Macca

You make some very valid points. I'm coming to terms with it all re the Packers but this upcoming game against the Saints might give us an insight into the short-term future of the team. If McCarthy can somehow eke out a win first up with Hundley as the starter, then I may entertain the thought of at least a 9 win season. Lose it and we then front up to a Detroit team who will really fancy their chances (that game is at Lambeau as well) 1 win (however small) can make a load of difference. Oh, and your thread is up to 200 pages. That's quite an achievement Dappa considering the site is largely devoted to our beloved Demons.

The NFC is an absolute crap-shoot now ... there's any number of teams who could win any of the 4 divisions. In the South, there's 2 or 3 teams. In the North there's 2 or 3. In the West there's probably only 2 in contention and in the East, the Eagles are in the box seat but it's not done yet. Dallas will start winning eventually and the Giants can play spoiler. The last time Rodgers did his collarbone the other 3 teams in the North couldn't take advantage and win enough games ... 9 wins might suffice but the Packers are up against it. If Rodgers can get back though ... The Saints are -4.5 favourites at Lambeau in the early odds and they might get on a roll ...and the Panthers are lurking. That division could get really tight. @ New England this week will be tough for the Falcons. Leaderboard in the comp 4 - Dappa Dan 3 - JV7, Clintosaurus 1 - Go the Biff, Macca 0 - The usual suspects A big 2 points on offer this week - it's time to make a move ...

Romo or the Kap were never really in the picture ... one pundit was quoted as saying that it takes 3 years to properly learn the McCarthy playbook (as a QB) However, I often struggle with those sorts of comments as our game plan often revolves around Rodgers throwing the ball through the eye of a needle to a well-covered WR. Apart from that, he occasionally hands it off to a RB. And we're going to ask Hundley to do the same? Hundley has a gigantic job ahead of him and I wish him all the luck in the world - he's going to need it. In terms of degree of difficulty, Hundley has just been handed a very tough assignment. Your former coach (Andy Reid) is handling Alex Smith to a nicety ... now that is coaching. Doesn't ask him to do too much and surrounds the bloke with all-around weapons. I've always been a fan of Reid.

We're lucky in the sense that we've got a number of 50/50 games coming up but the onus will be on the coaching of McCarthy. The next 6 ... vs Saints, vs Detroit, @ Bears, vs Ravens, @ Steelers, vs Bucs. There's 3 wins in that lot if McCarthy coaches great. Maybe 4 wins but that's a stretch. So we could be 7 & 5 or maybe even 8 & 4 after 12 games ... or we could lose 4, 5 or all 6 of those games and that would just about be it. But again, McCarthy has to coach great, we can't rely on or even expect Hundley to be great. We're about to find out whether McCarthy can coach under great adversity. I don't hate McCarthy, I just don't rate the bloke. He's Mr Average in my eyes and I want great.

I'd much rather Rodgers played a role in a similar vein to Peyton or Brady ... in fact, Elway reeled Peyton way back in, in that SB winning year. No individual is bigger than the team and Green Bay need to look no further back than Vince Lombardi for that line of thinking ... with the Demons it is obviously Norm Smith. The same principles apply. Mourinho preaches it and so too did Ferguson. McCarthy often looks like he is awe-struck by Rodgers yet Belichick seems to treat Brady like just another commodity. I'm not for one minute apportioning any blame on Rodgers either. The Packers play a flawed system in the sense that it needs a super-talented QB in order for it to work. Hundley could find himself throwing interceptions and/or getting hurt himself. I'm not confident tbat both those issues won't occur.

Just a final word on the Packers and the loss of Rodgers ... I originally thought we'd be behind 3 teams in the NFC this year - Atlanta, Dallas & Seattle. Detroit were a danger as well as the Vikings (with Bradford) But the way the games are panning out, those 5 teams have got their issues and whilst the Eagles, Panthers & Rams have ramped it up, those 3 teams still need to maintain their good form. So, the year was opening up for a number of teams to achieve a high seed in the playoffs. Green Bay were over the more difficult part of their schedule (already played Seattle, Atlanta & Dallas) so a more conservative approach against the Vikings (with a stand-in QB) was all that was really needed. Then half way through the first quarter Rodgers is scrambling around (for the umpteenth bloody time) and then goes down again. Belichick wouldn't have had Brady doing as such so why does McCarthy persist with this high-risk QB play? Crazy stuff. Our strength is also highly predicable so it was only a matter of time before Rodgers was hurt again. They'll target him even more now. McCarthy = Chris Scott and the Packers have a one-dimensional game like Geelong has. Good enough to win enough games to make the playoffs but there are always 1 or 2 teams who are our achilles heel. 49ers then Seattle then Atlanta. McCarthy has had 10 years to build a running game and/or to bring in some tight ends but nothing has changed. We're basically a team that totally relies on Rodgers finding his wide receivers. It should be remembered that our defence was the 5th best for points allowed in 2010/11. Since then, our defence has gone backwards. Unless some sort of miracle occurs, the Packers have thrown away an absolutely golden opportunity this season. And you've got to take your chances when they present themselves.

Might be right hand side of the collarbone instead of the left ... throwing arm vs non throwing arm. My point still stands with regards the high risk game that he plays. Three times this year he's been hit hard in a similar way ... in 3 separate games. Oh ... and the Giants won And I did foresee the Packers or the Pats losing. Had an uneasy feeling and there it is.

The pain threshold is less with repeat injuries ... he looked almost matter-of-fact about it. The worry is that the bone might be somewhat shattered. It's 12 full weeks to the playoffs so a 16 week injury?

From my point of view the only thing I'm really interested in is why they are calling it a season ending injury. Last time he broke his collarbone they were adamant it was only a 6 week injury (he came back in 8 weeks)

Normally collarbone fractures are a 7 or 8 week injury but they are saying season. If it's in the same spot as his previous break, it could be a bad break. I'm also annoyed that we don't play a more conservative game with Rodgers using more tight ends and our running game continues to be sub par. It was an accident waiting to happen the way McCarthy coaches the team. And I've been saying it for years now. We all know are own teams well.

I'm not a happy camper ... can't you tell? Season is over and Rodgers injury sounds like it might even be career threatening. My apologies to you and all for losing it. I should have stayed away from thread today.

Really? You don't think that has ALREADY crossed my mind?

Wtf would I love Hundley?

I'd take him over Hundley but he has been black-banned. Quite literally.

Is Romo available?

'Curb your Enthusiasm' is back finally (after a 6 year hiatus) ... the first 2 episodes have been up to the usual high standard - esp episode 2. 'Stranger Things' returns in a couple of weeks on Netflix ... Season 1 was terrific so looking forward to season 2. 'Glitch' season 2 is currently available on IView - worth a look. And good news re 'True Detective' - it's back in 2018 (no news on the month yet) ... Read all about season 3 here In the meantime, it's time to have a re-watch of Season 1 of the outstanding crime/drama series. 3 years in between is time enough. Wasn't in to podcasts then so that will be a good add-on this time around.

Here are the games again for those who are still to do their tips ...

The significance of getting pick 35 from the Crows is a factor in all this too. I wonder if we might bundle that pick up with our pick 27 together with the pick we might receive for Jack Watts. Put the 3 picks together and turn it into another configuration that suits our needs. .

The way-back machine in operation again - a couple of classics from Eric Burdon as the front man of 'War' & 'The Animals'

Yeah ... but I am the world's worst tipster. I thought about the Giants but they couldn't possibly win in Denver could they? Detroit would have to be a realistic chance although their road form against quality opposition and/or against solid home teams is not good at all.

Good game today ... not fantastic but a good game all the same. Newton seemed off with his throws all game but the Eagles D-Line and their run defense was immense. Wentz was very impressive and Blount made a number of terrific carries. Thought the Eagles drive for their final TD was great ... that throw under extreme pressure early in the drive from Wentz to Hollins was 'Rodgers-like' - hemmed in at their own 19 yard line and facing up to a 3rd and 16 - that was the game clincher right there. Clutch. 3 plays later the ball is in the end zone and the score is 28 - 16. The Panthers couldn't bridge the gap after that and never really looked like it either. 5 & 1 and the Eagles are flying.

Again, if there are only 20-25 A grade players out of a sample size of 100 top ten picks, then that is a 1 in 5 strike rate or at best, a 1 in 4 strike rate. So in order to attain a player of say, Dangerfield's quality, a club needs 4 or 5 chances at it. And even then there are no guarantees. We at Melbourne know that all too well. Percentage-plays based on probability factors will be viewed more closely with regards to drafting down the track. It might take a while but eventually it will happen. Then, the true value of a draft pick will be seen. Back on topic ... if Lever turns out to be A grade quality and plays mostly at that standard over a 10 year period for us, we've snared an absolute bargain. As it stands, he's a very good player already.

How many genuine A graders are in the top 10 picks on average? Say, over a 10 year period. Many would be surprised how few there actually are. Maybe 20-25 out of a 100. That's 1 in 5 or at best, 1 in 4 (top 10 picks) That's just the reality of the actual results. I created a thread about it a few years ago. Within the OP I provide a link to all the ND's from 2000 through to 2009. So there's the 10 year sample size. How many genuine A graders? Forget B grade players or 150 game players ... only genuine A graders for the sake of the exercise. Oliver is well on his way to becoming a genuine A grade player so that's why I wouldn't trade him easily ... let's all hope that Lever ends up the same. Here's that thread (again) ... Bad Luck or Bad Recruiting

Patriots Packers Rams

'Almost certainly' is what I wrote not 'almost' If his form continues on the trajectory that he's displayed so far, we're on an absolute winner. For what it's worth, I wouldn't trade Oliver for 3 top 10 picks. And it's line-ball whether 4 top 10 picks would be enough for a player of Oliver's quality. As many others here have said, draft picks are massively overrated. And the facts and results of drafting bear out those views. Adelaide pushed for fair compensation because they know how good Lever can be - Lever's exposed form is at senior AFL level, not junior football. But as previously stated, I still believe we won out on the deal.