The Chazz

Trade one what?

As per usual Buzzy, when you challenge these Jones-knockers and ask for evidence of their statements, they crawl under their rock and aren't seen for a couple of weeks, when they come back, give Jones another spray, and hope that they go unchallenged. To make their life a bit easier, I have found this information in the individual player stats on the Herald Sun site. While I appreciate stats can be tailored to provide any opinion with substance, I do think this one is pretty hard to argue against; Player/Total Disposals 2011/Disposal efficiency; Jack Trengove/387/72% Colin Sylvia/380/68% Brent Moloney/509/73% NATHAN JONES/507/73% And for a couple of sharp-shooters from other clubs; Chris Judd/633/67% Marc Murphy/699/74% Bryce Gibbs/548/74% Joel Selwood/465/72% Jimmy Bartel/485/75% Scott Pendlebury/677/78% Dane Swan/708/70% An unbiased view of those stats would say that our "Fab 4" are right at the industry standard in terms of efficency of disposal, however, we need to get our hands on the pill more often.

Taking up 1 spot on the rookie list - hardly clogging in my view. Would love to know the pay difference between a rookie-listed player and a ruck coach. I think it would probably work out very close. Might as well leave him where he is for another 12 months.

I'm glad you mentioned this name Old. I suggested him on the first page of this thread, and got no reaction.

Hope that we don't end up with as many Chris Dawes posts as we did Tom Scully. Not a required player at Melbourne in my view.

Hope for what?

I think the criticism of Jones' skills is totally unjustified, especially when there is an insane amount of love for Jack Grimes. For those that are happy to hang $hit on Jones' (lack of) efficiency, please put up some figures/evidence to support your case. But be sure to put up all listed players just so we can get an idea as to where Jones stands in this area.

The Cook v Darling arguement has nothing to do with the post I was replying to. Jacey mentioned a certain style/build of a player that I think we already have enough of, which one of those is a 1st rounder.

Do the names Jack Fitzpatrick and Lucas Cook mean anything to you Jacey? Similar height, weight, and are actually currently on our list (1 is even a first round draft pick). Even at minimal investment, why would you look at obtaining him, when we have 2 guys on our list of similar qualities? Can anyone tell me how we go about trading in/out a rookie listed player that is contracted? The player that I'm interested in is Ed Barlow from Carlton. Other than that, I would leave any uncontracted players alone. If they weren't considered by GWS, why the hell would we want them? We've seen they were willing to pay big dollars for good (not great) players, doesn't say much for what's left IMO!

These 3 are rookies M38, so your wish may be granted, however, we will still need to move 2 senior listed players on. If Warnock were to get traded, as he requested, then we still need to find one more player to shift. One would assume it would come from the top 3 names you mentioned. I can't see Neeld getting rid of Bartram. By his own admission, he'll have certain non-negotiables that he will be able to see players do (or not do), I would bet that Bartram would be in the top 3 at the Club in consistently performing in this area. Sure, his disposal is a bit iffy, but assuming the coach likes the way he goes about things, he'll play more to Bartram's strengths, rather than isolate his weaknesses. Neeld as talked about roles within the team, Barty is a very disciplined player and I'm confident he'll play his role.

It's quite concerning that every time I hear someone say "we need a big bodied forward", that I taste vomit in my mouth. Can someone please answer this question "what would Dawes bring to the side that Stef Martin can't"? We all juiced up (not of the Newton variety) over the improvement of Stef this year, I wonder what he could do if played as an 80% full forward/20% ruckman? For all the Dawes fans (not the Jim Morrison ones), what would you be willing to give up to get him? For a start, Collingwood's asking price would have to be a Top 40 pick at the very least, so, maybe we offer a 2nd-round pick (considering we have the $cully-compo picks). If that could do the deal, maybe we consider him, but if we had to pay more than that, we'd have rocks in our head if we chased him.

He got him mixed up with Matthew...

Will be interesting if Neeld compliments the over 30 rule, or if he decides that while we are mostly inexperienced, we will change our 1-year policy for over 30's. With the public disapproval from the way we treated Junior, I wouldn't be surprised if the Club took all (over 30) cases on an individual basis, which realistically, probably should be done any way. I have another criticism of the playing group though - why don't we have some of leadership group in photos with the new coach? Bob Murphy said last night that a lot of the Bulldogs players had already met with their new coach. I think there has only been 1 tweet from maybe Col Sylvia (?) about looking forward to meeting the new coach. I know these guys are in their off-season, but fark me, this is a significant time for the Club. Even bloody Harry O and Malthouse put something up. Whinge finished thank you!

Finally someone tha tagrees with me about Rivers' (lack of) leadership. he is the first one booted out of the LG. In regards to the OP, I have no idea what his status is, but I'm about 1 of 1 people on this site that wants to see Brad given a 2 year contract, and to remain captain for season 2012.

The easiest solution is to keep the collar, and recruit more players like this; Plenty of neck there...

Who would you suggest is St Kilda's most important? I'd say either Goddard or Roo. Where Melbourne are harder in this situation is that we don't have anyone of the same class as either of those 2! Milne was a very important player this year, and would be in their top 5 MVPs. Best 22 is always a hard thing to judge. If we are talking ideal world, and all players are fit and firing, you wouldn't have Wonna in a forward pocket/HFF? In my opinion that's a huge call (perhaps not quite as big as mine about the importance of Aussie!), especially when you go through our wishlists on this site and a lot are crying out for a small forward. That's almost 1/2 their career! And knowing what LJ is like, a dozen games can easily = 40 goals!

220+ posts in 9 days? Oozed e25/KS/AB/GK sorry RPFC!!! Maybe Aussie inspires LJ? If so, that would make Ausse pretty valuable. But thanks for saying other players Jacey. I agree with you, Frawley would probably be our MVP. I just can't help but think that when we get beaten, more often than not the KPIs that we get smashed in are areas of Aussie's specialty, ie. tackles inside 50's, lack of goals kicked from stoppages. I may have made the statement 12 months too early, but I just hope we get to see him play a 22 game season in 2012, and maybe I will have a bit more ammo this time next year!

Not at all am I defensive Crackers. When I put a call out there like I did, I want people to know why I think that way, so if I get questioned about it, I'll happily let people inside my mind (although they may not want to step inside!). I think Aussie ticks a lot of those boxes tha tyou mentioned above, but the attendence one is obviously letting him down. He reads the play as good as anyone, it's arguable that he creates as much as anyone on our list, and I honestly believe when he is on-song, he inspires every player and supporter. You just have to look at those first couple of games that he played, his football, and in due course, his celebrations, I have no doubt inspired his teammates. This post is written in a non-defensive way.

To be fair, I wasn't on this site when Bails was first appointed, so I have no idea what the general opinions were on his selection. I have no doubt that there was as much optimism as there is for Neeld. I will question you though (of course I will!!!) regarding your comments about the 2 appointments being vastly different. We all knew that Bailey was a respected assistant coach, who was invovled in a dominant team, of which they were a premiership team, and he was well regarded as one of the best development (assistant) coaches going around. This year is the first I've heard of Neeld, and most of it was after Malthouse has pumped him up as much as he did. He hasn't really been considered a true senior coaching prospect until this season, so basically, I know as much about Neeld as I did Bailey at the same time as their appointments. The presser when we announced Bailey compared to when we announced Neeld is frighteningly similar, and that's why I can't understand why people think that it seems like we have got it right this time, hence why I posted that link; * Coach has support from existing Club, who are disappointed to see him leave * New coach was impressed with the professionalism of those that hired him * New coach loves how passionate we are and how proud a Club we seem to be * Those that hired him had to move quickly as he was receiving other offers * New coach is going to get us playing vigorous/competitive/hard footy * New coach is greatful for what outgoing coach has done in terms of laying the foundation, now they will add their own spin to it The one main point that I saw different between the two was how Neeld demanded what sort of assistants he wants in the box, and that he is well on the way in getting what he wanted. But, I guess Bails brought his own personnel in too. Neeld does have the advantage of a lot of the hard work already done, and also the luxury of his first office being at AAMI Park as opposed to the Junction Oval. As you said in one of your earlier posts though, in the MFC I trust. I always do, and always will. They could've appointed Josef Fritzl as our coach and I would've supported him. I supported Bailey up until he was sacked, I will support Neeld for as long as he is the man in charge, but for the above reasons I'm keeping my optimism as low as possible (without crossing the pessimism line!). Good job on not using the emoticons - makes your posts so much more readible!

Who do you think is the most important Crackers? I think in a couple of years we will have a few more players ahead of Aussie, but when I watch games that he plays, he adds so much to the team, but then when he is not playing, it's those areas that we get smashed in. I also feel that Jurrah plays a lot more consistent, 4 quarter games when Aussie is around, and we all know how much the team benefits from that! I know it was a huge call, and didn't expect any supporters. Nb. The most important player doesn't always equal the best on our list.

I'm not suggesting it is a last resort, but I don't think it was our first preference. I'm quite sure if Clarkson had've expressed interest that he would've been ahead of Neeld. But, as we both agree, time will tell, and it's something that I'm used to as a Melbourne supporter! To be honest, the ABC interview did raise my hope levels slightly. Especially when he mentioned about the holes that we need to fill. I'm intrigued as to how we will go about filling them. However, I think Bailey said before he coached a game that he has a list that could play finals footy...

Well said DD.

This will probably attract some criticism, but I am of the opinion that we are a better team when Wona plays, and I'll go even further by saying that I think he could be the most important player on our list. His football brain is amazing, his skill execution can be elite (I hate using that word), his forward pressure is what's required in footy these days, and he doesn't shirk a contest at all. He can create goals out of nothing, and one of the most important parts of his game is his ability to get LJ to another level. I'm not saying he could be the next captain, but I wouldn't be surpirsed if he had great leadership, to the point that could see him part of the LG in a couple of years. I sincerely hope that he can have a massive preseason, get his fitness to the required levels, and have an injury-free few seasons. In Aussie, we have our small forward that is more than capable of producing regular 30+ goal seasons.

Hi B59. Not sure why I replied to your post to add my piece, actually, I did it becuase I know how much you love it when I do. So here goes; I'm not as excited about most on here regarding the appointment of Neeld. That's not to say that I think he will fail, I am just going to reserve my judgement until I have seen how the players respond to his ways. My initial reaction was of disappointment, due to the fact that we didn't achieve what we originally set out to, that being able to get an experineced coach. We tried, but we missed out. I can't help but feel we have had to go to our "2nd best scenario". In reply to the OP, can this be the start of a new era for the MFC? Well, time will tell I guess. The Club still firmly believe that we can become the Team of the Decade, and even though they offered Neeld an initial 3 years, Schwab menioned that this appointment may in fact be a 7 to 10 year appointment. Obviously Neeld interviewed well. I'll leave your post B59 with this little link; http://www.afl.com.au/Default.aspx?tabid=208&newsId=50195 This confirms why my judgement is reserved for the time being.

Can someone pleeeeeeeeease get it through my head the major differences between Chris Dawes and Stef Martin??? There is a lot of love around for Dawes, I just don't see why we need him when Martin is more than capable of playing that role (just needs to be played in that spot more often). I'm happy to have my opinion changed!