binman

Satan did you have anything to do with adam and eve's fateful choice?

Timely article: http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/expert-opinion/the-demons-most-pivotal-draft-day/story-fncqi979-1226332168836

Top of the Ponsford. With a crew of Melbourne and some bombers mates. Sitting amongst a sea of rabid bomber fans. After that first goal i yell at the top of my (quite loud) voice PERCENTAAAAAGE!!!!. Big mistake and one i was reminded of very vociferously. My percentage calls after that have generally come about the 29 minute mark when we are 6 goals up (and i don't get many of those opportunities either)

This is absolutely correct, in fact the whole drafting system is based on this very premise. All the money in the world won't change a spud into a decent player, though of course a lack of (well spent) money may mean decent players turn into spuds. I think we can ll agree that there has been poor player development over at least the last 10 years at Melbourne, which in large part is due the lack of financial resources in the FD. However its very important to note that money aint everything. For one thing it has to be used wisely to be of use. Also there has been examples of clubs in the same time period (last 10 years) who have had similar FD spends but have been much better at developing players IMO. Bulldogs, Sydney Swans and North come to mind. You could probably include Richmond, at least in the last 2 years. Club culture also plays a key role in the development of players. For example what Melbourne fan would not love to have a bit of the Shinboner fighting spirit North are renowned for. Players coming to that club are immersed in that culture and develop accordingly. I shudder to think what young players have been immersed in at the dees since Northey left. Love him or hate him but Scully, if rumors are true, made it clear that something was wrong with the culture at Melbourne. And Neeld will try to develop a better, stronger one.

I reckon this lens should be applied to anything and everything put out by the media. Applying this lens should be a fundamental skill taught to every kid going through school. It constantly surprises me how few people (no one on Demonland of course) seem to apply this lens. To this lens i'd add it's important to always ask - "what's the agenda" - because there always is one, benign or otherwise. The 2 recent Mifsud palavers would be excellent case studies to use in a class teaching kids how to analyse the media. It's funny with the explosion in media (24 hour news cycles, blogs, internet, social media etc etc) and the drop in editorial rigor there seems to have been a corresponding decrease in the communities 9perhaps read young people's) capacity to analyse what is pumped out in the media. Perhaps i'm just getting old.

Good point. We are going to need more than one or top shelf two players so won't be able to go silly with an offer for a superstar (or we won't have the cash to get more than one decent player - we certainly don't need more spuds) And realistically which players would actually want to come to the dees at the moment. There's every chance free agency is going to hurt us as we won't be able to attract anyone, though i suppose Jamar could be the only demon likely to attract attention from other clubs (and his star is fading). Correct me if i'm wrong but there will be compo picks for clubs that lose players through free agency, which could cause our picks to be bumped down the order in the (increasingly unlikely) event teams other GC and GWS finish below us and lose key players

Broadmeadows

Is that a clinical opinion? If so can we claim it (the bottle of JD) on medicare under the mental health plan?

Yep, i watched part of the quarter last night. Pictue pretty fuzzy. What a game. Cool site. Like you avatar by the way

What would he know. 30 odd years in the game. Top player, league coach, top administrator, key member of arguably the most successful club in the modern era

Spot on i reckon. Denham and KB were having a shot at the dees fro picking him this week after not playing him at Casey last week (with Denham suggesting it is further evidence of the chaos at MFC), Bolloocks, and to me shows a distinct lack of sophisticated or nuanced understanding of how a club operates. As noted by LDC he simply wasn't right to play. If conditioning was an issue one session, however intense, aint going to fix that. They no doubt took him to Perth to support him in the team environment, get him away from Melbourne and the spotlight and get his head straight for the tiges. Smart man management i reckon, which should be applauded not derided. Lets hope it pays off in spades and AD plays a blinder. I feel strangely confident about the game this week. Perhaps all the drama of the last few weeks will bring the team and FD together and actually end up being a blessing in disguise.

Credit where credit is due> If the CEO has to take responsibility for not securing a sponsor, he gets to take to take the credit and kudos when one is secured.

At the risk of going round and round the Darling bush I put more stock in his AFL form than his 2010 underage form. In any case the fact he was being selected for a senior WAFL team indicates he good enough in their eyes to play at a high level and against men so we would have been pretty confident he could have made the next step (which of course he has). So his "top age form"was good enough to play senior footy in the WAFL as an 18 year old, that's good enough for me. I wonder if Cook was still available at 26 if WC would have picked him before Darling. Me thinks not. Well played WC

Yep i reckon chasing a few more wins now wouldn't hurt. Getting smashed doesn't help our chances of winning a flag. Besides adding Darling would have helped build a structure around (whether that be Neelds or the then coach Bailey who was on record as saying we needed a big player up forward to compete), one of the arguments for getting Clark this year. And for that matter an arguments (along with adding grunt) for taking Sellar, Couch and Magner rather than younger players with more potential. Its the bird in the hand argument really. We have no idea if Cook will come on, if he will be the 2nd or 3rd strong KPF who clunks contested marks. We do know Darling, barring injury is likely to be a 150 game player. And on the logic that big men take time he is likely to get better and be reaching his peak about the same time Cook is playing his first handful of games. As a punter i like the odds of Darling being the better pick. The obvious question (which i think may have been posted by someone else) is if we had a choice right now between the 2 who would you take. I guess JM you would take Cook but i'd suggest, and i could be wrong, most footy experts (eg media analysts etc) would take Darling. I reckon Neeld certainly would.

I hope you a right about this, well to be more accurate i hope he delivers on that potential. I suppose part of where i'm coming from with that is if he does deliver on that potential it is likely not going to be for another 2-3 years, by which time Darling may well have racked up 80 odd games of footy. You are right he probably isn't a power forward as such but the aggression you note would be very handy over the next 4 seasons and is something we so sorely lack. As much as Miller was frustrating i miss his desire to throw his weight around

To clarify. We should have taken Darling not Cook. It was an error, in my opinion, not to do so. I don't see how you could argue it is revisionism to say Darling had been playing senior footy in a strong league (the WAFL) and as we have seen was ready to step straight in senior AFL footy, as a KPF no less. ​It is a statement of fact - he was playing senior WAFL football and he has slotted straight into a top 4 team as a KPF. Jose, there is a reason some posters are adamant you are also Dr Who (i could care less if you are or aren't though i have to say having multiple names strikes me as very strange). Both of you (and for that matter previous incarnations such as e25 et al) seem to feel it is appropriate to consistently use an insulting, condescending tone in your posts. It almost seems to be your default position. Perhaps your goal is to deliberatley create conflict (and if so that's sad) but surely you would be cognisant of the fact that consistently using such a tone contributes nothing positive, often detracts from your argument and makes it hard to take your posts seriously. As my dear departed gran often said about wankers such as Sam Newman - ïf you can't say anything nice, don't bother saying anything"

Yep. I don't understand how any one could seriously argue we should have taken Darling instead of Cook. It was an absolute no brainer. Even if you think that Cook will end up being a better player Darling had been playing senior footy in a strong league (the WAFL) and as we have seen was ready to step straight in senior AFL footy, as a KPF no less. We were crying out for such a player to give some chop out to Watts and Jurrah and we would have a player now who could fill that role at base rates. Even if he did end up going home to WA after a few years he would have served his purpose and perhaps we could have benefited from a trade. As i said no brainer.

It's not about the journey, it's about how you get there

Fight apathy............or don't

Damn. He's in my supercoach team. I hope Carlton takes the feather duster approach!

Yep, i agree. Neeld def gave the story oxygen with his emotional rebuttal and did look a bit silly a day or so later saying there was now no need or urgency in finding the "source"

Really? Grey? We don't have a FOJ sponsor. Our major sponsor has been sacked (and even if you accept that due diligence was followed in letting Energywatch on board the buck still stops with the CEO for selecting a company owned and run by a borderline lunatic - his self published autobiography at the least should have raised some red flags). There has been rumblings that Kapersky were less than impressed with the service they received and didn't re-sign. Not much grey there i wouldn't have thought. Red faced but not much grey. Like any business a CEO is judged on results and unfortunately the scoreboard does not look good for CS. Oh and you don't think the CEO has a role in building unity and ensuring everyone sticks to their roles?

As opposed to forging a united club, attracting the right sponsors and having clarity about roles

Topic should be Recruiting and Development

Bring back the roller coaster!