DeeSpencer

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.

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.

Considering that Port were keen to keep him and offered a contract and the article says he'll head to the draft you have to think he's not eligible as a delisted free agent. But you're right in that it's vague

Which is why it wont be him. He's always been a hard worker. He's had lots of games to get up to speed at the level and I doubt he's in for a position change. I really like Bail. Despite a number of shockers he also played some really solid games this year and in a better team he's positives would stand out more and his negatives be covered. But I don't see him taking a leap.

That we haven't delisted him by now possibly might indicate we are still interested in him some what. Maybe we are going to wait until the break is over and see what condition he comes back in. Then again he could just as easily be delisted tomorrow so time will tell.

I was surprised at the time as well. But then again we only had Frawley, McDonald, Dunn and Garland as taller defenders and the footy department probably knew Frawley was looking unlikely as a long term proposition. Dunn was far from a sure thing either. Howe was a forward. Pedersen was nothing more than a VFL player no matter what end he played at. Garland had just had ankle surgery (or was struggling with the injury). I guess they thought a late rookie pick on a competitive type of player to have around for a year was better than having a kid who was never going to play or blocking up the midfield (at AFL or VFL level). Sully from Geelong VFL is the one mentioned as one of the best key defenders in state leagues who might actually have AFL ability as was available in the 3rd round of last years rookie draft (presuming he was nominated and happy to be drafted). I'll look out for mature key defenders in this draft and hope we didn't fail to take one. But overall we at least got something from Georgiou which puts him ahead of most 3rd round rookie picks in weak drafts.

Well all national draft picks come on 2 year deals so hate to break that to you. Not to mention that's for a reason as well because the first year really should be about developing their bodies and adapting to AFL. Sometimes it's better to take the final year of an unde rperforming player hoping that something changes over preseason than extra 4th round draft picks. As for keeping players longer, well sometimes you end up lucking in to a Pedersen or Jetta if that happens. The other thing to remember is that by giving 2 year deals sometime you can save yourself big money in the second year. If you grab a guy for a 1 year deal and he turns in to a very serviceable player then you have to pay him like it from the next year. And finally there is a market out there. We aren't an attractive club even for guys wanting games. So you can't offer 1 year deal and minimum coin to players who have other options. Including state leagues. Better recruiting and development will no doubt solve a lot of these problems. I don't think the turnover has been heavy enough if recent years. I think that going all the way back to Daniher who loved a lot of his players and didn't even turn them over in the team yet alone off the list. Then when Bailey came in they shifted too many older guys and filled the list with younger suspect guys.

Well in a lot of ways that game wasn't junk time, until it was. And remember at the time Evans was right up there in our most promising mids. We really didn't have much else. He was finally over his injury troubles and was showing something. He had 27 touches on debut as a 19 year old. A Melbourne player this year told me that Evans has natural contested ball winning abilities as good as anyone at the club as well as really good strength for his size in marking the ball. Unfortunately the knock on him is he just doesn't have the commitment required to make it at the top level.

You don't play SANFL for that many years if you aren't passionate about footy, but the financial realities are he's better off working as an engineer and presumably getting 70k minimum and then getting SANFL payments as a premiership full back on top of that and so more than likely taking home 6 figures. If he stayed on 55k as a rookie plus 3k per AFL game then he'll have to play more than 7 games a year to make nearly the same amount and every year you miss out on progressing your career. He gave himself at least a year to make it as if he was upgraded then there's 200k per year for 2 years minimum and you can always go back to engineering later (and without a mortgage!). The press release was more about saying what he had given up. If you have inside knowledge he was happy to walk away then so be it. Personally if the offer was there I'd have given it another year to see what can happen if I were him. If he can get his old job back (engineering and football at Norwood) then at least he wont be a player who crashed out of the system so I hope that's the case for him. Either way risking it to make it an AFL is better than those clowns who give their jobs up to go on big brother!

But the difference between a 3rd rd pick and a rookie is 20k and a 2 yr deal v a 1 yr deal. Only poor clubs would treat guys differently. Hawthorn have created this culture at Box Hill where young players go to Box Hill to feel part of the Hawthorn system. No doubt they don't exactly get anything like the support given to the Hawthorn players but the feel like they do. Apparently even this year the guys at Casey felt like second rate citizens around the club. Especially late in the year. They weren't happy with the MFC coaching provided to them whilst they were at Casey and late in the year they frequently trained separately to those who were lining up for Melbourne. We wont get anywhere as a club until that kind of attitude is fixed. So I see the hiring of the new Casey coach as crucial and I hope he has Roos' ear as well as the guts to reform the system even if that means calling Roos or Allison out.

Yep. If we are going to use the disparaging term list clogger then at least use it for a guy who's been on the list for 5 years and done nothing and wastes a spot. It's pretty hard to clog the list just having a year on the rookie list!

Wouldn't impact the room for PSD or DFA but it's not a bad point. Lever would push Georgiou further down the depth order in medium/tall defenders so better to use his spot on mids/forwards. That said I think they'd make the move regardless. With pick 2 in the rookie draft we can probably get the best tall defender in that pool of players if we wanted. Or even with the 2nd rd rookie pick. Whoever that player may be is likely to have more upside than Georgiou.

From a personal view I thought Georgiou gave up a lot and had a good crack at it and was important in making the team competitive early in the year. From a critical list management view: 187cm key defender with poor skills. Came in and did a job for us whilst Garland was injured and Frawley/Dunn were forward but the reality was he was only ever going to be depth. Why carry depth with limited potential when you are a bottom 4 side? Tall defenders: McDonald, Frost Medium defenders: Dunn, Garland, Howe Swingman: Pedersen There's enough coverage there for 3, maybe 4 spots in the team. If we could get Mitch Brown from Geelong on the rookie list he has more ability than Georgiou, has the probably physical tools and can cover either end of the ground. Plus there's always a chance you can get his head switched on and he can actually make it as a long term player. He's just an example.

NFL practice squad. 5k per week for the 16 week season so hardly much more money. No security. Can be cut at any time. But do have the option of being signed to any other team at any time (after which they can be cut again the next day). Now that the minimum salary is 55k I don't feel so bad for them but it's pretty restrictive. I presume Harmes gets some VFL match payments on top of that for the games he played? Maybe 1,000 per game extra? You could make all rookies free agents at the end of 3 years. If they aren't upgraded by then and have had 3 years of limited rewards maybe the deserve a shot to pick their club if they aren't happy at their current club. That said I presume they can be traded or not sign on for the 2nd and 3rd years and enter the drafts if they so wish.

We get 40 list spots. 44 if you include rookies. The average return of late round draft picks or rookies is diddly squat. We extended the contracts of Bail, Riley and Terlich all before the trade period. The way I see if between now and this time next year if things are at least heading in the right direction then the cost-benefit of keeping him will probably still be worth it. Remember he's a great leader and guy to have around. Presumably we were interested in trading him and 23 for pick 12 maybe as part of a bigger deal. Even still that's a significant pick upgrade and shows he still has value. If we were willing to [censored] him to the Tigers for a 4th round pick and then want to keep him for 2 more years then it's a different scenario. For now I guess lets worry about this year first.

By the way I found it strange Tapscott hasn't got the chop yet. And he did seem to have more chance than Strauss and Blease last year as well as more injury niggles. He'd be the ultimate Jetta rebirth if he went back to the rookie list. Unlikely, but never say never I guess.