nutbean

I am just not so sure why people think that sponsorship and getting money into the club is such an easy and natural thing and just happens. The heart says - lets play every single game at the "G". Unfortunately the head knows that we need revenue streams and wth Darwin we will make good money - the payoff ? playing games up in the NT. We can say the Tassie and the Hawks is nothing like what we are doing but it is exactly what we are doing - additional revenue streams at the expense of travel - tassie being a bit closer and possibility of trying weather conditions - but having watched the Tassie games the conditions in winter are trying to say the least. Well done on the Dees trying to corner a market.

"great" is a stretch ( apologies Steven)

A little anecdote on Tassie. A Hawks friend of mine coincided a holiday for 2 weeks with a Hawks game. The morning of the game it was so cold that he had trouble opening his motel room door as it had iced over - then the rain, hail and sleet started coming down sidewards and did not relent for 7 hours - the game was 500 metres from his motel and he watched the game from his room for fear of frostbite. He was dreaming of Darwin.

I have done a complete 720 on Watts - I always thought he'd be good and Im dizzy thinking about it.

Firstly I am not an advocate of "he was a mad Melbourne supporter so he wants to come to us" but Prestia himself is not the issue - it is more that the only way we could get him is if we trade with GC. The money and Prestia you would hope could be worked out...but the only way to guarantee he comes to us is trade with GC - if he goes uncontracted into the draft then teams below us get first crack.

Havent been in 10 years I would guess and but it was in January. oh my frozen testes god. Also lived in HKG but that was 25 years ago

jesus - its cold in Dalian - do the throwaway Melbourne trams still run in that place ?

I love my club, but that we have one sponsor left with our form onfield for the last 5 years, our form off-field up until recently and all the negative media publicity is a major miracle in itself. That we can turn a profit with all that has gone before us even with the help of the AFL and still invest in the FD and facilities ranks up there with the Big J walking on water. I wouldn't condemn our financial people - I would beatify them.

This is me to a tee - I would love to think we are at a place where we are advanced enough that only the win/loss column matters but we arent there yet so all those thing you mentioned are the key indicators to me. Dont get me wrong I dont want to accept mediocre performances and close enough is not good enough but if you have big enough ticks and improvements on all the items above then the wins will take care of themselves.

How can you not have something in common with the people in this place. There is a wide spectrum of posters ranging from slagging off every player to forgiving all of them and convincing themselves that Simon Godfrey kicked the ball like Gary Ablett but in the main we all share the same highs and lows...shared the same euphoria of winning and same "sads" at a loss. There are few on here who have described that indescribable feeling of the walk out of the Whitten oval in 1987 after the realisation we had made the finals. How can you not share something with someone who has the same euphoria from something as simple as walking back to a freakin car !!!!

I am also hoping Trengoves kicking will improve as well and I certainly put that down injury of some sort - he went from a very sweet kick to ugghh last year as well as his speed deserting him and I can only attribute it to injuries as you dont lose speed and the ability to kick in one season at age 20.

I can understand ( but dont agree) with you not wanting to be critical of our players. I have no problem with players being criticised if it is measured ( as opposed to what was written about Fitzpaptrick on this site) and constructive. So I will ask you directly - do you think that Grimes is a reliable kick ?

No he doesnt butcher every kicks he gets. However he is one in the team that can turn the ball over/miss targets completely when seemingly not under pressure. You can forgive quick kicks out of a clearance situation where there is immense heat and even live with kicking it to a 50/50 contest but Grimes has shown that he can turn over the ball in an unpressured situation. I was critical of Bartram and the argument would come back that his efficiency would be at 70 or 80% but it would be the one or two turnovers, metres in the clear that were momentum killers and all the supporters shoulders would drop...ugghh...you would think that it could have similar effect on teammates. Grimes is also guilty of this on occasions. I think there are three types of kicks in the team - and all of them can turn the ball over - it is the nature of the game - Creative kicks - Watts falls into this category - his kicking is good and his vision and decision making enhances that skill. Reliable kicks - Jetta - he is reliable enough by foot. Then there are the unreliables and Grimes fits into that category, as does Joel Mc, as did Bartram. ( so does Howe in front of goal). Dont be fooled by kicking efficiency stat - watch and see the crucial ball that shouldnt miss a target sail out of of bounds or to the opposition. That is not to say that his kicking cant improve

I am not sure watchers of the game would put his foot skills in the elite category.

and further to the point, why you hear recruiting strategies that may revolve around recruiting atheletes, key positions, outside runners or in the case of Hawthorn over the last decade players that can "kick the footy". A prime example is Scully - there was a knock on his kicking prior to being drafted and as yet i have not seen it improve - time will tell. You compare most of Watts' delivery by foot and know that if 90% of the team had his foot skills we would be in a better place. (well..it is one of the areas we really need to improve on).

You are watering down the stereotype too much for my liking. I can concur that 95% plus members drive range rovers but am doubtful on their ability to land a hood ornarment of that quality.

His where I disagree. There is not a suggestion that he should carry the team but it is ill ring the individuals named to take a giant step. I have watched a plethorara of Matthew bates come through our club... Yeah... He was ok... But he never took the next step. Each of the players RR highlighted have something but they can either take that next which we are imploring them to do or be consigned to ...yeah... He was alright...

Its not tired old cliches that get to me. Its not criticism deserved that gets to me... Its..."this player is crap and should never play for the MFC again".... "trade that spud...trade him now..."..."he is a gutless peaheart, he is a splineless jellyfish, he is brainless...etc". Criticism (measured) ? no problem...vitriol and bile ? that I have a problem with... imploring certain players to do better...no problem at all

Telling Jamar that he has to take more marks is not constructive ? Suggesting that Lynden needs to impact more contests ? Tapscott needs to show more than cameo brute aggression ? In most of the cases RR has either mentioned specific areas or in the case of Trengove, Watts and Sylvia that a general lift in output is required. As to your point of thinking it strange that four of these guys are mentioned yet are in the leadership group - unfortunately I think it is more a reflection of where we are at. We have two players in our leadership group that were willingly traded by their former clubs ! Edit - i dont want to be the cheersquad here but there are posts imploring players to lift and improve like this and others that just slag off players - i see a difference

The criticism is constructive and yes, there are many others that could have been mentioned however if by seasons end you have put a tick next to all those names as having improved like you have suggested then we are in for a much better season.

I believe i will change my name to Nutdank

Morton looked okay when he first arrived

true - because it amounts to the same thing - if we are passing the ball around and not getting tackled then we are getting men loose/free - one of our big problems last year was not enough outside run/loose players.

me me...pick me

Im not sold on this. What you want is your ball carrier especially in the centre to draw hopefully more than one tackler leaving a player free. Judd has gone from being a sublime outside player in his days to working inside drawing in two to three players at clearances and releasing the ball effectively just as he is tackled to loose teammate. I saw our problem last year as not being about evading tackles but not having the loose to receive a handball from one of our guys who has drawn an opposition tackler (s) to him. ( there is also a fair bit of skill in being able to release the ball that split second before releasing becomes impossible due to being crushed to death in the tackle)