pm24

From all reports, it sounds like he has contributed positively to the culture within the club due to his positive attitude as a person. That's different to the professional sports and performance environment that we're all wanting, but how could a player who has never seen what that looks like, be expected to drive that? Is there any evidence to actually suggest that he is not contributing to the drive for professional training standards and the development of a better culture, or is that just being questioned because he is questioning whether to continue with the club? One player can try to influence the culture, but if the rest of the club is pushing the other way, the weight of numbers means that individual loses out. Jones is the perfect example of what we want to see, but the culture has still remained a shambles in his time with the club despite his example. I think what Jack is probably concerned with is whether he is just seeing history repeat itself where plenty of words are spoken about change, but despite whatever efforts the players make, the administration will again fail them.

High half forward rotating through the wing and half back. Just because he is tall, doesn't mean he can't play the role of a guy 5 cm's shorter than him. He's shown he has the skills to do so.

I know that Watts has been very inconsistent over the years and not produced as we've all hoped, but I think over the last 18 months he has been one of our better players. Sure he still needs to work on aspects of his game, particularly his toughness, but that has also improved. He's had more tackles so far this season in 16 out of 20 games, then he had all of last season, and has averaged over 2 tackles per game since Neeld was moved on. His pressuring of the ball has also improved. Many here say he is never going to get where they want him to be so he can get lost. Well they guy has more talent in his non-preferred then half our list most of our list, and his willingness to make a contest has improved dramatically. I particularly recall the game against GWS where he took the pack mark, coming in from the left to take the mark in front with a leading Fitzpatrick and two GWS defenders all over them. In the past that wouldn't have happened. I don't understand why so many seem to make up their mind on a player so early in their career, and then from that moment, until he becomes a star, he is permanently branded in a negative way. Watts is well within his rights to consider his options and what is best for him in HIS playing career, that could set HIM up for the rest of HIS life. When I've worked in a place that I thought had a negative culture/environment, I've looked to leave. Watts has been playing in a club which has been panned as pretty much having the worst culture in football. That doesn't exactly create a great working environment or a great incentive too stay. Neil Craig has mentioned on numerous occasions that we need to make this club a place where players can see their future. Then they will buy in. Then we might see the production from some of our players that we know they are capable of. But until then, everything our players are fed from management will seem like an empty promise, because that's all that they've been fed from the previous administration for nearly 5 years. It's not Jack's fault, it's the clubs.

I wouldn't say that. There's been reports that one of the Scott boys, and Mick Malthouse are seriously interested in adding him to their Assistant Coaching group. He may not be head coach material, but as an assistant coach he has a fantastic reputation. Dean Bailey got another job very quickly after we kicked him to the curb too, so I'd expect the same to happen for Neeld. The interest in Neeld was reported in the Herald Sun a couple of weeks ago: http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/north-melboune-coach-brad-scott-could-lure-former-dees-coach-mark-neeld/story-fni5f986-1226690613959

One of the articles on news.com.au is now saying a Melbourne coaching combo of Eade and Voss could be an outcome. If we could have Voss come in to look after the midfield instead of Royal that would be a fantastic step. I would then find it hilarious if Brisbane was to appoint a combination of Senior Coach + Mark Neeld as a Senior Assistant. Moloney and Martin would undoubtedly be pretty unhappy if that happened.

Whoops, I must have misread the Carlton fine, because when I first read the article it only said $93,000, so they might have corrected a typo or I just misread it. Either way, it appears that aside from Carlton's salary cap breaches, it appears that we've been fined quiet harshly when caught out compared to most other clubs.

I've just read an article on the Age which centres around the Essendon drug scandal, but what really caught my eye was the listing at the end of the article of the penalties handed out to clubs for various breaches of the AFL rules. What stood out is that the two highest financial penalties imposed on a club since 1996, were imposed on Melbourne FC. One for the salary cap breaches in 1999, and the other for the "tanking" allegations recently. Other like breaches by other clubs have been met with much lower financial penalties. If the Essendon drug scandal does not result in a fine greater than the one we received for the salary cap breaches in 1999 or for the "tanking" saga, I think it really brings into question the integrity of the AFL. How can one club be so harshly penalised compared to other clubs with like breaches of the rules? Check out the list here: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/draft-picks-must-be-the-holy-grail-20130814-2rwxf.html

At first I questioned how this rumour could be true given that the Gold Coast surely have enough key position prospects with players like Charlie Dixon and Tom Lynch, but upon review they don't seem to have a clear 3rd tall forward, which is the role Watts could undoubtedly play for them. Though I don't want to see us lose Watts, if we were able to get a young promising midfielder like Swallow (which many draft followers predicted would become better than his brother), then I might be on board with it, particularly given the insertion of Hogan into the forward line next season. However, I still see a lot of further development from Watts, and there were one things he did twice against the GC that I've been wanting to see him do for a long time......to take those running shots on goal from outside 50. I've wanted him to be more selfish with some of those things for some time, and to see him do it last Saturday was a beautiful thing. He looks a lot more confident during games, and more resilient than he has in the past and looks ready to take that next step. A tough call, and one I'm not certain about at the moment, but can understand the reasoning, and if we were to get Swallow, that would be a good value trade. Don't think we should add in the no.2 pick though.

I have to admit, I found it hard to read the rest of the post because this typo was just funny........the sane team lol However, many would say that insanity has reigned supreme in the club for some time.

If fit I think there are two automatic inclusions this week in Garland and Terlich. They would automatically come in for Frawley (inj) and possibly Tapscott/Clisby. I think Strauss deserves another shot because he has had about 4 games in a row where he has been one of our best. Barry has also shown something the last few weeks and could deserve a run. He's shown it over more weeks than Taggert, so I'd go with him before Taggert. So I reckon we go with: Ins: Garland, Terlich, Strauss, Barry (as sub) Outs: Frawley (inj), Clisby (to allow Strauss to have another crack), Kent (I think it would be good for Kent to go back to Casey to get some decent game time), Tapscott

I understand your view regarding Gawn, but Gawn hasn't had to deal with even half of what Jack has. No one in the media has expected much from Gawn as a 3rd round draft pick who had problems with his Knees. Everything he has done has been a success because little was expected of him. The club is to blame for making this a tougher decision for Watts than it needs to be. I can't help but think that when Watts if the Club had said spend a year at Casey to develop, like Hogan has (yes I know Hogan is only there because he can't be on the Senior List due to AFL rules), that the situation would be completely different. If we hadn't rushed him in for our "Grand Final" of each season, the QB clash, and if we had given him a bit more support and time, like we have to Max, then Watts might have signed already. It's the club who is to blame for not making it an easy choice for players to re-sign, not the players.

After listening to what Jackson said on The Couch the other night, where he revealed that the club had stuffed up the development of all our recent top draft picks, and that we just expected them to help revive the club without investing much into their development, I am not surprised that Watts might wait to see who is appointed coach before signing. If we have failed he and other recent draft picks with their development of course he would like to see if we appoint someone who is going to help get the best out of him and the team. Players like Watts have never been part of a successful winning team. Our club has had a poor culture, got rid of our best leaders too early (Jnr McDonald, Brad Green) and proven to be all show and little substance from the top, with an obscene amount of instability thanks to the continual sacking of coaches. If he had a club like Sydney or Geelong, or even to some extent Carlton, of course he would consider moving. Those clubs could potentially have more to offer any player, from a success standpoint, than ours at the moment. If this club wants success, and we know that the players want it, then the coaching appointment is vital. Totally understand this view from Watts, even if I really wish he'd just sign already.

I think Strauss has done enough to deserve a game, and I'd like to see him come in to play off the half back line. Resting Clisby might be a good move, and Strauss would be a natural replacement for him. I'm actually surprised they didn't bring Strauss in for Terlich as the late change. I'm not sure bringing in Magner achieves anything for us structure wise, because I wouldn't be bringing him in ahead of Jones, Sylvia or Viney, so I'm not certain where he would line up from a structural perspective. Does he deserve a game, probably. But I just don't know where he would line up, and whether he would present a better option that what we currently have there. I wouldn't make a whole range of changes though. If this side is going to develop together they need to play together and get more games experience. Then, once they got that experience, hopefully they'll do a better job at avoiding situations like Saturday.

So predictable that a thread like this would be started. Some things never change. What is the point of this thread given we still don't even know for certain if he wants to put his hand up for the senior role?

I didn't realise he was 188cm's. He'd be the perfect addition in the middle if he can show that he can consistently win his own ball. Being damaging by foot is of course a great thing as well.

I'm going to paraphrase the entire article.... Dear Dustin, Please stay. Yours sincerely, Caroline Wilson

Player agents might be another reason. The more often contracts come up for renegotiation the more opportunity there is for larger contracts to be agreed to at a later date. I would have thought this is very normal for a young developing ruckman.

I wouldn't be looking to trade him at all. Players that can swing from forward to defence are becoming increasingly valuable. Just look at all the positive attention Ben Reid (24) and Lachie Henderson (23) have been getting of late. Both were drafted as key position forwards at pick 8 in their respect drafts, but played for years in defence, only to now become valuable in the forward line once again. In the next 12 months I can see Watts become a similar yet even more versatile player. These types of players are becoming increasingly valuable, and I would argue more valuable than a mid like Yarran and Bell. Keep in mind that Henderson is being talked about as Carlton's most important player despite the presence of Judd, Murphy, Gibbs etc. Reid, is probably in a similar position at Collingwood now that he is showing he can be a strong target in the forward line as well. Watts is not a key position forward and we don't need him to be anymore. We just need him to be an extremely valuable swingman with skills to play all over the ground a la Brendan Goddard. That is more valuable that a Chris Yarran.

I think your eyes might be deceiving you because none of Duncan, Motlop, Murdoch or Smedts are particularly solid. Caddy and Horlin-Smith are much more solid than either of those others but that has more to do with their body-type than anything else. For comparative purposes here are the heights and weights of those you have mentioned who I think actually have slender build. Duncan - 187cm and 86kgs Motlop - 183cm and 76kgs Murdoch - 190cm and 85kgs Smedts - 189cm and 83kgs Now for our guys who you have listed: Trengove - 185cms and 85 kgs (heavier than two of the Cats players you have listed who are taller than him but over an inch) Nicholson - 183cms and 80kgs (same height as motlop yet 4kgs heavier) Grimes - 187cms and 85kgs (see comments re trengove - around the same height and weight as Duncan) Watts - 196cms and 91kgs (I recall some saying that he was intentionally trained to get lighter so he could spend more time working through the middle, but regardless, he is noticeably stronger this year - just for comparison, Tom Lonergan is 1cm taller than Jack and just 2kgs heavier but is 7 years older). Blease - 184cms and 77kgs (similar in height and weight to Motlop) I think the reasons the Geelong guys may look bigger, or are perceived to have more AFL ready bodies because of who they are surrounded by. But looking at the height and weight of those guys listed compared to those at Geelong, it's quite apparent that in terms of height and weight, our boys are either bigger or at the same mark as the Geelong players you have mentioned. I think it has more to do with body type, and the type of strength training the club is doing, and in particularly the areas of the bodies they are trying to build.

So you're saying that if someone has emotional or possibly psychological problems that makes them a [censored] does it? I'm guessing you're one who likes to judge people before actually getting to know them to. Such an immature approach to take.

I think this comment says more about you than it does about Harry O'Brien.

I did believe Neeld should have been given until the end of the year, and who knows what might have changed after the mid-year review if he had remained in place. With that said, Craig has obviously been a refreshing change for the list. The main point of my previous post was, some of these messages may finally be coming out regarding re-signings because the players have actually been in positions where the questions have been asked by the media directly. Watts at a post-game press conference, Sylvia at a press conference prior to his 150th. If Sylvia wasn't playing a milestone game, and Watts was never taken to the post-game presser it could easily be argued that neither player would have had any cause to comment about their contracts. If Neeld was still at the club, from what Sylvia has said in the press conference, I would have to say that he would have still signed because he indicated his desire to be a one club player. Now that view doesn't just come out of the blue. I believe the statements have come about because of the opportunity for the media to ask the question, and is totally unrelated to the Neeld sacking. Now, the attitude of the players may be more positive than it was, but that doesn't necessarily mean they wouldn't have wanted to re-sign if Neeld was still around. Would they have been a little less certain in their decision, maybe. But we'll never actually know.

Ummm I'm guessing this has come from a press conference which he has fronted because he plays his 150th this week. Watts only commented on his contract when asked at a post game press conference. I think people are reading too much into the timing of these things. Just as some might say it's only coming out because Neeld is gone, it could equally be said that these messages are only just coming out because these players are actually being asked the questions by journo's in a press conference.

Can we stop with this comments, and just put it in the past. GET OVER IT people. It's done. The club has dealt with it, lets move on.

Why do people criticise a guy as just seeking "media attention" for making comments which would be difficult for anyone to admit, let alone to do so in such a public way. Too many people are prepared to become judge and jury, and pass a guilty verdict before any evidence has been submitted. I've heard Harry talk at a multicultural diversity thing at work, and the guy comes across as extremely genuine and passionate about seeing equality for all. He wears his heart on his sleeve with that stuff and that, to me, is a sign of strength not weakness. It's safer to bottle everything up than it is to be open and honest about this stuff. He's been unfairly judged by many, and though he may not "fit" the desired make-up of what people see as the ideal footballer, I reckon he would be an asset for any club both on and off the field.