nutbean

And "ready to go round one" is a bit of nonsense statement - the amount of draftees that come in and make a big impact season one is very small..I am not talking about some good games - I am referring to week in and week out contributors like Wines was year one. Last years draft - maybe 3 - Taylor, McDonald and Bontempelli. ( to a lesser extent Dunstan and Billings). That's out of some 60 selected.

I have been a paid up member for as long as I can remember. I am always optimistic at this time of the year because of the BUTT factor ( burning up the track). I will say I have got despondent during the year and opted to curl up in the corner in the fetal position sucking my thumb rather than go and watch the game. I just couldn't imagine not getting a membership ( financial reasons aside).

It seems that Brayshaw is a lock for pick 2 but there is so much conjecture and uncertainty over pick 3 it wouldn't surprise me if at draft time when it comes to pick 3 we call out "pass".

doesn't matter what I think we should pick as the odds are stacked that whoever we pick there will always be someone "we should have picked".( cue Demonland going into meltdown) What I think we should do - we have started doing last year and have continued ( hallelujah) - we should concentrate heavily and invest in developing the talent we bring in. Roos identified this last year and has gone one step further by bringing in a recognised developer of players in BM.

I don't think there was an absence of talent in Blease - We have seen his best ( rarely) which can be very good - his attitude is absolutely not good enough.

I like the second paragraph a lot - it echoes my thoughts. The plan was not only about re-educating - it was about instilling some self belief which is obviously a work in progress. As to our recruiting - I still maintain that we brought in players and immediately wrapped them up in a Turd suit which was our club and wondered why they smelled like crap.

Let me rephrase - some players took a step forward.( massive is an overstatement) I think when Roos came in and said to the effect that the players were damaged and needed a hug - as corny as it sounded - it was pretty well on the mark. Forget about bringing any talent to the fore - Instilling any sort of confidence in our list was the first major hurdle Jetta was the standout improver but players who took steps forward in my opinion - Bail ( was almost a delist under Neeld - I know many on here don't rate him at all but I believe he can be a week in week out contributor). Pederson likewise. Dunn continued his progression especially in the first half of the year. Kent continued to contribute. Jeremy Howe who I expect bigger things of - looked comfortable down back. Tom McDonald whilst still scaring me with ball in hand continued his progression and continued to attack. Even Dawes who faded as the season progressed showed reasons why we recruited him. I suppose so many players went backwards under Neeld that any improvement was welcomed. To me the test will be this year in seeing if the same mentioned players can take another step forward. The one consistent theme in our players has been inconsistency from year to year. They tease with improvement one year and go backwards the year after. We need to see twice the improvement leading to twice the wins.

His major issue in my eyes is obviously he made no forward steps under the one year of Roos. I do agree with CF regarding the toxic environment prior to Roos arriving, Under pre Roos organisation name me 10 players who thrived - I can probably name 3 with another 10 that probably did no more than simply survive and have average output. Build a structure where a player can thrive, can develop, has encouragement and support to improve then we can squarely point the finger at the player if this doesn't happen. No excuses. However this was not the case pre Roos. Blease was an example of the worst affected by that period however it is a combination of Blease's attitude and a rotten environment. Nathan Jones has an attitude that would see him thrive no matter what the circumstances. I gave every player a clean slate as soon as Roos arrived as I saw go about setting up a new structure and dare I say the dreaded "C" word - try and develop a decent culture that has long been absent. Some players took massive strides forward - some players took small steps - some like Blease did little to embrace the new world ( either wouldn't or couldn't) - thats why he is gone.

I think that's exactly what I said (although I will question "countless others" becoming good players)

Arguing against yourself - Against Carlton we had 45 inside 50's - a long way short of the top teams ( and the mid range teams) - we didn't get the ball in more often that day - the volume of supply didn't improve - the QUALITY of the supply and the CONVERSION improved. I don't care how many forwards you have - if you don't get the ball in they are not going to get it. The one disclaimer is Roos himself admitted that he needed to teach the team not to leak as many goals and we were far better this year but that came at the expense of attack and Roos suggested the team needs a better balance between attack and defense - so the unanswered question is - will tweaking the game plan by itself mean more inside 50's or is the current midfield incapable of lifting that number ?

I am amused when I see this. Exactly how will he name his price and get to Freo ? Unless you are a free agent you have two options when your contract runs out. 1/ Get to Freo by the MFC trading him which I would suspect if he comes on would be for a huge return so you wouldn't need insurance 2/ He becomes uncontracted and wants out - worse case scenario is we don't play ball and then he goes into the PSD - and takes pot luck that he wont get picked up by a club lower on the ladder than a WA club. For non FA's there is not movement to your club of choice unless your current club allows it.

And go back through the history -it will show you that in every draft over the last 10 years that some blokes who the experts rated top 5 have been meh and blokes who the experts rated 5-10 have proven to be the pick of the bunch. I agree that you take the bloke who you rate top 3 - I will taken any money right now that in 4 years time Petracca at one , Brayshaw at two, McCartin at three, Wright at four ( the so called "experts" ratings) will not be the way they are rated retrospectively.

Semi agree - It's up to clubs to be a little more thorough in their recruiting process, analysism scouting and interviews but accept that with so much development to happen between 18 and 22, and with so many unknowns about how these juniors will turn out despite intense scrutiny that whoever any club picks, 3 years down the track accept there was a better player (s) available at your pick.

I think the stability at the club and the development has been non existent for the entirety of Blease's stay. However you can prosper despite the surroundings like Jones has, you can be somewhat a mixed bag like many players but show enough to have the club believe you will prosper under a better environment like Jeremy Howe or you can display to the club that you are not prepared to work hard enough to get to the desired level at our club and that's Blease.

penny may drop...penny may not. I see his attitudes not being dissimilar to Colin Sylvia. The penny never left his pocket let alone being given a chance to drop.

I don't want to raise the draft age so there is more certainty for clubs around selections ( if we stick to the current age limits then we have to accept it is more of a lottery). More certainty around selections is definitely a byproduct of raising the age though. I want the age raised so there is more maturity in incoming footballers both in terms of skill levels and physical development. I was going to make a case for more emotional maturity but I don't the thinking of 18 year old as opposed to a 20 year old is that much different to be a huge benefit.

Hmm - not seeing a trend here.. As Sherlock Holmes said "Eliminate all other factors, and the one which remains must be the truth.' We have recruited - talls,shorts, pace, plodders, insiders and outsiders and pretty much every player recruited has got to mediocre at best. Whilst players have to take responsibility for their own output and development ( Nathan Jones) they just don't . The one factor that is evident is all these recruits were drafted into the MFC system. With Roos and Co ( and now the appointment of a good development coach in BM) I have some optimism that all this may change.

It's not a trend - it's set in stone, forever in a day reality that so many fail to grasp. We have a host of immature footballers coming through a system with little emphasis on defense. And then we try to rate them in order ! The order of selection for every draft compared to output has been wrong and will continue to be so. Clubs will pick a player and two seasons later supporters will rue that they could have had someone else at a later selection. Of course talent isn't being identified correctly because who you select or don't select now will look markedly different in two to four years time.

check out Gartlett's career stats and compare them to Nahas...not even close.

so no friends under 56 years old ?

interesting you say Evans is far too injury prone - can't the same be said for tappy ?

a boy wonder apparently

Disagree - have a look at the last 5 drafts from 2009 back... - pretty much the best two 17 years at draft time are NEVER the best players at 22 !

Why exactly is that ? He is captain of the club and well respected. Because he has poor execution skills you wouldn't take him seriously ? Way to go on promoting good culture. "Do as I say not as I do " - not relevant ?

We share a birthday !