DeeSpencer

Thanks for that Nostradamus. Got the lotto numbers for Saturday? McKenna was contracted and played plenty of NEAFL games in his time at GWS, had some injuries as well but it's not like he's been constantly injured. In the delisting period as far as I know he was getting better and I think he either made it back to the main group or very close in November before further trouble. You can't delist contracted players who missed 1 year with injury unless you're certain it's an ongoing injury or you just want them gone. He's obviously battling some pretty severe hamstring troubles now but it's still a long way until the end of the year. I have a soft spot for Vanders as a player. I think his physicality and size could be very handy in September style footy. But it doesn't look like things are going well for him. Where our list is at I'd rather take the risk on Vanders than pick a rookie who likely won't play either. Especially in last years draft which apparently had no depth. I think he was our last player recontracted for this year so the club were weighing up options and tracking his recovery.

Fritsch showed me enough in the AFLX to think he's very much in contention for round 1, but I think back to Hannan last year and Brayshaw a couple of years before that debuting after only playing VFL practice games. I think there's a small chance we hide Fritsch in VFL games until round 1 and there's also a chance that someone from Baker, Spargo and maybe a handful of other players sneak in to the side on VFL form as well.

It's different if he doesn't want it due to other responsibilities but as long as he's not opposed to the idea there's not much downside. After the captain and vice captain, or in our case co-captains, the rest of the official leadership titles are relatively risk free. Lewis and Lever are probably going to do what they'll do anyway. This is all my speculation but Jetta is a long time servant of the club who could take his leadership to a new level if given the chance.

Lever and Lewis have been brought in to give the backline more leadership but I'd rather give Nev the title and see if he flourishes with it. It's a yes for me.

1. I've barely ever seen Lever win a one on one against a quality tall forward in his career. Whilst playing as the third tall lets him lead the league in intercept possessions. Put your best players in their best positions and find role players for the rest is usually a wise philosophy, every other point I make pales in comparison to that one. 2. I like the risk reward of leaving Jetta and Hibberd in occasional mismatches but signing them up to start on talls is asking for trouble. Eventually they'll get beat by a tall if given enough chances. 3. Even if you were to play only one of Frost and Oscar you'd have to play both in this practice match given you've got 25 spots in the team and have them compete for the spot surely? 4. Geelong - until proven otherwise - probably go in with Hawkins, 2nd ruck (Blicavs/Smith), Menzel with Dangerfield (or Ablett) playing a fair bit inside 50. That combination means there's enough height to have 2 talls and Lever. 5. After 1 key defender, Lever, Jetta, Hunt, Hibberd and probably Lewis you've got 6 defenders. Your next best options are either Vince or Wagner. It's ambitious to expect much of Bernie and whilst I like Wagner I think he's best as a rebounding and intercepting player. Playing a second tall makes us stronger defensively and putting Hibberd and Lever in more attacking roles counters the loss of attack. If we had Joel Smith as a 2nd tall option I'd consider him, same if we could play Salem at half back and be significantly more attacking with 1 less tall but that doesn't seem to be the plan.

Jones should be right to play shouldn't he? FB: Hibberd Frost Jetta HB: Lever Oscar Hunt C: Stretch Oliver Jones HF: ANB Hogan Melksham FF: Hannan T Mc Fritsch Foll: Gawn Petracca Salem Int: Pedersen, Harmes, Brayshaw, Maynard, Wagner, Lewis, Bugg Emerg: Vince, JKH, Balic, Keilty, M King etc.

Base wage this year is 80k for players drafted 40+, 90k for players drafted 1-20. With $4000 match payments and $3000 bonus for ever 5 games played. So pretty much it's close to 200k if you play every game. 3rd, 4th and pretty much until a player establishes themselves are probably the hardest players to know what kind of deal they are on. Minimum is 105k with 4,300 match payment but you'd think clubs would go well above minimum for anyone who's played a few games in the first 2 years. Salary cap is 12.5 million. Which fits with the average wage of just over 300k. Given there's a lot of depth and youth at most clubs who make less than the average I think teams can squeeze in a few big contracts ie. 750k+ and can have a lot of solid players making 400-500. I think where the media reporting and guess work goes wrong is for the players who are allegedly signing deals worth 550, 600, 700 etc. My guess is a lot of those deals are very incentive based and they work out a lot lower than reported.

The games he went missing in were the ones he played alongside 2 other tall forwards. I just can't see him playing with Hogan and Tommy Mc. Unless the make Hogan a midfielder for half the game or get really funky and play Tom on a wing for part of the game.

I like the idea of getting Tom as much match practice as possible and the format will be good for a forward who needs to work on leading patterns. My theory on Pertracca and Jetta is that they are 2 guys who aren't natural runners but are very competitive and so get more of a fitness benefit from playing a game.

I'm not as negative on this as others. I think it's a bit of fun to see some of the guys have a hit out and I think we've named the right kind of squad. I'm keen to see Petracca playing midfield in a shorten version of the game and Tom McDonald up forward. Otherwise I'd like to see the 3 draftees and DJ. It's a televised competitive training exercise before the shortened preseason of 2 games which is the right number.

Squad to be named soon but this is how I'd go in to it: Unavailable: Viney, Vanders, J Smith, T Smith, Weeds, McKenna, Garlett, Kent Rested/clear best 22: Gawn, Jones, Oliver, Tyson, Frost, Oscar, Petracca, Hogan, T McDonald, Lever, Hibberd, Hunt, Salem, Lewis, Vince Unsuitable: King, Filipovic Leaves us with: ANB (capt), Stretch (vice), Harmes, Brayshaw, Melksham, Hannan, Johnstone, Spargo, Baker, Fritsch, JKH, Balic, Bugg, Wagner, Petty, Maynard, Keilty, Pedersen

If he's fitter I'm still not sure why he isn't right in contention for the CHB spot. He's an excellent mark, lovely kick and reads the play well.

Top 10 1. Matt Crouch 315 2. Rory Sloane 253 3. Rory Laird 226 4. Sam Jacobs 224 5. Richard Douglas 219 6. Taylor Walker 211 7. Tom Lynch 203 8. Brad Crouch 194 9. Brodie Smith 194 10. Eddie Betts 187 10 handy players who beat him. I have my concerns that we paid too much at the trade table and that we'll also have to temper expectations because he played in a very good team with a lot of support - a excellent CHB in Talia, a decent other tall in Hartigan and 2 excellent flankers to move the ball in Laird and Smith helped him play his role. He also plays a fairly risky game backing himself to zone off and be the interceptor. All of that said when he's having a good game he's an exceptional interceptor and can control a game. Plus is young enough to keep improving and the right kind of leader.

I enjoy his instagram videos, but surely Misson and the rest of his team have a handle on the various aspects of the job. Represents an opportunity to retain most of his knowledge and then bring in some fresh ideas. It is disappointing that the AFL would open what surely must be an attractive position on the verge of the season starting at a busy time for strength and conditioning. Is it only with the introduction of a new head of umpiring recently that they worked out they needed new strength and conditioning programmes? You'd think it would be better for everyone if the hiring and firing in these positions occurs over the October break time.

I haven't seen a running session since he did a time trial with Maynard where he was clearly beaten but not embarrassed. From early match simulation drills he showed an ability to find the ball and use it creatively. He had to get fitter and hopefully that's happened just by doing a good chunk main training and his kicking needed to be more consistent so I was glad to see him working on that today.

Anyway, back on topic. Watched a bit of training this morning from about 10:30 until they finished after 11. A couple of new entrants in to the rehab group. 1. The coach. Goody had a knee bandaged up and was on crutches before getting carted back to AAMI park at the end of the session. 2. Death, taxes and Dom Tyson getting injured in preseason. Dom had compression on his right calf. Rehab group: Viney, Kent, T Smith, J Smith, Vanders, Mckenna, Weed, JeffyG, Tyson. They were doing a little version of slips catching with footies then a decent boxing hit out. Main group were split in to multiple groups. Seemed to be a lot of small drills. Didn't really notice any particular themes of interest. So really just some tidbits: - Salem and Jetta sat out a drill at one stage, Hogan the last drill and wandered back to AAMI - Frost's set shot for goal remain the scariest thing you'll ever see, but at the end of training him launcher a torp from the goal square to near midfield - Harry Petty kicks with a very flat and penetrating trajectory - Flippers looks fitter in the legs since late last year, starting to look more like an athlete - Balic did extra kicking at the end of the session with Crossy. - Melksham seems a bit more built than last season, not major, just less sinewy.

Disagree on that. Rucks have to be extra mids around the ground and at stoppages. The Tigers used Nankervis and Grigg as ruck rovers as much as rucks to use the old terminology. Dogs the same with Boyd and Roughead when they won the flag. The way teams link from handball at stoppages requires rucks to stay involved. Pedersen and McDonald did it very well last year and we were better with them than with Gawn! But we need Max at his best back in. For us to win in round 1 he has to dominate the taps but he’ll also have to chase Danger, Selwood and Ablett at the stoppages as well!

He’s 7 foot tall and white! There’s only so much agility the man can have. Of course he’s working at it but he can’t chase down mobile defenders. I’d be annoyed if we were playing against him and he consistently pressured the likes of Jetta, Hibberd, Frost, Lever or Hunt! That’s not to say he’s not working on it, improving or a viable forward option it’s just a reality.

The obvious answer is because he's 7 foot tall. Gawn would chase and pressure to the best of his ability but his agility to change directions to tackle or to gather the ball at ground level is still going to be worse than most key forwards yet alone smalls. Playing off him as a predictable target to at least bring the ball to ground isn't a bad idea and I like the mobility of Tom McDonald/Pedersen in the ruck so I expect to see Max forward a fair bit but more a rest or change up than regular tactic.

Is there training tomorrow at Gosch's @satyricon

Back in training in a month. Probably needs another month after that to play an AFL game. Looks like round 2-4 to me. That's ok. Get him right for the full season.

He's contracted to the Eagles for next year and they'd want a good backup for Wentz. The logical move might be for the Eagles to keep him until the trade deadline then sell him if Wentz is back at his best. What can they get for him now? A 2nd or 3rd round pick? Pretty handy to have that come draft time. Alex Smith already traded. Cousins and Foles available. Keenum/Bradford/Bridgewater situation in Minnesota. It's looking like a very interesting QB offseason.

Belichick made one great adjustment moving Gilmore on to Jeffery. But should he have started on him? Otherwise I was surprised he couldn't match up the rest of the Defense. That said, it was a lot of Ertz and the big plays from Clement. Possibly the problem was the Eagles had the weapons and run game. If they played Dime defense to get all the match ups right the Eagles could run the ball on them. Kansas City did it in week 1. Panthers with Newton's ability to run or throw caused them issues. Pittsburgh kind of did it later and should've scored at least 7 points more! The Dolphins even did it in December. Very easy to say after the fact but the reality might've been that the Pats just didn't play a very good schedule of teams this year. The Belichick theory of take away your strengths and beat you because you 'can't play left handed' works very well against teams with more weaknesses than his defense has. Doesn't work as well when you're playing a team with an excellent spread of attacking options up against your own weaknesses in the front 7.

It's an American cultural thing. But not really in a good way. A lot of it has a racial background that black athletes can't be trusted to be sporting. If not that there's also a huge paternalistic view that any athletes need discipline. The issue the AFL has is that you now can't do anything to square up or shut up an opponent who is taunting you. Back in the good old days you crunch them at the next contest and even in recent years you could give them a jumper punch. And if you don't focus on the physical square up it's also harder to win a one on one given the team and pressure nature of the game these days. Still, it's not impossible to just play better and win the game, and that would still be my advice to encourage that rather than bring in overbearing rules. As for the kids, I don't believe in making rules for adults sports purely on the desire for how kids should act. It's not up to AFL footballers to parent your child. Fair enough to outlaw violence and draw the line with sledging and obscene behaviour but it's still adults playing the game.

I was thinking if the Eagles couldn't get a stop before they got to half way and/or 1 minute of game time left they'd may as well let Brady score a TD as quick as possible and then get the ball back themselves for a tying or winning FG. Shows how good the Pats are that I was ready to skip the 'they will score and win' stage and go straight to 'the Eagles need to go outside the box here' stage.