried amphetamines at least once and 11% had used them in the previous 12 months. 14% of females had tried amphetamines at least once and 9% had used them in the previous 12 months. Ecstasy 21% of males had tried ecstasy and 15% had used it in the previous 12 months. 18% of females had tried ecstasy and 12% had used it in the previous 12 months. Inhalants 5% of male respondents had tried inhalants. 3% of female respondents had tried inhalants. Socio-economic status The usage patterns of selected drugs were found to be similar across all 4 quartiles of relative socio-economic disadvantage. Source: Premier’s Drug Prevention Council 2003, Victorian Youth Alcohol and Drug Survey, Melbourne, p.3 [viewed 30/11/2006].

I'd just like to say that if I'm ever trapped in a burning building, I'd be happy to know that Doggy Brown is on the way. That man never gives up. Never shuts up either! How quiet will training be without him?

Yep, bugger it. Let's kill 'em. Carlton fans have become addicted to high picks, and addicted to blaming their bad seasons on the loss of picks. Oh oh! they cry, if only we had players like Bartram, Bruce, and Hird... Which brings me to the other half of the point - high draft picks guarantee nothing at the team level. I absolutely cannot stress enough that success is built on culture - on effective training, determination to build fitness, good off-field habits, commitment to the contest and building an understanding between teammates. Maybe I'd be a little more hesitant if it was an extra pick at number one at stake, but for pick 20ish, it's not worth the speculation an innuendo. I'd rather not have yet another negative thing people can say about our club (true or not, if we lose it will be said). With a regular battallion of quality injured players to come back in next year, and almost a whole new coaching department, one moderately good draft pick just isn't going to count for a hill of beans in the grand scheme of things. C'arn the Demons.

Poor old Belly, still rated below Sylvia even though he's provided a consistent strong presence as well as a couple of match-saving performances. I have patience for Sylvia, acknowledging the injury issues, but on that basis shouldn't Bartram be ahead of him? (1 season, 3rd in Rising Star). It'd be interesting to rate them on consistency, actually - might re-shape something like - Jones Bell Bartram Petterd Newton Mclean Bate Dunn Sylvia Frawley Meanwhile, I still think Chris Johnson can come through. Don't know where his pre-season cup form went, but we have to find it because that was a good player. Buckley and Bode are both pretty fast, good acceleration, right? I'd love to see them perform because, as others have commented, we could use some pace in the line-up.

Exactly. Asuming we end up losing, for example, Ward and Brown. Players who would take their position running or sweeping across half-back who are either coming back in to the side, entering their second /third year, or both, are Bartram, Petterd, Whelan, Wheatley, and even Yze. Throw in Frawley, CJ and Buckley just to flesh it out. I do applaud the service these guys have given the club, so it's a little awkward to be also thinking 'they aren't needed'. Surely Ferguson and Neville are gone. Bizzell and Holland fill roles we currently lack depth in, so they might be a little safer. Warnock doesn't seem to have taken the next step. He's been in the system for a long time... I think five retirements/delistings would be enough, likely followed by another five (possibly much more difficult such as White and Neitz) next year. That leaves us with three national draft picks, a preseason draft pick and the elevation of Jace Bode. I like Bode, he looks a little bit like he might be a transformer...

Schwab seems to be getting gradually more involved in the process, particularly since Fagan has stood down. Could we already have a first choice for the new football department manager? I'd be comfortable with Schwab in there as well, a capable football operations person with a range of experience.

That would be a problem with the coaching, too, yes? Ok, I for one don't have confidence in Williams - but that's because I really, really want Viney to come back and take over the midfield. Whatever people's opinions on Williams, can we agree that we'd be happier with Viney?

It's funny, my brother supports Carlton, and it looks like I'll have the chance to make it down to Melbourne for the game... I can see us now, barracking sort of. I wonder if we'll swap scarves? I have plenty of spares (since they give us a new one every year) and I think he has a clean one as well as the one he wears for eating hotdogs (ie, actually going to the football). Given that we're happy to see our team lose whe there's pick 18ish at stake, imagine the poor old Carlton buggers with pick number one in both drafts on the line, when they've had so much losing already - to win now would just kill 'em. Honestly, if we do win I'd want it to be by a LOT. But seriously, how can any team, ANY team, not beat Melbourne at the moment? We've quite literally reach the point where our only selection decisions are POSITON, not IN or OUT. I'd like to make one last comment on the priority picks - the circumstance of this game is insulting to both clubs, and I hold the AFL 'leadership' responsible.

Brock Mclean comes quickly to mind - a specific point of reducing 'load' on his hamstrings. Well, his hamstrings seem to be coping better... We had an entirely redirected pre-season training program compared to the previous year's emphasis on building up body strength - another influence of the (I think we all now say it as an expletive) 'run-and-carry game plan'. Long running and sustained fitness was the goal. I love Cameron Bruce, but I don't think his body type should be the goal of an entire team's preseason!

Nah, I don't think it's necessary to trade Bruce. In fact, to be honest, I think we'll be pretty quiet this trade period - maybe Ferguson for an upgrade from pick higher 30ish to pick lower 30ish. I'd take the year to see if some of the undeniable potential stars can deliver under a new coach. We have a steady stream of 'natural' delistings coming for this year and next, I'd say five a year for two years. Unless a really good opportunity presented, I will always prefer stability so long as people understand their own limitations - if those senior players who drive us mad aren't stepping up again pretty damn soon, they should have a whole lot less payments coming there way... to make room under the cap for Judd (or any similar superstar quality player, Judd is just everyone's favourite speculation).

Maybe White will be a late withdrawal, bring us to the BIG ZERO players to play every game. As a point of reference, Sydney (who are allegedly having a worse than usual year with injuries) have 14. My guess in reality is that Robbo isn't really expected to play. Or Neitz, he's hurt still isn't he? Bleah.

If players are willing to take pay cuts for the sake of the club, more power to them I say. But you're right that it could be manipulated by heavy back-ending or front-ending of contracts to create a 'dip' year. But, how does the club hold on to the players expecting rewards in their next contract, AND keep the bright new champs payed appropriately? The annual salary cap sets a maximum, so if you don't pay out, say, $600,000 that you otherwise would in a given year, then that cap amount is gone, never to be seen again. The playing list as a whole gets paid less. Maybe the second round of the draft could go lowest to highest player payments? Then again, as a special for the Demons, maybe the second round could go in order of DAMNED BLOODY INJURIES. (That was irrelevent, I know, but it felt good.)

I'd laugh for a month if Carlton got penalised for tanking/match fixing and missed out on high draft picks. Cheating to win, cheating to lose - that'd be Carlton culture at it's finest!

Ok, it'd be really helpful if someone did an 'ins and outs' chart for our footy department. At the moment we're missing a Senior Coach and a Football Manager, right? And it seems ever more likely that we'll be selecting a new captain, too. Does anyone thing Williams might be doing a Ratten and moving on at the end of one year, too? Can't say I've been impressed with our midfield 'system' and Sydney-like defensive teamwork :angry: Still, I guess this means that a new coach would have a big opportunity to create his own coaching and leadership team.

While we might be able to knock over Freo at Subi, and Carlton might be able to put a real spanner in the Kangaroos finals postition, chances are we are going to be faced with an awful, awful prospect in round 22. Carlton wins, they lose pick number one. Melbourne wins, they lose pick 18(19?) and their pick 2 becomes pick 3 because Carlton keep the bonus pick at 1. For both teams, we're talking about picks and draft positions that would normally only be achieved by trading a star player. For losing. It's a blazing banner shouting to the world that the priority pick system is screwed up, seriously. There has to be a better way than the simple-minded setting of the bar at four games, which makes it an all or nothing benefit based on one extra win for a season. I like the draft order going from bottom to top, that's a fair enough equaliser in my opinion, and is incremental so wouldn't become such a disincentive to win (or, more fairly to the clubs, a disincentive for supporters to want cheer a win) What changes should be made? Option 1 -scrap it, it's stupid anyway. Option 2 -base it on a 'rolling' period of losses - eg. last 22 games rather than in a given season means that there won't be an 'all or nothing must-lose' situation. Option 3 -allow clubs to underpay the salary cap when performing poorly, and become entitled to additional picks based on how much they have underpaid the cap! (Freaky, completely out of thin air). This would base priority picks on the accepted market 'value' of the existing player group - if you have a weak team then you get early picks, but if you don't pay legitimate champions then they will, obivously, leave. So you can't 'tank' your salary payments. Let's hear better ideas than mine, because when we smack the $%%#$ out of the blues we'll be losing a Jared Rivers level draft pick, and I'm not happy about being punished for winning.

That Nathan Buckley being injured makes a news headline every week doesn't actually mean you've had 22 injuries to star players. And Pendlebury was close to the best player of the 05 draft several times on friday night, for sure, because Nathan Jones was playing. As for experience and playing kids - PLAYER - AGE - GAMES PLAYED PRIOR TO 2007 Bate, 20 years old, 14 games. (and injured) Bell, 22 years, 28 games (injured) Buckley, 20 years, 0 games. Dunn, 20 years, 11 games. Frawley, 19 years, 0 games (injured) (drafted for this season) Garland, 19 years, 0 games (injured) (drafted for this season) C. Johnson, 21 years, 13 games. Jones, 19 years, 8 games. Mclean, 21 years, 29 games. (injured) Newton, 20 years, 0 games. Petterd, 19 years, 0 games. (injured) Sylvia, 22 years, 36 games. (injured) Bode, 19 years, 0 games. And lets not forget Bartram, 19 years, 22 games in just his first season on the list, third in the Rising Star despite playing largely as a tagger, and injured for essentially the duration of this season. I guess what I'm saying is that of the 14 players who are both under 22 and under 50 games at the start of this year, including six debut players, more than half have been injured for multiple rounds. Our team looks older than we'd like it to because we've had no choice but to play veteran 'depth' players such as Ward, Brown, Bizzell and Holland. Meanwhile, you want to make a point of Buckley, Clement and Holland as major injuries? Robertson, Johnstone, Rivers, Yze, Neitz and Bruce have all missed at least 5 games this season, in addition to the above injuries. Davey will pass that line from here, because of the hamstring injury. And as a final cap, only two (thats one plus one if you have trouble with the maths) players have played every game this year for the Demons - White and McDonald. We have been playing the kids, we have had an unbelievably bad run with injuries, including to those kids, and Collingwood do have a soft as bum-fluff draw and are trying very hard to look like they've been hard done by when they've actually had a pretty nice run of, well, everything. For about five years. That's the facts, deal with it.

There seems to be a Melbourne tradition of a long-serving captain followed by a two or three year captain, then back to long-serving captain and so on. That certainly fit with the 'Brock in 09/10' theory that seems pretty popular. But honestly, I'm warming to Green, and I think the club is too. Last year he was right out of form, there's no denying it, but the key thing was he just kept working and working, even playing essentially a tagger role for several games just so he could be sure of making a contribution. This year he's been growing steadily - certainly he's been a consistent presence in the 'not rubbish' list, which has at times been pretty long. Only a handful of really exceptional games, but always contributes. I get the impression his radar is back on (unlike 2006), so he can go forward and kick important goals. He often provides the linking lead through the midfield, and has shown considerable determination when moved closer to the defense. He's definately comfortable with media and fans. A little media training should sort him out to speak for the club - which he's been doing more than Neitz this year, interestingly. I back the judgement a couple of people have made that he has played better when captain and has been very active talking to other players and 'working' the quarter time huddles. I'd speculate that the occassional great game he has at the moment would snowball a bit if he was captain and if those games got more recognition - Green is a player who's confidence would be boosted by captaincy (which doesn't seem to be the case, YET, for Mclean). I also think we do need to appoint a new captain. I honestly think it's starting to play on some player's minds, and we need some certainty that there will, in future, only be a change of captain when a new person is obviously ready, rather than because the incumbent has sacrificed more than their share. Green for Captain in 2008, and I think by the time the season actually starts we'd all be comfortable with him there. It's not like Neitz would disappear, he'd still be there being the inspiration full-forward - giving out that positive strength the same way Richardson can suck it out of the Tigers!

What amazes me is how many of those players who have made the 200 line are recent or current players. Add to that the likely 200-game milestones of Mcdonald, Green, Bruce and Johnstone and you're looking at most of our 200-gamers coming in since 1990. Green in particular could be one of our next big totals - still barely 26, about 160 games to his name, and he does seem to be reasonably durable/lucky on the injury front. And I'm sure he'll want to get in 100 games as captain...