DeeSpencer

Pick 3 Frawley - Pick 4, then on trade that in a Dom Tyson style deal, say for pick 15 and a player Toumpas - Pick 12-15 (Port or Adelaide) Watts - 20-25 Trengove or Grimes in an upgrade for our second rounder (pick 20odd) for a team around pick 12 It would leave us with 3, 12, (Trengove+2nd rd),14 (Toumpas), 15 (Frawley), 23 (Watts) plus a decent player Pretty much selling the currency of 4 players in order to get 4 picks plus replacing one of those players with a decent player in a Tyson like deal. It would be a move to go full ball in to the draft in order to get a group of young players together the way the Saints are building now and the way the Hawks and other teams build together. It disregards a few things: 1. I think development has way over taken the draft alone as a way to build 2. We already have some pretty high level talent youth wise coming through 3. We've had 2 failed rebuilds, the fans don't want another 4. It's just not Roosy 5. Hogan, Viney, Tyson, Salem, Kent. We have some upside talented kids who need to get games already 6. Tanking and Neeld destroyed our playing groups spirit, trading a bunch of them will do the same 7. All these high draft picks would be nice, but we'd still have to use a bunch of third and 4th rounders on our actual delistings/retirements

I don't buy this role players mumbo on how some on here have manipulated it. Doing your role means performing to a standard. Footy is not some magical game where effort alone and attempting to follow the coaches instruction produces results. I understand role players when mentioned in conjunction with lock down defenders who play within themselves with ball in hand. Or someone like Bail who's in the team for his run and defensive efforts. But when Roos brings it out when talking about Watts I can't help but think it's just a BS excuse he's using to protect Watts from criticism. Because the current criticism of Watts is fair but Roos knows he got more than enough that was unfair early in his career. There is no role in a team that sees players miss tackles and fall over from being out of position and not attack contests.

Heard that. Likely just a rumour or speculation based from sources, there's no way all 3 clubs would leak answers, if they've even made up their minds. But based on needs it's a fit. GWS have no need for McCartin and less need for Wright unless they only want to play him ruck and I wouldn't take a ruck number 1, a dynamic mid/fwd makes a better fit for them. St Kilda have Rhys Stanley as a second ruck or could use Hickey/Longer in combination and desperately need a key forward. And either a mid or Wright as a fwd/ruck makes sense for us. Just on the footage above Wright looks very raw. Clean with his skills but raw in terms of how he uses his body, his intensity at the contest and physicality. I wouldn't expect much from him for 24 months as he learns how to compete against guys without just being bigger. But once he did to have a big guy with clean skills and good athleticism he could easily be a Kurt Tippett deep forward and relief ruck.

When you break your nose you need a small operation to set the nose back in place. This his replaced the old fashioned process of just 'setting it' back by hand. You can't do it in the first 4 or 5 days after the break as you have to wait for the swelling to go down. And once you have the operation for an every day person you wouldn't play for a month or so to allow the bones to heal. For an AFL footballer you can probably risk it after 1 or maybe 2 weeks out. If Pedersen was in the squad he would've played Saturday v Hawks, had the nosed operated Sunday or Monday, then been touch and go for selection again v GWS if all things went well. Instead because he was dropped they booked the surgery and got it done last week, he then missed all games over the weekend (hence the nose plaster) and then should be touch and go for this weekend be it AFL or VFL level. Just wanted to clear that up. And also point out that AFL players play games with broken unset noses if need be and play games the week after surgery (it's minor surgery) where every day people would wait a month or so for contact sports.

But surely 2012 and 2013 has shown you that no one develops in truly bad football teams. For most of the year at Casey the best has been dominated by Michie, McKenzie, Gawn, Blease etc. Not 6 out of 6 but pretty close. The two experienced senior VFL players on the Casey list are Evan Panozza and Troy Davis and they are more back up tall players, certainly not at the pointy end of state league players. They've only been in the best 6 players 4 times and 3 times respectively. Jake Best only once. Ed Morris who was straight out of the TAC and in the 2's mid season has been in the best 4 times. Look at this list: http://www.foxsportspulse.com/team_info.cgi?id=20320211&c=1-118-0-294689-0 Only Morris, Panozza, Smith and Davis in the best more than twice. That's an indictment on what Casey are bringing to the table. And of course the Melbourne list has (as all AFL lists are) been subjected to injury. No Clark, Hogan or Trengove all year. Spencer, Byrnes, King, Hunt missing big chunks. Casey have also lost a fair few close ones with fade outs. So it's not all a disaster. And as younger guys develop they might run out games better. Just pinching a couple of close ones and going from a 5-11 record to a 7-9 record would probably be a reasonable year. And that might have happened with just one or two more experienced Casey players.

So if the coach is completely wrong players should just sit back and put up with it? The whole time and place was a mess. But I think it's best considered a two way street. By the way the West Tigers in the NRL are going through a similar thing to us in 2011 right now and just lost 64-0. Comparatively from league to AFL I'd have that on par with 186.

The Nicholsons. Footy always starts with contests. And the Nicholson's would win the contests. Unfortunately Nicho is also a little soft and not that great at the contests (besides his fumbles and turnovers) but overall pace, endurance and ability to actually lay a tackle would lean to the Nicholsons. In reality it's a team of VFL players v another team of VFL players. Which is where Watts belongs

No change. Riley to start, JKH sub. Continue use of guys like Barry, Watts, Vince, Riley, Michie, Cross, Matt Jones in a range of positions I think is a good idea. Keep the structural players (talls, lock down defenders, top mids like Tyson, Jones) in set spots but mix up the small forwards, half backs and wings like Hawthorn do.

King and Harmes aren't ready. No benefit in handing them a soft debut. And I'm the other 3 can be evaluated at VFL.

We actually didn't kick the ball too badly yesterday. Sometimes even going forward we hit up Dawes and Frawley much better than in previous weeks. But Hawthorn power run and carry from half back and then kick in to space often for midfielders or half forwards leading in all sorts of directions to the space who can then wheel and kick to dangerous areas and one on ones. McDonald was dead to rights on Roughy with that deliver. At times Garland and Howe stopped Breust. Schoenmakers stopped himself. Jetta destroyed that little turd Puopolo. Jack Watts got beaten by Schoenmakers by not winning a one on one that led to a Hill goal. Slipped off a tackle that couldn't hurt a fly when Breust turned and ran straight for goal which he does incredibly well. And conceded another goal when instead of being goal side he was trailing his man and was tripped up by a McDonald/Roughead contest. But hey when you can't find the intensity and lay tackles forward why are you going to do it down back? Dunny also stuffed up a bunch of one on ones that were quite surprising. He's had a shocking 2 weeks although was better in the second half. A switched on Lynden Dunn, never ever playing Watts in the backline again when up against that quality of an opponent and Matt Jones avoiding a comical turn over and we probably hold Hawthorn to a reasonable score whilst still getting some ball movement and flow to our game. Pretty much the plan was right and the players executed the plan about as well as they could. We just need our bottom 10 players to be fitter, faster, stronger and more experienced and more skilled. If Gawn, Barry, Michie, Riley, Tyson, Viney, Kent, JKH and McDonald all improve we are on to something.

I tweeted 7 at half time a few weeks ago asking for them to please get BT get to stop saying 'real' as an adverb. He kept saying what a real nice piece of play or he's real fast etc. Darcy does it as well. Anyway, second half of that game and BT started saying 'really' nice and 'really' fast and using a proper adverb not an adjective. Maybe it was a coincidence. But I thought it was a victory for the proper use of English. Call me old fashioned but I think TV commentators have a responsibility to at least not completely butcher the English language. BT has definitely toned down the over the top commentary and inane chat in the last 6 or so weeks. He's probably copping it now on reputation more than anything. Darcy is my least favourite of the Saturday night crew. Rumours are that next year 7 will convert Darcy to calling the games alongside BT. And as all he does is state the obvious poorly he should be doing it already. As a combination they might actually improve each others calling. Then Richo, Lingo etc can get some usual special comments in.

Barry started on Hill. Had a good first quarter. In the second he tried to corral Hill too much when at times I would've liked to see him just go hard at him and risk getting run passed. But that's ok. Hill snuck forward on a good lead and Barry wasn't able to spoil which resulted in a Hill goal (or behind) and he got another goal but that wasn't Barry's fault. All the while being near the play Barry got involved and wasn't bad. Second half they probably thought Hill had got on top so moved him forward and gave Matt Jones (who was having a stinker) a try on Hill. Barry got involved a bit forward and wasn't too bad. Overall he looked ok. Still timid, not soft, just timid as to whether to get involved in play. Definitely a defensive first and outside type at the moment but he should hopefully improve knowing when he's best of just hunting the ball or the person with the ball. Michie. He was ok as well. Cleaner with the ball than he was early in the season. Although kicked long from a centre stoppage free kick to Dean Kent at one stage. That's what I call an unforced error and it really annoys me. If you're bombing it long do it to a tall! He fought well at stoppages and won the ball and got it out. Certainly worked hard around the ground but you do notice he's still a bit off the pace when it comes to defensive spread. Just a matter of being 110% switched on I guess. But he's not the only Melbourne midfielder with that concern. The 27 plus disposals of Lewis, Shiels, Mitchell, Langford and 22 to 3/4 time for Hodge shows you how as a unit our guys need to lift. I think Michie spent some early time on Hodge before rolling on to Lewis. Michie and Riley both showed they can be contested ball winning mids. Barry showed he's not out of place at the level and has a heap of improvement in him. Gawn showed some lovely Max Gawn action. All 4 are worth watching over the next 3 weeks.

Not all meaning to pump myself up but I was mighty glad we saw a bit of this. Not all of it worked but it was worth a go. Barry tracked Hill very well for over a quarter. He got away a bit at the end of the second but fair enough, the way the Hawks move the ball and the way Hill runs he's pretty much unstoppable. Matt Jones moved on to him because he was having a shocker, freed Barry up to play half forward and he was ok there. Not sure how far Barry will go as he's very much an athlete who can kick but hey in todays AFL that gets you a fair way! Michie also learnt a lot about his spread defense I'd say. But he won some ball and clearances. He and Riley might be fighting for a spot but I think the word for that is depth, what a lovely idea! If they can get fit and learn to do different things they can make it as ball winners in the midfield which I'm sure Tyson, Viney and Jones would be pumped about! Cross at half forward and Vince at half back is a good move for the future I think. If we let those guys add experience to those units and things they badly need (Cross, some hardness and fitness across half forward) and Vince some skill from half back and we can break even in the midfield then we are getting somewhere. Tackling was good today. Pressure went in and out of the game. Our own ball movement, whilst full of skill errors seemed to have some proper function about it. A mix of fast and slow. Some good switches and patches through the corridor. I'd say the 4 steps to beat Hawthorn (which Geelong have done more than anyone) are: - Win the contested ball - Pass - Rebound out from their forward line pressure - I'd give this an ok. We were never going to do it but we gave it a go - Test their defenders one on one - not really. But Maxy Gawn gave us something. The likes of Dawes, Frawley, Kent had moments, but too often we could only get it to 60m out - Mess with their ball movement particularly forcing pressure to them at half back - fail. But there were a couple of patches where we pushed up and hunted them instead of dropping back. A patch in the second quarter threatened circle work and whilst they took the foot off the gas at least we didnt keel over.

Exactly. Unless he's in 30m of space why would you kick it to him because whilst at times (late last year) he's found some space on leads there's half a chance he either doesn't run through the lead or can't protect the drop with his body. If you don't mark it like a key forward (see Jack Gunston) then you aren't a key forward. So you have to contribute in more aspects. Which means winning contested ball and tackling etc. Watts is a great player. He's just no good with any footy that requires a contest. And Paul Roos' style emphasises contests. The one position where you don't find contests in this game style is the wing. Hence where Roos played him. However if you can't then run all day two ways to defend and attack and find the ball you'll fail there. I don't know how many times I have to call for Watts to go dominate VFL for him to learn how to be the man and impact games before it has to happen. It would be the best thing for him. Yet I feel the coaches are afraid he'd fail.

They did make it to those pair of AFC championship games. And were what 8-8 last year. So they remind me more of St Kilda or Richmond that us. It's just I think I could coach offense better than Rexy. I'd hire him every day of the week to be my defensive coordinator, but stay the heck away from offense! Unfortunately we can only dream of being the Jets. I reckon we are more Jacksonville or Oakland. Is anyone watching HBO's Hard Knocks at Atlanta's training camp. The first episode was hilarious.

1. You think Fitzpatrick actually had value last year 2. Unless Jamar and Gawn work out how to play together soon Fitzy is really only kept out of the side by Pedersen (which was unexpected) 3. Despite disappointing results at the start of the year Fitzpatrick might actually be better now than he was last year. They are teaching him how to ruck which he's apparently improved at. And are making him play more as a marking forward instead of just a fast leading player. I doubt his form last year was ever sustainable and that a club would've given anything more than the pick 44 Sydney got for Jesse White. I think the decline in his VFL results has been pretty linked to Casey's decline, I doubt he's getting any delivery at all. If he could learn to kick I'd still have faith in him as he's got that Stef Martin style speed and agility and there just aren't many forward/rucks who can do either skill well yet alone both. Unfortunately his kicking is so dreadful it ruins my confidence. 5 years on an AFL list and he hasn't significantly improved in the most important skill.

I don't mind young immature players who make mistakes. But Robinson is passed that. It's the second time he's brawled in public (that we know of) and he's lied about it. What's going to stop him spreading that culture? And he's crap anyway. He's not getting a game in top 4 side. He'd offer us minimum initial improvement and after that we'd be stuck with him.

I think tagging is the best way for him to establish himself as a player considering he doesn't find much of the ball at the best of times. So I think Cross will tag someone around the packs and eventually we might need someone else to take over in that role. But Barry can get up to AFL level by using his discipline and top quality endurance in a tagging role and hopefully then become a two way player later. It's why i think he's a nice match up for Brad Hill and hope they give him a chance to play the full game in that role compared to at half forward where he will likely struggle or as the sub which doesn't really suit him either. Barry will be interesting to watch these next 2 years. He's fit and fast. And should add a bit more size. He doesn't waste the ball he just doesn't seem to find it much either. An interesting proposition who I haven't always been keen on but the mix of speed and stamina is something we are so desperately lacking.

Can you even do this. My understanding was contracts are locked in and it's just not possible to delist a guy or even move them to the rookie list. I'd love to free up the spots but I don't think it's allowed.

Harsh to omit him, he's been playing well and doing the job. But if it wasn't this week when does Gawn get a chance? He had 50+ hit outs against an almost AFL standard ruck in Warnock, kicked 3 when resting forward and has been doing the same thing for a month. If it wasn't Pedersen then it might've been Jamar but the Russian has been rucking extremely well so I understand why he stayed in. The other options were to drop Dawes and Frawley as forwards but Frawley had his moments last week and Dawes is still the best defensive marshall we have out there. I would've moved Pedersen to CHB to play on Schoenmakers or Hale given the Hawks will likely go in with the 3 big guys (Schoenmakers, the resting ruck and Roughy). Instead it seems Garland will play tall and Jetta will take Breust. I can understand them not wanting to fiddle with the backline at this stage.

What I'd actually do is make some positional changes to see if we can get some improved ball movement and stay in the game defensively - Dom Barry to Brad Hill at either half back or wing - Cross to Lewis/Hodge or Burgoyne - Viney to mind Sam Mitchell at stoppages as another learning exercise - N. Jones, Cross, Tyson, Viney, Michie or Riley (the other as sub) to do the centre square minutes to free up: - Bernie Vince to half back - Matt Jones then plays his usual game on a wing Mainly I want some skill at half back in Vince, and I want to play Matt Jones, Barry and Michie in the midfield where they've been playing in the VFL and in the roles that suit them. It's not ideal for them to be back in the side the week we play Hawthorn to trial this and I understand why we need our best players in the midfield usually. But it's hardly like our midfield has been firing. Time to mix it up.

Don't get me wrong we needed to make some changes, but I'm not convinced they will help. Cross for McKenzie is an obvious upgrade in class there. But the rest: Gawn for Pedersen - more marking power and something extra in the ruck but we lose the ability to keep the ball in the forward line and Gawny has struggled to get to contests when forward at AFL level Matt Jones for Terlich - if Jones does play half back I'm not convinced he's a good defender or he can use the ball better than Terilch Michie for Tapscott - Michie is better as a mid but not sure about his ability on a flank Barry for Blease - Barry might be better defensively but not sure he'll find any ball

Bail's goal kicking has really improved. That's one positive. He's much more impressive as a defensive forward/hard working forward if when he gets a shot inside 50 he nails a good percentage. Don't have the stats to back it up exactly but just from watch he's a lot more confident and successful when kicking for goal.

Agree, but getting rid of Bail doesn't get rid of the problem. Kent, JKH, Salem and maybe Toumpas have the talent to take his spot. They just haven't been able to do it so far. Getting rid of Bail probably means anyone of those 3 become the next Sam Blease ie. gifted games and unable to fix the deficiencies in his game. It's the Blease's of the list who really highlight the problem which is failed development. We can draft and delist whoever we want but if we don't get some player development right with this current crop we will never get any better.

Tapscott (knee), Blease (never again), Riley Matt Jones, Cross, Gawn FB: Garland Pedersen Jetta HB: Dunn McDonald Howe C: M. Jones N. Jones Vince HF: Kent Dawes Bail FF: JKH Gawn Frawley Foll: Jamar Tyson Cross Int: McKenzie, Viney, Terlich S: Watts Pedersen down back to play on the resting ruck, McDonald on Roughead don't care if he gets a bath he needs the learning. Dunn on Gunston, Garland on Breust or vice/versa. Reinforcements to the midfield in Matt Jones and Cross. Gawn to hopefully provide a bit of a spark forward and some ruck advantage. Watts, Riley or if fit Tapscott for the sub spot, don't really care. So many limited footballers but my main focus was on who coming in because there's too many to actually drop Can add Michie or Strauss in to the team if you think they'd actually be better than someone else getting a game