Keyser Söze

Yes, the substitue will need to be a versatile player, not necessarily tall, but it will necessitate the use of guys like Morton or Dunn who are big AND mobile, so players can be shifted around the ground to fill holes. They will rotate. The substitute will also change week to week, even if fitness is maintained via extra training. These things I'm stating may seem obvious, but many have missed them up to this point.

It has been in early days, but as time goes by he shows more and more. Still not enough, but enough to have not given up hope. The kid has time on his side.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/no-rest-for-the-bench/story-e6frf9jf-1226022084920 The plan is for the substitute, depending on actual game time played, to complete a rigorous training session after the match, to ensure match fitness is maintained.

This is Mike's predicted top 50 headed into the season. Presumably he thinks Jamar will drop off, while Jolly & Mumford will be better. He may be called a fool and make some contentious decisions, but no one else releases a top 50 players list that gets paid this much attention. Credit where it's due. (which makes me wonder why the Age have never tried to jump on the bandwagon & release a rival list...)

One idiot posted that in the feed and Stevens said he'd check on that. He never mentioned it again. I'm sure if there was even the slightest hint of truth in it, he'd have found out and there'd be a Hun fluff article about Sylvia being in doubt for round 1. Relax and worry about things that have actually happened...

Maric was drafted a year earlier and has just now started to fulfill some of his potential. Blease was even bottom-age in his draft year, like Watts, and is only 19. He also lost a year due to the broken leg. He has at least 2-3 years before anyone should be worried.

Jaded's post was actually quite funny & clever. The posts following on from that aren't, and it's got little to do with them being in poor taste. Honestly, if you're going to make a joke, can it at least be mildly funny..?

Like a broken bloody record... The season can't start soon enough!

Well, if you can't understand the merit in Bailey's simple approach, then it's pretty clear that I am and you unfortunately are not... I'm pretty good, that much is certain.

*sigh* Sometimes, it doesn't matter how much sense you make, some people refuse to listen... You guys are seriously lacking some perspective here.

I think you might be right. I'm thinking "taller Jarrad Grant".

Look at the raw attributes that Watts possesses. This is what I look at when assessing a young prospect. Compare them to what Miller had. No contest. Excellent pace & agility, taller, much better skills and kicking for goal, higher football IQ, excellent below his knees. All Miller really had was a bit of size he was willing to throw around and an excellent work ethic. If Watts can develop the same, we'll have an out & out champion. It is already clear that if he doesn't he'll still be a very good player.

It also puts a bit more heat on Stef Martin - perform or we'll swap you with Juice! We're not bluffing, we'll do it!!

Realistically, Evans would have a hard time squeezing into the side when other fringe dwellers in Maric and Nev Jetta have had such great preseasons.

Yes, in ONE game. Played by a 19 year old. Do you recall what supporters said of Frawley or Garland back in 07/08..? Give the kid time FFS. It doesn't matter what you see because he's still bloody developing! Why is that so hard to understand? Stupidity? Impatience? Denial? What is it?!

Dappa, I believe it's that a midfielder has 5 minutes to show that he has what it takes, while a tall has 5 years to show that he doesn't. * Unless you are Jack Watts, then supporters begin baying for your blood after 5 weeks.

The rich man's curse. I'm blessed with intelligence and frustrated by those around me who are not. Especially when it's so bloody obvious, as in this case.

My apologies. I couldn't remember & couldn't be bothered checking. Yours have produced some replies that our just as bad though!

Not at all. We would want to have more than one tall KPF in our forward line if at all possible. It is not a 'one or the other' proposition.

I'm pretty sure they were keeping a close eye on Robbie Campbell until we pounced, meaning they had to settle for our scraps. Cheney isn't all that bad though.

Personally, I think to stop at winning games as the aim is micromanagement of our goals. Even premierships is too close-minded. He should go into the huddle and the sole priority should be a decade of abject domination. Anything less and he has to go. I can imagine Bailey now talking to the boys: "Grimes, you need to stop being so undisciplined or this run will end at only 3 premierships. Stay tight on Dangerfield in this quarter, and on LeCras next week, Monfries the week after, but then I want you to play as a loose man against the Lions and really drive the ball forward. Stop focusing so much on the task at hand and look further ahead. Boys - kick more goals and let less in. Simple. Run it every chance you get, although, bear in mind against the Swans in 6 weeks they'll slow it down and try to create stoppages. Be prepared for that. And in 3 years we expect Collingwood will change their gameplan, so be ready for it. ... Kick it long."

Maybe this is the crux of the issue..? Some posters understand the reasoning for Bailey's approach and applaud it. Others want to have a whinge because after a loss they don't hear the soundbites they are gagging for. Completely different topics, yet perplexingly the same.

I'm shocked more people don't recognise the genius of Bailey's method. Dividing the game up into easily manageable packages of work, to maintain the players focus. Young players who are inexperienced and need to maintain their focus with a simple methodical system of achieving goals. Nowhere did Bailey ever say "just focus on winning 3 of the 4 quarters," he has said (paraphrasing) "focus on winning each and every quarter in isolation as an achievable goal." This makes the players maintain an even focus, rather than riding the rollercoaster of emotions in an entire match. Focusing on the quarter at hand and winning that means that they are not focusing on (as an example) having lost the last quarter by 8 goals & they are not distracted by the enormity of the task ahead, of getting back into the game. If they then knuckle down & win the next 3 quarters by 3 goals each, the game is won. I'm not sure how it has slipped through the net, but Paul Roos has always had a similar philosophy in terms of playing the game. He doesn't word it the same way, but it is almost identical. And the hallmark of his teams has been a tough consistent unflinching effort across an entire match. I think the only reason anyone doesn't understand this is due to their own inability to comprehend.

Sorry, we're not accepting new members at this point in time.

Doesn't that demonstrate that sometimes the coach can be doing everything right, but you have to wait for something in the players to 'click' before they truly find form? There's no secret formula, but it's easy to blame the coach without looking at other factors that influence form. Easy and stupid.