The Chazz

I think Roos knows who has and hasn't got trade value, hence why he is keeping certain players in the seniors, and others at Casey. He's also talking up specific players, which I'm in no doubt is a bid to lift their value again. My opinion... Players Roos believes have trade value; Watts - Roos saying he has the smartest footy IQ on the team, and that we are a better team when he is in. Really? He's either saying that for Jack's confidence, or he's showing the footy world that Jack would be a valuable pick up for the right team. Howe - Played forward and back, showing how versatile he is. Now he's up forward again and kicking some goals. Probably the highest trade value of any "unsafe" players in my view. Players on the borderline (ie need games in the second part of the season to determine where they are at); Grimes M Jones Bail Fitzpatrick Players Roos believes have no trade value; Terlich McKenzie Hunt I don't see any players outside of the above that will be offered for a trade or delisted. If they want to be moved on, it will cost the receiving club.

Fremantle/Sylvia? Clubs can be dumb.

This is exactly right, Dr. So what's Roos going to admit in public - that these players are still no good, thus reducing any trade value they may have, or imply that they may be better in a more successful environment, thus maintaining or slightly increasing their trade value. People want him to be honest, to some degree I do too! But imagine the outcry if he came out and said Howe was a lazy, selfish, one-trick pony that would be lucky to make it on any list. He'd go from a (rumoured) potential first round trade, to a late 4th rounder.

Thanks Christ Roos is in charge and not you. He knows what he is doing, you don't. It's pretty clear that he is preparing supporters for some bigger names to be moved on at the end of the year, so that when the time comes, he's got this "baggage" as an excuse. It's not baggage at all, it's just not good enough, but there will be some names that will cause mild outrage within certain circles. Then, there is also some players he is going to move on, but knows that they will have trade value, especially if they can regain form. I think Howe fits perfectly in to this category, and Watts too. Listen to what he (Roos) says about these players in the public forum - Watts has the highest footy IQ on our team, that we need him in the team and getting the ball to be a better team. He's played Howe forward and back to show versatility, and is persisting with him in the main team, all to get him back in form so that his trade value is higher. He (Roos) did the same with Frawley, Clark and Sylvia. Talked about how significant losses these players would be, got absolute maximum compensation, all while he was happy for them to go. I know for a fact the Sylvia case was, which netted us Vince, was orchestrated by Roos' media ability.

Given we basically swapped him for Clark, I'm quite satisfied with our end of the deal. I think H is in our Top 10, and brings a lot more to the team than what we (supporters) observe for 2 hours every week.

Clearly the shirt is the admin uniform, given Mahoney is always wearing the same style. Chances are they own a few of the same thing. (Nb. NOt sure if your taking the pizz, but I've seen his shirt mentioned a couple of times on here).

I did the ladder predictor on the AFL website and had us finishing with 9 wins for the season. For the record, I did the predictor yesterday.

Nasher/Mods, FFS, lock this thread already.

Not many sides of the past couple of decades have won a flag without 2 dedicated key forwards, plus a forward/ruck.

There's no reason why we can't have a forward line of Hogan, Pedersen, Dawes, Garlett, Watts, and Howe/Kent. The word I have received, and this is quite recently, is that Frost was picked up as a full back, and when he gets enough games experience and settles in to the team, that's where he will play a bulk of his footy. At the moment (excluding injury), he's earning games based on his versatility around the ground. I'd be expecting 18 months to 2 years time he will be a lock in our backline.

Should we expect Cale to be redrafted next year, on his way to playing over 500 games?

Is there any audio of this? Have been reading about it all day, and before I get all worked up about it, I want to hear it first.

Vince too. Had a shocker in his first game back - obviously made up for it the week after, but he was clearly underdone in the GWS game. Roos admitted that both Dawes and Vince were best 22 so had to come in. 2 blokes who played their role in a winning team lost their spots because of the changes that "needed to be made".

We made that mistake after the Gold Coast game.

Bit of an overreaction there, Oli. He didn't get personal, he just mentioned who it was that made the call just 7 days earlier. A call that was forcefully questioned at the time, which was justified at our very next opportunity.

A very simple target that one of my old coaches used to set us for tackling. Everyone had to lay at least one tackle per quarter. You do this, you will lay 4 tackles per game. If EVERY player does this, you lay 88 tackles for the game. The sub has to work extra hard to get the 4 tackle target due to restricted time, however, as a sub coming on in the last 40 mins or so, you would expect them to make more contests. I'd expect most posters on here would accept that as a realistic target.

Can someone please tell me why they are wanting M Jones dropped? If he has concussion, then I appreciate he will be unlikely to play, but if he's fit, he has to play based on yesterday - he slaughtered Bob Murphy. Again, it's all going to be based on injury, but the only one that may find themselves dropped would be Bail, and it would depend on the fitness of Tyson, Viney and Jetta to determine who would replace him.

So who do we name then, Ox? We had to make two forced changes (Dawes and Salem), and dropped Michie. That means we had/have to make 3 locked in changes, as well as an extended bench due to the game being on Sunday. With Watts and Hogan coming straight back in, we still needed to name one replacement for Michie, as well as an extra 3 to meet the extended bench requirement. From there, you need to look at form at Casey; Riley has been close to selection, Newton has been around the mark, Fitzy and Gawn have been solid without dominating. If it's not any of those names, then it has to be out of McKenzie (been there, done that), Harmes (not ready), Jamar (not in form at all), ANB (not quite ready), Oscar (not ready), Terlich (terribly out of form), Mitch White (not ready). While I understand what you are saying about earning your spot, I'm in no doubt Roos is hoping that he can implement this, but sadly, given the state of our injury list, as well as where some of the kids are at in their development, we have to pick the likes of Gawn and Fitzy, even if it is just to fill up the numbers of an extended bench. If I'm picking the final changes, I'd be going; Out: Dawes, Salem, Michie, Bail In: Watts, Hogan, Newton (sub), Riley Give Stretch this game to play against a younger group, Toumpas likewise. To be honest, I quite like the look of our team this week. The line of 17.5 points if rather juicy.

That's because they would only run one way, Oli. I'm also yet to hear a story from the Neeld and/or Roos era about players picking and choosing when they would run a 3km time trial during preseason.

Almost got a handy spine there, as well as a bit of run out of the backline, a good goal sneak, and a bit of grunt around the ball. I reckon the injury list could well challenge the "fit" list at present!

Stop picking on the poor kid. Olisik's favourite topics to post about are draft picks and trades. If they didn't have that, then they would never contribute to this forum. Just leave it be.

To be honest, rjay, I have got to the point where I don't even enjoy watching Howe take big grabs. I ask if he's willing to put the effort in to jump on some bloke's shoulders, something that comes easy to him, then why isn't he putting in the effort to chase/tackle/pressure? Clearly these things don't come as easy, which probably explains a lot. In regards to changes for this week - it's an absolute lottery because of the injury status to those that should come straight in when fit (ie Viney, Jetta, Hogan). Obviously if those three in particular are fit, then three changes have to be made, which would be Salem (again, presuming his will be a forced change), followed by Stretch, and WTF knows for the third spot. I'm concerned with the Dunn v Crameri match-up, but the rest of the backline should match up well - thinking McDonald v Boyd, Garland v Stringer, Grimes v Dickson. Grimes has one clear instruction, and that's to never, EVER kick on his left foot again. It is cruel watching (N) Jones and Tyson play with injury. Sadly, we can't take them out of the team to recover properly - just hope they can get through to the bye round and recover enough in the week off.

How Cross didn't get in the best on the AFL site (and Hun from memory) is mind-blowing.

Thing for me about Spencer was that I didn't notice how bad he was. Which for mine, shows he has actually improved. Toumpas looked a little lost in the first half, but thought his third quarter was very good (came out and took the game on a lot more, as though Roos had a positive word to him). His last quarter was ok, just seemed that every time Sydney went forward, it ended up in Toumpas' opponents hands. I don't blame Toump for this however, the ball was coming in quite easy and making it very difficult for defenders. Did enough to warrant selection in the 21 next week.