The Chazz

History shows RP, that Carlton are a very proud and successful club, the most successful in the league, and their supporters generally know that while they do have down times, these aren't normally for extended periods, and as such, they have expectations of the Club and its players. You ask any of their supporters, most wouldn't care that they had that bad patch/rebuild in the early to mid '00s, becasue they expect that the culture of the Club that has been around for decades would ensure they would rise up the ladder shortly there after. They went out to get the best in the league, and succeeded, and again, the expectation was for that player to play a major role in re-establishing that culture that, while it had been lacking in the couple of seasons prior, knew that existed within the walls of the Carlton Football Club. Problem for them (which I love!!!), is that Judd is a fantastic onfield leader, but that's where it stops. He forces players to rise in games, and quite simply, if they don't go on the journey with him, they get left behind. But where the galring issue for me is that they know that if they don't rise, that Judd will anyway, and that is often enough to win them games. Geelong and Sydney don't have that, they have a group of players, or senior leaders, that demand that when the chips are down, the expectation is that all players get to a different level. If they do that and still lose, they will be bitterly disappointed, but would know when they walk off that they have nothing left in the tank, and admit defeat. Carlton are a lot like Melbourne, they have one or two players that stand up when it counts. Is that a culture issue? I'm buggered if I know! The Club knows that we need a core group of players that set the standard, but we don't have it yet. We have a group of players that could be it, and are now working on developing them in that role. The best part is that at Carlton, it's not as obvious that they are doing that, especially while Judd is the leader. If I barracked for them (yuck, just tasted sick in my mouth), I'd be wanting Murphy, Gibbs, Walker, Kreuzer and Betts to be stepping up as a group, but from what I hear from other Carlton supporters, it is questionable if they can (all of them that is, Murphy obviously can and does step up).

You mustn't have watched too many Melbourne games this year if you think "Pick your Top 10" games are boring.

I saw "Passion Pit" and "Colin Sylvia" in the title and straight away thought he had been seen at a nightclub on a school night somewhere.

Dr, while I did make mention of one specific topic, of course it isn't the only thing. However, you ask the defenders and the midfield, after they work their arse off to get the ball forward, and our captain takes a mark 30 metres out and doesn't make the distance, ask them what sort of an example that sets. JT isn't in great form, and onfield his confidence looks down, but when you're in that position (captain), you need to pull yourself together pretty bloody quickly. I do like that "supporting teammates" reference you made. It is one that I have been harping on about all year about the lack of enjoyment/celebration/encouragement after we kick a goal. They are little things that needs to start at the top, and doesn't take long to spread through the playing group. If you want examples of it, watch how Richmond react after they kick a goal.

That's exactly right Oucher. Gold Coast have Pick 2 this year, could get Toumpas. Next year, you would expect them to finish at best in the bottom 4, let's just say they finish 15th, they get Pick 3, which they will be able to use to pick up one of the 17 year olds that wasn't picked up in this year's mini-draft (keeping in mind only 2 will get picked up), or better still (for them), the true Number 3 pick! Makes no sense whatsoever for the GC to use Pick 2 on a mini-draft selection.

Are you going to play the game and list your top 10 BH? Or would you prefer to sit in the stands and take pot shots at those playing?

I think you're pretty accurate Jnr, which is why I brought up Carlton. I think they made the mistake that Judd would create this culture for their young guns. As it's one of his not-many weaknesses, I think we are seeing Carlton not fulfil their potential this year because of it. They have a lot of very good players, but too many of them think they are a lot better than what they are. It certainly is an interesting topic, one of which we can't fully know everything about because of the fact that we don't know everything that goes on behind the scenes.

I was semi-interested until about here. Is volleyball classed as a sport?

WTF are you talking about? Who is carrying an injury? Trengove? F M D. Nathan Jones and Mitch Clark are the culture setters, we need our captains to get on board, but as I said, they may be doing a lot behind the scenes that you and I don't know about.

Don't get too sucked in with possession counts though, they might be in our top 3-5, but where do they rate in the entire league? When our LG has names like Grimes, Trengove, Jones, Clark, Watts (he will be told and taught what it takes to fulfil his potential), McKenzie (not the best player but a bloody hard worker), that's when I will be happy about how our culture will be, and would expect the likes of Blease, Howe, etc to really stamp us as a contender. It's then when Viney could quite easily step in to that LG without huge amounts of games under his belt, because he will be Mr Cultre ©. I guess that means I will be interested to see what 2015 looks like, but keeping an eye out for steady improvement in 2013.

Bloody tough to answer from an outsiders point of view Oucher, especially considering I haven't been to a game this year. In my view, and forgive me as I could be well off the mark, while we still have Sylvia, Moloney and Rivers running around, it's going to be bloody hard for Trengove and Grimes to turn this ship around. I pick those players because I would expect that any new player would be drawn to them initially, due to the fact that they are probably more recognised as our leading players (not to get confused with our leaders). I would imagine that those 3 personalities would be quite difficult for JT/JG to change, mainly because of pride, and further to that, the respect that our joint captains have earned. The fact that Jones is a leader has probably ensured that Moloney and Sylvia espe especially, have adapted to some degree, as I do believe they are fairly good friends. To be honest, I wouldn't expect to see significant changes to our culture, changes that are visible to the general public (which is what 99% of us are on here), for at least 3 years with this current Leadership Group. Jones and Clark took the right steps this year by displaying a minimum standard onfield. I don't believe Trengove and Grimes have done that, which concerns me, but I'm willing to wipe out this year (another blood year!!!!), but will will expect different next year. I look at Carlton, the inclusion of Judd, and what their general culture is like. Again, I am only doing this from vision on TV. Judd obviously came from Wet Coke, where that was a bizarre culture to say the least, but somehow managed to snag them a flag. Carlton, with top picks coming through, needed a senior player, which turend out to be one of the best of all time, to lead that team. He's obviously a gun, Judd, but has he been able to create a culture like Geelong and Sydney? He tried, but I don't think that's his strong point. He has shown leadership, but how it looks (again, just my view) is that for Judd, he can turn up and he's one of the greatest, the harder he tries, generally the more damaging he is. Murphy is on board, knows that he has to work bloody hard to get to Judd's "average" level. It's the blokes like Robinson, Betts, Scotland, Gibbs, Simpson, when they are up and about, they are one of the best in the league, but it's when they are not, that's when you can see their culture issues. This is my view, no facts, figures or otherwise.

While it's fair to say that the Leadership Group create the culture (as per BH's post), the players outside the LG need to respect those in the positions above. Expecting Jack to come in and gain respect from day 1 aint gunna happen. It might only take him a season, but for 2013, Jack will be just another 1st year draftee trying to crack in to the senior side. If he can do that from round 1 and consolidate, then show on the training track that he never puts in less than 100%, then his status will rise, the level of respect from his peers will rise, and he will be a leader creating this "culture" that we need. At the moment, and it is only early days, Grimes and Trengove are a long way from creating a culture that the likes of Geelong and Sydney have. It's hard for them to sit in front of the group and demand elite level disposal efficiency when one is continually turning it over, and the other can't kick a goal from 30m out. I'm sorry, but if these are the blokes that I am looking up to when we are trying to develop a culture, I'm finding it hard to buy-in based on what I see during a game. I just hope it's the stuff that I don't see (ie at training and general offield antics) that they are working on in Year 1 of the new Culture Club ©.

Ah, I could have fallen for this trap, but I count 5-6 players on that list that should be part of our midfield going forward...

If it meant getting no contract compared to getting a rookie contract, I'm quite sure Barty would be willing to go to whatever extremes he needs to to remain on our list in some fashion in 2013. But, perhaps a 1 year deal at a very reduced rate with bonus payments made per amount of games played might be the best. If it turns out he can't get back, then we can place him on the LTI list and upgrade a rookie when required.

While I will sound like a selfish [censored], what do we do with Clint's contract? Do we ask if he would be willing to accept a demotion to the Rookie List, with assurance that if he fully recovers, he is promoted as soon as possible? Of course I wish Clint the best for his surgery, and for his general quality of life after football, whenever that may be.

In no particular order; Jones Clark Frawley Jamar Howe Watts Grimes Martin Jurrah Trengove Top 6 pick themselves, and yes, even Watts. The next 4 are difficult - Grimes & Trengove must be in our Top 10, and they MUST continue to push to be in our Top 5 - I don't think they are there yet. Jurrah makes the list based on his past seasons scoring output. Stef Martin is the one that will be argued by some, but I think big Stef is a valuable contributor to the team. We have a lot of players that could be put in the 6-10 range, which is part of the reason why we are stuggling. The thing that will continue to hurt us is the fact that we have minimal in the Top 50 in the league. Yeah, sure, the main one published is Sheehan's, but still, I would only have Jones and Clark in the 30+ range based on this year. We need to have 5 or 6 players regularly in the top 30 in my view.

I agree. However, the AFL have set it up so that the eligibility covers players that get nominated later in the season. By that, I mean if a player is nominated in Round 22, and it's his first game for the year, then providing he is under the age requirement, he'll have 22 games the next season to prove that it wasn't a once-off. Any player that get's nominated after Round 12 has minimal chance of winning in that year, but should use it as a stepping stone to get an early nomination the followin gyear to give them every possible chance of winning the award.

GWS wouldn't get that pick until AFTER the F/S bidding process, so when they walk in to that bidding room, they (GWS) will only have pick 1, and the others (GC) will still have pick 2. Unless they organise a special deal before hand, which I'm again doubtful. And the other thing, why would GC give up Pick 2, to try and pick up a 17 year old who may be rated between 3-6 in a "normal" draft? They gave up pick 4 for O'Meara, with the massive difference being that O'Meara was considered a potential number 1 pick in a standard draft. The fact that they got him a year earlier and for pick 4 was, in their view, a very good outcome. As has been said many times in the various threads, our first pick, pick 3, is a long way where we expected it to be, especially back when we convinced Viney to commit to us.

You don't give the Powers To Be at our Club enough respect. They have played this JV situation perfectly over a period of time. They got JACK to commit to joing the Demons via F/S selection, and by the sounds of it, we have a condition in the agreement regarding what selection we would take him at. I'm quite sure at the time of JAck's decision that all and sundry were expecting the MFC to be pushing for the 8, meaning that we were probably looking at "sacrificing" Pick 10+, not Pick 3! Now that it is clear what pick we will be using, opposition Clubs, especially those above us, know that we are potentially getting a potential Top 10 draft pick (or in your eyes, a certain Top 5 pick), with a pick in the 20's. Of course there is going to be uproar from other Clubs, but you know what? Fcuk them. We've won 3 games this season, that's been bloody tough on Club and supporter so I don't care what the other blokes/clubs think. Then, these Powers To Be have come out and made it clear that there is no binding contract, and that we don't "have" to take Jack at our first selection. the fact that there are only 2 sides underneath us that can force our hand quicker would absolutely be questioning what our movements are, especially given we have made it public that we will not be forced in to paying overs for him, which it would be reasonable to believe that Pick 3 is in fact overs. Having the slightest doubt in the minds of GC/GWS is more than enough to not require us to make special deals. GC/GWS will do what's best for them, and won't be bullied in to dummy bidding for Jack by the 15 clubs above us that are making a song and dance. Can you imagine Sheedy/Gubby caving in to "the rest" by nominating Jack, at the risk of losing Whitfield? Obviously RP, you can imagine that, and I respect that. But I will just be thankful that you aren't one of the decision makers in this situation.

RP, I'm well and truly done thanks, I just wish you were.

The contract isn't an official, binding contract. What part of that don't you understand? You can keep looking at the pictures, but perhaps read what Jack actually said in an interview a couple of months ago... http://www.theage.co...0629-21899.html ''I know there's a bidding system to go through and it could be that I don't end up going to the Dees, but that's life, that's footy. ''[Dad] keeps his lips shut about a few things. I don't think he's telling me too much, but he's just told me that if they don't reckon I'm worth what they have to use, then they won't pick me." Sounds like young Jack is fully aware of the "agreement" between he and the MFC, which is obviously that we don't have a written agreement that we WILL take him. In that respect, you are totally wrong. In regards to him being a potential number 5 pick so we won't use a higher selection on him. IF, and it's a bloody big if, the Club rate him as a top 5 pick, of course we would use Pick 3/4 on him, there's no argument there (except for trying to make special deals). Where the argument raises its head is the fact tha tyou think he is rated Top 5, and a massive majority of punters don't, it's as simple as that. But just because you rate him in that category doesn't mean that anyone who thinks differently are incorrect, or living in fantasy land. Personally, I don't see enough of the Under 18 competitions to give an educated assessment on where players are. I rely on the media, especially the likes of Kevin Sheehan and Emma Quayle, to give their views. Because of that, Whitfield is the obvious number 1 pick in my opinion. If we had the number 1 selection, I'm pretty sure we'd take Lachie in front of Jack. From all reports Grundy is top 5, although this could change, especially with the fact the element of risk with taking young rucks with high picks is a high risk/high reward tactic. Wines is rated highly, Toumpas must be top 5, Daniher from all reports is ranked higher than Viney. According to some reporters on Saturday night, Garlett is a potential top 5 pick. The thing that is becoming apparent is the fact that the standout 2 or 3 (Whitfield, Toumpas and Grundy) are ahead of the "peleton". Will GWS or GC "risk" missing out on any of those players just to try and shaft us? You are extremely paranoid if you feel that way.

Bloody hell RP, you can be a bitter thing some times. "Fanciful bluffing" - what's so fanciful about it? I put making special deals with our opponents way more fanciful, especially if there is no need for it (ie. those clubs lower than us bidding for Viney with Pick 1 or 2). You are in a very small minority if you think Jack is worth pick 1 or 2, so I well and truly rate your belief as more fanciful. There is/would be an element of doubt in GWS & GC's mind about bidding for Viney - that's without any special deals going on in the background. You're a smart man, so why don't you understand that?

I think it's part of the reason some of those kids playing at Geelong look to have "it" already. A few of them have been on the list for a good couple of seasons, are starting to get their opportunity now due to retirements, injuries, etc, and they don't want to not be a part of the Gellong "senior" team, so are making the most of the opportunities. While some of them are good footballers, they have a lot of class helping them, especially in the big games (which you see the kids drop off a bit). That's the culture I'm sure Neeld is developing, and it's an area that I don't think RP has the drive to achieve.

What's your thoughts on this RR? I strongly believe he is one of those players that worked his arse off to get in the seniors, then when there, thought that the hard work was done. Too many of our players have that attitude; they are content with playing senior footy. It's the ones that work hard to get there, then work bloody hard to stay there, they're the blokes we need. I put Jones in that category.

Haha, Nasher, just wait for The Hindsight Recruiter © to come in here and tell us that we should've taken Kurt Tippet instead (who went at #32)...