Slartibartfast

So who gets their way with the player they want? Who has the casting vote?

Riddle me this. At the last meeting before the draft Roos argues for Parish and Goodwin argues for Curnow. Who's view prevails? This is not a question about the players but who is holding the reins. The more I think about it the more I fail to see how Roos will be much different to any interim coach holding the reins until the "real" coach takes over - Barker/Bolton, Campo/Pyke, Craig/Roos. The only difference is we know who is the successor and that should work in our favour. Given that Goodwin is the destination and Roos is the facilitator surely Roos should just sit back and mentor Goodwin this year as Goodwin sets game plan, player selection, approves training programs and has the final say in team selection. I think Roos job is done as senior coach and Goodwin's starts now.

If Barry had been any good we wouldn't have Hogan, Brayshaw or Petracca. He's clearly the architect of any future success we have.

Prendergast had nothing to do with Warnock.

Don't talk to the players and get any interesting goss cos you'll be accused of being an apologist. Don't give any opinions cos you'll be accused of knowing nothing about footy. And don't favour anyone or you'll be accused of having favourites. And don't tell us that we've improved because you'll be told "it's only training". Really looking forward to your reports!

It's been a common misconception for a long time but I can promise you James Kelly was the most likely pick if not Molan. ND asked him for the toughest KP player in the draft so Craig didn't really focus on top end smalls but when I asked him about Dal Santo he said he had others in front of him. The other interesting thing he said he'd have taken Robert Murphy with pick 5 if we had retained that in 1999. Disappointing because Murphy is my favourite non MFC player. Yep Utah, I was always a fan of Neale. Great man and so much better than he was given credit for, particularly at the time. History will treat him kindly although life hasn't.

Not Dal Santo. James Kelly.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2015-11-02/dockers-fan-pleads-guilty-to-assault-after-preliminary-final-incident- The guy who punched the women has pleaded guilty and will be sentenced at the end of the month. I note the stadium has banned him for life. How on earth do they police that if he is not a member and just buys a public ticket? And why isn't the ban extended to all stadiums and sport events in Australia?

So what specifically was the difference in Fyfe's build to (say) Morton and Watts that indicates that one will be able to bulk up and the other can't?

How can you tell? What particular attributes indicate easily bulking up compared to someone who won't? Can you give an example of someone in the ND who won't bulk up based on their "frame"?

Strange response to a genuine question. Put me on ignore, you'll be happier. I'll continue to read your posts, I like them.

Have I missed something? Was there a statement that GCS didn't want Parish at 3? Makes no difference to Essendon if it's them or us taking Parish assuming GCS were going to take him and I've yet to read anything saying we are. I'm glad we've got pick 3, not that we've trumped Essendon. Couldn't give a rats about them.

And I think too many overvalue draft picks anyway. I think I saw somewhere that the chances of picking up a good player were about the same at 20 and 40. Having said that, I can see where others are coming from.

Why? Mahoney said at one point that while he was disappointed Howe didn't go to GCS that the fact he ended up at Collingwood allowed us to get Kennedy. Howe did us a favour as it worked out. We still got pick 3. Why are your knickers in a knot? Hasn't Howe got the right to go where he is happiest. So much aggro, so little logic.

Fitzy was delisted because he was out of contract. I think if Terlich and Jones had been out of contract Fitzy might have been retained but I doubt Terlich and Jones would be picked up by other clubs. He certainly wasn't the lowest rated player on our list. The fact he's been picked up by Hawks says he can play. But I accept your point. Having said that I measure things against what is possible not against what is unrealistic. I'm glad I wasn't in your class at school! (you were/are a teacher aren't you?)

Which A grader could we have got? Do you think we didn't try? Reality is the A graders didn't want to come to us so we couldn't get one. And who says we've finished moving out the dead wood as you've so politely described them? There are more list lodgement dates. Or are you suggesting we should have traded out the dead wood? If it's dead wood it don't trade.

In the first few picks all this "cloak and dagger" stuff is silly. The draft order is now set. Nobody can do anything about who we pick at 3 bar Carlton and Brisbane. We will just rank the players in order and take the best available at 7. We are not going to let the player we want go at 3 with the hope they get to 7, that would be dumb having gone to all the trouble and cost of getting 3. And I don't think we will necessarily take a tall for the sake of it. We'll take the best available. If that's a tall so be it. The way Hawthorn structure their forward line is just to have as many goal kickers as they can in there. Doesn't matter about size. Even Roughy plays a lot around the ground. They succeed because they are unpredictable and don't have a go to target. They are arguably better without Buddy. Our danger with Hogan is putting all our eggs in one basket. It can go horribly wrong as it did for WCE in the GF. We need a team and system that kicks goals and a set formula of "two talls" is yesterdays philosophy I reckon. Best available. Players able to play multiple positions and roles. That's what we should be aiming for. And I reckon we've got the second tall on our list already in Tom McDonald. His kicking is an issue but no more so than coming out of the backline. He can run, mark and finds the ball. I think he will play forward a lot next year.

I think you're overcomplicating it. I reckon what will happen is all AFL clubs will rate all players including the academy players and F/S in draft order. If it's your pick and it's an academy player then you nominate them. If they are taken by the other club you just move onto the next selection. If they aren't you've got the next best player you rated. Imagine what would happen if you tried to force another clubs hand by nominating a player you didn't rate as the best available and they didn't match you. You'd end up with a player who was not your first choice. Fairly simple strategy really.

No, I'm just saying that he's not on a gungheap. Hawks may only have him for depth but they rarely recruit players who they think cant play. If Carlton picked him up I'd be more confident we hadn't made a mistake. I'm not fazed either way but I do think he has elite attributes. I think he was delisted because he didn't have the natural competitiveness we wanted. Either way it will be interesting to see where he finishes.

Hmmm, three peat dungheap. Nice heap.

I hope it's not in writing.

Haven't we basically turned our first round pick next year into pick 7 this year?

No issue, I just thought you might be interested. If you looked at the administration you'd find a similar thing I reckon. I've never been more confident about the management of the club - not that it had much to beat!

I was a Fitzy fan and thought we should have given him another year. It's interesting that the Hawks have picked him up. I'm not saying we were wrong in delisting him but it will be interesting to see how he goes at Hawthorn and what they can make of him. He'll have to get used to winning too.

- Todd Viney - Manager Player Personnel - Josh Mahoney - Manager Football Operations - Kelly O’Donnell - Pro scouting - Darren Farrugia - Recruiting Technology Coordinator - David Misson - Elite Performance Manager - Spike Harris - Team Manager All there when Bailey was coach bar Misson who came with Neeld. Edit: Forgot Pete Roberts. He was also there in Bailey's time.