DeeSpencer

Positions are kind of useless, but I get the theory. I think he will start his career in the forward line at AFL level as Salem, Kent and others have recently. But I can definitely see us going Petracca's paddock if he develops to his full potential especially when games open up late. Richmond did this so well with Dusty Martin this year and Adelaide have done it with Dangerfield.

Cinn Miami Arizona

Obviously he plays differently and the game is different, but not just because he's Italian but the bubbly enthusiasm Petracca has is very like what I imagine a young Dippa would've been like.

So is Joel Selwood's at times, so is Josh Kennedy's or Dayne Beams', so is Dustin Martin's at times. Matty Priddis just won the brownlow and he can't kick over a jam jar. Rory Sloane is close to an elite player of the comp and kicks helicopters. It was the knock on Wines as well. If he wins 10 clearances or goes forward and takes 5 marks inside 50 then I don't care if he's just floating it forward or sitting it up for goal. Certainly he has to be at a reasonable level, which I think from the highlights video above he is. He's not perfect. No player ever is. But he doesn't have to be Nick Malceski to play the role he's designed to play. Scully doesn't suck because of his kicking. He sucks because he hasn't become the inside midfielder and heavy accumulator he was at under 18 level and even in his first year at Melbourne. He doesn't win contests and therefore as an outside player his poor kicking hurts him. Toumpas, Salem, JKH, Stretch those guys are recruited to play outside roles and need their kicking to be at a high level. Plus kicking can and should be developed and improves with training, decision making and experience. Petracca is starting at a higher base than Nath Jones and he kicks it pretty well these days.

They are Petrified. Are we going with Braytracca or Petrashaw?

Well that's a bit awkward. All thoughts are with Hughesy. Really hope he can pull through. Clarke's fitness battle with the selectors and who will be in our top 6 batsmen is much less important now

Green Bay are the standout. Take the form line through the Bears and Vikings last two weeks, have to tip them. Gets very hard after that. Tempted to tip Arizona or Miami but they are coming up against quality sides. Surely the saints don't lose another at home? Even tempted to take the Jets but I think the Bills have to do it for their community. I'm going to take Cleveland, just on how poor Atlanta have been and how despite inconsistencies at their best Cleveland have been very strong. Then I'm taking Tampa Bay. Lovie Smith will be all over Jay Cutler with zone defenses and QB pressures that will result in at least 2 INTs. If McCown can turn good field position in to some points they'll get the win. Tampa 27, Chicago 20.

Probably 0-5 if Dawes and Hogan stay healthy and McCartin has as much work on his game required as we think he does. But no draftee should be expected to improve the side in year 1 and Roos knows that and showed it with patience with Salem last year. Brayshaw has the body and competitiveness to play, but there's no guarantee anyone else like De Goey, Laverde, Duggan, Pickett etc would settle in to playing and making an impact in year one either. We've got 2 later picks and 2 rookie spots if we want to find some more ready to go help.

Our consecutive number 1 picks were compared to Nick Riewoldt and Chris Judd, so really Martin and Wines should be easy enough! Petracca has the body (particularly after a solid preseason building fitness) to impact early. And he has the ball winning ability. That's really his strength - he can win it in the air or on the ground better than any kid, so he should be fine. And because he's come from the background of a forward he will start there before moving up the ground. Really in a lot of ways he's very well suited to the number 1 pick.

Brisbane 11: Warner Rogers ???? Smith ???? ???? Haddin Johnson Harris (hopefully) Starc Lyon I guess we will go with Mitch Marsh and Watson. Neither inspire me with confidence. Anyone got a good idea for a top order batsman?

The Rams would not only be leading the NFC South (or tied?) but they'd be the best team in it by a fair stretch. Are Tampa out of it yet (almost Seriously) It's nice to see the Eagles copping what the Bears did last week. I had doubts on GB, because I saw them like the Broncos last year, great QB, but not strong enough of D or on the offensive line. But they are changing my opinion. As well as Manning played last year, with his ability to extend plays and scramble I'd say Rodgers is a level above. He doesn't need an offensive line right now (even if they are playing well) and he's giving the green bay D such a lead to play with as well. The Bengals and Browns completely swap form (I had initially tipped Houston but swapped to Detroit). I know there are still blow out wins, really bad teams (next week Oakland) and some boring games, but wow this any given Sunday thing is fun with unpredictable results. The AFL should really try one of these (somewhat) even and unpredictable comps one day.

Brisbane Broncos Brisbane Lions Australian national wheelchair rugby Steelers Also this could be the week for Oakland.

Have Shield games always been 4 dayers and if so why? Why not make them 5 days? There are new rules this year that reward a team for getting 5, 7 or 9 wickets in the first 100 overs. Or for making >200 runs in the first 100 overs of the first innings for either side Just crazy. We need a number 3 batsmen and we don't need an attacking one. We can have Rahul Dravid. We can have whichever style as long as they can average 45 and perform in a variety of conditions. We have 1, 2, 4, 5 and options for 6. We have a keeper. We have and always will have some decent quicks. We need a spinner and a number 3. Asking teams to bat quicker or take more wickets in the first innings of shield games does nothing for the development of either of those positions.

Dallas, Denver, Pittsburgh. I'm sorry I'll see you guys next week as Chicago has another bye this week.

Wright (second ruck), McCartin (FF), Hogan (CHF) could all play together in a 3 prong modern attack. Wright obviously goes to the ruck and Hogan and McCartin would play as modern forwards do with McCartin still playing more close to goal on average. But Dawes would likely hold his spot for a while given how long big guys take. And in the mean time we get little improvement and in the end we likely dump Dawes who's a pretty honest footballer. We'd then get 3 gun forwards if we developed them correctly but what good is that? There's only so many inside 50's a team has with a gun midfield. With a poor midfield these guys would end up fighting for marking contests. If I really was convinced they were the best 2 in the draft I'd take them, but barring that you're almost asking for one to fail through lack of development opportunity.

It's not who you are tipping that's unoriginal so much as who you are tipping against! Jacksonville, Oakland and the Jets with a combined 1 win and what 20+ losses! I'll wait a bit longer before tipping but I think that will be a pretty standard 3 this week. That said the Jags might get a chance against the Cowboys. I just can't believe they'd play Romo off only 2 weeks rest with 2 fractured vertebra even if they are on TP fractures. And Oakland are playing ever so much better since they sacked the coach. I'll stay with P Manning off a loss to seek vengeance but Oakland surely get a win soon.

Arizona Washington Tampa

We can take 2 mids with later picks, plus Brayshaw and Billy Stretch. It will come down to best available. If there was a second very good mid to take we'd take them. But just because Roos is suspect on drafting young forwards doesn't mean he won't let the recruiting staff do their job. I don't see Roos complaining about us getting Hogan. If McCartin is rated high enough we have to pick him.

Nope division winner makes it. I'm happy with that. But I do think the team with the better record should host the wildcard game. The 10-6 wildcard should host the 8-8 division winner. It would certainly be an interesting coincidence if Seattle finished with the better record and had to go play the Saints as the reverse happened a few years back and Seattle as heavy underdogs at home got the win.

Don't pay national draft prices next year for a guy you could rookie this year! We've got the former Sandy Coach! Plus several others. The VFL (especially if Casey is half decent this year) isn't too onerus for most 18 year olds. And there's always the VFL reserves (shudder). If he's borderline I think someone takes a chance on him just like Adelaide did with Craig Kelly's son last year.

I'll say one last thing about the injuries and if you don't understand it I'll agree to disagree. It's not an excuse for us losing. It's just a reason for why I think we threw a game in round 1 and then won the next 2 and have been horrible since and the reason is lack of depth. The injuries are the mechanism that exposes that. It's the lack of depth that is my comment on the Bears. And it comes from years of poor drafting, development and over reliance on free agency. There's no woe is me about the injuries. I do think discussion of injuries is fair regarding the NFL because if you lose a bunch of players from similar positions you can be exploited in ways or in particular games. I agree they are in no way an excuse for how your team finishes a season though with the exception of QB. In every other position it's about having depth on the roster. I think we are coming at the GB/NO game the same way you are just seeing it from a fans point of view as you blow chances. Personally I thought you went for an ambitious onside kick and still easily kept holding serve by putting up points and NO could only struggle to match you. Maybe that's the case that if you waste chances on the road they come back to bite you, I get that. But I felt to half time GB had their noses in front in terms of how easily Rodgers was working. You had a drop catch and a big penalty wipe away your chances of TD's. Where are the saints after the first drive seemed to be scrambling to get their FG's. Anyway all a bit irrelevant. But that flukey interception certainly changed the game. On Foles - I remember the 3rd last play. The 5 foot something honey badger jumps up and swats away a pass over the head of a 6'3 rookie WR. The new two are in the NFL highlights package. Second play was definitely catchable. He gave the defense a fair chance but it was a fast and safe throw to get a third play if needed. On the final play WR jumps through the air and takes what we'd call a chest mark and is then pushed out whilst airborne. The pass is landing in bounds. If he trails his feet and leans through the air he can catch that. I think CC said it's hard but possible to catch after the game. And that pass was after back pedaling when the Cards sent a 7 man blitz at him. Foles makes inconsistent mistakes with accuracy and occasionally bad decisions and missing receivers. I just thought he did a decent job on that last drive.

They won last week and had reasonable performances against Arizona (10), Seattle (10) and Philly (3) points before that. So I agree. It's the blowout by the Giants that made them look silly. If Dallas win by 10 or more I think it might say more about them. At the same time it's 3rd string QB time for Wash which spells disaster! I'm not sure about the call either but I can see why they called it. It looks like he grabs the DB and pushes him down so he can get the catch. But then in slow mo on replay it looks like a dive by the DB. Guess it's one that if Smith keeps his hands to himself it's a catch. They would certainly call in defensive PI if it were reversed so I understand why they want to be more consistent this year. It comes down to whether you favour black and white rules and calling every breach or if you like a bit of incidental contact and want the game to be contested. I'd say just like the AFL it's a better game if not every single minor breach of the rules is called. Unfortunately you can't win either way as we saw this year with the AFL where they didn't pay anything and everyone was happy until the media revolted.

We've been through this before. I'm not saying the injuries are an excuse. Our defense just has zero depth and hence our defense covered us early in the year and now can't. I can take Cutler being inconsistent, I'm staggered at how consistently unproductive he's been this year though. It doesn't make much sense. I think Trestman has been caught out as a play caller and between the two of them they aren't making adjustments. Cutler is like a lifetime of Daniher era teams. Good enough to get somewhere but nowhere at the same time. His contract is structured so we have him for this year and 2 more and then can cut him (or keep him for 4 more years of misery). I'd be inclined to cut or trade him after the 2 years and take a chance in the draft. In fact if we have the pick and the QB is there I'd do a GB and grab the QB to ride the pine. However it would be a dramatic riding of the pine! I still Carolina are more physical than NO, just a matter of whether Newton finds his straps soon. Thursday night is a huge game for that division. You guys had the better of the saints in the first half. I feel the saints were lucky with some calls to be level at half time. Then the Rodgers hammy seemed to take the wind out of the game and I have big fears on your run defense. It's the missing link that gives another team too much momentum on offense. It's completely un-GB to make a big trade for a DT or DE (or dominate inside LB) but if you had the cap space I'd do it. The NFC is wide open. Philly v Cardinals was a great finish. Thought Foles did pretty well on his 3 throws in the end zone. Didn't waste the clock. Gave 3 different receivers a chance to make a play. Fantastic plays made by the 2 rookie safeties to bat down balls and push the receiver out of bounds. Oh how I wish the Bears hired Bruce Arians. He was runner up for our job and would have Cutler dropping long bombs to receivers and would've hired a better defensive coordinator.

The swans had plenty of academy picks to take care of, the lions had 2 plus Scott Clayton's son as a father son and needed the picks for trades. So either side might still be very keen on him for the rookie draft. But they weren't keen enough to put him ahead of the guys they took. If he's a raw prospect then our new beefed up development team plus Goodwin will be the ones training him up.

Pick 50/PSD/Rookie pick I'd say but I wouldn't at all be unhappy if we did pick him up. He's got the bloodlines. If he wants it bad enough he'll be a player and Roos will have pretty little to do with actually coaching him.