Macca

I will give you an example then ... just remember that all things are possible whilst draft picks are valued as they are (too high in my opinion but it is what it is) Lets just say that our club wanted to bring in 1 A grade player every year as well as 1 B+grade player. All on the young side too ... 21 to 24 years old. As well as drafting at least 3 players because they are the rules. The bits and pieces players swapped around by all the clubs are add-ons and you might unearth the odd gem. And that can be 3-6 players at most or all of the clubs. The list cloggers but again, it is what it is. Elite players are really tough to get but have we ever drafted one? Maybe Gawn? All time great status though. League standard not club standard. So lets get to work ... There's free agency where you play the long game whilst always making sure you've got salary cap space if you land a big fish. But there's always a few on offer and we might even land Tomlinson & Elliot this off-season. Then there are the players we have listed who are surplus to needs or others who have some currency. So you clear the decks whilst hopefully picking up a couple of 2nd round picks and a couple of 3rd round picks. In effect, you can end up with at least 1 first round pick, 3 x 2nd round picks & 3 x 3rd round picks. It might even be better than that. But you can't be afraid of making tough decisions - to get better. So you've then got the currency in draft picks to attain that A grade player and the B+ player. Plus, you might unearth a gem with your remaining draft picks. Any number of great players have been drafted past the 2nd round. Bundle the picks up whichever way you can to get the players that you want. And then do that every year. Before you know it, you've built another base to replace the base that constantly needs to be built upon. Built with traded-for talent.

If Frost goes Oscar may well stay on. You've got to have back-up for May, Lever et al I'd keep Oscar but not play him unless he's needed as back-up. He has no real currency so he is more value to us in that regard. Petty might come on though and Tomlinson and 1 or 2 other new talls could come on board so a lot of fringe players will come under the microscope RN. I reckon we're set for a do-over rather than a mini rebuild. Pace, kicking & marking skills & poise being the prequisites.

Putting the money in the cap aside for now DS You'll know more than me re Tomlinson ... I don't watch a lot of footy outside of our games. So for the benefit of others and myself ... Can Tomlinson be one of our best 12? (Best 22 is not descriptive enough for me) Does he make good decisions and can he kick well to position? 2nd key forward or 2nd key back? Marking skills? Big body in the midfield and can he make a difference there? And has he got a good tank or more of a burst player? Leadership skills?

If the Tigers win their 2nd flag in 3 years they should put up a statue of Jordan McMahon outside of the Punt Rd oval.

I believe it was RPFC who stated that our recruiting woes started from the early 2000's and I reckon he's right. Hard to remember back that far but you build for the super-list from a position of strength. But we sat back, our good players got old and before you know it we were in for a total rebuild with a rookie coach and a meddling CEO. A recipe for disaster. We went all-in with drafting and the rest is history Think I'm right in saying that only 2 players remain who were drafted before 2010 An ageing Jones and Jetta who is now struggling with injury We actually need some more experienced talent who could help out for a few years. Free agents & RFA's who can actually play AF.

And I reckon you can easily get your base talemt from trading (primarily) And we're currently sitting at half and half after going all-in on drafting (which failed spectacularly) My way is the safer route ... yours is high risk. Are you not in the least bit sceptical with drafting? It seems the club is because we're now trading for talent. Agree with the club taking a different tack like you did when we were all in with drafting?

So what do we differ on?

By the way, the club is doing what I am advocating so take it up with the club if you have issues May & Lever came for 3 first round picks whilst Melksham, Frost & Hibberd all came for 2nd rounders. Your way means probable/possible busts or you have to wait 3 - 5 years for the draftee to mature. And you may well get Toumpas or Morton. My way sees the traded player (for picks) slot straight in to being one of our best players. And my view has been a consistent one for decades. Should I post up that thread I started up about drafting results from a broad perspective? No, you don't want to know about it. The club changed tack - well done MFC.

It must also be pointed out that we have used our last 3 first round picks on Lever & May Prior to that we used 2nd round picks on Frost, Melksham & Hibberd All good moves in my book regardless of the injuries. Draftees like Brayshaw, Petracca & Hogan all suffered major injuries or setbacks so it works both ways So what I'm advocating is actually happening.

Yeah I know ... you're not telling me anything I don't already know Equally, any number of flags could have been built in the back of trading primarily But it has never been tried has it? Same as 3 hour version of cricket was never tried until 10 or 15 years ago. Another winner. And you don't have to like t20 either. You're another one who has an unhealthy obsessing with drafting. You know about all its pitfalls but you won't try anything different. It isn't about development either - another cop out. Stars are born. So you trade for them. There's no getting through to you either. You've bought into a flawed scheme and it's time to sell rjay.

Rams, Panthers, Falcons

26 years old and a restricted free agent. Drafted in 2011 so 8 years on the GWS list by trading time. Approximately half our list isn't up to it (or unproven) and if our only cost is salary cap space then we acquire him if he wants to come to us. We can get 5-6 years of football out of the bloke and we get to add another decent player to the list. Do it times 3 if other restricted free agents are available. Why stop at one? Our list needs an injection of talent. Think of Tomlinson as replacing a player who we're going to delist anyway. It's a no-brainer really.

My reckoning is that you need an ongoing great list in order to win multiple flags. We could pop up and win one (only) if everything goes well but I'd rather see the club build a great list and maintain that great list. Have multiple chances to win multiple premierships. Starting off from our Demons in the 50's & 60's we've seen any number of other teams rule the roost In a bit of a jumbled order from beyond our great era ... Essendon, Richmond, Carlton, Hawthorn, North, Carlton, Hawthorn, Essendon, Hawthorn, West Coast, North, Brisbane, Geelong, Sydney, West Coast and then Hawthorn again. All won multiple flags with great lists. And in that time frame other top teams with top lists of players couldn't even win 1 flag. Collingwood twice, Geelong and St Kilda as well. In my time, we have never gone close to having a great list. Nothing replaces pure talent. I have actually been saying the same thing since the early 70's. It's always the other teams with all the best players. Not us.

Well they had better hope that the broadcast rights money keeps increasing as they've got a combined $60Million cost each year for the 2 new teams. TV ratings dropped off alarmingly from 2014 through to the end of 2018 (109 million actual eyes down to 90 milion) Not sure what has happened this year although Gil came out this year and told us some propaganda about TV numbers. I'm sceptical though. Hey, footy rules Rack-em but you don't necessarily want large ongoing debts. The teams in Melbourne might have to watch their pennies if and when they get out of pokies. We might be moving out of the NT eventually but the $800k per game gets replaced with what? I get the whole long game argument but it has to be cost effective.

Not sure we've got that strong a core AF. I might have said so at the end of 2018 but our list of top players has dropped away to a point where we don't have that many Top player = plays well in 4 of 5 games by either winning his position or beating his opponent. In the midfield breaking even with your opponent counts but those top players still need to get 'wins' We had any number of our better players down on form this season and that is a worrying trend. We became lazy. Didn't work hard enough for wins. Did the players think it was all just going to happen? We now are a team that looks good on paper only. The core that you speak of only managed 5 wins. And that's not good enough. Make no mistake, we need a big injection of talent over the next 4 - 5 years. If that happens, we can challenge for the flag. But not before Sure, we can get back up to 9 or 10 wins and maybe even 12-13 wins at a stretch but to be a true contender we are a fair way off. Above all else, we're just too slow right now. I don't believe in aberration moments in sport nor outlier moments. Flukes don't count although they can happen. Just never rely on them.

Maybe, but I could mount an argument that 18 teams dilutes the talent base and you end up with unwatchable games (or low interest) Also, it remains to be seen whether GWS really do add to the bottom line. I hear the corporate spin but GWS and the Gold Coast have no real income streams and are burdonsome The AFL almost certainly plows $30Million per year into each 'franchise' so is it all worth it? Year after year after year The media won't be talking like I do but they're tied strongly to the AFL aren't they? There is what they tell you and then there is the truth. Me - I don't necessarily believe any of it.

Even though I see GWS as a broadcast rights team I'm not sure they add many eyes to the TV sets or other forms of media The membership number is total nonsense and I just flat out don't believe it. As for the crowds they attract, the numbers are low and that's why we have the fake piped crowd noise. It's just rubbish But they've built a very good list and that's why they're in the GF. I'd say good on them but who are they? Mercenaries? Freeloaders? Sorry mate, they are not a proper footy side and all they represent is money. Even Leipzig in the Bundesliga has a core of proper fans. Look them up for the story. I'm not even sure you care a lot for them either. You're probably like me but saying otherwise.

Don't assume that all the circumstances would remain the same. And don't assume that we would have become a basket case. So at the end of 2005 the club notes that we've some talent on the list but it is ageing. That's when you bring in a couple of talented players. We're playing finals so we're a destination club yeah? So, with a lot of creative recruiting, you're able to trade for those 2 good players. Not too old but 25 or 26 is ok if the player is a gun. And then keep repeating the process. You don't bottom out and you don't become a basket case. And don't wait until you become a basket case and then have too much faith in drafting. But of course, that is what we did. I did try and warn people both here and elsewhere. Most I know now agree with my stance. Even a few here. ?

Ķ As previously stated I would play the long game with trading for talent If it was me calling the shots every player B+ or A grade could get called upon (via their manager) and they would know the offer was a fair chance of happening. It would never be a last minute offer. So take your pick. Every talented player is an option. My view on footy is that X amount of top players = X amount of wins. In an ideal world we'd have 6-8 more top players than our nearest rival. And that does happen ...all the way back to the Demons of the 50's & 60's with a whole bunch of dynasty teams in between.

That's because it's never been tried ... why are you so convinced that it can't work? New information difficult to process? Primarily trade too ... not totally as a club does have to draft 3 players per season. Perhaps you need to start thinking outside the square a bit more. Your way is far too conservative and there's too much company policy involved in your argument You really think the pick 2 or 3 is the answer if the player is an 18yo draftee? The messiah mentality will rear it's ugly head again. Expectations through the roof and the kid is still at high school.

Congratulations on being a spokesperson for the AFL. No really, you're doing a good job. You won't be convincing me. Why should I be concerned about the corporate dollar? Care factor zero Mayz

We've played 1 finals series in the last 13 years ... there's your answer. And we won't be playing finals next year without a healthy dose of added talent. We are a long way off and the reason we're in that spot is because of our putrid recruiting. Numerous draft picks going wrong could have been avoided. Trade for talent. May, Lever, Melksham & Hibberd is a good start so we're at least not putting all our eggs in one basket with drafting (as we did previously) And I've never been one to say we should have picked another player in the draft. That really is hindsight nonsense.

Ok then ... we'll just sit on our hands and hope for the best hey AF? Your way hasn't worked. My way hasn't even been tried. You might want to read up on the New England Patriots. Arguably the most successful team going around and they have turned trading picks into an absolute artform. They are brilliant at it Broaden those horizons and look outside the AFL bubble.

You're building a list through trading for 21-23yo proven talent. And you use draft picks to trade. And I'm not talking anything less than B+. You also bring in quality free agents. You might still draft when it suits but trading is the main M.O. So what is so hard to understand? As you add more talent you get better. To be honest, I'm not sure you even know what you're talking about I think you've got drafting 18 year old's on the brain. Let it go mate. There are other ways to get to the finishing line.

Weekend Special MLB Monday 4.15am KC Royals @ Minnesota Minnesota Win (-1.5) $1.80