speed demon

11 hours ago, dazzledavey36 said:

We are getting this bloke for a F4?! Just as a 5 man interchange is being introduced?

Umm, OK Saints, I guess that’s fair. Do you sell property too? Need something for a guy coming from QLD.

While it’s sad how his career at MFC is ending it’s worth reflecting that, given his personal challenges, it could easily have never happened at all.

We got some things wrong at the end but we must have got a few things right at the start.

3 hours ago, Ted Lasso said:

Here is a @Ghostwriter egg on your face type scenario.

Imagine you have a guy called Clayton Oliver.

2x AFLCA player of the year, best and fairest, all Australians, he's done it all, and this guy desperately wants to get back to his best because he feels he owes your club.

Imagine you pay that guy 700k a year to play somewhere else.

Imagine that given this guy has had no serious injuries and seemingly retained his power, he goes to this new club and does rediscover his best, and we pay a get worse in the midfield, while he dominates and makes All Australians somewhere else

I think everyone associated with the MFC would have a MASSIVE egg on their face if that happened.

They'd better be right about this.

I get what you're saying but we can't live in fear of "what if..."

We need to make our decision on what's most likely to happen.

My guess is Oliver's future ceiling is somewhere between his best and his form in 2025. For a club that needs an inside bull, that's good value for $7-800,000/yr. For us, looking to adapt our gameplan and a fresh start, ~1.5million/yr is not good value. Maybe, we can create better value for our money by paying Oliver to pay for GWS and buying draft picks or luring Humphrey on a fat contract.

(For what it's worth, if Oliver does go to GWS I genuinely wish him well and with Hogan and Bedford already there Giants would become my second team - if I allowed myself such indulgences)

53 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

First time I've enjoyed watching Collingwood highlights.

Strong, skilful and crafty. Great value acquisition.

I want to give Trac some credit.

Firstly, while his form this year was below his best it was still very good and as good as could be expected given the physical and psychological impact of his King's Birthday injury.

Secondly, after last year's failed departure, I expected Trac to seek a trade at the end of 2025. Despite everyone's hypervigilance for signs of discontent, the dominant narrative this year - at least externally - has been that he was committed to the club.

In these two regards, I think Trac has conducted himself professionally and somewhat re-stored a reputation that took some damage in 2024. It has also put us in a much better negotiating position than if he had a poor season or seemed desperate to leave for the whole year.

With that being said, it's in everyone's best interest that a fair deal is struck. King deserves to start his reign with committed and unified squad. The persisting presence of a want-away high-maintenance star is harmful. I'm all in on a straight swap for Humphrey (+/- change either side).

Finals bound or not, this is smart list management. For little cost or risk, he immediately improves our best 23 and addresses a major need, while reportedly also being a solid citizen.

More of this please.

33 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Hope he loves it there and GC love him.

I'd rather a fair trade than CP5 stay at this point.

There's a lot of assumption Langford will move into the midfield but should he?

Playing him on the wing this season was an excellent move; allowed him to use his strengths (decision making & ball use) and mitigate his weaknesses (speed, left-sidedness).

To me, his marking game was inconsistent but showed potential. Will almost certainly improve.

A wingman with composure and class who can take contested marks and kick goals is highly valuable.

I'm more interested in seeing someone developed in the midfield like Windsor - who attacks the ball at pace - especially if he can re-find his kicking skills we saw in 2024.

4 hours ago, Ghostwriter said:

Final captain’s run for 2025.

Chocco is here. Right now he’s working one-on-one with Tracc goal-kicking. They had a big hug before they started 🥹

Started trying to correct Trac's ball drop? 😬

34 minutes ago, biggestred said:

once again news about our club in the media before our club announces anything.
we need to find the leaks and plug them tigher than a drum, because its a disgrace.

Perhaps the leak was Chocco himself to Cornes, in exchange for Cornes public endorsement and recommendation for Tassie etc.

14 hours ago, praha said:

Given the outcomes of 2022-2025 holistically, anyone who says that the St Kilda game didn't have a bearing on his sacking is delusional. It was undoubtedly the nail in the coffin. You simply can't defend that sort of loss in your 9th year as coach for the same team, unless your results elsewhere make up for it. The loss kind of compounded everything else that was going wrong.

I said it at the time that there was no coming back from that for Goodwin. It was simply inexcusably. Honestly I expected him to resign. I couldn't believe he still kept a relatively unmoved demeanour following that loss. And saying that there were positives in the final four minutes... I just think that the Saints game alone was kind of symbolic of his coaching over the past 12 months and it was the end of him.

I also still believe we should be playing finals at the very least. I also think that the reports suggesting the board disagreed with Goodwin about where we are at have been misinterpreted: I am willing to bet that the Board and Goodwin had differing views on who will lead us to the next flag. I am pretty confident at least one, possibly both of Oliver and Petracca will be elsewhere next season. And I also think May's time at the club is done. I hazard a guess that Goodwin presented 2026 as being a year where all three were fit and healthy and a key component of our chances to contend. Anyone with half a brain knows that is just delusional.

That's my take too.

We may not be too far away but, to get there, hard decisions need to be made about premiership players and I was increasingly doubtful Goodwin was going to make those decisions.

11 minutes ago, Ghostwriter said:

Oi Chook… I’m juuuust starting to warm to Bucks. Please don’t make my acceptance of a Collingwood person be in vain!

I find it helps to think of Buckley as a Brisbane Bears person...

48 minutes ago, Adam The God said:

I had a chat yesterday with some guys we regularly sit near at the footy. We discussed Buckley and all four of us agreed that none of us liked Buckley, so we were having to shift that in our heads, but that if Buckley won a flag with Melbourne instead, we wouldn't be complaining.

The second chance saloon is definitely an issue though. It would be unprecedented (correct me if I'm wrong) if Buckley won a flag having failed in his first time as a senior coach.

That doesn't mean you don't employ him, but he has to, pardon the pun, buck history.

Not quite unprecedented: Malthouse did not win a flag in his first coaching stint (Bulldogs '84-89) and neither did David Parkin (Hawks '77-80) with both going on to win three flags each.

I wouldn't summarise Buckley's time at the Pies as a failure. I'd say there were successes (turning over the list, improving culture, improving training standards) and failures (player relationships). If not for a Dom Sheed miracle he would be a premiership coach with a winning percentage of 53.6 from 218 games. Similar to Leigh Matthews time at Collingwood with one premiership and a winning percentage of 55.6 from 224. Matthews did alright in his second gig too.

1 hour ago, BW511 said:

I listened to this a while back by chance, it made me really appreciate the journey Bucks has been on post Collingwood - would highly recommend.

Out of Simpson, Longmire and Bucks I’ve become reasonably excited at the thought of Bucks coming on board.

Initially, I was all in on horse but have swung around

Agree, worth a listen.

Like many, I’ve enjoyed disliking Buckley based on my various biases.

Begrudgingly though, I have had to recognise he’s quite intelligent and seems to conduct himself well.

The interview shows his awareness that his ego has been both a strength and a weakness throughout his career.

I think he still has the necessary drive to be a premiership coach but now with greater maturity and balance. Would be a strong play by the MFC.

18 hours ago, Jaded No More said:

They want to win their lawsuits by saying "we tried to punish every player who caused concussion' in order to stamp out head injuries in the game.

Never mind that this could not be further from the truth, because they didn't suspend the guy who concussed Petty, nor TDK for concussing May.

I am not suggesting those players should be suspended, but their argument will be that they're forcing a duty of care on players and punishing those who don't display it.

Of course you can argue what is duty of care. Is it duty of care not to go flying knees first into an opponent? Is it duty of care not to contest a ground ball if you're only a 50% chance of winning it? Is it duty of care not to lay a chase down tackle?

The rules are murky, and while some things are black and white, aka leave the ground, hit someone high behind play, raise your arm and collect someone etc, some actions are just grey. 99% of marks don't result in concussion, 99% of ground ball gets don't result in concussion, 99% of chase down tackles don't result in concussion. So to punish the 1%, if those actions were taken with the reasonable expectation of winning the ball, is just stupid.

This reminds me a lot of the JVR suspension a couple of years ago, where JVR had eyes on the ball and went to spoil and accidently collected his opponent in the head. How many spoils since then have resulted in concussion? The appeals board was right to throw out his suspension, because suspending him would never have stopped players from spoiling a high ball, just as suspending May would never stop players from chasing a ground ball.

Whereas suspending guys for leaving the ground to bump, has significantly reduced those incidents, because they are very avoidable and not necessary. Keep your feet on the ground if you're going to bump an opponent to win the ball, is much easier to execute than asking a player to measure the projection of the bounce of the ball at full speed within 0.5 seconds of said bounce.

Well said as usual.

The AFL's focus should be on dangerous non-football acts like players pushing opponents into marking contests. It's like pushing an unsuspecting pedestrian in front of an oncoming car.

5 hours ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Its a good point on confidence.

I think its why we just have to play him out in the seniors for the rest of the year and hope that the penny will drop in terms of him knowing just how hard he needs to work if he wants to make it at senior level.

I will give it to him though, unlike some key forwards ive seen, hes not afraid to leap into packs and create a contest. I feel with each experience and a bigger frame, hell start to clunk those marks.

Agree with your comments on MJ. He's usually clean with his hands and a good kick, so I put the dropped chest mark and set shot miskick down to nerves and not skill. I like that he's getting to more contests and having a crack. Keen to see the club stick with him. I think he's got more to gain by playing AFL than VFL at this stage.

Going nowhere.

In his current form, he is exactly the type of player we need more of; crafty and skilful while still doing the necessary team stuff.

4 hours ago, binman said:

Yep, all good points.

And what I like about them is the focus is, for the sake of argument assuming our clear dead legged performance was as a result of loading, questioning the logic of doing so.

Given how big an impact it has on our fortunes, our high performance program and strategy should be questioned, should be critiqued.

I question our ability to perform when we are fatigued and wonder to what extent mental preparedness plays a part. There's no excuse for not being switched on at the start if the game and it didn't link like we were.

Let's say I'm right, and I think I am (your point about not covering their spread is an excellent one - we have been the team spreading opponents of late, Lyon clearly knew we were sluggish and he looked to exploit that), my thoughts about your reasonable question about not changing tack because of our 0-5 start are:

• What would the consequences be of changing a complex, carefully calibrated program halfway thru the season (different scenario because they had banked wins, but when the pies played freo off a five day break they had a lot of injuries yet stuck with their plan to rest key senior players, clearly impacting their chances of winning. When asked about that decision Mcrae said they had a plan created in the preseason and stuck with that plan - it's about the war not the battle)

• If we are not in optimal shape against the pies they will shred us - after two peak games (the lions, then swans) would we be able to have yet another against the Saints and then peak again and be in optimal shape against the pies?

• How important is it we play really well next Monday - one of only two guaranteed marquee games we have each season, one we have played poorly in in recent times, huge TV audience and a home game go boot

• What is impact on the high-performance program and planning of having to play Port, in Adelaide Oval, off on a six-day break after the Pies games (i'd argue it's not really possible, particularly for teams with so many young players in it, to be 'up' for five games straight (and we were up and about against the hawks too)

• The bye is the recovery period for pre bye loading - given we have the bye after the Port game we have to load at some point ahead of the bye and given we had perhaps given we had a seven daybreak into the Saints and an eight day break into the Pies perhaps doing that work ahead of the saint's game made more sense than comprising our performance against the Pies and Port (potentially an 8 point game given they are more likely to be make finals than the Saints

• That would be a calculated gamble, but that's part of the equation no doubt in the preseason planning process - and really even fatigued we should have beaten the Saints given it's not as if they played out of their skins

Loading is a hypothesis that better explains the observation (i.e. great, high-intensity footy the previous weeks and rubbish, low-intensity the next) than the alternatives put forward (weak, soft, drinking bathwater etc).

However, seems indulgent to be loading into the Saints game given our ladder situation. I note the points you raise above and, if loading did occur, maybe these are the reasons why. Even so, I think this is flawed. A high performance program that is rigidly set at the beginning of the season and not recalibrated as the season unfolds seems high risk of imploding.

I think this is particularly true for MFC in 2025. Coming off 14th place in 2024, it would be foolish to assume we could roll into the middle of the season with 10 wins. Especially when pre-season we had injuries (and suspension) to key ball users in the new game plan (McVee, Windsor, Melksham, Kozzie). Six debutants in round 1 was both exciting AND worrying.

I think we will be more competitive against Collingwood but even at our best a win will be hard. Come the end of the season, I worry that the Saints game will be game that we couldn't afford to drop.

10 hours ago, poita said:

Yes, he was excellent in 2021, and was deservedly All Australian that year. The overall strength of our defence allowed him to thrive in a role that suited him perfectly.

That was almost 4 years ago now, and he has barely played a decent game since.

Teams don't allow him to play off his man and take intercept marks anymore, and he is absolutely woeful in one v one contests. I don't see a single useful thing that he brings to the team, unless you value pointing and looking exasperated.

Goodwin's obsession with playing Lever has destabilised a defence that was functioning well, and has seen us dump our best performing defender.

Can Lever step up his game and become a meaningful contributor again? Doubtful. Will Goodwin man up and resolve the issue he has created? Highly unlikely.

The coaches disagree; Lever has received 59 coaches votes between 2022-2025.

I wouldn't write Lever off yet though I think Turner is going past him (similarly good intercept mark but better one-on-one, better disposal, faster and more agile).

My recollection was that McKay's kicking yips reached a peak in 2023 when he was kicking snaps for set shots directly in front but resolved in 2024 when he returned to more conventional approach to set shots. His goals/behinds for 2023 (29.29) and 2024 (49.21) would seem to support that. Was also in the All-Australian squad in 2024.

A genuine forward / 2nd ruck who would allow JVR to be full-time forward and Petty to shift back in the post TMac / May / Lever years seems worth considering.

Loved Max rag-dolling Grundy to take it out of the ruck and snap truly. Perfect start and set the tone for the day.

https://www.melbournefc.com.au/video/1790882/gawn-v-grundy-max-banks-early-win?videoId=1790882&modal=true&type=video&publishFrom=1748152740001

13 hours ago, Maldonboy38 said:

Viney in for Spargo, although it is not like-for-like so unsure what it does to rotations etc...

If Lever does not recover, TMac straight back in.

AJ remains a question mark for me but he continues to create havoc, impose himself physically, and have direct goal assists. His physicality in particular is glorious to watch, even if it is totally reckless and dangerous. He has to stay in.

I liked the look of our midfield yesterday, especially the extra dynamism Kozzie and Rivers bring.

I'd bring back Viney to play Spargo's role. Viney similarly fit, disciplined and tackles hard and his disposal is better when he has more time and space.

Agree with the above.

Seems like we are incorporating the best of 2021-23 (i.e. contest and defence) with a more dynamic midfield (e.g. Kozzie and Rivers) and faster / more precise ball movement (e.g. Bowey, Langford, Lindsay)

48 minutes ago, Fat Tony said:

Johnson had a game player rating of -2.5. He looks like he isn’t skilled enough for AFL.

That just shows the limitation of the player rating system. There are qualitative elements that are difficult to quantify into a scoring metric.

Another example is Petty (player rating 3.9) who played an effective role in nullifying McCartin.

I agree AJ's not highly skilled but contributing in ways others have already posted.

39 minutes ago, Little Goffy said:

There's a problem here which in the past I looked at in the context of hospital expenses and the 'baking in' of ridiculous price margins on things like latex gloves.

Once the final retailer has added a crazy mark-up, their supplier starts pushing the wholesale price up to get their 'fair' share of the final price, and then that flows further back upstream to the input suppliers, manufacturers, and if the supply chain is linear enough it can even reach primary producer commodity prices.

Trouble is, if then some good-hearted hospital-owning private equity firm (ha ha) decides they don't want to impose a 400% mark-up on latex gloves, they find that actually a large part of that mark-up is gone, absorbed by the wholesaler, supplier, input manufacturer, primary producer. To unpick that mark-up would require getting every step of the supply chain to simultaneously agree on a price cut.

In the free-to-air TV and football context, every 'supplier', from coaches to players to managers to executives to pundits to marketing gits and even the beer and chicken strip providers, has had their price calculated based on the TV rights deals and the estimated ad revenues and the estimated revenue of memberships and gate/food takings.

It is all pretty clearly a bubble.

A major 'market correction' is going to have to happen eventually. Annoyingly, there's clearly a whole lot of useless dead weight (BT's salary, Michael Christian's oxygen, for example) which can be cut dramatically with almost zero effect on game itself, but the political state of Australian football is such that the least useful people are the same ones currently deciding who are the most 'valuable'.

Basically we're looking at the primary thesis of Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. Or Ibn Khaldun's analogy of the indolent self-consuming fourth generation of any dynasty. The fundamental meaning of decadent, when not referring to dark chocolate.

Any minute now we'll see gothic mercenaries guarding our borders.

👍🏻😂🙏🏻❤️

A solitary emoticon was insufficient