bing181

Byrnes was the only FA, and there was no compo pick for him: GEELONG Gained: Jared Rivers Lost: Shannon Byrnes Compo: None

It's obvious we're getting nowhere here, but just in the interest of accuracy, of the 4 players you refer to, only one was a draft: Rodan, down amongst the dregs at pick 88. As for the actual draft, I would suggest that as early as this weekend, round 4, we could be the only team in the AFL where all of their previous year's draft picks will have played in the first 22. (Toumpas, Viney, Terlich, Jones, Kent, Nicholson, Evans). If Kent gets selected that is ... Must be some kind of record, and credit to Viney and his team.

Come on Robbie, you can do better than that (or you are better than that ...). People just see things differently. I don't have a problem at all with the 4 you mentioned, and for whom - as has been pointed out - we basically gave up no draft picks of any real worth. We turned over 14 players ... that's Fourteen. Kids? We got kids coming out our ears - we took more "kids" this year than we ever have, including even a 17 year old (plus a 17 year old from NZ). It's not as if we had the regulation turnover of a half a dozen players - in which case, yes, taking 4 senior players who may not exactly dominate could be questionable. But they're bonus players on top of about 10 other pickups, stopgaps, some guys to add a bit of experience around the place, if not on the field. If it bothers you, forget that they're there ... whoever we took at pick 88 would NOT have been doing even what Rodan is. Upgrade Magner? Maybe, but in spite of his grunt, he was shown to be a bit one-dimensional and with questionable disposal last year. In any case, he'll get his chance, but let's not pretend that any of our problems will have been solved if we'd upgraded Magner and not taken Rodan. Pedersen? Had a good first year at North, and seems to be able to play really well in the VFL (B&F last year, really good game for Casey 2 weeks back). Not yet doing it at senior level, and maybe he never will, but definitely worth a punt. Byrnes? I'd wait until we have a few games with more than 20 or 30 I50's before we write him off. In any case, leadership group, good club man ... a handy pick up off the field. Rodan, adds a bit of spark off-field, a good mentor for the younger guys it seems, and for a season or two, not a problem - it's not as if we have a heap of 30 year olds. Gillies. Depth KP defender - which we don't have. Give him a season, then let's see, once again, if it doesn't work out, no real cost to us. In any case, re the defenders, hard to get a feel for where they are when they're under the cosh the whole game because the opposition mids are running riot.

Because there were no other reasons.

We have an experienced coach doing reviews (and reporting directly to the Board).

No, that would be too simple. Also, it doesn't involve sacking someone, so obviously not the solution.

No, we need change from the bottom up. Grass roots, attitudinal, cultural change, Which, as this thread illustrates, starts in places like the spa baths and the recovery sessions. I think a few here should have a look at Martin Flanagan's recent article in the Age re all this. He covers it very well, even though I don't agree with all of it: http://www.smh.com.au/afl/afl-news/culture-not-simply-a-word-20130412-2hr1o.html

For starters, it's not 3 years, it's 3 pre-seasons which isn't quite the same thing. Secondly, it's not about getting fit, it's about getting to the extremes of fitness needed these days to play professional AFL footy. Which takes time, because there's only so much loading the body can take without injuries.

Grimes will be 24 next month, Trengove is 21.

Not looking too good for Brad Scott then. Or Sanderson: Adelaide were 6 goals up half way through the third. By half way through the last they were 5 goals down, that's an 11 goal turn-around. Buckley's comment after the game was that Collingwood had only played a half of footy. etc. etc.

Yes, because the kids we might have got at the tail end of the draft would be cueing up for Rising Star nominations.

And if they don't (yet) have the skills or fitness (and I'd throw into that, experience)?

I don't believe I said that we should be behind GWS and GC in our development, simply that they've had a free run at the best players going for the last few years, and sooner or later, we're (all) going to start seeing the results of that.

"the heroics of those who anonymously attacked him behind keyboards and secretive firewalls is not going to achieve a single thing on the field but weaken us off it." See above. And they talk about blind.

It's not that they wouldn't get picked, they'd be the 21st or 22nd pick in a much stronger team. Even players like Buckley and Cheney went on to get games at Collingwood and Hawthorn, teams not exactly short of decent players. The idea that there were star midfielders available and ready to come to Melb is far-fetched at best. Rodan, Byrnes etc. are experienced players from successful teams, brought in to help establish some standards in training, preparation etc. Don't think we'll be seeing reports that either of them were out at 5 am getting p*ssed. As has been posted elsewhere, Terlich credits Rodan with being the one who's helped him most make the transition to AFL footy - that's already a win. If the pair of them spend most of their time at the Dees as effectively playing assistant coaches at Casey, that seems to me a more than useful step in helping with development - something we're apparently notoriously bad at.

McCarthy. Unproven assistant. 3 year contract Sanderson. Unproven assistant. 3 year contract Watters. Unproven assistant. 3 year contract Neeld. Unproven assistant. 3 year contract. Hinkley. Unproven assistant. 4 year contract.

No-one's accepting this. Responses differ though. For mine, for the life of me I cannot see what good can come out of playing under a stand-in coach for the rest of the year.

It could make perfect sense, depending on the circumstances. Neeld explained why Watts was kept at the MCG. An Emergency is just that.

Don't agree. With the ball coming into their talls the way it was, it was a way of getting someone with a bit of aerial prowess in to spoil. But it's the old story, dammed if you do, dammed if you don't.

Ah, so the lack of development is Moloney's fault. Glad we could get to the bottom of it.

GWS and GC have taken the cream for the past few years, and sooner or later, that cream is going to come to the top. It's not going to be just us that they go past.

If Neeld goes now, we play out the whole season with a stop-gap coach and stop-gap solutions. Having Viney or Craig in charge is not going to help us going forward, all that then happens is that the bulk of the team will end up with a fifth coach (Bailey, Viney, Neeld, Stop-Gap, New Coach in 2014) in 3 years - which I would have thought would have a catastrophic effect on the players, especially the older ones. Then where? We tread-water through the season, and there's talk of the likes of Clarkson, Mark Williams, Eade etc. All of whom are gainfully employed and even if they were a) available and b) interested, we'd almost certainly have to wait till late into the final series to even begin, all over again, starting from zero with everything from List Management, staff, assistant coaches, FD dept. setup etc. etc. We need, more than ever, to be solid in what we do. Changing direction mid-stream can never be solid.

Because Morton, Scully and Gysberts are all doing so much better at their new clubs ...

Ratten/Malthouse ...

No Blease in the bests.