binman

Me too. As i noted before there are two, maybe three, aspects to comms - fan engagement (eg social media, content etc), media engagement (eg interviews, pressers etc) and issue/crisis management. But just focusing on fan engagement, like you i love videos and info on how they train and prepare. I'm not on social media, unless you count Demonland, but from what i have seen from clips etc posted on DL, the information and videos MFC put out on the socials often seems pretty brief and fluffy (lots of clunkily edited video put to god awful soundtracks). Popcorn. I understand people love that stuff, and that's great and know I'm probably in the minority but i prefer more depth and detail. The super positive response on here for the brilliant photos from 666 and fantastic track reports (thanks all) suggest i'm not alone in that. I get that doco style videos like the the Hell and Back series are expensive and that in a resource constrained environment perhaps the cost outweighs the benefits - perhaps being the operative word. Plenty on here rubbished that series - less talk, more action and all that. But for me it gave me a reason to actually visit the MFC website, the online front door to the club. Which in turn meant engaging with other information and content about the club. It is part of the value proposition for members and sponsors. I watched that series of videos at least twice (once after winning the flag - which was fascinating because you could see the genesis of how we got there) and thought they were brilliant because they gave me a real insight into how they train and prepare and what goes into being AFL ready. For example, the footage and interviews with Vanderburgh about the incredible ongoing rehab program (for his feet issues) he had to endure just to train and play amazed me. Crazy stuff. But in this day and age clubs don't need to spend a fortune on high end productions to produce content that is engaging and interesting to people like myself. As an example, Freo, who i think do really good comms, have these videos on their website which i found really interesting from a technical point of view and getting a sense of how AFL teams prepare and develop systems - and I'm not even a Freo fan (by the by, for any Omac fans like myself check out 3:11 to 3:38 in the second video - text book):

All good points. To be honest i was in shock after the QF game and Gus incident - in large part because it was the worst, most awful, febrile environment i have experienced at any sporting event. Because of that, and becuase he had been quiet for the preceding few weeks, the JVR suspension washed over me and i didn't really factor it in when thinking ahead to the blues game. But to a large degree, as you imply, JVR missing that game was the straw that broke the back. Even if he had another game he would have had his chances and with his accuracy most likely taken them. And JVR strikes me as a big game player and so there is every chance he would have risen to the occasion and had a big impact. And Smith and JVR would have been a hard combo for the blues to cover. I reckon there is one factor that the impact of which consistently gets underplayed by fans and the media (and me too) - luck. People seem to hate suggesting luck is a factor - i suspect because it feels like making excuses and/or perhasp it so ephemeral. But however anyone assesses our performance, its hard to argue that once again we had our (un)fair share of bad luck.

I feel your pain. Jokes aside, as long term dees fan our outlook looking forward for say the next 10 years or so looks a hell of a lot more positive than say it did in 1980, 1990, 2000 and certainly 2010. That said, a positive forecast is no guarantee of flags and i am in furious agreement with you that we left a flag on this table this year.

This time x 1000. Pay peanuts get monkeys. They clearly have made a decision not to invest in comms to the level i would expect of any professional sporting club in an elite competition. Personally i think it is short sighted as fan engagement is critical in terms of continuing to grow the fan base and membership But its more than just fan facing content and engagement. Good comms is critical in terms of managing potentially fraught issues, not to mention responding to any crisis or serious incident and/or damage control. Look at last season. The Grundy demotion to the VFL to 'work on his forward craft' was a shocker from a comms perspective and the best you could say about the messaging around the clarry injury and related palaver is that they did a good job of keeping things in house. But they let Goody twist in the wind with the weekly updates he had to give. I don't blame Richo or Goody for those comms snafus - particularly goody who is not a natural media performer like say Mcrae. Getting such messaging right is the responsibility of the comms team. Bottom line is Demonland is much better source of information and content for dees fans than the MFC which should not be the case. And speaking of Demonland, from a comms perspective the club are wasting an opportunity for basically free comms and promotion. Instead of locking out fans from Casey training they should be encouraging people like Picket Fence to get downs there and report to their hearts content. Even give them special access (get some players or club official to chat to them). Then cross promote on the MFC socials. Free content and great engagement. Simples. Oh and they could hire 666 to take photos.

Too bad you picked the dees to support then. Failure is part of the deal. Not sure how long you have been a dees fan, but as someone who has been supporting the dees for half a century the current model of failure sure beats the 70s, 80s, 90s, 2000s and 2010s model.

Fair enough. But whilst i take your point that prior to the Gus incident (which occurred at the 8 minute mark of the first quarter) we weren't as switched on as we should have been, surely you concede that for the rest of that quarter we were understandably in la la land psychologically and emotionally and that had a direct impact on our effort and performance level in the first. Basically the first quarter was a write off. Which left 3 quarters to put in maximum effort. Which they did. Are you not impressed that after quarter time they rallied and put maximum effort in right up to the final siren? I mean plenty of teams, including plenty of other dees teams over the years, would have turned up their toes after the first quarter (how many finals end up in a blow out after one team is jumped in the first quarter). We didn't and whilst I understand your point about how we started the game i think the team deserves a lot of credit for their fight in the last 3 quarters.

A serious question, ie I'm not being facetious. For the sake of argument lets say you are right and the 'way we started the QF was nothing short of abysmal, bordering on pathetic' and we 'weren't ready to play football right from the start'. And for the sake of argument let's say we agree that losing Gus had a massive impact on the game. For the sake of argument, let's leave the obvious, and completely understandable, emotional impact of Gus being poleaxed just a few minutes into the game out of the equation. But let's agree that from a purely footy perspective losing Gus for almost an entire game had a significant impact on our chances of winning the game. I meant to say, we lost one of our best players and leaders, a starting midfielder, had to cover all the kms Gus runs in a game, lost his defensive smarts and had to bring our sub on early, robbing us of the chance to bring a fresh player on late in the third or early in the last quarter. And finally, for the sake of argument, lets agree that inaccuracy cost us the game and that we were clearly the better, stronger team in the last quarter. So to the question. Given we started poorly, lost one our best players only a few minutes into the game and were down 20 points at the end of the first quarter, were you impressed with our mental strength to fight our way back into the contest and be in a position to beat the team who finished top of the ladder and went on to win the flag?

Collins dictionary definition of supporter: Supporters are people who support someone or something, for example a political leader or a sports team. Collins dictionary definition of support: verb: if you support someone or their ideas or aims, you agree with them, and perhaps help them because you want them to succeed. noun: If you give support to someone during a difficult or unhappy time, you are kind to them and help them. Collins dictionary definition of troll: noun: In Scandinavian mythology, trolls are creatures who look like ugly people. They live in caves or on mountains and steal children verb: If you troll someone, you deliberately try to upset them or start an argument with them, especially by posting offensive or unkind things on the internet.

So terribly predictable, both the timing and the [censored] covering.

Interesting clip in terms of highlighting good and bad kicking technique. I cant make out who has the first kick to Trac, but good technique with the ball drop close to his foot and hits a stationary Tracc. The last kick is by brown, and again good technique with the ball drop close to his foot and hits a leading Farris White. The odd man out is tracc. Ball drop nowhere near his foot. Terrible technique. It's actually a nice kick in terms of putting it in space for i think Farell to run onto which keep the ball in motion - a kick that Tracc is good at, in large part because there is bigger margin for error than say spotting up a stationary target or kicking for goal.

I should have been a Geelong fan. No one in my family was into football at all, with one exception - my grandfather who was my hero. My dad nominally supported the tigers, but was never a really a fan and wasn't even really a football fan (i went with him to two games - the 1978 Grand Final. I sat right behind Mike Willisee. And the tigers game, I think against the Hawks where Roach took that pack mark screamer). Mum couldn't stand football, or sport for that matter, as much of her youth involved waiting for her dad to finish cricket or football training. My grandfather was a gun footballer. Right before WWII he trained with the Bombers. The war skuppered his VFL career in the short term, but he played representative football in the Army and by all accounts that was a super strong team. After the war there was some VFL interest but he ended up signing for Camberwell in the VFA as they offered him more money than he would have got in the VFL. I'm not sure why he picked the Cats as his team but he wasn't a huge fan of them or the VFL in general. He lived on the Peninsula and never went to the footy, in large part because he played footy well into his 40s so there was no time. We were close, but he never tried to get me on the Cats train. But that might have been because he missed his chance as i became a demon on my 5th birthday. Family friends of ours were huge dees fans. They were the only people we knew who were football crazy like i am now. We went over there for dinner one day sometime around my 5th birthday. For my birthday they gave me a puppy (Patch, coz it had a patch on its eye). But there was strings attached. They also gave me a dees jumper. And the unspoken agreement was that i had to support the dees. I've been a dees tragic ever since. Fair to say the timing wasn't great seeing i got Patch in 1972.

I've heard from a reliable source that they didn't bring schache on in the semi so as not to impact his preseason.

Agree that hunter is not that quick. From my perspective that is only an issue if there aren't enough quick players accross the team to balance it out. But we didn't last season and it is no coincidence the two draftees are apparently good athletes who can cover the ground at speed. And as you suggest woey and Howes both have good toe. Such players should help hunter as opposed to being a threat for his role (which in time they no doubt will be). It's a bit like kicking skills. I've long been of the view we haven't had enough elite kicks. And that hurt us last year. But teams don't need more than say 5-6 elite kicks and 5-6 above average kicks. If they do they can carry some butchers. The issue comes when there aren't enough elite and above average kicks as the turnover merchants, that every team have, have an outsize impact. There was a lot of talk about our accuracy in our losses in big games, and fair enough too. In large part accuracy is a function of skill (sure ability to handle pressure is a factor but the stronger the technique the better mitigation of pressure). But our turnovers on transition were just as big a factor, particularly in our last two losses against the blues. The impact of turnovers on transition often get overlooked I reckon. Sure it's obvious when a turnover directly results in an oppo goal (and in our losses to the blues their score from turnover was almost double our season average - and ultimately cost us the semi with vineys turnover to weitering with 90 seconds to go). But it's the opportunity cost from turnovers on transition that really hurt, whether the oppo score or not. That's to say a turnover breaks a potential scoring chain for us and costs us a scoring opportunity. Again, no coincidence that Taylor targeted players with good kicking skills. On the DL podcast Taylor said they went best available, but I don't really believe that (though he did equivocate a bit to be fair). I think they drafted more for need - specificlly speed, athletisim and foot skills.

1. Agree. Personally i think bowser has struggled to have the same impact as 2021 because since then Salo has either not been in the side or not been at his best. This has forced Bowser to pick up elements of Salo's role, in particular balancing responsibility for a direct opponent and being aggressive on transition (it's worth remembering that Bowser was not a defender as a junior and isn't a natural defender). If Salo can get back to his best Bowser can better utilise his strengths and be more aggressive in terms of his offensive positioning, running off his man, getting higher up the ground and taking on high risk kicks (with the impact of any turnover mitigated by an in form Salo) 2. Agree. See above

IT. WAS. A. JOKE. JOYCE.

IT.WAS.A. JOKE. JOYCE.

He's def ahead of schedule but given 12 months is the standard recovery period for an ACL, which would be near the end of the 2024 home and away season. Let's say he makes it back in 10 months he could play his first game back not too long after the bye, say aprox round 15.

Unlikely. They might get some midfield minutes here and there, but with Gus, tracc, oliver viney and sparrow all midfield locks for another five years that's it. Besides, Rivers has become critical to our transition game, so can't see him moving from defence. Mcvee can play mutiple roles - defender, winger, outside mid.

Agree we are on the same wavelength in terms of Taylor being ambivalent about the Colt playing as a mid. I had the same vibe from Taylor when I listened to the podcast interview (ie might go through the middle at some point = probably ain't happening any time soon). I'm not so worried about our midfield depth, but only because tracc, oliver, viney and Gus have another 5 plus years of elite footy left. And we have Sparrow, who whilst not an a grader is a solid player and still pretty young. But with harmes, jj and Dunstan all leaving the question of depth through the middle is an interesting one - particularly given we didnt pick up a pure mid in rhe draft. Laurie played as a mid at Casey last season (which was why I so perplexed they didn't use him in the middle when he replaced Gus in the QF). So he's def an option. The cupboard is pretty bare after that.

All good, wasn't trying to have a shot at you. Apologies if that is how it came across. People are def interested in any conversations posters might have with people from the club. I think every new recruit will be a fantastic pickup for us, but the Colt certainly fills a need and looks like he has an X factor and plenty of upside - two things Taylor clearly places a high priority on.

No. Mid to late next season is what I've read as best case scenario. But agree he looks in great shape. That said, whilst I'm to orthopedic surgery what Hodge is to commentary I'm surprised how hard he seems to be working that knee in some of the photos of one on one marking contests.

I think we have become so used to young players coming in and having an impact straight away that we forget that key position players have almost always taken several years to get near their peak and have a real impact. In that context JVRs first season at AFL level was phenomenal - and a tough benchmark. Cadman is much better player to benchmark Jefferson with. Cadman, the best key forward in the 2022 draft, was picked at one by the Giants (Jefferson went at 15). Yes he got run in the seniors in his first season, but as reflected in his numbers (12 games, 6 goals, 6 contested marks and averaged 4.5 disposals and 1.6 marks per game) he was all at sea and clearly miles off. No surprise he didn't get a game in the finals. My view on Jefferson is that he is almost the classic old school young forward. Looks a natural forward, reads the ball in flight super well, uses his body super well in marking contests and has great hands. But is 3-4 years away from nearing his peak. He actually reminds me of a young Tom Hawkins, both in style and the fact that Hawkins took a few years to become a force as a forward. I suspect Jefferson is at least another season away from regular senior selection, and I won't be surprised if he doesn't get a call up in 2024 (though i think they might give him a couple of senior games later in the season in the same way that have with, say Disco and Woey).

I was joking, but that said i'm a tad confused. On a publicly available podcast Taylor said the plan was for the Colt to go through the middle at some stage. He then said the same thing in an interview with a Herald Sun reporter. Are you suggesting Taylor was not being candid on the DL podcast or with the reporter when he said the plan was for the Colt to go through the middle at some stage? But he was being candid with you when in response to your question whether the plan was for the Colt to go through the middle at some stage he replied “yeah, maybe”? Apart from being a little more equivocal, how does that response contradict his public statements? I mean to say the Colt would play as a mid 'at some stage' is basically the same as saying that 'maybe' he will play as a mid at some stage. For what it's worth my view is that of course there's a chance he could run through the middle at times (just as Nibbla did this year) and/or become a permanent mid down the track. At different times the same thing has been suggested about Rivers and McVee (ie they could end up being mid fielders - despite, like the Colt, having limited experience in that role). In my opinion they recruited a player with excellent aerobic capacity who has played all his junior footy as a half forward, with occasional runs on the ball (ie not a specialist mid) to play the high half forward role on the other flank to Nibbla. To me that's clearly the plan, at least for the next few seasons. A good one too because the high half forward role has become critical in footy - as evidenced by the fact clubs are now trading (eg Bedford to the Giants) and drafting (eg the Colt) in players to play the high half forward role. A similar phenomena happened with the wing position - ie players being drafted or traded in specifically to play that role. There was a lag before the footy media and fans understood how critical the winger role had become and i suspect the same thing will happen with the high half forward role. Windsor looks like being a winger and they have been clear the Colt will play as a forward, at least in the early part of his career. Which suggests recruiting a pure mid was not high on their agenda and was not considered a key 'need' at this point in time. Which i think in part reflects a big shift in the game. When Roos came to the dees in 2013 (his first season as coach was 2014 but he was appointed prior to the 2013 draft) the orthodoxy across the league, in large part based on his team set up at the Swans, was teams couldn't have enough mids. Teams basically needed at least 8-10 midfield bulls who could run through the middle and as a result the forward and defensive flankers were often mids. Under Roos we duly loaded up on mids - Gus, Tracc, Oliver, Viney, Dyson, Vandenburg, Bugg, Balic and to a lesser extent Salo (he was a defender as junior but like the Colt there was the suggestion when we drafted him he might become a mid). But in the ten years since Roos joined the dees the game has significantly changed and there is a much, much greater emphasis on transition, all team defence, running, speed and spread. As a result of this change the athletic profile of players is changing. Sure teams still need some midfield bulls, but really no more than 3-4. Characteristics such as fitness, aerobic capacity, ability to cover the ground at speed and ability to do repeat sprints are now much more important attributes than a decade ago. Instead of needing 8-10 midfield bulls, teams now need 8-10 brilliant athletes on their list who can run between the arcs all game. Ideally these players are also excellent kicks. That hasn't always been the case with 'role' players like Nibbla an Cotterill being brilliant athletes but not necessarily highly skilled. I suspect the importance of such 'role' players (historically a pejorative - eg 'he's an athlete first, footballer second') has well and truly filtered down to the junior level and good athlete and good footballer are no longer mutually exclusive terms. In this context, drafting in the Duke and the Colt makes perfect sense. Both are apparently really good athletes who play specialised roles AND have excellent skills.