Rogue

It's not that I didn't see much improvement, it's that I saw a decline. However, I didn't see the extent of the decline that occurred. Then again, I'm not sure how anyone could - injuries hastened our fall dramatically (but it's probably a good thing we bottomed out quite rapidly). Who is in your best side and what's the age? Given how few of our best 22 are older than mid-20's I'd be surprised at that.

Indeed! Do we want to give Moloney the kiss of death?

I agree with you on both points - it is hard to comment without being in the inner sanctum, but Green for a while and then handing the baton on to the best of the youngsters seems the way to go. One potential concern with the Moloney suggestion is that there may come a time well before he's reached retirement age when there are better leadership prospects and/or he's no longer in our best 18. It would make for an interesting dynamic.

Obviously there are some guys that don't fill out - Ferguson says 'hi' - but Newton's only 22. I still think he could add some bulk. I haven't seen much of this, particularly in marking contests. His technique might be good but his conversion is good. I wouldn't be surprised if it's a mental thing. IMO if he comes good for one of these reasons it won't be because he's under pressure to perform or perish, it'll be because of something you allude to later on: For all his flaws, Newton gets enough shots at goal. If he can work on his goal kicking he'll be every chance of getting another AFL contract.

Valenti's a better player but I'm not sure how much improvement is left. He seems like a guy who would be getting the most out of himself and I don't think he's quite there. I don't think Buckley as good and he may well be fatally flawed for AFL level but he has the potential to be a better player. Since I can't see Valenti as part of an elite AFL midfield I'd take Buckley. I agree. It'll be interesting to see if we do delist three more though. Assuming we keep one pick for the PSD, is pick 50 in a shallow draft pool (due to the changed age rules) worth more than a guy like Buckley or McNamara? Of the listed players you've mentioned, only Bartram and Miller are uncontracted. It seems likely we'll cut three more, so if not Buckley, who else are you getting rid of?

Some of his kicking into our forward 50 was actually very impressive. While I think Wellman's using a bit of dramatic effect with the '27 year old' call, he makes a good point. I'm still not sure how he'll turn out though.

If Maric hadn't come to the Club with such a big wrap on his efficiency it'd be interesting to see if fans were so adamant about his skills. I don't think he's lived up to that reputation yet, which is fair enough - he's only played a handful of games. However, I think the Champion Data stats from his junior days have framed the discussion. Anyway, good news that he's signed up but it's a signing you'd expect. Hopefully we can sign up our better players soon.

Still young, but last we saw of him he was Ward-like. Initially the biggest problem was his workrate but that improved after he was dropped. However, his disposal is still a concern and unless that improves dramatically he's nowhere near best-22 in a few years (or we're nowhere near good enough). Unfortunately for Buckley he might get cut when, if the contract situation for a few others was different, he might have hung on for another year.

I don't think either of these will spend a majority of their time in the backline. Grimes will be used in a midfield role more than occassionally - I imagine he'll train with the mids over the pre-season.

No, I don't. I was thinking of the next line 'the team of the red and the blue'. I'm not sure what you mean by this. The emblem is clearly the flag (lines 1-3). I don't think the team represents the emblem - an emblem is representational, and the song states that the flag - the emblem - is the emblem of the team. The emblem is clearly the emblem of the team, not the Club (lines 4-5). Hence my - firmly tongue-in-cheek - suggestion that you contact the Club to get this horrendous oversight corrected. I think you started the semantics when you ripped into someone about their sig having a line from the song which refers to 'team'. Common usage isn't always perfect. Ever heard someone say 'which team do you go for?'. They're not referring to a particular list in a particular season. While it might not be correct, team is used in place of Club at times, including in our own song. If we sing a song that uses 'team' in this manner you could cut some slack for a guy and his sig.

Need to get on to the Club ASAP to change the song.

IMO this analogy doesn't work. Picking Scully at pick #2 has no impact on his playing role etc, whereas swimming 3rd instead of 4th or being deputy instead of PM is a major difference. If the suggestion was to play Scully as a forward pocket instead of a midfielder that might be analogous.

The only part I didn't hear when Robbo retired was this: The rest he's said before.

I don't think bb was suggesting that.

IMO this shows we need to find some good tall prospects. It seems like there won't be anyone worth taking as a KPF in the top two though, so I'm not sure where we're going to find one. It's very hard to get a good KPF via a trade and it's also quite hard (relatively speaking) to find a KPF later in the draft. Add this to the fact that KPFs take a long time to develop and future drafts are going to be pillaged by GC/WS and it looks somewhat bleak if you think we're short talls.

Probably flattered by the times where he hasn't made the difference/missed everything from 40+, but it's still a surprisingly positive return.

First, IMHO whoever deemed us as 'the best Victorian list' had rocks in their head (where's mo64 with his obligatory jab at RR?). I certainly didn't predict the injury-plagued train wreck of a season we had in '07, but we were only going to get worse after 2006. Most of our key players were going to be past their best and our age gap - as a result of some draft penalties and failed picks - was going to bite us. Second, while I have no problem with deriding the Dockers, they finished above us in 2006 for a reason. Heading over to Subi is always a big ask for us and this was no different. From memory we also had an injury crisis that meant 426 was taken over there as a ruckman against one of the better rucks going around at the time. To be fair, virtually everyone in this thread's been ripping into Collingwood and their supporters.

+1 IMO it works well as is.

I agree. McLean wasn't overly harsh - he said Newton had the ability (which many here disagree with) but said he hadn't been able to string consistent games together. Given Newton's been in and out of a cellar-dwelling side with a number of injuries that's a pretty fair comment. I don't think this suggests we're going to pay Newton out. Would it be beyond belief that McLean simply didn't know or forgot that Newton was contracted?

Regarding his comments on Watts, I'd like to know what exactly it is that you disagree with.

Absolutely.

Off the top of my head we had guys like Schwarz, Lyon, Tingay, G Lovett, Prymke and Charles cursed with injuries around that time. Who else?

Unless you think McLean is going to decline I don't know why you would trade now, when his trade value is at its lowest. Not that I'm particularly keen to offload either of them at this stage, but Moloney and Jones would give you more bang for buck at the trading table. I think Moloney's value would be quite high after a return to some sort of fitness and a consistent year, while Jones is the type of player that another Club might feel has potential untapped by Melbourne. I doubt we'd get enough to look at trading any of them though.

:D