The Chazz

For that to happen, they need to be nominated... We potentially have a young guy that can win the award this year. In fact, based on ability, any one of possibly 7 of our young guys can win it - Watts, Scully, Trengove, Tapscott, Gysberts, Strauss and Blease. Obviously they all need to play and actually play well for multiple games to go close to winning. It is quite possible that at least 5 of these kids could get nominated. If so, our ladder position will be significantly improved as generally a player only gets nominated on the back of his team winning that week. If this is the case, having 5 or more nominations is a definite possibility. If we can get our young guys playing potential rising-star football, I have no doubt blokes like Sylvia, Moloney and Davey will take that next step. This will then hopefully result in a couple of more wins for us. It will only take a couple of early wins with our younger guys showing promise for the entire playing group to lift. After that, momentum is a magical thing, and bloody hard to stop. In regards to exceeding expectation, I would think winning a game or two against quality opposition (eg. St Kilda - we nearly did it late last year, Bulldogs, Geelong, etc) will build a belief amongst the playing group. For this to happen, the biggest thing that we need to see if our midfielders kicking more goals. We need Sylvia & co to be aiming for 20-40 goals each for this season, anything less will be a failure. We wont have the forward power this year to kick enough goals to win too many matches, so the blokes in the guts need to step up in this area.

Fair call in regards to McLean's 09 season, however, the previous year he was runner up in the B&F playing some 14 games. Last I looked, Davey, Moloney, Jones and Sylvia were on our list in 2008, none of them finished in the top 5 of that year. As I did say in my post, I especially want Moloney and Sylvia to back it up again in 2010, and for the few seasons after that. That's when we can say that there would be no room for McLean in our side. I hope for Sylvia and Moloney's sake that they do have a great year, otherwise you may start a campaign at the end of 2010 to trade them both. From all (media) reports, McLean is training the house down at the moment. Again, while I hope he struggles to get a game for "them", I still think you're a bit premature in your claims about him in regards to not getting a game for us. While like every Demon supporter, I have high hopes for "Scullgove", but, until they make it in the big time, I will not have them in the "superstar status" that you seem to have them in already. I'm not saying they wont be, I'm just going to wait and watch this beautiful thing play out. Sorry to everyone else for this conversation getting off the original thread.

Almost G2W. It starts in September!!! Not sure if your comment was tounge-in-cheek, if not, I can understand why you would think it was October!

My question for those that didn't see the need for an extension YET is this..."Will we be able to see if Bailey is a premiership coach this year?"" He will still be developing players, has a bloody young list, will still be experimenting to some degree (not to the same degree as 2009 though). We all want improvement, but what will you be satisfied with that would warrant an extension? Chances are we will lose our first 3 games. Will you still think the extension was premature? Most probably. I wont. While we have got the potential, it would be unfair to judge Bailey's coaching ability on the 2010 season. If we won 5 games, got a lot of games in to our kids, and we didn't lose ANY game by more than 20 points, I would give Bails a "pass". If we come out and win 7 or 8 games, cop a couple of floggings from top 4 sides, again, Bails would get a "pass". What will I think if we have a poor season where none of the above applies? I'd be still more than happy to give Bailey a chance in 2011. At the end of 2011, DB will be able to make his own mind up, knowing that Watts, Grimes, Morton, Jurrah have played over 50 games, and Scully, Trengove, Tapscott and Gysberts, Blease and Strauss have played close to 50 games, and that significant improvement has been made. If it hasn't, it answers everyones question. Not sure if I have contradicted myself at all in that, but my point that I'm trying to get at is that we wont know if Bails is a premiership coach until at least the end of 2011. I can give you a tip - in 2006, the Geelong faithful didn't think Thompson was a premiership coach. (Mid) 2006 was to be his last season should the team not improve, look what happened.

While I'm not a big fan of Brock (for walking), I can't see how this comment can be taken seriously, given our state of play at the moment. Brock is leaving an at-best, average midfield, with a couple of kids coming in that may make it one of the best in years to come, but then again, they may not. If it does go to plan, and that these kids turn out to be stars, well, yes, Brock MIGHT struggle. On the flip side, and this is where I can't agree with that comment at all, Brock has gone to Carlon, who has by far a better midfield group than us currently, and they too will continue to get better as their kids (Gibbs and Murphy) get older. I would be thinking it harder for Brock to get a game for Carlton in the short term (2010-2012) than he would at Melbourne in that period, but that didn't stop him from going to the dark side. Reality is that I rate Gibbs and Murphy equal to, if not better than any of our current midfielders (Judd is obviously in a league of his own). I'm not getting ahead of myself with Sylvia and Beamer, I want them to back it up again this year and maintain that form for seasons on end, not just games. If they can, and if Trengove, Scully, Gysberts & Tapscott can reach the potential they have shown, that's when I will sit back and say that Brock POSSIBLY wouldn't get a game for us. Until that happens, if it happens, Brock would be a walk up start for a gig in our top 18. I think, injuries aside, Brock had been a far more consistent performer over the years compared to Sylvia and Moloney. While both those boys played some of their best footy in '09, as I said above, I will wait until they do it for seasons on end before I rate them as stars. That said, I'm all for cheap shots at pricks that leave our Club for "greener" pastures, and hope that he finds it hard to get a game in Carlton's current midfield, which will happen if C&B's thoughts are correct.

Here is an article on the AFL website; http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tab...90/default.aspx Sounds as though Jack may be a little lazy at training? I'm not in Vic, so would be interesting to see what other people think.

He wasn't 100% self-made though was he?

Kegs, not sure if this mentioned after you named your team for 3 years time, but you had Tapscott at CHF. You are sitting here saying that Martin is no good, but then you select a 180cm player at CHF. Sorry mate, can't take this thread serious whatsoever. FWIW, I rate Martin, I think he has the potential to be a very good FF/CHF. Personally, I'd prefer him to fill that spot rather than Garland. If we play Martin in the backline, where does that leave Frawley, Warnock, Rivers and Garland? I feel he (Martin) is more valuable as a FF/CHF with the flexibility to play ruck if need be. More than happy to have Watts and Jurrah in the forwad line (FF/FP), then Martin at CHF. Have Wona in the other FP, Tapscott and Sylvia on the flanks, and all of a sudden we COULD have a potent forward line, with a heap of midfielders kicking goals. I don't care how silly this comment sounds, but I am happy to see a big forward with Jurrah and Watts. That "big" forward doesn't have to kick a heap of goals, but just gives a different option when our 2 key forwards are being held. I have no doubt Watts will be a big forward when he grows, I have serious doubts that Jurrah, while he will be tall enough, will not have the big body to be classed a "big" forward.

Thanks for uploading that Keyser, you found a great clip to confirm this nickname! I hope the boys at the club get on to this one, would be a pisser if that's his new nickname (not because I made it up, just because it's a spitting image of him!).

Not sure where Miller is at. Voted in to the leadership group again, so has the respect from his players. His leadership/age will be an area that we will need as blokes like Junior and Bruce fall off the other end. I did read somewhere that the GC may decide not to pick up all 16 out of contract players. It'll depend on what high profile players they pick up and how much it costs them. The still have a salary cap, so if they pick up the likes of Ablett (doubtful, but if they do), it will cost them around $1m+ a year, that chews in to their salary cap, therefore may only target 8 or 9 OOC players. 2010 will be a big year for our (experienced) ruck stocks. As I have said in a previous post, assuming all are fit, Jamar is easily our best. I don't think there is much gap between PJ and Meesen, with Spencer a long way behind them. I think we are best to stick with Jamar for the remainder of his career (again, assuming we can keep him on the park this year), as we get jack sh!t for him come trade time, and he will be a valuable leader in the development of Max.

I did indicate that Gawn would be underdone because of his injury, but from round 10+ he should be ready. By no means am I saying we should be playing an underdone ruckman, the question I am asking is what would we achieve by playing a developing ruck in the seniors? There are strong points for both sides of the argument, but as I said, I'm on the fence for it. If Jamar is flying, I would love to see our future ruck stocks operating as his understudy (ie playing the 2nd ruck role) - very similar to the White/Jolly era. The hard part is that there is no right or wrong generic answer, it is all dependent on the individual. Some will prosper playing at that next level at a young age, some will not have an immediate impact. The fun/difficult part is when do you test it out.

I'm of a similar opinion Keyser, but I'm starting to think that it's worth throwing in a young ruck and let him develop playing in the 1s. As I said about Kruezer he seems to be handling it fine. Sure, he has his games where he has copped a hiding, but he's played some pretty bloody good footy too. Even Nic Nat played some OK footy. Reality is that we need 2 rucks playing a majority of our games, Jamar (assuming 100% fit) is by far our best ruckman, so let's make the second spot a competitive one. Chances are Gawn wont be ready by round 1 anyway (because of his knee/general fitness). As I said, I'm not disagreeing about the "development method" used by the club, but where would the player get the best development from - Casey or the MCG? Looking at blokes like Frawley, it was the MCG. It's the million dollar question, I'm totally sitting on the fence!!! On one hand, it would be great to see the likes of Gawn running around in the seniors (especially fr us interstate supporters as we get no VFL telecast), but if his longevity will be increased by taking a slower approach, well, I'm all for that too.

A lot will depend on how Mad Max goes in 2010. I totally agree with Bailey's opinion about taking time with these big blokes, but let's face it, ruck isn't the most difficult role on the ground, and if Max can get fit enough to play some AFL footy next year, we could possibly see PJ, Meesen and Spencer (I hope so) gawn (sorry - gone!). I'm not sure how many rucks we need, if someone knows what other clubs have I'd be interested to know. Have a look at Kruezer at Carlton. Number 1 pick in 2007, played a handful of games in 2008, and played all 23 games in 2009. He has been very good in the ruck (playing as 2nd ruck) and down forward, I can't see why either Gawn or Beaker Fitzpatrick can't do the same thing. While Gawn or Fitzy are far from number 1 picks, if they've got a big enough motor come next year, I reckon they'll play. Jamar needs to stay, providing he can play 16-22 games next year.

While I hate them with a passion, the Joke Watts clips are a pisser. The few errors that jack made, they have added the Super Mario music to the background. There are about 4 of them...as I said, hate them with a passion but can see the funny side to it!

Fitzpatrick = "Beaker" from The Muppets; http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1052/118325..._3390fcc71d.jpg Would love someone who knows how to to upload a pic of this great character - spitting image of him!!! If Bill Lawry commentated Football, would he call Gawn "Gottim" - Gottim, Gawn, Yeeeeeees!

Tim - THANK YOU!!! I can understand your point, and it is exactly what I have been trying to say to RPFC since this "debate" started. As you personally have seen from the above replies from RPFC, he really does have no idea what it is I/we are trying to say. What you have said is totally 110% REALITY. In regards to your comment about a "go-to" forward, Stef Martin is the man that is being groomed, and will do it well. A go-to forward doesn't have to be the best forward in the team (as you said about Dutchy), but he has to do a job. And, a big part of that job is to make sure you CAN kick a bag of goals when you are matched up on a weaker opponent (a la Jamar's 5 goal haul). Geelong are experts at having a go-to main forward in Mooney. They then have Hawkins (who gets the next defender), but they rely on Stevie J to kick goals week after week. Mooney is far from the best forward at Geelong, but plays that go-to role to perfection. When Stevie J doesn't kick the goals he needs to, Geelong then have a solid midfiled (and other forwards) that get the score on the board - exactly like the GF this year. RPFC, your argument is boring, beacuse you are seriously not listening to what WE are saying. No doubt you have been pi$$ed off with me over the last few days, therefore will not listen to what I am saying, but surely you can see what timD is saying???

I will post the nickname "Beaker" from The Muppets; http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1052/118325..._3390fcc71d.jpg Would love someone who knows how to to upload a pic of this great character!

I posted in my original post that Jurrah will most likely get the best defenders this year, that was my point in re-posting it yesterday. The bit that you are clearly struggling to get your head around is that not always will the best defender line up against the best forward. You continually make other points, but this is the guts of my argument with you. Not sure if I'd agree with Morris being the best defender at the Dogs, again that would be a personal opinion thing - I rate Lake as their number 1. Surely we would both agree on the fact that Scarlett is Geelong's best defender, so would he line up on Jurrah? As has been mentioned a number of times is this "discusiion", Mackie played well against him in the only game LJ has played against the Cats, why wouldn't he play on him again? The football world knows what LJ is capable of, but I can assure you if Thompson was satisfied with the job that Mackie did on him, he will more than likely play on him again. If we had an intra-club match, would Warnock go to Jurrah, or would it be a better match up having Garland or even Rivers on him? Can someone else please tell me/RPFC that what I am saying about the best defenders not always going to the best forwards is correct. It is all based on who is the best match-up (height, weight, speed). If I'm wrong, which I'm stuffed if I know how I am, I will happily apologise to RPFC.

Here you go RPFC, this is a paragraph I put in my original post on this matter. You have wasted a lot of people's time with this argument that you have clearly lost the plot on.

So is Morris a better defender than Lake? Riewoldt is St Kilda's best forward, so from what you have been trying to tell me, best forwards get the best defenders, therefore the Dogs must rate Morris as a better defender. Morris would be their number 2 defender, Lake would be by far the best defender. I saw Lake play on Hawkins in the Cats/Dogs final; Hawkins is far from their best forward, but the dogs had their best defender playing on him. Your argument (from what I have read) is that the best forward (in this case LJ), will attract the best defender. Your theory about Morris on Riewoldt (and the fact you say Lake very rarely plays on the best attacker) is backing up my side of the argument. My argument is that LJ will not always get the 1st best defender, even though he is our best forward. Being our best forward doesn't mean he is our number 1 forward target. I would love to see sides step up their defence when LJ is down there, because if they double/triple team him, it will mean we have loose players everywhere, so on the rebound, we will just pump it back in to our 2nd/3rd BEST forwards. I would hate to see LJ in that situation though as regardless of how mercurial he is, he will rarely win a 3 on 1 contest, although he did manage it sometimes this season. Playing Jurrah on a HFF can still see him as our best forward, but what it will do is allow the football public the opportunity to see those freakish things. By playing him on a flank that sneaks up to the wing, and then down deep forward (but not for long periods of times) will ensure he doesn't attract that best defender. This is not a ploy to protect him, it's a play to let him do what he does best...the unpredictable. Put it this way RPFC, I will be gutted if LJ plays as a FF for the rest of his career (with the opinion that Watts will eventually be our CHF), it will be the first time I would question Dean Bailey's coaching style.

You're joking? Martin was not recruited to be a ruckman.

I'm just not sure what your argument is RP. So, let's say our forward line consisted of Jurrah (191cm, 81kg), Watts (196cm, 83kg), Bate (192cm, 90kg) and Martin/Jamar (both 198cm, 100kg), who would Brian Lake line up against? Brian is there number 1 defender (195cm, 104kg). In your opinion, he would line up on Jurrah - our number 1 forward. Do you really think this is a great match up? By having a Martin (or Jamar) as our FF, chances are it will force Lake to play on them. Most of the time, our number 1 forward will not line up against the number 1 defender. In the above scenario, Jurrah (our number 1 forward) could quite possible attract an opposition number 3 defender. I seriously can't make this any clearer for you.

Nah HT, was going to be a lot bigger announcement than that, maybe next week will give us more of an idea. Shame I can't come out and say "I told you so!!", but like the post J-Riv posted, just giving everyone the heads up that stuff if happening. I can't remember the last time the MFC has been in the press as much as this in the past couple of months. Obviously the draft had a big part in that, but new sponsorship deals, exhibition matches o/s, and potentially something next week too. We have won the past 2 spoons right??!! What will it be like when we start winning games and then the flag? Other clubs will hate us over the next 3 years!

Too many - don't want to think about it! There were a lot of people doing the ripping! lol.

I posted a thread a couple of weeks ago stating that there was a big announcement pending, but didn't know any more than that (and people tore me a new ass because I couldn't give them anymore!). Since then, we have announced the China match against the Lions, as well as the Volvo sponsorship. Thought my mail might have been one of those 2 things (as I think they are both great news for the Club), so if it's bigger than that, it'll be interesting to see what it is.