Cheesy D. Pun

This. If available, take multiple small forwards. With our current game plan, the game is won and lost in this area.

Christian Petracca?

This guy only has a job in the media because he was willing to spill every possible detail of the machinations of his previous employer (Collingwood). Not a smart move. He'll last another few months before that well of insight dries up and he's unemployable.

Just a sensible acquisition if it eventuates.

I went to school with all six of Blair's kids and lived just a few doors up the street. He would come to our school every lunchtime without fail and facilitate a match where he'd not only umpire but quite often commentate. Everyone had nicknames based on their playstyle. It was something I took for granted but realise now that that level of dedication to the younger generation is a pretty rare thing. A good cricketer who represented Tasmania and played first XI cricket in Gippsland until well into his 50's.

You have two choices - you pay the player or you let them go. I find it hard to believe that you'd have backed a decision to let him go. Here's a hypothetical, Would you let Trac go if he wanted 4 years?

Haha..yes!

A good nickname is multi-dimensional with a degree or two of seperation. With that in mind, I think his nickname should be 'Bobby' as in Sideshow Bob and Bobby Brown.

The jumper didn't save this bloke. Agree on Bernie - legend!

Yeah, I totally agree with this. We need dedicated, specialist small forwards.

Absolutely!

I think the mental health issues are the biggest worry, both for Adam and any potential suitor. The way this is being dealt with is concerning. Clubs need to do due diligence in terms of identifying these issues but by shipping out or avoiding players with mental health issues, the game will create a culture whereby hiding it becomes incentivised - it's a dangerous game.

I haven't gone through the entire thread so might have already been mentioned but what about Jack Higgins? Whether he's the right guy or not, I don't know but we definitely need more specialist small forwards.

This is the major issue. We love to blame our midfield for us not having a forward line. I'm not usually one for hyperbole but there's a decent argument for us having a top 5 midfield, top 5 defence and the least potent forward line in the comp. While it would be nice, we don't need to have big 50+ goalkickers down there, we just need to start making defences accountable. This is why I think Ben Brown is a no-brainer. Even if not at his best, you have to man him up.

If running a football club only involved list management, you might have a point. Every element of a footy club - from commercial sponsorship, resources and infrastructure, marketing and communications through to the football department and players all have an influence on success. You could hand us the 22 best football players in the land but it will mean very little if they're not supported by all of those other functions. Good clubs do more than one thing right.

I know zero about this kind of thing but Green's resume looks a little bare.

Depends on his preseason. He looks really good leading up at the ball and has held his own pinch hitting in the ruck. If he has a fantastic pre-season, both on the track and in the gym, he could be used on-ball at different stages. I'd go with 80% forward, 18% ruck and 2% as a surprise mid (a role I think he'll play more and more as his career goes on).

Sounds completely plausible but where does this info come from or is it just conjecture?

Does not matter - the recruiting was a very small part of our problem at that time. Neale's career would likely be done by now had he been been chosen by the Dees.

I don't get how people can honestly judge a coach to be the difference between success or failure. They could be but how are people so sure this is the case. What's the evidence? Is it in the result? Richmond 'failed' 7 times under Hardwick. He was an awful coach according to Richmond supporter forums. He should have been sacked according to the armchair experts. There is no silver bullet in creating a successful football team. No one coach or player can drive success without a hell of a lot of other things being right. Once you've got all of those things in place, you've then got to compete with 17 other organisations who are likely trying to do very similar things with differing resources. And then there's luck. No team has ever won a premiership without it.

Why not!

..and we are looking at Smith and Brown among others. We may yet get multiple best 22 recruits which, by knock on effect, will improve that critical bottom few on our list. I don't think it's too far fetched to say our premiership window is opening. Our age/games played profile suggests we're starting to get closer. The alternative views would be that we're a couple more years away (with Max and May past their best) or we should be rebuilding. It's clear we were aiming to be a little further along at this point, but with a few adjustments, particularly in our forward half, we'll be a shot at going deep into finals, again.

I understand what you're getting at and you're right but unscrambling the egg is a lot harder than not cracking it in the first place.

I've never understood this argument about Tassie. You'd literally need a quarter of the capital city's population to turn up each week. Also, those other markets are a long term project with a far greater potential for growing the game. If you were thinking that in 50 years time we might have a team outside of Australia, you've got to break into the largest and toughest markets here first. Tassie already supports the AFL and you could make a sentimental argument that they deserve a team (and I would agree), but if you're wanting to grow the game, Tassie is inconsequential.

That goal was ridiculous and gets my vote.