DeeSpencer

This Callum Toomey is an interesting one: Well not exactly. He still has a heap of other pancreatic functions Well yes, those dangerous chemical substances = glucose = run of the mill sugar in the blood Then he goes on to describe McCartin stuffing up his insulin and having a seizure. It happens to most young diabetics every now and then if they aren't really careful. Not a great thing to happen but usually if your head is switched on right (ie. you want to be a professional athlete) you don't let it happen too often. The childhood anxiety is interesting. It tells you not to judge a book by the cover. He certainly doesn't play like he's anxious. Anyway. Some interesting stories. Good on him for opening up. I like the kid. Whether we take him or not I hope he does well.

I just feel there might be a gap between now with Harris and Johnson and when those young guys actually get over their injuries and can perform. Siddle is our only reliable performer and he can't carry an attack. We should always have a decent pace attack. It won't ever be bad. But it should be our strength and will probably only be good enough to win games at home. Lyon does a good job at home as well, he just can't step it up on spin friendly pitches when he needs to, particularly on day 5 pitches. Hughes has many problems but scores runs! Warner has problems. Steve Smith has problems. We don't have any perfect batsmen. I understand the theory behind fixing some of his technical problems before he gets another shot. But I don't think you can wait much longer.

Then between the two of them (DM and MN) they decided to spend months on end of our players largely running 300m sprints and also put the disclaimer in that it would take 3 preseasons to get the guys up to scratch. There's was a noticeable difference with Roos in charge this year in how much footy training the players did almost from the first day of preseason. Sessions went longer under Roos but with many more drills including grappling and close in handballing drills as well as getting the repeat running in long drills.

I think the game changed a bit on Morton. It got faster and he went from having a yard of speed over guys to being just average pace. And it got more congested meaning more pressure on kicks. Morton was a very good kick as a junior as he found space and could kick long to advantage. He was destined to be a wingman. And this current Hawthorn team have brought the position back in to fashion a little. His job was pretty much to just run up and down the field and be an option, plus with his height you could kick it up to him 1 on 1 v other wingmen. When Morton came in only Hawthorn played full ground zoning. Then St Kilda and Collingwood perfected the press. What should've happened is after a good first season, Dean Bailey should've put Morton back to the 2's and made him develop his contested ball, made him develop his kicking under pressure etc. Instead he coasted along in the team. Neeld was right to put Morton back to Casey but ambitiously tried to make him a centre square midfielder. It didn't really work. Also tried him at half forward.

Did Birchall, Suckling, Stratton, Langford, Hill, Isaac Smith,and Gunston all play in the grand final or am I mistaken? Hill was tiny when he was drafted and is hardly bulky now. The other 6 were all tall and thin.

If there was a Harley Bennell or Daisy Thomas at pick 3 I'd be all for it. But I don't see Pickett at that level. What's best case scenario for him? Brad Hill? Laverde is interesting, but I'm not convinced by him. I'd have him in the mix for pick 3 but am more keen on the talls. Brayshaw should give us a really nice complement to Jones, Tyson and Viney. Effectively he should take over from Cross in 12-24 months. And those 4 should be part of our centre square set ups for hopefully years to come. If they come on quickly and get some support from Michie/Riley/McKenzie/Harmes then we can redeploy Bernie Vince to more outside roles. Speed and skill are vital. But only need to look at the grand final where Rohan and Jetta didn't touch the ball to see you have to win the ball first. It's ball winning and work rate that creates a lot of fast ball movement. The skills just make it flow. As I said I'd love to take the line breaking beautifully skilled player with a top pick. Who knows what we will get from Lumumba, Matt Jones, Watts, Salem, Toumpas, Dom Barry, Kent and of course Billy Stretch who's probably a second round pick rated outside mid prospect. If we don't get a more outside mid type then I'd be hoping we find someone in our later ND picks or rookie picks to balance the list.

Good older batsmen: Rogers (37), Clark (33) Good young batsmen: Steve Smith (25), Warner (27) All rounder: Watson (33), Marsh? Faulkner? Keeper: Haddin (37) Older bowlers: Johnson (32), Harris (35) Decent bowlers/prospects: Siddle (29), Pattinson, Cummings etc Spinners; Lyon (26), O'Keefe The problems with the current aussie team are: 1. Spin bowling - Lyon's played a lot now and seemed to plateau. But at the same time he's young enough. Can't give up on him but he looks only serviceable at best 2. Fast bowling decline - Harris and Johnson played career peak seasons last year, but it's unlikely they can do it again. Siddle is a good 3rd support. The young guys need to step up 3. Haddin and Rogers - 2 cornerstones of our team at the start and the end of the batting line up but they are also likely to decline soon 4. What to do at 3 and 6? We don't have an answer to either. I think our best line up is Hughes and Watson. But they just haven't given Hughes a good shot of it and Watson can't stay healthy. I'm staggered to know why M Marsh got the shot at 6 ahead of Faulkner If we don't add another good young batsmen and get one of the bowlers to stay fit then we will be in trouble.

Thankyou Detroit's new FG kicker. I'll take the 2 points, it's about all the fun I've got left in the NFL. And thanks everyone who tipped the Colts. In other news the Bears defense carried the team for a while this season but now due to injuries and shocking lack of depth on the roster have crumbled to a mess at the hands of Brady. And we pulled one from the bonehead Detroit play book by a guy doing his ACL celebrating a sack (whilst down the best part of 30 points). GB v NO is heating up. If Brees plays well this will be 40 all. NO can't stop Rodgers. Julius Peppers on offense at goal line TE dropping a pass. Oh Mike McCarthy you so crazy.

He obviously killed those under 16, but from what I saw of him in the under 18's he was underwhelming. He's small. Doesn't pack a lot of power like he showed in that 2012 vid and more outside. I'd be wary about a first round pick at all, yet alone pick 3. If we want outside silk I'd go with Laverde or Lachie Weller.

Spencer played the game of his life under Craig before injury. Fitzpatrick had a great end to 2013. Watts a pretty solid end to the year. Clisby looked like a player. But the main one is Garland who had a big relationship with Craig. I think you'll find Nathan Jones was a fan of his as well. Anyway it's not about specifics. Craig largely did his job which was to support Neeld. Unfortunately it's hard to support a guy who's self destructive. But I actually would've had a lesser opinion of Craig if he hung Neeld out to dry at first opportunity. McCartney has worked with Goodwin. I'll think they'll make a really nice duo. Obviously they have to follow on from what Roos does, but note that Sydney won a flag with Longmire when he tweaked the game plan but kept the successful frame work and culture. You're drastically overrating footy game plans if you think we brought Roos in for some special defensive master plan. We brought him in to make us a successful club that people want to work at and to have a winning culture.

I think where you are wrong is that you don't have the right expectations or understanding of what creates a successful football club. You've highlighted in there with all your examples. I don't necessarily agree with those contract extensions but when weighed up with where our list was at and how many picks we will take to the draft they make sense. You say Craig gave us nothing. What he actually did was give us a steadying presence by taking over for half a year, he also helped develop quite a few players and gave us some respectability when Neeld was running the place in to the ground. Craig had delisted Sellar at Adelaide, had barely played him. The recruiters wanted him and Craig only backed Sellar's character. Considering it was our last pick in a horribly compromised draft it wasn't much of a loss. Sellar gave us more than Tynan and Taggert that's for sure. Tall depth spuds like Tommy Walsh and Spangher were on Sydney's list when they won a flag. He was at Essendon for a year and players raved about him. Crameri quit Essendon to play for him. Mooney and Scarlett signed on in a flash to work for him then quit the day after he did. He's made Libba, Macrae, Stringer and Bontempelli look like future stars of the comp in their early years. I'm not going to claim we've signed some super savior. Not even Roos is that. But if we've signed McCartney for a development or assistants role where he can develop players then we will have done very well. You say he got lucky at Geelong. I'll say Geelong put the right people in the right jobs and that's why they got lucky as a club. Kenny Hinkley is obviously a great coach at working with attacking players and getting hard work and hard football out of them. It's why he was the perfect assistant for Geelong especially with their forwards. McCartney knows how to bring youngsters along developing them in to complete footballers so that's the job you get him for.

Hey don't reveal your sources. Just sit back and enjoy your glory if/when you are right!

Detroit (feel a bit sneaky tipping the London game) Miami Houston (JJ Watt v a 3rd string QB on debut - feel crazy tipping a team with Pickspatrick at QB, wanted to tip GB, but maybe some vintage Drew Brees can turn it around at home?)

Kent already is important. He had a delayed start to preseason, injury and suspension that cost him momentum at the start of the year but he's clearly best 22 on talent and for where the side is at for results as well. Garlett's being brought in more as a crumber/goal sneak forward. JKH is in the side for his forward pressure and ability to find the ball as well. But Kent remains a vital part of the forward and (hopefully increasing) midfield mix as he can do a lot of really good things. He's an explosive player and I hope he gets trialled up the ground more next year. He wouldn't really be 'the next Jetta' though because his career has tracked well so far. He can be most improved and it would be an extremely welcomed surprise to have a player develop properly and efficiently, so I hope he is.

Tapscott's muscle does occasionally come in handy with some big bumps, tackles and hard ball gets. It's just wasted most of the rest of the time. It's his skills that haven't stepped up to AFL level which has probably been the greatest disappointment. The game changed and he didn't adapt so not only does he not get much of the ball but he doesn't use it. I wonder if the lack of professionalism in our players and fitness staff also caused troubles by him never having a preseason. If he had trained more efficiently from the start he probably would've got through a preseason by now. The whole you make your own luck thing is probably true regarding fitness for some people at least. And you forgot the one other thing he brought in recruiting him! Being Trenner's best mate. A silly factor to recruit someone for but if Trengove went and became the superstar and Tappy kept him in Melbourne it would've worked a treat!

Paul Roos may be opposed to it but TAC footy is played the way it is for a reason. To let as many kids as possible show off their attacking skills and attributes. Defense can be taught and I'm sure back pockets still play similarly in TAC footy. Contested ball mids still win contested ball. It should be a huge step up from any under 18 football to the top level, I don't see that being a problem. You pay coaches to coach and you pay recruiters to notice the players who can step up. I don't think the difficulty in recruiting or draftees not being ready is any reason to change the system. High level VFL players still struggle to step up and recruiting is just as difficult in US sports with top flight college programs. In my mind the main reasons to raise the age is to let kids have a fair crack at finishing schooling and figure out what they'll do if they don't make it by giving them some time to start uni or training.

I don't think you can trust crucial development years to state league clubs though. They don't have the coaching, development coaching, sports science or medical support. I mean to make it to AFL as a current state league player you have to play brilliantly but also seek out a lot of things by yourself as well. Obviously putting more kids in would put more resources in, but it might not bridge the gap. Too many kids might go the way of the wandering junior tennis player who hits the senior circuit without support and struggles and crashes out. A standalone comp would counter against that to a degree. But you're right if the AFL is paying for it then it's a heavy expense. If it's a college system then it's competing with the AFL and so that means the AFL are paying for it in a different way!

After this year he'll be lost to cricket. He's no good. And he'll then be long odds to rebuild his footy career. He chose cricket because it was his favourite sport. Cricket Vic offered him a better deal than the base AFL contract but neither guaranteed much. It was more cricket stepped up to the mark. T20 definitely offers a chance of big earnings for state based cricketers. But it's not every one.

Which of course leads us to the obvious end point Macca! College football! Maybe just a small 8-10 team league: Melbourne (VISY park) , Monash, Deakin (base the team in Geel), Latrobe, Sydney uni, UQ, University of Adelaide, UWA. Make it happen. Ballarat or Bendigo would work as well as it could be the peak sport in those towns. Of course it would probably just compete with AFL. Would cripple state leagues and could be very hard to make financially viable especially in non football states. But it's not impossible and would solve the development pathway by having just a small number of elite programs. Players get free uni scholarships plus a small stipend so it's still attractive enough for most athletes and after maybe 2 years can enter the AFL draft.

I was a fan of raising it. At least to 19 so kids can finish school and start uni/technical training and then have something to fall back on. Although the top kids would only do the minimum of part time stuff around football. They'd be doing a lot of training for the draft and for playing well in a presumably under 19 champs. The main reasons I wouldn't change it are: 1. Some AFL clubs develop talent far better than the existent talent pathway - See how many tall undeveloped kids are taken each year - See how many well the northern club academies are doing compared to the old system 2. I don't think VFL clubs would be well suited to player development - They don't have the resources and giving them top juniors might just burden them 3. Some AFL clubs develop 18 year olds in to men better than other clubs 4. It robs the league of Bontempelli's, Viney's, Wines etc who can play from day one, from a selfish point of view with 18 clubs we need those guys But I feel really bad for poor kids in year 12 who are committing 20+ hours a week to footy training with absolutely no guarantee and must be either sacrificing school work or sacrificing their social lives (which are somewhat important for young guys development).

That he's headed for the national draft not PSD tells me he doesn't want to play for us Well Geelong have pick 55. We have pick 53. We've been playing nice for a long time. If he's the best available and still there well welcome to Melbourne.

The best players isn't great. The tackles poor. The disposals hardly inspiring either even for a deep forward. But the marks numbers and shots on goal are pretty solid. There's no doubt this kid can be a great target inside 50. The midfield and strong backline are mainly the backbone of any good team and of the Roos game plan. Not to mention forwards like Hogan who get up the ground and are crucial to ball movement. But the other thing about Roos' game plan and footy in general is teams are defending so hard you need forwards who can win contests that aren't in their favour. McCartin looks ideally suited to that. He's going to be hard to pass up.

I remember those days. Blease and Davey were always last in the repeat 300's even trailing in the young talls. Davey paced himself through them to somewhat trial in behind. Blease tried to keep up for the first couple and then in the latter reps was miles behind. Not all his fault. He probably should've been held out of football until he got up to scratch. Instead he teased with some VFL performances and wasted time as the sub. He was fitter this year and so he found some reasonable consistency in output in the VFL. But was such a poor VFL team that I'm not sure anyone would've looked great. It's much easier to take care of your defensive game when you don't have to be the driving force in actually attacking the game. That said he was still miles of it at AFL when he did get his chance.

Anyone feel like a GNF riddle: Blease to the cats is a Lynden deal.

No way. Hasn't played a good game in years and even then he wasn't anything special. Short, slow, poor skilled. We've got guys like Michie and Riley already who are far more worthy to get games in to than Polks.