Keyser Söze

Exactly. And it is in no way undervaluing Davey, but he is not yet in the class of a Judd, Pavlich, Brown, Hodge or Franklin. I have seen these 5 players take over games. Judd has done it since going to Carlton; taking clearance after clearance in a final quarter, willing his team over the line. Davey does not yet do this. Given time he may; even if he doesn't it is nothing to be ashamed of.

He didn't say that; he said we will only see glimpses until then. The presumption being that by 2012 the glimpses will have become consistently great performances. As much as we'd like him to be, Jack Watts is not Nick Riewoldt. He may one day be better; he may turn out to be worse. But expecting him to reach the same milestones would be folly. Edit: grammar.

On the back of a wily old fox as a coach. He took some good risks and the players didn't die wondering.

I think you overestimate Davey, or what he has shown so far. He's a very good player, but I am yet to see him take a game by the scruff of its neck and win it off his own boot. He's kicks timely goals sometimes and is very clean with the footy, and may take that next step... but so far he hasn't.

Salient point. I hope one is an indication of the other, but to be honest, we've not yet been in a position to find out.

He'd think the loss must've been against Hawthorn, because they can do no wrong and the AFL revolves around them.

10am start

Good man, you get it.

Surely you stick to points that serve the purpose of defending the club, rather than bringing up MFC's perceived weaknesses. Maybe that's just me...

Yep. I'd say Charman will get squeezed out for most of the season, decide to leave at season's end and then stay at home and play with GC17. Leuenberger is only getting better and if its a line-ball decision he'll play every time.

The reality is that teams built of great players like the Saints and the Dogs aren't automatically premiership teams. All of our young players, properly developed, will evolve into a premiership CONTENDER. Don't count your chickens.

Clark won't fit in a forward line that already has Fev and Brown. Maybe he'll end up at CHB?

One of those 3 could easily find themselves defecting to GC17 at season's end. My prediction would be Charman.

Really? His body was that of a TAC cup FP. He needed to develop his body to be able to compete. When he gets the ball and gets to the right spots he is clean and makes good decisions. So far he has not managed to get to the right spots due to a combination of poor fitness and reading of the play. A couple of seasons were always going to be needed to improve these things. Just another kid we have to be patient with; getting them on the list is only the first step.

It has, but I don't think many took it seriously.

"drafted AMONG the best" I should have said.

Will be there, camera in hand.

Having had time to sit down and actually read his entire article in the paper... Shane Crawford's effort here is pathetic. He has only regurgitated old articles and so-obvious-Robert-Walls-could-see-it viewpoints. He constantly refers to his 'spies' and sounds much more informed about anything involving Hawthorn or ex-Hawthorn players. The rest is filler because he has actually done no research into what is going on; merely he has made what he thinks are educated guesses. Don't waste your time reading it.

Your argument depends on your definition of the bolded section. If you mean we brought the best talent into the club of any other team, then we have drafted the best. If you mean we've managed to draft the best young talent in relation to which picks we had, then it is debatable. I'd say the former is only relevant for this thread.

It is a crock, but it doesn't necessarily say our players aren't up to standard. It is an indicator of our dearth of competent senior players over the last 3 or 4 years. Whether the young players were up to scratch or not is not relevant or indicated - they had to play.

How exactly do you do that? It's subjective. Performance is judged based on indicators such as games played. MFC players will appear favourably because they have played, but this system fails to take into account that some have played ahead of their time due to injuries to others, or the club having insufficient capable senior players. More of MFC's later draft picks have earnt significant game time, whereas the doggies receive a poor rating due to few of their recent draftees having been able to squeeze into a strong side where the majority of performers aren't in their final years.

??? You don't have to sell TVs to know how they work. I've bought a few TVs in my time and I know enough. Your own lack of knowledge on the subject isn't reflective of everyone else's.

Exactly. Crawf is an attention seeker, hence his claim the doggies will win the flag. He's taken a different stance to get noticed. Beyond that there is nothing insightful or clever in that article; it looks like it has been written with the bare minimum of effort.

It'll depend on our ruck situation when we cross that bridge.

Brownlow would be nice, but Col Sylvia will steal too many votes off him!