Slartibartfast

I'm not aware of what he's done "behind the scenes" and would be interested to know. Can you elaborate? And yes I agree it's nice to finally have a Chairman who realizes it's not all about him. He knows his role and he's playing it unlike many before him.

I think it's more likely this sort of thing than within the footy department as I think Roos would understand that Goodwin needs to have clear air to take control of the team. Having someone looking over your shoulder wouldn't be helpful. But would he want that sort of non FD role? I don't know. I wonder how he really feels. I'm not doubting his effort or intent but he was a Swans player and a wonderful Swans coach and you can't help feeling his heart would understandably still be there. Whether we like it or not he wouldn't have come to us without a large financial inducement and while I think it's been a great investment by Jackson how all that fits together in the future is anyone's guess.

It will be interesting to see if he gets it.

Parish 25 possies today in a losing team. Tidy start. Oliver is a freak and if there is a better player in his draft year he'll be extraordinary.

Oh for heavens sake. They're sending a message

I'm usually accused of being in the positive camp so this is a nice change! In my view Goodwin is our coach, Roos, Jackson and the Board were aware of all the issues when they appointed him and from all reports he has a terrific relationship with the players and an excellent understanding of the game. He's had time under Roos. What's not to like. I don't give a stuff that he was at Essendon but there are those that want all things Essendon purged from the AFL (probably along with the AFL as well). This is a discussion forum and we are discussing Goodwin. I'm interested in their views and how they reconcile there position. I don't think that's negative actually, I think it's interesting. Or at least it's interesting to me. But TBH I doubt I'll hear a lot from them.

Gotya. Issue solved.

I'm not fazed. I'm just interested in the genuinely difficult position the "Essendon haters" find themselves in. And WYL I'm not particularly concerned about PED in AFL footy. I reckon after the Essendon saga it's very unlikely to happen again if it happened at all. I'm more pizzed of the the WCE GF victory than Essendon's situation.

Look, I reckon we are past the stage of needing to highlight Jordie's deficiencies. Of course Oliver is a (several) classes above in terms of skill but the reality is if he can get the best out of himself the way Jordie did there is soo much to like. And his interview suggests to me he will. Frankly from what I've seen I like Oliver more at this stage of his career than of Brayshaw at the same stage - and I reckon Brayshaw is/will be a gun. Oliver has flown under the radar this preseason but I think the radar will pick him up soon.

I'm just interested JH. If it's a bit sensitive for you don't participate.

I always saw a gun in Jordie's body Nash! You've gotta love this kids attitude and comments after his first game. Not only is he a Jordie look alike but from the sound of that interview his attitude and personality are very Jordie like as well. Jordie's paved the way, now it's time for Ollie to take advantage!

I'm interested to know how all those that are outraged by the Essendon saga are reconciling that Goodwin "was first in line for the good stuff". It's an uncomfortable truth. This is a serious question. As many know I'm not particularly fazed by the issue but there are some who are taking a particularly "high moral ground" approach. I reckon they must he horribly conflicted. And was Macca there to?

What a great series!

The world is against us isn't it.

How can you make that call? Have you seen Parish or Oliver play? What has changed your mind?

Apologies.

There's a bit of history mo.

Not sure it was RFPC that accused Hogan of being a mercenary, think it was the Nut but could be wrong. Don't care really.

You've obviously never had a good red.

Unnecessarily personal. Anything to say on Oliver?

I agree with all you've said but it didn't address my point. Or maybe I've missed it. Jones stayed when the trajectory was down. He stayed when we were a hopelessly managed basket case. So did Watts by the way and he was subject to the worst of the "bad management". Who says Jesse won't do the same? Who says wins are his criteria? They don't seem to be for Cripps who could have sort much greener pastures. I just don't like putting a tag on Jesse who signed a contract extension well before the current improvement was evident and he doesn't deserve the tag that goes with RPFC's comments.

Hogan will be offered enough money, I think we can assume that. RPFC said "money and wins". Cripps certainly hasn't been offered wins. Nathan Jones stayed for more than money. I think to say a player will only stay if the team wins is presumptuous. Some will and some will stay through loyalty, personal objectives and relationships. We don't know what Hogan will do at this stage and to suggest he will leave only if he gets wins is insulting.

Patrick Cripps says hi. Don't know why you have to tar Hogan with the equivalent of the mercenary tag. He's not done one thing to deserve it.

Pro there is no need to go on. You're arguing with Stuie, you've won and you won't educate him. For what it's worth Jones was played out of position for much of Bailey's time. Bailey thought he was too small to play midfield and so played him on a wing/flank. Neeld played him in his rightful position and he flourished.

Poor Jack.