Striker475

Sheedy has said this week they would target KPPs over other players.

Yeah but ultimately you can't have a team of 22 stoppers. When you've got that depth of talent that Geelong had, and Melbourne will have, it's really up to you to dedicate your game style. Collingwood have, in my opinion, a huge number of second-tier players. Their A-Grade are really Swan, Pendlebury, Ball and Didak, with Daisy Thomas and Heath Shaw knocking on the door. But the entire rest of the side are certainly B-grade players, but I couldn't name you a player I would rate below that who is actually getting a game for the Pies. In the end they still have to play football, and even if you can take their best player out of the game if that next echelon is supreme class you can still play how you like.

I don't think the rise of Collingwood marked the death of rebound football at all. Remember, Geelong still made a preliminary final playing rebound footy. They did get smashed by Collingwood there, yes - but a lot must be said about the commitment of that Geelong side. You can write all day about Bomber Thompson and the side not responding to a coach whose heart wasn't in it, but the reality is that the players didn't seem to be in it. Indeed, only one Geelong player gave his all that day, and that was probably because he knew every final he played in the blue and white hoops would be his last for them if they lost. Rebound footy is far more awesome to watch than the zone-press Collingwood and Hawthorn play. It is also far more dangerous with the right players than the zone-press. Yes, Collingwood can rip a side to shreds. But Collingwood also have one of the deepest lists we have seen in an AFL club in years, where probably 30 players can make that 22. Geelong had maybe 25 come Grand Final day 2009? Indeed, the need for depth in your list when going for a zone-press is epitomised by Hawthorn, who won the flag with it in 2008 - but haven't backed up since due to injuries and loss of form among many of their players. I would suggest that rebound footy seems to be easier on the players and much more capable, but harder to acquire the assets to actually utilise. The Geelong midfield read Bartel-Ablett-Ling-Selwood-Chapman. Melbourne's midfield will probably read Scully-Trengove-Jones-Gysberts-Blease/Strauss/Viney. There was a comment in another thread on here that the side that wins the flag's game plan is all the rage until they get beaten, then it's the new strategy. The rebound football plan is by no means dead because of the zone press, indeed, with the right players I believe it can rip the zone press apart as the weaker zoners find themselves exposed due to speed and skill. Unfortunately, Melbourne are by no means at that stage, and the victory of Collingwood has forced some adjustments to our game plan and will need some things to change (see kick-ins).

I'm going to admit it, I thought it was as well. =/

They're coming. Some have arrived already. They make look a little different, but they'll be just as hard and just as good. The names include Tapscott, Jurrah and Trengove. Who knows who else might join that group? But they are coming. Literally keep your eye on the red and the blue

Hate to one-up you all, but I got a 160 on the Australia's National IQ Test last year hosted by none other than Eddie Everywhere.

Dunno. There's part of that. But from what I recall, that game was especially humid, with rain and all?

The Wet Toast game will be a toughie. WA sides in WA are always tough, and they've hit form. But it's right. We're up and about, we've got 10 points from a possible 16. 14 from 20 would be great, but this is a game that I certainly have not, nor ever will, pencil in as a win for Melbourne.

If we're going to take Todd we may as well stick with Bailey. He's been there longer and has has a better feel for the particular playing group - while Todd could liase better with the rest of the club I think that if we were in a situation of choosing between Todd Viney or Dean Bailey at season's end, we should take Dean. It would also be terrible from a club PR perspective. Think about what Carro has been writing over the past week about the 'old boys club'. We sack Dean Bailey and have Todd Viney take his place as part of a Stynes-Schwab administration with the invisible hand of Garry Lyon in the club? We would be shredded by The Age.

Anyone catch the North-Richmond game? Based on that game, I'd say we're better than both sides. The difference though, and where we will continue to struggle, is still the big bodies, especially against the Roos. The old brigade of North are a tough group indeed - Petrie, Rawlings, Wells, Boomer. Those guys are players who are 100% grit, and will push hard at every contest. The Tigers are less so, but some players (Riewoldt in particular, but also noticed how well Jake King played - can't name many more of the Richmond players who are of the big type) play in a similar fashion. Whether it's through reliance on Junior, Bruce and Jordie last season and now being exposed or simply...being less willing at the ball (for want of a better turn of phrase) we are not as hard and determined as either of those two sides. However, we can most certainly out-skill the both of them. The issue is that skill will only get you so far in contested possession and such.

Freee-o, way to go...

No thousand-yard-stare, no ability to rev up a poorly-performing side.

They'll be 15th, end of the round. But that's still a step up from 17th.

Dad made the comment 'way too much of a nice guy'

GAME DAY Any late changes? Unfortunately cannot follow as I am working. But put updates on here, I'll read 'em tonight.

Wet Coke are our bogey side, have been as long as I can remember =(

It's a good point. A Melbourne vs GC grand final everyone here would support the Dees.

Something like that is exactly what I'm thinking. But short and sharp. All we need is ten seconds, really, to put it up there. This is the one from another game but it's the same song I saw game - the Chicago Blackhawks.</iframe>

Not like that. But something to make it seriously more fun. A riff of a song that is actually cheerable rather than a ripoff of the worst cultural thing this country ever produced.

More I have thought about it more this is relevant. Following our bye in Rd16 we play Port twice, Geelong, Hawthorn, Carlton, Wet Toast, Richmond and Fold Coast. We should win four and possibly even five of those eight. Which means we need seven wins from the rest of the season. Two of which we already have. Thus Norf Adelaide Richmond make ten. Throw in Saint KFC, Wet Toast (again), Carlton, QBD (which I view as winnable after last year's tussles) and Essendon and we could be looking at thirteen wins. Of course, it could all go belly up and we finish 13th. But the reality is it really can go either way right now and I'm hoping and barracking for the former.

It's a fair point, but we can't afford to persist if he doesn't shape up. The reality is, the club expectation for this season seems to be a minimum of 10th and/or ten wins. Next season, finals. If he falls behind this he will go as the expectation is to be a regular finals side by 2014 and starting to challenge for a flag.

I've got a related idea. Was watching replay of the NHL playoffs. Notice that after the goalhorn, the stadium loudspeakers generally play a modern rock song of some sort. Why shouldn't we adapt something like this? In addition to Grand Old Flag, something else to chant with during the games and/or scream at the filth every time we score a goal would be great.

Honestly? I think he was bought in primarily as a development coach more than a game-strategy coach. Now we're at the point where game strategy is needed, it's either shape up or ship out.

At Casey Fields or at Gosch? If it's at Gosch I might turn up, want to get signatures for my jumper

dee-luded, it IS shared. Remember, a club only benefits if they're the home team (with the exception of ANZAC Day, which has had the arrangement sorted by the AFL). See the point I made above - the reality is, only four clubs DON'T have a 'blockbuster' and of those four, only two really could consider needing it. Those two are Norf and the Bulldogs. Norf do NOT deserve one, and the Dogs aren't much better. I'm fine with the status quo - and if clubs want such a game, they should earn it though support and on-field success, as well as encouraging the AFL to create such a game for them.