Macca

Pedersen is 'serviceable' Willo was a lot better than that. He gets marked hard for some odd reason but I rarely saw him play a bad game. On top of that he was a very good team player ... always giving the ball off by hand or foot to a player in a better position. He loved a goal but so what? It was a different game back then and when he was played as a permanent forward he was expected to hit the scoreboard. And he did.

A strong mental approach = talent. In some cases that strong mental approach is a player's greatest strength (Tony Shaw, Tony Liberatore, Selwood et al) Our best player this year also had an unwavering strong mental approach - Clayton Oliver. I'm with @old dee on this one. We need more players like Oliver but instead of 4, I reckon we need 6 more players of his ilk if we're going to become an ongoing contender. 4 teams in the last 2 decades have built and had super-lists (Lions, Syd, Cats & Hawks) ... it will take time but I see no reason as to why we can't build such a list. Take GWS for instance - loaded with talent but have they got the mental aptitude? I'm almost sure that it's there but can Cameron harness it? My natural bias wants them to fail but all bias aside, they can be a strong contender for years. Can be.

Yep ... the AFL would have known the crowd figure was always going to be a talking point so in their eyes 14.865 looks a hell of a lot better than 8,500 (my estimate) But who has the capacity and want to prove otherwise? - not the media by any stretch. The crowd noise was cranked-up for TV purposes also. Fake news abounds.

Well he's the right age and his best is very good but ... Bereridge sees him as surplus (for whatever reason) He's not an overly quick player Is in and out of the team His teammates might see him as having an ego that doesn't fit the mould On the plus side he's sometimes a game-changer when he's on and he has that 'big-occasion' bit about him. Seems to be rushed when he has more time - I'm not sure he even understands his own game. I do like a maverick but we've been burnt by these types before. At the right trade and as long as his salary isn't at a disproportionate level, I'd give him a go.

About half way through the first quarter in the Collingwood game, the ball was kicked forward to an open forward line and Jack was trailing his man by at least 5 metres. Given what was at stake, that was totally unacceptable. Garlett's rushed snap at goal (when he had more time) in the first few minutes was equally as unacceptable. The game was lost there and then. We had our chance at taking the initiative and decided to pass. The Pies sensed a kill and the rest is history. Looking upon both those moments as a coach would, you might have the red marker out. But here's the thing, both players might be better value kept in preference to what we might ever get in return. However, I would be inclined to not play both players in the same team. And against good opposition in a big game, I'm not sure either player could be expected to excel.

Couple from 'Oasis'

Swans 2nd to the ball all night J They've got no excuses.

It's possible that we're both right (or at least partly right) I've had numerous discussions about the subject matter and it often ends up in parallel arguments. I'd normally defer to the 'agree to disagree bit' but it's a complex debate. You make decent points and I believe I do too.

It comes with age. Or it doesn't.

Ok then ET To be honest, I never even notice the umpiring. It's so f/ed up that it's not worth worrying about. In an odd way, it kinda evens itself out. It used to do my head in and now I don't care.

That last mark & goal was all class. 4 goals - game-changer/difference-maker.

Yep ... and such is the nature of divisional football, a team can win a division, get hot at the business end and win the whole thing. We've seen it happen with the Steelers, Giants, Packers and 1 or 2 others. For that reason alone, the sport is fascinating. It's like following 8 different leagues within the 1 big league. It's a great system.

I'm a great believer that when results are poor we should always look at the systems that these poor results stem from. Cause & effect. But it's footy/sport bub - we have faith, hope, trust, belief systems & dreams. And I'm a grinch. haha

I disagree ... I actually believe it's mathematically possible to pick a whole host of players who don't make the grade. And we did it. You want a bit of proof - go here. But there again, my faith in drafting extends to having a modicum of faith only - which is quickly dismissed once reality sets in. Toumpas was never going to make it ... same goes for Morton and numerous others. Too much is staked on development too. For instance, Toumpas only had half a year with Neeld, another few months with Craig and then 2 full years with Roos. Gun players nearly always get there on their own. Coaching & development adds maybe 10% - 15% to a players value. There is no possible way of turning a D grade player into an A grader. Nearly every top end pick who ended up a bust was a gun junior. That's right across the board with every club. The only explanation that can give anyone any real closure is that we pick these draftees when they're too young. That will almost certainly never change by the way so we should just learn to live with it and come to terms with it all. I have. If Brayshaw & Weideman don't make it then there's another 2 to add to the list.

Yep. Looking ahead, Houston might win their division if Watson is decent. They'd have a chance regardless as the AFC South is wide open.

The opposite is possibly true as Neeld was quoted early in 2013 as saying he wanted grunt and 'they' went the other way. He said as much at a press conference. I'm by no means wanting to pump up Neeld's tyres, I just distinctly remember him saying it. And I'd be surprised if Taylor wasn't at least consulted on the Toumpas pick. Ok, he wasn't 'officially' with us but when we consider how much we valued him (Taylor), due diligence alone would have prompted a quick phone call to at least get his opinion.

Although Watson's rushing TD was quite impressive though. Don't know much about him but he looks like he can at least run well with the ball.

Arizona New England Dallas

A number of the pundits reckon we need to see the how the teams are faring after 3 completed weeks ... however, even after week 1 there are a few teams who look like they've emerged or could threaten - Rams, Raiders, Vikings, Ravens, Panthers, Eagles & KC. The AFC South is up for grabs too. Conversely, there's a few identifiable poor performers already. The Colts look woeful without Luck and Cinci won't win games if their QB keeps getting QBR's of 0.6. The Jets & Cleveland could have long seasons ahead and the Giants will need to find some form quickly. Leaderboard in the comp 1 - JV7, Go the Biff, Clintosaurus, Macca 0 - The rest The Re-match of the NFC Championship (Packers @ Falcons) on SNF should be a beauty but there's a number of other excellent match-ups this week (Eagles @ KC, Pats @ Saints, Vikings @ Steelers, Dallas @ Denver, Washington @ Rams and then MNF - Detroit @ Giants) 2 points on offer in the comp this week. Arizona looks a monty but finding 2 other road winners might be tough going ... Here's Bill Simmons 'Guess the Lines' podcast as well (which may or may not help!)

A tad late but here's a couple of up-to-date magazines with their NFL preview's for the year. ESPN The Magazine Sports Illustrated USA .

Good win by your lads ... especially at Houston.

You're right Akum ... speed of movement is key too. When we move the ball quickly with confidence & purpose, we can mix it with any team. But for whatever reason, we often revert back to moving the ball too slowly. Teams are adept at flooding back so the initiative is therefore lost. We could do with a couple more speedsters like Hunt. I'm happy with the Frost re-signing for the same sort of reason.

Yeah bm ... there's a lot of over-the-top comments made about schoolboy footballers. I take it all with a grain of salt. The first thing I noticed about the lad (when he first played in the seniors) was that he was trying to take chest marks instead of having his hands outstretched in front. At AFL level, a KPF has got to be trying to mark the ball at it's highest point. Hogan & Tommy Mac can do it, Watts doesn't. The Weed is better now but he's still a ways off. Because of where he went in the draft, he'll get more time. Also, the MC will know more than we could possibly know.

We're at a stage with our list where us supporters will find a reason to keep certain players on the list ... or, another way to look at it is why we would justify keeping certain players. I'm in the latter group but I'm also not advocating mass changes. Mine is more of a 2 year changeover ... in other words, which of our current players will be required and productive from 2019 onwards. In our sport, list management works that far ahead. I thought Roos was particularly important with regards to all that and it was my wish that we were to somehow be able to keep him on in some sort of consultancy role.

We can bridge the gap but we need to improve ... the Cats have more game breakers (mainly Dangerfield & Selwood) and the Tigers have a better outside game. Both those 2 teams generally win games that they should win where as we often don't win those types of games. And I thought the Tigers were great on Friday night ... the Cats hung in there for a while but Richmond were relentless. We lost too many games to below average opposition ... we're inconsistent and we often start poorly. Despite all that we still won 12 games. We need to become much more of a solid outfit. We improve the list and that will happen. If we sit back and think we've done enough, we could regress.