Slartibartfast

Cross to join Demons on Friday

If you've got good administration the good football will follow. If you've got poor administration you're pretty much stuffed.

The process is fun for us and it keeps footy going in the off season. It's just that too many take their views too seriously.

Couldn't disagree more. Hawthorns success came from Dicker, Kennett, Robson, Fox, Clarkson, Evans and the rest of his FD team. If you think that a couple of recruiting failures account for the difference in our success over the decade I'd suggest you're sadly mistaken. The optimism for this year rests with Peter Jackson and Paul Roos. Imagine the mood if Schwab and Neeld were seeing out their contract. I'd suggest the club would die. I know many would agree with you but many would be wrong.

I agree to a degree. So what's your point?

I don't really need to point out the successes because it seems that everyone assumes picks in the top 10 will be "stars". It's just not like that and that's the point. Rioli was outside the top 10 and Hodge was before 2003. That leaves Roughhead and Franklin as success. 2 out of 5 in that period.

As posted elsewhere: Top 10 selection duds: 2003: Tenace, Clarke, Trotter, Dunn 2004: Tambling, Meesen, Russell, Egan 2005: Ellis, Dowler, Oakley-Nichols, Drum 2006: Gumbleton, Thorp, 2007 :Morton, Grant, Palmer, 2008: all still playing with original club 2009: Sheppard, Butcher 2010: Polec, and after 2010 it's too early to tell. Some of the above still have time. Some are debatable, Getting it wrong in the top 10 is common. Who are the likely "dud" we are all craving now: Boyd, Kelly, Aish, Billings, KK, Scharenberg. Lennon, Bontepelli, McDonald, Freeman, Salem? Come on GD, who are they and why couldn't Freeman be one. Most here are judging players on about 5 minutes vision out of say 1600 minutes played in 2013 (20 games by 80 minutes). It's funny how some get wedded to players on so little evidence. I don't have a clue who we'll pick but I know the FD will have their reasons. I also know there is no guarantee they will get it right.

Yes, but lets not pretend we are the only ones to get it wrong. Top 10 selection duds: 2003: Tenace, Clarke, Trotter, Dunn 2004: Tambling, Meesen, Russell, Egan 2005: Ellis, Dowler, Oakley-Nichols, Drum 2006: Gumbleton, Thorp, 2007 :Morton, Grant, Palmer, 2008: all still playing with original club 2009: Sheppard, Butcher 2010: Polec, and after 2010 it's too early to tell. Some of the above still have time. Some are debatable, Getting it wrong in the top 10 is common. Surely it's time to move on from Morton, Gysberts and Cook. It's not their selection that have led us to where we are. They are a side show. Hawthorn have won 2 flags whilst drafting Ellis, Dowler and Thorp in the top 10.

He's not on his own.

Surely the issue is how good he is. Top 25? What if he was top 15? Our trading has brought in two more youngsters in Michie and Tyson who offset some of the delistings and Cain is hardly "old". I haven't seen him play but from a structural perspective I'd have thought it was a bit of a non issue when weighed against the need to become more competitive immediately. And I reckon at the end of next year we'll have plenty of spots to fill and can bring in some kids then. BTW Master, I really enjoy your postings, thanks.

At least most Demonlanders have seen Nicholson play many AFL games and some have seen Taggart play for Casey either live or on TV. Compare that to the comments coming about who we should get at pick 9 this year. These potential draftees have been exposed to most Demonlanders for no more than 3 minutes of selected play out of (say) 1,600 minutes of footy (I've approximated 20 games by 80 minutes) and yet we have self appointed experts salivating over Freeman, Lennon, Sheed etc etc with views on their kicking, speed and decision making. I enjoy reading it all but I take peoples comments for what they are - purely amateur opinions and more a desire to talk footy than anything else. Of course, some take themselves very seriously. It's funny really.

You can't tell unless you've seen them live.

Thanks Dazzle, good stuff. Some of my mates could learn a lot from those!

Well then you're not that interested. Check his interviews on the MFC site - if you can be bothered.

Who?

You highlighted " minimal interest in potential draftees" and went on to say " I believe so". I was referring to that point and take no issue with our players struggling to be AFL standard.

Comical? With Ben involved it could be nothing else. I reckon he'd think we're having a bit of fun. Welcome Crossy, a great get and a no brainier. We'd have won the R23 game if we'd had him a year earlier.

I'd be very surprised if there weren't clubs interest in Blease or Fitzy. It's not only a matter of how good a player is now but what the new club believes they can do with the talent. And every club knows how poor we've been at developing our talent. Roos has backed the list and his ability to do something with it. Neeld just blamed the players. Someone should have given him a mirror for Christmas.

I'm staggered by the devaluation of players once they are drafted. Tyson is pick 3 originally and has 2 years on the clock and we were somehow ripped off paying pick 2 and upgrading other picks - 20 to 9 being a very valuable upgrade. Players at this level don't depreciate once drafted, they're not like cars driven out of the new car yard, they actually appreciate. But people get so intoxicated by blue sky and want to punt a "star" they interpret very good trades as negative. People are waxing lyrical over this years crop of early picks but it will be highly unusual if 3 or 4 of them aren't disappointments if not outright duds. Still people will continue to be blue sky junkies and then lash out at those who fed their fantasies and got the dud.

I think the reason it's an A+ is that in assessing the performance it's important to take into account the desirability of the destination.

What I think is interesting is that we didn't trade anyone out and not only that but there was little if any talk in the media about any of our players being traded out. It could have been because they just were not rated or it could have been a philosophy. I think it's the second. I think Roos recognizes the need to restore confidence and if he had traded players out this could send an unwanted message to the playing group but more importantly he recognizes that the previous FD were so inept that he can't really make a fair judgement on the marginal players like Tapscott, Blease or Strauss. This contrasts so much with last year. I wonder which will produce better results?

Barrett thinks it's a D and I think it's an A+. Who give a flying F. All that matters is what happens on field next year.

No, but I wouldn't laugh nearly as much!

No, if you're going to trade him then trade him for a player you need and know can do the job, not some young speculative pick in a weak draft. He can possibly play back and is good cover for Dawes and Clark. How many games did they play last year?

And don't forget Jordie McKenzie. He's listed at 186 but is taller than that. Does Roos like tall mids?