Slartibartfast

They've clearly picked up your zest for life.

Didn't like the description "unrestricted free agent". No salary matching option unfortunately.

I think what is being overlooked about the list is their footy skills. Yes, training has been significantly more sophisticated this season and we have very competent people in charge but the best teachers in the world can't train donkeys. We have a much better list than many think who will adapt quickly to Roos style. What we are witnessing now is a coach who has looked at the list and is coaching to its strengths and particularly the individual player strengths. He is putting players in their best positions and getting the most out of them rather than the last couple of years where players strengths have been somewhat ignored and they have been asked to play roles that they have been unsuited to. Rohan Bail's game might be a flash in the pan but I'd suggest it's the best he's played for the club. He was allowed to use his main strength which is his gut running at pace and make the play. Last year he was purely a defensive forward and was unable to use this strength. It's this aspect that will be our greatest improvement this year and why I believe we will surprise many. For a couple of years now we have been using about 50% of the players talents. Important factors indeed but it's the Roos game style that will most benefit Trengove as he can now play to his strengths. TBH we need to recognize we played a brand of keepings off on Friday and had more possessions than we've had in a while. Trengove got 50% more of the ball than usual but so did the team. I really liked his game and he played as I remembered him under Bailey. I liked what I saw but it did worry me a bit that we had so many more possessions than Richmond but only managed to fall over the line when it clearly meant more to us than them. Having said that I think we'll enjoy this year for the first time in a while.

On last nights form we got a bargain.

I don't understand how a team can let a player like Vince go.

No, I'm wrong, 4 years in 2010. I thought it was 5 years.

Think you'll find he got his contract during 2009 well before his AA year and when he was little more than a promising back. The TPP was 7.7M in 2009 and is close to 10M now. I'm not at all confident. Jones, Watts, Dawes, Trengove, Clark, Tyson, Garland, Vince, McDonald, Grimes, Howe and Jamar would all be well above or round about the mark. There may be others. I reckon he's unrestricted.

Is he? To be a restricted free agent he has to be in the top 10 or so paid players at the club. He signed a long term contract which means his contract amount might be lowish. I'm not confident he's an unrestricted FA.

Rivers was terrific last night. A sad loss.

Did Fitzy and Viney do the full session? Thanks for the reports guys, so much better than Roger's earlier attempts but he did improve for one report ...

I doubt Viney will play as he missed last week.

Fitzy becomes important to give us some structure but I can't see him playing if Dawes and Hogan don't as he's been in rehab as well.

I love these sort of comments. How did you feel after R17 in 2010? Did you still think we were in big trouble?

They all were and he was one of the best. If Roos rewards performance McKenzie will play.

After last weeks hit out McKenzie is a certain starter, perhaps even as a free running mid. He was clearly in the best half dozen.

Yes, it has been mentioned, but is it right? You may believe everything you hear but I like to see the evidence to back it up and I've seen none. In fact I'd say the opposite could well be true. Interestingly we've completely changed our training methodology this year which further casts doubt on the claim.

Can you explain this to me. What evidence do you have that we were fitter and better prepared under Neeld than Bailey. I certainly didn't see any evidence on field and I find it hard to believe that a team that won just under 40% of its games over two seasons was as far off the pace as many suggest.

I don't think there are any weaker opponents. I'd have preferred to play the likes of Brisbane, Footscray and Saints who are more our level. And I think what we need to do is to learn to win more than anything else and start to replace the scars of thrashing after thrashing. But that is a amateur view and it's why I've said I'd like the view of someone with some experience in the area.

I think it's good to question but I also think you need to look what is happening and measure your view of people around performance. I questioned Neeld early as I didn't like a number of things he did before he coached a game. Contrast his comments on Davey and Watts in one of his first pressers with Hinkley who told Kane Cornes that he was there to extend his career. I liked Schwab early, he knew what a footy club looked like and I believe he was experienced and knowledgeable. He was also passionate about the club and presented a very good face. It was only after time that it became clear he wasn't up to the task. I like what I'm seeing from Jackson. He's restructured the club personnel cutting $1.8 million from administrative salaries. He's negotiated a non repayable $1.4 million from the AFL to help replace people who weren't up to the task. He's secured a major sponsor who is a class above the likes of energy watch, he's maintained or increased footy department expenditure and secured the best available coach in the business. He's restored confidence to those that work at the club and he has earned their confidence and secured their loyalty. I understand those that have seen too many false dawns only to be bitterly disappointed. But the false dawns don't impact on Jackson, he will sink or swim based on his performance not our past failures. For those few who question Jackson I ask "what has he done to earn that doubt"? I can't see anything. And in the same way that I can't see anything wrong with what Jackson's doing I can't see anything wrong with what Roos is doing. Be watchful by all means but don't question these blokes based on the past performance of others.

If there is anyone here who has some knowledge of sports psychology I'd be really interested to know how you go about rebuilding belief. I'd have thought much of it would have to come from performance and it's why I disagree with Whispering_Jack about our preseason opponents. It's likely that even if we play good footy with a good team we'll lose 3 games and I can't see that helps. I think there would have been a great deal of work done on this by the new FD. It would be interesting to know what that involves.

I think you'll find it was Harris and Gardner that committed to AAMI and that Stynes/Schwab oversaw the move. Gutnick is responsible for our net asset position because of Bentleigh. Each administration since has played their role in securing it. Without it we'd be in pretty poor shape as it provides a pokie facility as well as the land. Joseph may have saved us twice. Save might not be the right word but you know what I mean.

I'm not sure that's right, I think the comment of the "mental scaring" of the players relates to the impact of (particularly) two years of Neeld and the previous FD. And it's a vicious criticism, one I've never heard before. And whilst we focus on Neeld I don't think the other coaches were much good. I can understand people not being happy with this type of approach but like Hannibal it's just straight talk. Just as you can take that as a criticism you can take his comments about the general player fitness as a positive of Neeld. Jackson has done the same in his AGM speech and has slammed Schwab, McLardy and the previous Board without really mentioning them. But it's the reality and I don't understand peoples concern. I didn't notice too many criticising Neeld when he did the same about Bailey or Stynes about Gardner. What is clear is that when Roos and Jackson came in we were in a terrible condition that is being quickly rectified.

I'm not sure if it's been mentioned here but one of the things that astounded me in Jackson's address was the fact that he has been able to cut $1.8 million from administrative salaries. I did get that right didn't I? To think we can operate effectively without these cost, attract major sponsors, deal with more members and still manage to cut that number of staff is very frustrating. I'm not a FH but I have been a player sponsor for a number of years, certainly since Schwab and Stynes/McLardy took over and I've been happy to contribute because I thought I was helping the club be competitive. It would appear all I've done is support a top heavy administration and have unnecessary senior staff running round whilst the club has failed on the field and struggled financially. We really were taken for fools and it's hard to feel any affection for those that squandered our money. Thank heavens for Jackson.

In the HS article Roos said of Trengove "Roos is blunt: he plans to rebuild Trengove's game. "I have seen some positive signs with Jack. What we need to do is reconstruct his game. He has been the captain and he's never been able to solely worry about his game." Well back to the opening post and it seems that Roos is not of your opinion TGR. For all Trengove and Grimes might have been good leadership material they were not ready for it and it hurt Jack Trengove significantly.

I reckon this is right although I wonder how critically important it is to have AA mids. I think a well drilled group of B+/A- mids can at least negate most midfields which means other advantages you have can be decisive. We have three quality talls both defensively and in attack. Hawthorn don't have a dominant midfield and last year Mitchell played off half back and Sewell was dropped at one stage. Their midfield was not anywhere near the midfields that dominated in the mid 2000 of Brisbane or WC. Without looking at it Sydney didn't have a standout bunch of mids in the middle 2000's either. So if Cross, Vince, Tyson and Jones can form the pointy end of our mids and are backed up by a well drilled cast of players around them we become fairly competitive. It's also important that someone like McKenzie can negate the opposition key mid as that brings them back to us. I think our forwards and backs are as good as most teams with only Swans, Hawks, Collingwood, Freo, North and Geelong better. It's why I think we can be competitive with 10 or so teams and given we play those teams often we should win more games than most think. I also think most people are focusing too much on individual players and not focusing enough on the impact a positive environment and effective game plan can have. Roos challenge is to eradicate the mental damage inflicted by the previous FD and if he can do that we will surprise many. It's not like we are waiting from Blease, Strauss, Tapscott, McKenzie, Evans, Grimes, Trengove, Watts, Howe, Clisby or Terlich to physically develop. They just need the environment and mind set to thrive. And we only need a handful of those players to step up and we'll see an extraordinary difference.