La Dee-vina Comedia

11. He's at Satyr's old workplace asking three different people why Satyr no longer works there. Square-up: I really like Satyr's contribution to this forum. He's passionate and consistent. I might not agree with all his views but I don't see why he should be criticised for both having them and expressing them.

"something that I personally introduced"? What the... (a) not something that someone, rather than the club, should be taking the credit for; and (b) not something that special that someone should want to take personal credit for anyway.

Definition number 5 surely fits.

Wow. The bit of this post that stood out to me is that the Dandenong Stingrays have a position called "Talent Manager". I honestly had no idea that TAC football was that sophisticated.

Isn't that what we did with Jetta last year and allegedly offered Michael Evans this year?

A pedantic but possibly important question (possibly important because of the laws of defamation). Is it legally correct to say the 34 Essendon players are "on trial"? If it is, by all means leave the thread title as it is. If it isn't, I think the title should be changed.

This double cliche should be banned: "Momentum* is a big thing in football these days" *Insert any other cliche to replace "Momentum", such as "Two way running" or "Defence"

Do we even know whether he has nominated?

Truly great leaders know when it's time to move aside. I don't know whether he jumped or was pushed, but if he jumped he's shown real leadership by putting the team first.

I'd like to ban "regroup" when talking about an individual. I'm not sold on it being used for multiple people or a whole team - but at least it makes some sense in that context. But how does an individual "regroup"?

I don't think that's the right question at all. The better question would be, can he help us develop a team which will challenge for a Premiership within a few years? Winning 5 games in 2015...or 7 or 10 is irrelevant if that's all we achieve. If it's a stepping stone to something grander, by all means he could be considered. But I fail to see how anyone over the age of 25 is worth putting on as a rookie at our stage of development.

But if we don't let posters say "Player X will be a gun" instead they'll write "Player X could be anything". Surely that's worse.

Unless a team is realistically expecting to play a serious role in finals, I can't see why any team would rookie anyone over the age of 25. It would be a waste of a development opportunity.

I suspect someone said exactly the same thing after we drafted Sylvia and McLean. Let's hope we get a better result this time.

So we upgraded chips to an Angus burger.

I appreciate that determining "greatness" is subjective. I just think our team's performances have been so lamentable for most of the past 50 years that as supporters we are too accepting of mediocrity. Similarly, the bar for assigning "greatness" is too low. I've set it higher, and the only three Melbourne players I would call great in the last 50 years are Flower (daylight), Stynes and Lyon.

Hay Satyr (sorry, I can't get used to your new name), I respect what you are saying and that you are reporting on what Harmes is saying...but I have a question about the statement "he was going to work over the Xmas break to catch up". Do we believe all the other footballers (our team and all the others) won't be doing any training or fitness work over the Xmas break? So what does he mean? Is he going to go into the clubrooms to train during that time? If so, does that fit in with the players CBA?

Now I see the problem. We've never had a pick 7.

100% agree with everything you've written here. Everything. Unfortunately, years of mediocrity mean players like David Neitz and many others have greatness presumed upon them by supporters who have not had the opportunity to see truly great players in red and blue.

I think potential coaches are best served by learning their craft at a club different from the one at which they played. It makes them appreciate alternative approaches - or "intellectual property" as it's now often described. He may or may not make a good coach, but he gives himself a better chance of succeeding by working for a while elsewhere (and, let's be honest, at what would appear to be a very good place to learn a bit about coaching).

As a matter of interest, how old is Dustin Fletcher's oldest son? And is he a prospect? If i recall correctly, Essendon has had a Fletcher or a Watson on its list every year since 1967 when Ken Fletcher began his career (apart from a couple of years when Tim Watson had an early retirement before coming back to win another premiership in 1993). It would be amazing if that dual dynasty were to continue. It seems to me that Essendon and Geelong have had the most success with fathers and sons. Is it just luck or skillful development?

Mind you, if you state that a coach, any coach, should be sacked, you'll end up being right about 98% of the time...eventually.

I agree. But what do we think the fundamental differences are between junior footy and AFL? Commitment? Body size? Skills, and, if so, which ones?

I agree there's no problem when we wear our traditional kit. But I was responding to the statement that we could wear the red away strip and not need the white one. Personally, I'm in favour of us wearing our traditional gear at every game. I've never seen the need for clash jumpers. But that's a different argument.

I appreciate the term "top liner" is somewhat amorphous, but I think Lumumba and Vince would get a game in any team and should be classified as "top liners"