Rogue

CJ's handy and will probably forge a decent AFL career. I think many people had already crossed a line through CJ earlier in the season, only to reach for the white-out later in the year. I'd prefer we kept him, but it won't be the end of the world if he goes. I imagine the answer is that the Club doesn't rate CJ as highly as you.

Firstly, 'more remote' isn't a definite statement. However, if you're right re: Gosch's Paddock, it's pretty interesting. I'm not sure what other options there are - both Stynes and Schwab have said our future is in the heart of the city, and I don't think training on the MCG full-time during the season is even a remote possibility. Where else? As far as I'm aware, it's not a done deal - it wasn't late-ish in the season, and I haven't heard any announcements since then. Maybe we'd lose some money we had to front up though, but I don't think the contract has been put to bed. There's been some speculation that this could be the case for a while not, but it seems mostly based on lack of progress at the OP precint and the touted redevelopment of the 'G plus our desire to cosey up with the MCC. Is that the case with your guess? I don't think it's the fit-out that is necessarily the major cost concern.

There's a report button under each post (bottom left, under the 'favourite players' field).

Perhaps a 'name' would have got the members excited - did anyone get excited about AA and premiership-winning 300-gamer Paul Williams? - but a 'name' doesn't make you a good coach. Mark Williams' promotion might get people who've heard of Sandringham's recent success a little excited (does anyone get excited about second or third-tier coaching appointments?). A name's nothing, particularly if your name comes from playing rather than coaching. Do all successful people have the ability to teach others how to be successful? I've met experts in their field who couldn't teach if their life depended on it. Likewise, I don't know why you would think a coaching appointment pre-requisite is a big name. In short: substance > style. While I can understand a common sense approach would suggest that it's a specialist role, it doesn't seem unusual for second-tier AFL coaches to take on different areas during their career. I think the most important aspect is being a good coach - all the knowledge in the world is no good if you can't coach. Mark William's past performance suggests he can coach. I'm more optimistic about 2009 than I was coming into 2008. I wouldn't be surprised. I think Schwab said that we would need to make sacrifices in the short-term to survive, and this would impact on our on-field ability. You're right with regards continually sacrificing, but on the other hand you can't keep spending if it's not sustainable.

Casey is mooted as our summer base. From what we know the plans are to have admin and player facilities in the 'precint' and training oval (Gosch's Paddock) nearby as our in-season base. Since the deal hasn't been signed, there's been some speculation regarding the Olympic Park deal on these boards. As Roost It has mentioned, some have raised the prospect of having facilities housed within the 'G - we currently have offices there and I believe some revamping of the Southern Stand is on the cards - and using Gosch's Paddock to train on. I have no idea whether this is plausible. From what I've read on here, the plan for a while has been that we will train on Gosch's Paddock. I'm not sure if that's classified as 'part of the precint', but if it isn't, Wilson's comment that we may not even train within the precint isn't revelatory. How could it? Cost is one reason I can think of.

Bangladesh are hapless and should have Test status revoked. In the meantime, we have stats like this: DL Vettori 1 1 0 3* Talking of hapless, Vettori has saved NZ from embarassment this series. However, there's still a fair gap between the two sides. * the wickets were batsmen 2,3,4.

I contend that they're created with insight and thought - consideration of what button will most likely get others 'charged with emotion'. Most of the time he succeeds, despite the fact that all Demonland regulars should be familiar with his modus operandi.

What rubbish. Are you realist in disguise? edit: beaten by Y_M

Considering he wants to base himself on the Gold Coast after AFL, that sounds odd. I think Peter Street is being courted by some SANFL teams - possible your friend got them mixed up?

:D

Considering that's what is intimated in the article, it's probably not a bad guess

:D

So what's your answer, considering you said we needed to get a quality spinner in there? I don't think there's one available, let alone one on tour. I agree with McGain. I'm really surprised Kreza got the call though. Obviously Casson being overlooked was a bit of a surprise. Doran seems to have fallen off the radar a bit (while you could argue he was never on it, Kreza was fourth in line at NSW when he left). Deep breath first, then write your replies

I agree that Wheatley's better off playing further up the ground, but don't think Dunn is suitable for the 'third tall' role.

Didn't Garland play on Farmer in one game? That only leaves Warnock and Martin, plus Rivers to take the third tall.

The fact that a big wrap on Blease is his pace and Watts (196cms) had a better time in the 20m sprint, certainly puts Watts athletic ability into perspective.

I still can't really get my head around how people thought we were destined for big things in 2007. Agreed I'm glad the Dees held on.

If a player ducks and receives a free kick for over the shoulder you can blame the umpire rather than the rules.

I suggest BP's simply playing the percentages, and he's probably right. Up to a certain point, you're probably better off investing your resources locally. How many successful recruits have been taken from alternative 'avenues'? Collingwood might be at the point where there are diminished returns with further investment locally when compared to overseas exploration. That was the most interesting part of the article for me. It's pretty surprising, and shows how much we can improve. That said, I'm sure other Clubs are constantly improving too, but if we are starting from a fair way back then perhaps we have more scope to improve our operations.

Haha

You don't need to attend the summit to suggest ideas. IIRC the summit email and/or application form invited people to contact the Club directly with their ideas.

Average player who doesn't fit our youth focus. Yawn.

Haha, I think you've probably cited the only example where it's been used appropriately. I totally agree with you re: football claptrap, btw

Hardly semantics. Hypothetically, if poor skills mar our season and mean we struggle to execute a game plan, I'd suggest that personnel might be a factor. Hawthorn struggled under Clarkson for a while. Did they come good simply due to a better game plan, or were improvements in their personnel a major factor?

Doesn't the very definition of 'plan' exclude execution of said plan? I'd ask what your definition of 'game plan' includes, but perhaps it's easier to outline the factors that aren't part of your definition of 'game plan' Let's not say that, since I haven't said the 'game plan' won't be a contributing factor if we fail to improve next year. What I have said is that deciding now that a failure to improve next year will mean X is at fault seems a hasty call.