deejammin'

Nobody on here, but the AFL media machine will go nuts about it and at some point patronisingly tell struggling clubs that GWS has the blueprint to success while we all wonder how the hell any team can get 30 first round draft picks over 3 years. Gold Coast has stuffed it up but also had bad luck, if O'meara, Swallow, Ablett and co played 20 games together for this season with Lynch in the forward line they would be in serious finals contention. They could be pushing for finals next year with a better run with injuries and some good trades. We'll never know how much was concessions how much was astute management. If we could go back in time and halve the concessions and salary cap given to both teams my guess would be that we would see a more even competition with GWS having more good will as they would earn their success like every other club.

If the concessions given to either GWS or Gold Coast were given to any Victorian club every other club administrator and member would be screaming bloody murder about the Comp being fixed. Both these clubs have had more first round draft picks than any club ever, they also have had the unprecedented ability to trade players like Hogan etc for what was meant to be senior players. They still have no fixed salary cap. GWS also had a clear advantage on Gold Coast as they watched what they did with their concessions and improved it and their academy includes traditionally Victorian zones and has yielded better results. Despite all this if Gold Coast had had slightly better luck with injury we would be seeing them in finals too. Im sure a lot of people at GWS have got a lot right and worked very hard, but it's hard to get excited about something that has so clearly been manufactured. Think of the debate around giving teams like Melbourne and now Brisbane ONE priority pick then look at GWS and Gold Coast's draft concessions, it would have been ridiculous for them not to succeed, and we're still only at the beginning... Getting excited about GWS winning finals is like getting excited about big banks making profits. Sure some people were smart and worked hard, but the system was fixed from the beginning.

Luke Hodge and Joel Selwood seem to spend more time talking to the umpires than any other captains in the league....

While I respect and understand your comment I actually think the biggest success of the Essendon, Hird and his sympathisers campaign has been to con fans into thinking the bold statement. Essendon came into 2012 having been spanked by Carlton in the first Elimination final with a list most thought would need to go backwards before it went forwards. They started out the season unexpectedly on fire winning their first 9 games in a row with amazing fitness and strength before an unprecedented spate of soft tissue injuries crippled the list and their season. The reality is a lot of people think the performance enhancing drugs mustn't have worked as Essendon didn't make finals, but really had they kept their pumped up players on the park they could probably have made finals or even top 4 based on their first 9 rounds. The combination of the drugs enabling the Essendon players to get too big too soon for their own bodies and bad luck is what I believe kept them from succeeding, not a failure of Tb4 and other substances to enable them to recover faster and endure larger training loads than a clean athlete. Also on Jobe Watson compare his 2012 stats to every other year he played and you will see a sharp spike in almost every category, 3 more possessions a game than his next best year, 2 more marks etc etc. Sure some players have a blinder but the coincidental fact that in the year he was being injected with a number of substances including Tb4 he played so much better than his career average and the good luck that unlike his colleagues he didn't succumb to injury and was able to take the park during the height of the Dank/Robinson/Hird program says to me that his performance was clearly enhanced by what CAS has found to be illegal performance enhancing substances. We'll never know how much worse Essendon or Jobe would have gone without the program, maybe it would have been the same, but this is the eternal argument of drugs in sport and given the rigour and systematic intensity of Essendons program in 2012 and their improved performance during that time it's highly, highly likely that drugs helped both the team and Jobe win his Brownlow. Its a shocking endictment on the Afl and AFL media that this hasn't been discussed more openly and this blanket "the drugs didn't work anyway" argument has been allowed to be preeminent. As to anyone who looks at it logically it seems highly, highly unlikely that the drugs didn't help in some way.

In many ways the fallout of the past two weeks is that it gave ammo back to those with an axe to grind against our footy club. The Damien Barrett, Greg Denham, Rohan Connolly brigade will start up with this stuff again when they had largely fallen silent or turned their aim on other clubs. Anyone who watches MFC enough knows we improved this year, and has good reason to believe we will again next year. But the meek, shameful performances in the last two weeks gave the portion of the media determined to protect North and Essendrug by potting Melbourne enough that for the next six months we will hear how Kelly is better than Tyson and Salem, that Hogan is going and that Goodwin may not be a good coach and Melbourne may not be improving. None of these things may be true, but these muppets will peddle it, and perhaps our players deserve it after those games. The great shame is that MFC supporters don't deserve to hear it again, we have stuck fat and have a lot to be proud of and to look forward to. Our season was more promising than at least 7 other clubs, but you won't hear that. I admit I was hoping for a good showing against Carlton and Geelong (aside from the obvious finals chance) because it would make this offseason the quietest one on the MFC bagging front for many years. The players now owe the fans the crap (like this RC article) we will now have to put up with for six months and that is bloody annoying, improvement or no.

So Roosy said in his final pressed that the things that show clear improvement this year were a percentage over 100, gone as of today, back down into the 90s. A team that had been more consistently in games including not getting belted in losses, that ended with the biggest belting of the last 3 years (and Roosy's career). And that the best win of his tenure was the one over GWS in round 23 last year as it set up a huge preseason. Well we now go into this preseason with the beginning of an untried coach with an demoralising, soulless performance. Ive seen improvement this year and genuinely enjoyed being a MFC supporter for the first time in ages and 3 weeks ago I would have told you that even if we were to lose the last two games we would be competitive and show a lot to look forward to next year. Now I'm honestly not so sure, it seems we still haven't turned the corner and that if there has been any internal quiet change over to Goodwin these last two weeks things look worrying for his tenure. Typical MFC to turn such a promising year into such tripe.

Great news!! Ideal world 3-4 years for Tom but hopefully there are triggers for an extension. Hopefully GNF's info on Hogan is on point and this will be the first offseason I don't have to agonise about our players leaving! Well done MFC. Classy year all round. Now for the sweetest two words in the English language to come to fruition... mathematical possibility....

Call me a pessimist but I won't be comfortable until pen hits paper for all four. Clearly Tommy is the biggest worry, and Jack and Dean sound very likely to stay, but for my jangled nerves and MFCSS I'd really like to see this done now.

Must sign: Jesse Hogan Tom McDonald Jack Watts Dean Kent All huge for the future of this club, all yet to hit their peak. All heart and soul players. I hope our list managers are doing the right thing and signing all four ASAP.

At this stage we have 7 more games against teams currently below us on the ladder. Winning 10+ games already requires us winning all of those games and getting an upset. We've missed two golden chances to get ahead of the comp for the rest of the season. Id consider improvement 8+ wins, but at this stage we'll need some incredible performances to get that, especially given that teams like Freo, Port and Saints won't roll over for us, and we've already shown how we perform with expectation and favourites status. We may have blown a legitimate chance at improvement and even finals with deplorable showings against the saints and drug cheats and we have every right to be frustrated. I hope the players are...

It's also worth noting we are still yet to beat a team we didn't beat last year. Obviously we must do this to improve and with a few teams below us improving there's still no guarantee we win more games than 2015 with the form we've shown. Both chances to change that we've blown, and blown badly.

Long time between posts for me. Been enjoying demonland from the sidelines. I am overall positive about the direction our club is heading and the talent we have on our list. I think if we are able to retain our key talent we should enjoy a very successful period. However, while I am calm and acknowledge that young teams will be inconsistent, I am extremely frustrated that after 3 years of Roos this team still fails to do the basics well, and by that I mean perform well against teams we should beat. In fact we have turned in our worst possible form on both occasions this season, as we did last season. And worryingly it seems to come as much from the coaches box as the players. The quality of teams is always hard to gauge at this stage of our year. But looking back on our opening six rounds I think we have had a draw that should have us 4-2. 3-3 is not bad, and it shows improvement, but 4-2 would've set us up to definitely improve this season with a "softer draw" our first 6 rounds. Essendon and Saint Kilda are bottom four - six sides . They will finish there and for us to fail to beat both of them is an endictment on this group. Collingwood and Richmond have also dropped to bottom 8 sides. They were great wins but expected. Our performances against North and GWS were great as I believe they are top 6 sides and we were lucky to get a win. The problem with this group last year and this year is that we turned in our worst in winnable games. I'm happy with the overall direction but beat one or both of the Saints and Essendon and you not only set up our team for a strong tilt at finals but also put both other clubs under extreme pressure which will in turn will help the MFC. You cannot build a period of success without putting away the bottom sides. This club needs to learn to win as favourites and until we do consistently we cannot claim meaningful improvement. We should keep calm but it is cause for concern that in games where we were clear favourites against sub-par sides we are 0-2 after performing similarly (Carlton, Essendon, Saintsx2) last year.

Sounds like yet another player blaming everyone else for their own results. No one wanted Sam Blease to succeed more than the MFC and burning bridges and blaming everyone else on the way out is not very mature behaviour. No one has had more control over the performance of MFC than the players and yet every one when departing has spouted the same "I want success, I'd be a star if I wasn't at Melbourne" rubbish. The proof has been in the pudding with Gysberts, Sylvia, Moloney, Petterd, Morton, Bennell ect after they left. I'm usually sad to see players go but in this case I think young Sam has it a@& backwards. No one had more control over Sams two way running this year than Sam and yet he failed to perform under a coach famous for getting the best out of all his players. I wish him all the best but if he thinks that B Scott and the cats are going to tell him he's perfect and his football club is to blame he's in for a sudden shock!

Taylor Hunt?

No worries WYL. We'll both see how he goes at the Hawks. I hope we trade well, but I'm not happy with the FA system, and without it I think our club would've retained key players and would be better off. We are currently 2nd last and lost two of the most valuable players on our list when we were already struggling for KPPs. I'm usually very optimistic but it seems to me the odds are stacked against us.

We need: Quality mids At least One KPF At least one KPD A running half back

Lol, yeah and with a terrible attitude he led the team for marks, came 2nd in our goal kicking despite playing full back in at least 5 games, played 21 games and had the support of Paul Roos and came top 10 in the best and fairest. He made some mistakes but given he played an unfamiliar role for most of the season he was one of our better players. If he did have a negative attitude this year then I fear what he can do at Hawthorn even more!I understand trying to see the silver lining in losing our players but this is a poor result for the club and an indictment on free agency.

Also Pennant Spagher played a hell of a lot better than Garland this year and is far more handy up forward than Garland. Dunn is not as big as either Schoenmakers and Spangher are both bigger than Dunn and are far better for providing a contest which is their role. I'm not saying they'd look at MFC as what we need is a FB and a FF like Frawley and Clark not a role player. But I think you grossly underestimate them and overrate our back line. TMac and Dunn had great years but beyond them we are very thin.

Rpfc and Pennant you both have short memories. We have a dearth of quality KPPs. It is one of the key reasons we lost to the Saints and GWS early in the season. Our midfield improved this season, it's not great but it improved the reason we continued to lose was a lack of tall forwards and this is why Frawley was pushed forward. It had nothing to do with having an allegedly strong back line. Had Clark and Hogan been fit as we expected pre-season Frawley would have been full back and Garland and Dunn would have played slightly different roles. Hawthorn just won a flag on the back of its depth currently it's KPPs line up like this: Rough head, Hale, Gunston, Schoenmakers, Lake, Gibson, Frawley, Spangher, with rucks like Segler and Macevoy capable of playing KP during a chopout and Grimley and Lowdon in the wings. Our KPP have injury concerns and a lack of quality. One long term injury can see our already weakened Forward and Backline turning to guys like Pedo and Fitzy playing key roles. Frawley is light years ahead of them: Dawes (susp rnd 1), Hogan (missed a year of footy, yet to play a game), Pedo (improved but not capable of carrying a key post), Fitzy, McDonald (suspect kick), Dunn (not big enough for most FF), Garland (better playing small), Jamar, Gawn, Spencer, King A long term injury to TMac and we don't win a game, we desperately need Frawley!

Sorry Rpfc I love your contributions round here but I strongly disagree. Our back line functioned so well without Frawley that we came second last and lost 18 games including a 10 goal loss to GWS. Frawley was key I all of our wins and performed exceptionally well when he went back against North and Petrie in round 23. MFC needs a stable high quality player more than a speculative one right now. Hawthorn hasn't stuffed up a trade in years. If they need Frawley with Lake, Gibson, Spangher, Stratton and Schoenmakers we definately need him with Dunn, Garland and McDonald.

The likelihood we won't know for years if pick 3 is worth it is why it is a bad deal. MFC needs big bodied KPP players with experience now, with pick 3 we can trade for developing young players or draft an even younger player. By the time MFC benefits from this pick clubs like Hawthorn (who are already 70 points ahead of us while we had Frawley and they didn't) will have had time to remain ahead by nicking struggling clubs best players in their prime for success. Right now we are well behind most clubs, with Frawley gone we are further behind and unlikely to catch up on the back of pick. PS Vince for Sylvia is the only deal we are ahead on. Rivers is the no.3 defender in the comp statistically for the cats while Kent is coming on but hasn't set the world on fire. Moloney helped Brisbane smash us a few times and has enabled their equally young midfield to develop well ahead of ours while Byrnes was a total bust. MFC is well behind on free agency as the player driven system favours the top clubs. Believe it as it's only getting worse when Dangerfield goes to a top 4 team next year for nothing.

Actually front ending contracts is part of the reason Frawley found it so easy to leave as had we not front ended his contract he would have been a RFA and Melbourne could have matched what was an entirely match able offer.I have said my piece above and agree that the problem is not confined to free agency but FA is definately making things worse not better. Also what we are paying our players is only relevant as far as the rule that makes teams pay 90+% of the cap needs to be revised. Given players get to choose where to go MFC don't even get to the stage where we discuss money as almost every desirable player has flatly refused to entertain coming to MFC, if the clubs chose where players go we may get a look in with our higher draft picks and our cap space however as long as players choose and they can go get an easy premiership for a little less money we will have no chance. Sad, inequitable, broken but true. We cannot "wait until we have a better list" as if the current trends continue we have no reason to believe we will get one, no matter how good and clever our management are

3 teams have won the last 8 of 10 premierships. These three teams have all picked up great players in free agency and are odds on to be top 4 again next year with one of the three more likely than the rest of the comp to win again next year. Given that three clubs have 9 of the last 10 championships in the EPL I would say we already have the EPL like farce competition we all feared. Free Agency is not the only reason we have this situation as it has been a slow degradation of the two lone bastions of equalisation in the AFL "competition". The salary cap and the draft. The AFL is already heinously inequitable when it comes to fixturing, blockbusters, match revenue, access to profitable time slots, football department spending, facilities and ability to have access to and affect decisions by chief AFL officials, but all these issues aside player movement is being degraded by 5 key factors: 1. The erosion of player loyalty and media acceptance of the most traitorous behaviour by players. 2. The ability of players to choose their destination in trades and FA. This has ruined the desired impact of the salary cap as low clubs who should be able to offer more lucrative contracts often don't even get to have a discussion with highly desired players. Also it has effected the draft as the system was meant to mean that the lowest finishing clubs either gain the best youngster with their draft pick or have the best pick to offer in a trade. Given that players don't field offers from the entire comp it means lower clubs can't use the low draft pick to bid on the best players, also it means clubs don't get the best available deal for the player, particularly if the player chooses a top team. This plays out in the Clark example where if the MFC could trade him to any club it could field offers from clubs like St Kilda and WB who can offer far better picks than his chosen club the cats where the demons are greatly limited in what deal they can strike due to the cats relatively low picks and advantage given melbourne can't meaningfully threaten not to deal with the cats. At the very least Melbourne could drive up Clarksville value by fielding other offers and force the cats to give up something of real value making it a more even competition, not just for the dees but for everyone, however this isn't an option as players choose their destination! 3. Draft picks ain't what they use to be. The increase in player movement has made high draft picks far less valuable. Given that if you have a player from ages 18-25 you are far less likely to see their best football especially given that the clubs receiving them usually are already vulnerable. Clubs are better off waiting and gaining players in their 25-29 yo prime via free agency or the aforementioned rigged trade system. This is why with both pick 1&2 on the trade table this year neither team will receive a tier 1 player as a trade. 4. Players are taking less lucrative contracts for success. Now that has happened with members of a team taking cuts to stay together (which ultimately negatively effects the salary cap mechanism) I think most footy fans are ok with this. But players are now moving clubs for less money to play in successful teams it is hurting those teams that happened to have the bad luck to be unsuccessful in this era more than ever before and has effectively made the equalisation effect of the salary cap non existent. 5. Finally free agency. Not only can top clubs now have the advantage of a rigged trade system ( one where clubs cannot even threaten to send a player to the draft due to the Luke Ball saga!) but they can grab the best players from any club in their prime for nothing. Mfc has lost one required player to a top 4 team every year that this system has existed and has gained discarded players who were likely to be delisted anyway and devalued draft picks in return. Not only does this make the teams that gain these players stronger making it near impossible for teams like melbourne to beat them given they had most likely lost to them in the year proceeding already but the loss of these players hurts melbourne more than most other clubs due to its already relatively small number of high quality players. Needless to say 3 clubs 8 premierships ten years likely to become 3 clubs 9 premierships 11 years. A competition where only 3-5 clubs can win every year while the other 13 get worse is no competition at all. If Nathan Jones leaves MFC next year, or Dangefield goes to the swans, cats or hawks or any of the other bull@&$) scenarios likely to play out under this rigged system then I, someone who has loved AFL all my life and is a 26 year member of the demons will be turning my back on the sport. I thought Australia was about the fair go, obviously not.

If Frawley does get up to play it will be the first time the demonland banner have all played together...exciting!

I can see us being 1-4, but 0-5 I would be very dissapointed... I really can't see why the writers at the Hun think the Saints will be so capable. They were not very good last year (admittedly better than us) and have since lost a coach, added a first time senior coach months after every other team alledgedly as a result of serious issues in the senior playing group. This has left them a full two months behind every other club in planning and adding Richardson when he had no input on their drafting strategy and trade period. They have lost two quality and experienced players as trades in MacEvoy and Dal Santo and replaced them with young kids and a fringe players in Savage and Delaney. Had Milne, Koshitsche and Blake retire and replaced them with kids. They have the bulk of senior responsibilities in the midfield carried by Lenny Hayes (who is getting on) and Leigh Montagna who won't play in round one. Their ruck stocks are young and inexperienced, their backline looks thin and is largely carried by Fisher who is getting on and Gilbert who is enigmatic at best. Their forward line is completely reliant on Reiwolt, who rarely dominates against us. With guys like Lee and Maister backing him up, which is hardly a scary proposition, especially if our three KPB's play well. As for the mids while Jack Steven is a quality player with the loss of Dal Santo he will now face hard tags and may not have the same impact as last year. While Hayes, Armitage, Jones, and co. are probably a better unit than our mids it is a contest we should be able to break even in and if this happens with a superior backline and forwardline this is a very winnable contest. I think St Kilda are in big trouble this year, injuries to Hayes and Reiwolt will see them struggling to win any games. This is our most winnable game of the year and even with the Etihad curse I don't think the Saints have the cattle, or have had the time for their coach to properly instigate a game plan and repore with the players to win. I've been wrong before but I see this as our best chance and can't understand how the Hun sees them winning two of the first 5.