binman

Would be consistent with two of Roos comments about the draft. One that they did not plan on taking Kelly. Two that Roos was specifically after tall mids and whilst Billings was only 2 cm taller than Kelly when drafted he was still taller none the less

That's gold GM. Two weeks ago, great get. You should follow up now with a tweet to him with Roosy's quotes (which by the by they replayed on FC last night). I still reckon Edmund simply made the quotes up because seriously what recruiter would make such a big a call so early?

Interesting that Watts-Nic Nat is brought up as blunder. A year ago every man and his ill informed dog (and many an increasingly silly looking dl poster - Ben Hur says hello) was 100% certain we had made a massive, massive blue. And now? Also its a nice reminder about Wines. He went number 7. We took the Toump at 4. So why are those two players bracketed together? Are the Bullies who had picks 5 and 6 being criticized? Should it not be the Toump v Mcrae/Stringer? But apart from anything else what the article above pre-supposes is that we got two serviceable players not two stars. What if they both turn out to be stars (as is increasingly looking likely). Would the gob smacked recruiter still be so sure? The other funny thing is Tyson went no 3 in the 2011 draft (one spot higher than the future brownlow medalist Kelly - which by the by if he is so good why didn't any one have him at number i like O'Meara or Martin?). I don't recall any gob smacked recruiters coming out at the time saying he went too high. So essntailly we got a number 3 pick and a number 9 pick. Out of interest i wonder where Edmunds industry sources think Tyson would go if he was available in this years draft.

He has the all so rare ability to allow the opposition to move around him while he seems to stand still. Watss has it also. Pendulbury is the best at it.

No i don't mean undecided per se. The definition of ambivalent according to the Oxford is: Having mixed feelings or contradictory ideas about something or someone. That's what i meant and is why i used the word ambivalent. But thanks for your offer of help. Your comments about him sculpting, chipping away at formless stone and shape is very Murphyesuque in its unnecessarily florid use of words. Indeed all you needed to do was include a look at me aren't i hip musical reference (used to illustrate a point, as an analogy or metaphor) and you could have been parodying him. Actually you've captured in a nutshell why i have mixed feelings about his writing.

I'm ambivalent about his writing. It has improved but still is a little try hard HSC style, with over use of metaphor and a grating flowery style. C'mon BB he couldn't fill Flanagan's ink well. Those two are playing in way different leagues

And i doubt mids get many more disposals on average. Its the back half whose numbers would have increased given they're the ones doing much of the chipping around (with some midfield help)

good comparison. Also a left footer, which is a big plus I reckon as it gives him a bit more time.

Been some great comedy on DL of late. Big, bad Rob Wilson is DL's new comedy hero - who by the by needs some practice with his punctuation, assuming he meant he has been a member for 34 years rather than GTG as his erudite riposte suggests

I love these old threads. A bit scary. Maldon Boys' post on page 27 has proved to be pretty accurate

Given the post about us merging from 'household demon' i would be very wary of believing this info. Smacks of trolling to me.

I agree that those would all be important KPIs for him. I'd also include inside 50's and rebound 50's and an avergae of a goal a game. What i meant was his key KPI (if that makes sense) should be score assists as his strength is his kicking and our forwards will need good supply. On Talking footy (i think) they highlighted how important Hawthorns kicking skill was in terms of setting up goals, showing several examples of pin point passes from the wing/half forward. As it stands Watts is our only elite kick and it makes sense fro him to play a key role in spotting up our forwards. I'd be tempted to play Strauss on the other side for the same reason.

Watts will play wing, high half forward i reckon. Which i in this day and age is part of the mid field. Interesting interview with Mick Turner (ex cats champ) on SEN last night. He was saying how in his day there was a huge emphasis on players needing to be physical whereas today whilst it is important to have players who get the ball, outside runners are crucial. He said receivers were key players in modern footy. Turner reckons he would thrive in today's footy as he was an outside player who could run fast all day (he noted that in today's footy if you can't run all day - ie be a super athlete - you'll never play AFL). Also interesting that Turner pushed forward in his last 3 years and and kicked 40-50 goals in those seasons. I could see Watts in a similar role, certainly as an outside receiver type but also one that pushes forward. As i have said previously i'd set his KPI as score assists.

Agree. With one change. 6. get small forward who can regularly rotate through the midfield (which by the by is the role i reckon Roos will try Jetta in)

'.......and then there is former No.1 draft pick Jack Watts. I was there the day Jack played his first game. I have never seen a fanfare like it and is it any wonder he has never lived up to that hype? It was one of the biggest mistakes I have ever seen from a football club in handling a young football player. Make no mistake, the Demons need to keep hold of Watts because he is incredibly talented and still could be a star. He needs a coach that will find a position for him, play him in that position and teach him what it takes to be a genuine AFL player.' Paul Roos

Spot on Redleg. As i have said before win win trades are very rare. The most likely scenario in a trade would be a couple of b graders in return. He's at the crucial 80 game mark and it would be crazy to let him go if we can avoid it. I accept he is nowhere near hard enough at it. But as you point out he he has great skills, i would say the best by far in terms of hitting targets by hand and foot. Obviously our major weakness is our midfield but a close second is our appalling kicking skills. It just crucifies a team to turn it over as frequently as we do. Makes no sense then to cut the best kick in the team. Again as i have said before i like Watts as a high half forward/wing whose KPI is score assists (but who can also kick 20-30 goals a year himself). Watts strikes me as someone who needs to know his coach has full confidence in him. Which is why i could see him instantly improving at another club as it would mean that by definition a coach has gone out, chased him and put their faith in him. If he stays i reckon Roos will show that sort of faith in him i would expect him to make a significant improvement in his application and intensity (which is his area of weakness).

I like the Toump. He has exactly what we need in terms of skills by hand and foot. All game plans in modern footy depend on players having the ability to hit targets. We are beyond woeful in this regard. My query on Toump is his fitness and his speed. I know he had hip problems and did not have a full preseason as a result but i was behind the goals on the weekend (city end) and there was one play in the forward pocket where the Toump had to chase a man. He was too slow to catch him (i forget who kicked it but he got a goal) and he was completely exhausted after it, despite it not being a huge chase.

I'm not getting this idea that Toumpas is soft. What absolute rot, particularly if the evidence is dropping his head when going for a mark in the second quarter in their forward 50 (the mark was intercepted and they goaled). I was at the game and right behind the goals. It was poor play by Toupas but he absolutely did not drop his head or squib the contest. His mistake was the ball was crossed to him and floated a bit and he didn't move towards the ball which allowed the cats player (who he should have sensed was there) to come in and mark. Not great play but not soft.

Are you the love child of Ben Hur and Rhino Richards? A half brother to Satry?

I agree. He looked slow against the saints but here's hoping he has the opposite trajectory in this regard to trenners.

Exactly. The message isn't the issue. The forum this issue is delivered in is the issue. Plain stupid to be honest and i thought so at the time. RPFC's point in the post above that "most of Neelds words in public are poorly worded and haphazard and they get misconstrued constantly" is spot on. He is a head coach a and for any coach (in any sport) being a good communicator is a key competency. There are any number of examples of him making comments that are not clear, the recent one about 5 years being the most recent - a comment that had Mitch Clark perplexed. Its one reason why i think he should stop doing so much media. If your messaging makes things more confusing don't say anything. I wonder whether his poor communication in the media extends to explaining to his players his game plan or what he wants them to do. The on field evidence suggests it does. Much was made of him being a teacher and good teachers also have to be good communicators. I wonder if he was a good teacher?

i don't think any of these reasons are plausible. I'd suggest the plausible reason for this rumour is the same as the one about Roos. To destabilise Neeld.

Right. Do you understand parenthesis? Perhaps with your ability to misquote you could become a footy journo for the age or the hun

Almost all of these players left because they were not best 22 and wanted to play more senior footy (with some obvious exceptions, two of which are covered in my post above). Of course as say above players leave but if Watts goes we will have had 3 of our best 22 choose to leave the club in 2 years.

I didn't say MFC members wouldn't care if Watts left. I said i would be gutted. As for my comment that clubs with healthy cultures don't lose players perhaps i needed to be more literal. Clubs with good cultures rarely lose player because they are not happy or leave because they have been treated poorly. Clubs with good cultures rarely lose multiple players who are in the best 22. Clubs with good cultures rarely lose their young guns (potential a graders with 40-60 games). Clubs with good cultures keep their best players. Think Sydney. Think Hawthorn. Think the Cats. Even Port were able to keep their young guns. Give me some examples of a club noted for its culture who has had a genuine young gun choose to leave? And the examples you gave? Judd returned to Victoria but before he did helped win a flag for West Coast (and played what 150 games for them?). Ablett was lured north for a then unprecedented amount of money (interestingly rumors were a factor in his decision was he was not getting on with an increasingly erratic coach - a coach who left in acrimonious circumstances soon after. Also interesting that the talk is Ablett may return to the cats) . But not before playing 150 odd games and winning a flag. Both clubs were solid and remained solid after their star player departed.