DeeSpencer

Or for extreme optimists Boak (the leader and star) - Jones Hartlett (the injury restricted unfulfiled talent) - Trengove or Tyson Ebert (the consistent worker) - Viney Cornes and Cassisi (the underrated veterans) - Vince and Cross Wingard (the second year break out) - Toumpas Wines (the top 10 pick who makes those who passed look silly) - Pick 9 Unfortunately I don't like our chances of any of those players reaching the Port equivalent in 2014. But that's for the dreamers out there.

Nice work from Ryan but I'm not overly interested in hearing about Watts being the next O'Keefe or Viney being similar to Hannebery. Better comparison: Jones = Griffen Vince = Cooney Viney = Libba Cross = Boyd McKenzie = Wallis Trengove, Tyson, Michie, Watts, Toumpas = Macrae, Smith, Hrovat, Stevens, Hunter That Bulldog midfield was beaten by us and nearly rolled by GWS at their worst. But at their best served it up to some of the better sides and won 8 games for the year. Now you are some kind of optimist if you wouldn't settle for 8 wins next year right now. The Bulldogs top 5 has an edge on us as LIbba matured a lot in 2013 and Griffen has the edge on Jones and Cooney's best whilst rare is a step up from Vince. But after that I think we have the edge in the next 5.

I'm kind of with Robbo on this one. Sure go ahead and tee off on Whateley for race calling. If he's not much chop (and I haven't listened to him) then he's a part timer who's over exposing himself. But to add a cheap shot insulting Robbo's intelligence with Whateley criticism is exactly that. A bit of rivalry between the papers is fine but just a plain snide attack is exactly that and therefore Robbo has the right to be angry.

Our development has been rubbish. Only a small amount of players under the latter Bailey and Neeld years made any progress. Be it coaching, training standards, psychology or fitness we've been miles off the mark. Not saying Cook would ever had made it but he might have been at least a VFL seniors player at the end of his MFC career.

No need to defend yourself on those two when it comes to output and ability I think everyone on here knows they have talent and in Toumpas' case it should just be a matter of time, Blease a bigger concern. But the great balancing act for any bad team in any sport is do you go with the skilled players who might eventually make it or do you go with the guys who contribute now but might not have a great future. It's the same thing the Aussie cricket team is struggling with. In fact our slides have mirrored each other quite nicely. I just think the bulldogs 2013 would be a perfect model for demons 2014. Start off slow developing a few kids who can play but sticking with some older and more mature types (Nick Lower etc) until the team builds some confidence and then more young guys can come in - in the back half of the year the dogs got Tom Campbell, Nathan Hrovat, Mitch Wallis, Lachie Hunter, Tutt and even Jarrad Grant playing well! So if I was Roos I'd say we've got Kent, we've got Michie and Tyson stepping up, we've got Watts new to the midfield and we've got Hogan. So surround them with Cross, McKenzie and Matt Jones who can do the AFL running and physical stuff. Then second half of the year bring in Toumpas, Blease, Pick 9. Now that's all on paper stuff in maybe Michie and Watts need the VFL time and Pick 9 and Toumpas are AFL standard next year but either way my point is balancing some youth is probably a good idea in a team so bad last year that after a few goals were conceded in succession it often followed with 10 goal quarters against, no contested ball and no inside 50's.

I think people give Ben Hur too much credit around here as some kind of force of evil. He's got a lovely mix of narcissistic and antisocial nature to his prose, not doubt reinforced by those who call him names. Sure there was a lack of civility and the team work nature that lead to the most enthralling discussions on demonland but BH isn't here for that. He's here to express his view. He gave up. His answer was pretty reasonable in the end - he said the fringe positions are largely irrelevant as it's the enhance core of players that matter most. He didn't attack me personally in the answer. He did say Jamar was a spud but that's hardly earth shattering on demonland. And I can see the point although I'd argue with a team with a percentage of 54 getting all 22 working together makes a big difference as well as the top 15 or so who decide the outcome of most AFL games in a week.

Nah I'm pretty sure when Bailey let the players protest so much in the Geelong game that he put the noose there himself. The only problem was we didn't clean the whole joint out. Everyone says Watters is like Neeld due to the similar back ground and personality. But really he was like Bailey, undercut by footy manager and management. The Saints have now left the management in place to pick the new coach. For their sake I hope they at least go for experience.

Things I dislike. Would like an earnest debate BH cause I like your opinions - Naming Pick 9: We need to get out of this attitude. I think it's half the reason why Roos was so keen to trade pick 2. Pick 9 in all likelihood will be good enough but we shouldn't be reliant on it. The current players at the club have the best part of a months advantage under Roos and then much more fitness base. Let's wait until at least the draft until we get to this stage. If we draft Freeman then I'm not convinced he should be playing round 1 - Cross at half back. Cross is a midfield running specialist and can't hit the side of a barn by foot. Put him in the midfield and let him use his run, hand ball and ability to lead out in space and mark I'd say. The saints at this stage dont have a great 4th tall forward after Riewoldt, Lee and a second ruck. So at this stage Grimes can cover and Watts is always an option come game time. The Howe idea has merit as well but I liked to see another half season of him forward and midfield rotation especially work on his defensive game. Cross doesn't remind me of a Roos half back. - Jamar over Gawn. After his first preseason surely Gawn goes past Jamar. Gets way more footy and based purely on hit outs I think Gawn will even the gap - Blease. The ultimate Paul Roos prospect. All depends on his preseason and form if he's seriously fit and fires in the preseason then I'll be the first to pick him but surely the first thing Roos does is set a standard on work rate from our half forward/midfield rotation players and to me that means Blease starts at Casey and gets a good month of midfield footy and consistent performance. I don't have the faith in him right now. - Toumpas. Similar to Blease I think Toumpas has a heap of work on his physical game. He's a reasonably willing tackler but pretty rubbish in the air and good midfield runners can lose him in traffic or in space. And just like Blease it depends on preseason and how limited his first prep was I'd say. Overall (besides Gawn for Jamar as a personal preference) I think my main differences are because I'm looking towards a Roos style set up with a more skilled player at half back and replacing 3 young midfielders you've named (pick 9, Blease, Toumpas) with 3 older more mature and more defensive mids. Who knows if Roos will actually see it that way or will go for the speed and skill but I'm going on Roos' exposed form and if we aren't backing Roos in then we are stuffed!

Bailey's suspension was reported by some as part of the reason for Adelaide's regression this year.

The All australian at under 18 level is the most ridiculous award ever given. There's 4 teams competing you simply have to be the best player in your position of the 4 teams. I don't know who the other CHF's were in Cook's draft year beside Darling and as mentioned he had a poor carnival. So really a couple of good junior games had Cook in that prime position. Watts taking strong marks and winning games with clutch goals says all you need to know about playing as a key forward in under 18's. In Watts' year the only good key defender at the time was probably Hurley who was on Watts' team. That's the other thing to consider, who knows what opponents Cook was against. Cook is so low on the dees dodgy drafting record because we took a shot at a key forward at pick 12. You'll miss a lot with them. John Butcher looks like losing right now. Mitch Thorp and Beau Dowler were big wipe outs. You take a chance because the upside is huge. I get upset over Taggert, Tynan, Blease, Strauss, Tapscott and Gysberts before I care about Cook.

The guy's not the prototypical key forward though. He's 21 so it's incredibly hard to say anything negative about him right now but I think he should be moving in to the midfield a la Jarryd Roughead because at his size I predict his improvement as a true key forward is limited. West Coast dont have a big midfielder so I see it happening.

He's good, but maybe it was just a drop of form that young players suffer from but to me he's starting to look a bit more like he's not quite the dominant key forward but more a dangerous and crafty slightly undersized tall. Remember he dominated under 18's as a 17 year old and everyone thought he was the next Jono Brown. 12 months later he hasn't grown any taller, didn't play as well, messed around with a school girl and got his head kicked in on a night out. Of course a clever team drafting for needs in a tall forward still would've had him ahead of Cook but an even smarter team might have avoided both and gone for best available. Or taken Cook in the second round and developed him properly and maybe today he'd be a decent B grade option at least. His post AFL career has shown he wasn't ever going to be a star. I also think when Cook was drafted he probably should've been made a defender. Good reading of the play might have countered his poor athleticism and he did have nice foot skills.

Maybe they dont even make it back. If it's the official first day under Roos you'd think there would be a lot of meetings first and Misso might want to start with a session in the gym on the bikes or weights. Hopefully the clubs tweets a first open training date

1+2. We finished bottom 2 both years. We are always going to get a draw that appears easy on football aspects. And the way people rate draws are often very superficial. A 6 day break going from a saturday arvo to a friday night is not a big deal when your opponent is doing it as well. 3. The bail out package isn't huge 4. A new club took our number 1 pick and future hope. Sure that compensation looks generous due to Scully's rubbish form but what about the brand damage it did to us 5. Again they didn't fudge the numbers. Sylvia is worth the same as Dal Santo 6. Yes we get QBday. But it becomes our only drawing game 7. The AFL are rapped at us moving those games to 2 different markets and the NT government are providing the bulk of the funding. Everything the AFL gives us they then take something else. That's competition though so I understand it. Except I'd rather them not give or take anything instead of this rubbish they pull where they shift things around.

You don't agree with party politics? I actually like the idea of groups of people coming together in teams and putting away some differences for the sake of the overall ideal. At heart the Labor party is a beautiful idea, it's mandate is to protect the working class and marginalized and make sure social supports are strong. Same with the conservatives who's main idea is to keep the government unobtrusive with lower taxes to encourage growth and personal opportunity. Ideally the election cycles should swing from "they took all our money and haven't spent it on enough good" after a Labor government and then "the economy may be strong but their isn't enough government help for services and the little guy" after a Coalition government. Unfortunately the parties seem to be lurching towards the middle and we don't seem to be getting anything done one way or another. That said the main problem lies when moral issues become politicized. I guess we should be thankful we aren't the US where the republican party is so infiltrated with misfits from the church and the NRA that it's losing all legitimacy.

I heard this one. Don't you love these rumours. Also heard that the dwarfs at the mad monday were there as replica Watters', hence why they got set on fire.

That's why Saad's got an asterisk. It's not a great line up but I think it's far from useless. Most of the players have had a few preseasons so they aren't complete babies and the general skill and footballing level is actually pretty decent. I think that team it's actually harder to beat than people would realise. Steven and Armitage have taken over in the midfield now with help from Montagna. The big concern is winning games without Riewoldt dominating and so a lot falls to Lee and Stanley. But at Melbourne we haven't seen us win games with Dawes, Clarke etc because they haven't been out there.

Show me where. I think Frawley obviously gives us a class edge in the key defenders. I and rate Tom McDonald of course but he's not miles ahead of Delaney and Bruce. Mids and small defenders they win. Come the midfield its probably Vince, Jones and Viney V Montagna, Steven and Armitage, a match up they win. The likes of Michie, Tyson, Toumpas, Watts, McKenzie haven't shown anything more than the Saints young boys plus we'll add pick 9 and 40 whilst they'll add 3 top 20 picks including pick 3. Same for small forwards and rotating mids. Longer and Hickey v Gawn and Spencer for rucks. All 4 unproven. We have a clear edge in the back up ruck and key forwards with Clark, Fitzy, Dawes and Hogan v Stanley, Lee, Riewoldt. But that's only an edge if finally get our guys on the park together. We naturally have an advantage in that the bulk of a decent side on paper are already at the club but none of it has been developed. The saints have the advantage of a few more seasoned players across the lines and higher top picks in the draft. But it's way too early to declare us past the saints. We should've gone past them this year but stuffed that up badly

Classic Derm speaking before he thinks. If they employ Mark Williams they'll be level pegging with us. If they go a young coach they'll likely be behind but not miles behind. They've just added 2 decent big key defenders that they missed in 2013. Plus 3 first round picks and Shane Savage should help cover Nick Dal Santo. FB: Roberton Delaney Dempster HB: Fisher Bruce Geary C: Savage Armitage Newnes HF: Curren Riewoldt Ross FF: Schneider Lee Murdoch Foll: Hickey Steven Montagna Int: Stanley, Hayes, Wright, Pick 3 Plus. Backline: Simpkin, Gilbert, Gwilt, Webser Midfield; Longer, C. Jones, Saunders, Ray Forward: Milera, Siposs, Markworth, Dennis-Lane, Spencer White, Saad* Plus 2 more top 20 picks That backline despite the 2 talls not being superstars is very good. Good rebound and good defensive skills and coverage. Midfield lacks depth but probably still has us covered and they need fresh blood in the forward line but they aren't useless. Overall the doom and gloom about this list is over hyped. Nail these draft picks to fix the midfield and then they have most things sorted. Plus the plan will be to get the permanent answer post Riewoldt in next years draft that has a couple of gun key forward prospects. In terms of pure playing list I wouldn't be overly concerned if I was the next coach of the saints. I'd just want to know that the new Pres, new CEO and Chris Pelchen are all on my side.

Actually the club website has Pelchen named above Watters on a list which is indicative of where they stand. The saints appear at least in this case to have moved to a system seen in the NFL and many other sports where the football manager has authority beyond the coach. With all the pressure on coaches these days it's not a bad idea to limit their power and authority over what they actually control and specialise in. Then the manager of football can take care of the playing list and other decisions. If the 2 aren't getting along then you pick which one if not both are holding you back and fire them. At the moment the saints think Pelchen is doing a great job refreshing the list. He's just got 3 top 20 picks, added Shane Savage and replaced McEvoy with Longer which long term could be a masterstroke. Watters on the other hand seemed to be struggling sharing the responsibility and working with Pelchen so he's out the door.

Good decision by the saints. Watters was Neeld 2.0. Power hungry, horrible communicator, indecisive and divided the playing group. He didn't want the rebuild. The saints board and head of football did want the rebuild. Therefor you find the coach who fits the plan and you do it as soon as possible. The players can now enter the season with a clear plan to focus on and the club doesn't have the negative press of when Watters will get sacked which was bound to happen otherwise. But they have to go for Choco Williams I think. Which is unfortunate because he's a quality coach.

No idea. Someone was prattling on about him playing as a midfielder. And whilst a lot of us recognise Jetta might be a midfielder the reality is he's never played there for a long period.

Neeld and Royal a dysfunctional combination of coaching. Who would've thought it! But gee this shows what an entitled bunch of players we'v'e had recently. A rookie who came in to the game at 24 with obvious deficiencies in his game and he's complaining in the first 6 months of his career about having to be played forward. Talking about his strengths like he's some amazing endurance athlete when that's his job. Brushing over his weaknesses. Obviously Jon Ralph is leading him into these responses as on AFL.com.au and SEN he was much more reserved but I think it's another window it to what exactly has been happening at our club. The management and coaching has been so bad that the players don't trust the advise given. So when something goes wrong they have an out to just blame it on the club. It's hard to demand standards of improvement when players always feel they have an excuse due to poor coaching etc.

How do you propose the AFLPA go about influencing the relationship between the AFL and the TV networks? Are you suggesting that at the next CBA they strike on the basis that the AFL sells out too many games and doesn't give them equal exposure. Sounds unlikely to me. The AFL are committed to 18 teams, the players get looked after fine. It's the clubs who are getting screwed.

Yeah he's AFL appointed but it's not like they are paying his bill directly and forced him to come work for us. They simple identified him for the challenge and he accepted it. The AFL got nearly 1 billion for 5 years of TV rights. Throw in their own sponsorship's and endorsements that are multiple, plus radio and other media rights and their share of the game receipts and we are looking at an orginasation that must bring in nearly 250 mil per year right? And it's all based on 18 teams playing 9 matches a week right. That's there product. So I understand they dont want to dilute the big matches but surely you should give each team an opportunity to bring in a share of money as well so they can stay strong by themselves. To be honest I'm ready to give Queens Birthday the flick. It seems to be the AFL's response when anyone questions our commercial fairness. And they have been holding it over our head whenever they need to as well. I always here that the Dees have retained QBday. Yet I never hear Coll and Ess have retained ANZAC day. It's an insult to the loyal demon fans who turn up every year. I just hope we have that good season next year otherwise we will be looking at a big debt blow out. PJ has already cut back a number of redundant positions at the club but he can't cut back much more I wouldn't think. And we are spending 1 mil more per year on our senior coach. I don't want supporters to be asked to dig into their pockets again whilst the AFL continue to rake in such huge profits and then charitably offer us not much over 1 mil relief funding all dependent on agreeing with them overseeing the club.