Rogue

Good to hear he has at least some vision - it must have been scary to go into the operation knowing that you could come out of it without the ability to see.

I'm with you there.

That's the only good thing I can remember about him. Sadly I also remember the groan as he turned it over - Ward-style.

Good to hear you're getting down to the game. It's hard to recommend something without an idea of what sort of food/budget you're after, but if you want to get something fairly close to the 'G you might want to try something at Federation Square since it's a reasonably short walk to the ground, and you can also catch a tram. I don't recommend Time Out, but Il Pomodoro is quite decent: http://www.fedsquare.com/index.cfm?pageID=330 Obviously there are a bunch of places in the city (ie. Hardware Lane) or you could go to Southbank - La Camera - http://www.lacamerasouthgate.com/ - is also quite decent. You could also consider something in Richmond - Swan St, Bridge Rd, etc.

Good delivery will allow most of the forwards we have on the list to kick bags. I did like the call about needing to be forward of centre, though. Zing!

I reckon I could go through every week of the season and pull up a quote from someone who claims that a round's game is 'make or break'. Let's assume this game really is 'make or break'. Let's say we play in a similar fashion to the past couple of weeks and get beaten by 40-oodd points - I assume that's a 'break'. If we then go on to pound Collingwood and win four games on the trot was this game really 'break'?

Depth is important, but it's far less important than having a strong group of core players, stars, etc. It's also less important when you're a developing side - it's not such a big deal if you have a few injuries and your team hurts a bit because of it. Indeed. I'd hope this is pretty obvious. The only exception I'd make is when you're 'in the window' you might want to hang on to players who are just outside the 22, even if they don't have much improvement in them, depending on the balance of your list and the role they fulfill. In example, a limited ruckman who will never be best-22 might be handy depth, particularly when you're 'in the window', if you have no one else to fill the role if you're numero uno ruck is out injured.

First, you're counting your chickens. Esconced? Walk-up start? It's early days. Second, plenty of average players play in good sides. We delisted Armstrong and he went on to win a premiership with the Eagles. Does that mean we made a mistake? Third, players can improve. Anyway, good on him for making it. I don't particularly care what he does now, though.

He played midfield for Casey seconds and did well (30-odd possessions and some goals). I think he's played midfield since he returned to the senior side recently, but I'm not entirely sure about that.

Clearly you've forgotten about Blease!

He's definitely got big feet.

Ouch. It's a shame we, like Richmond, sold off our home game versus them. I can't believe he's 10 cms taller than Jamar - massive.

Really? Petterd might disagree. Reimers kicked eight against Gold Coast, which is worth noting.

Nice, you could be right. I thought we'd have to go back many years (back to an era where players stayed in the 2s until they were ready, etc).

Haha.

Age is a big one. I don't know that it's worth spending draft picks right now on fairly old players. Of course you'd look at him at pick 35, depending on the salary cap. What's he going to be like at 33? That's when it'll matter.

Ahm.

I'll take that as none

Since CC has said they want Scully to play 75% game time this week, I doubt it.

How many teams have won with five guys with 3 games or less?

We've made more changes than I expected, given we were already so inexperienced. It's nice to see Trengove and Scully back though, and seeing debutants is always interesting. However, I reckon we're missing ~11 best-22 players. The good thing is that of those who I don't think are best-22, all bar one are young players who could plausibly push their way into contention. I also like the fact that Blease is an emergency, as I think he's the type of player that could be very damaging.

I still don't see that we have many key backs, but hey If I was coaching Essendon I'd try and stretch a Melbourne defence sans Warnock. Anyway, locking this thread since new discussions have popped up since the team has now been published.

Good stuff. We'll know in 20 mins or so.

There's a difference between 'desperate measures' and showing a form of desperation that I think comes across as pathetic. I agree that keeping Scully is important and I think most other Dees fans will do. I simply don't think that the ideas you suggested are the most effective way of keeping him.

If I was Coach and my players were labelled soft I would publically support them, regardless of what I said/thought behind closed doors. Since this is my view the question of what the players have given in return is a bit irrelevant - I don't think it's something you do in order to get a response.