bing181

Perhaps, but the unexpected loss within 12 months of Gus and then ANB changed the profile of the list in terms of experience, and especially in terms of leadership. Even reports coming out of the Crows refer to the difference ANB has made in that regard.

On field AND off. Re Ugle Hagen, there were reports last off-season about Bont taking him under his wing, trying to get him to the gym etc. And captaincy these days is so much more than about how you play e.g. the St Kilda game again. Max was standing in the centre, why didn't he realise that we were a player short there and address the developing 6 6 6 issue before it became the infringement that eventually cost us the game? You think of the amount of directing of traffic that players like Hodge or Pendlebury do/did, where's someone like Max in all that?

Not a coincidence, and standard board practice given that their role is to provide leadership and continuity. Also important that they identify specific needs in terms of skills and experience, which they appear to be doing here. None of this prohibits others throwing their hats in the ring, and they're up front and transparent about it all.

All those close losses smack of a lack of on-field leadership. You only have to go back to the St Kilda debacle (sorry) ... Max was standing in the middle next to Nas, yet failed to pick up on what was about to happen. Max is a great leader-by-example, but he's not a great onfield coach or tactician. Once again, we're paying on-field for the loss of the likes of Guss and ANB, plus the absence this year of Lever.

I'd rather be boring and win a flag than be entertaining and watch teams cut us up every other week. Could be just me.

Clazz and Trac weren't traded because of what's happening on-field.

Which is one of the main reasons Goodwin was moved on. Not just in terms of his longer term future - could we realistically have renewed his contract next year if we were sitting mid-table or lower? - but in terms of membership and profile. A new coach buys you a couple of years optimism and grace. You only have to look at Demonland - posters will accept finishing 14th again under King ("development year" ...), but hard to imagine that many would have accepted it under Goodwin.

Gawn spoke to this in a recent interview. I'm paraphrasing (probably badly ...) but said that October now is what December used to be, and that this is the period when you do all the hard running. Club training, when it starts up again, has become more footy focused.

There's not any evidence that King even spoke to May, yet alone the rest of the playing group. In fact, King himself said: “I haven’t had a chance to sit down with Steven yet, that was more a list management decision,”

I'd be surprised if he's had any conversations with King. It's off-season. Fitness staff during his exit meeting at the end of the season would be something else.

Not about not having the answers, it’s about not having the players. Ones who could kick for starters. It wasn’t the coaching that killed us, it was the turnovers.

This was also the Tim Lamb comment re the draft and what having higher picks gets you. Not so much better players, there are plenty of lower draft picks that go on to have great careers, but more that these higher picks are closer to AFL standard already in terms of athleticism and fitness.

And vice versa. King took the time to meet McVee. Trac ... a quick phone call. We never in a million years wanted to keep him.

Both the Hawks and Cats play their experienced forwards alongside emerging forwards (Deer and Neale for starters). In any case, I said "built around", not "including". Experience up forward is invaluable, but you can't have your young KPF's running round in the VFL because you've got 3 old blokes keeping them out.

For me, it was the easy part. For many, even most people, removing Goodwin in itself would have been enough. New coach, new game plan, new dawn, positive spin etc. etc. The hard part was taking Goodwin's departure as just the start of the necessary changes, and then carrying through on what really needed to change.

No-one from the club said that.

I don't think the CEO is or has been on the List Management Committee. I suspect he was there because of the names we had on the trade table, not every day you trade out your golden boys. Also perhaps to get a feel for it as he's new. But who knows ...

Interesting in that it confirms that Jason Taylor is very much part of List Management and Trade. Which we knew already, but still ... Presumably also confirms the List Management committee as Lamb, Taylor, Richardson, with perhaps someone from admin, David Chippindall who's COO? melbournefc.com.auInside the Trade Room | AccessExclusive access to Melbourne's trade rooms as the deals took place.

Which is one of the reasons he was let go.

Not really. Draft day yes, but that's more for the optics and photo opps. I don't believe I've ever seen Tim Lamb in the coaches' box. From images and vids I've seen around the place, I don't think any of the coaches were present. Not their remit.

I don't believe King ever worked with him at St Kilda, King was there before Steele arrived.

Perhaps also Jared Rivers.

Interesting to see Paul Guerra there.

Essendon, Swans and St Kilda CEO's have been discussing list management/the trade period in the last 24 hours.

You might be writing Max off prematurely, especially as he has a contract for the next 2 seasons.