Macca

Garland is playing a lot better and Viney had stepped it up before being injured. Jetta was doing 'ok' but the expectation should be that the experienced players should all get better - not drop off by 10-15% (or worse) The focus can tend to go towards the young players because of expectations but in all reality, we won't win games unless all our established players are firing.

As well as those 5 players, Cross, Jamar, Howe & Dunn have all been down on last year's form. Not by a great deal it must be said but to have at least 9 players needing to play better is 5-7 too many. Too much focus is placed on the fringe players or draftees when it's the leaders and the more experienced players who need to show the way. My expectations on these players is far greater than the players who have played less than 30-40 games (or the depth players)

Eddie does what is best for his club and who could blame him? I fully expect him to be unfair to others, selfish, arrogant, money-hungry, ambitious etc etc. That's just how things work and I'd expect our chairman to act in a similar way if we were in the same strong position. From an ethics and moral standpoint it's a trifle unpalatable but the AFL is big business now and in a lot of ways it's every man for himself. The AFL on the other hand needs to have an attitude that embraces all - as custodians of the game they need to look after the welfare of all the clubs - unfortunately they're not very good at that. Their primary interest is making money as well as garnering as many sets of eyes as possible. They mistakenly think that by doing that it helps all the clubs but they are effectively creating a large gap between the haves and the have not's. Their business model squeezes out the smaller operations. The fixture reflects that - it's designed to help the larger supported clubs. Extra millions of dollars go to the bigger clubs every year at the expense of the smaller clubs (Dogs, Saints, North and us) Over time, that model is creating larger and larger gaps ... and that model didn't start recently either - we've had 10-15+ years of it (so far)

The Giro d'italia kicks off on Saturday night ... looks like SBS & SBS HD are covering every day of this Grand Tour - from about 10.30pm - 11.00pm (Cable Eurosport HD & Eurosport SD are also covering every day) Contador is even money favourite but our own Richie Porte is a firm short priced 2nd favourite and he might be a real show with the might of the Sky team behind him. Richie Porte confirmed as Team Sky’s leader in Giro d’Italia

It's his 3rd year and 20th game ... he'll get more than one more chance Wyl. Nearly every ex footballer worth his salt will tell you that a player needs 60-70 games before they have firmly established themselves in the big time. Tom McDonald has always shown something but he's only now really starting to hit his straps - he's played 65 games. If Toumpas can snag 15-18 possessions with a half decent DE rate he will have done well in terms of re-starting his career - others who are established in the side and the other leaders need to show the way. We have a number of players in the side who need to hit their best form. Let's also remember he's the 21st or 22nd player picked in the side. People here need to calm down a tad and show a degree of patience ... I understand that our patience has been tested previously but we can't lose sight of how things are normally done with draftees. Having said all that, I'm hoping that Toumpas can be established in the side at least by year's end. Edit: grammar

Michie was a tad unlucky as he did very well the week before - might have been worth another go as the sub but those are the breaks. Roos has certainly sent a message - Jamar may be rested though and this gives him a chance to look at Spencer. We needed to give our back-up ruckmen some chances at some stage so why not now? Against these top sides I don't see any problem with a bit of experimentation so the promotion of Stretch and Toumpas gives both those lads an opportunity. The whole McKenzie decision is a bit of a head scratcher but as 'titan' said, it might have just been an initial mistake at the selection table - or as someone else indicated, the original plan might have just gone astray. A little tough on Grimes too but Roos is obviously looking for an impact from our depth players ... other depth players who get their chance in the future will need to take their chances by the looks of it. All the best to Stretch for his debut.

Just another point re Lucas Cook - what if the 2010 draft had looked like this? ... 12 - Tom McDonald 33 - Jeremy Howe 50 - Troy Davis 53 - Lucas Cook 81 - Jordie McKenzie (promoted rookie) 96 - Jake Spencer (promoted rookie) We'd almost certainly wear the late picks and be very happy with the first 2 picks (especially the first pick) Spin

So who gets through to the conference finals? ... it's sort of looking like the Blackhawks/Ducks & Capitals/Lightning but the Rangers might overhaul Washington. Montreal will need to get a hurry on too.

Wanting a player to be better than he can be is one thing but basing that thinking on a top end draft pick number is just silly (unless one has an unwavering belief in our current drafting system) Often these same people will claim the draft is a lottery when someone like T-Mac is snared with a late pick You can't have it both ways

My argument on drafting also is firmly pointed at the totally unnecessary lashing out at the club, the recruiters and the players involved. If it doesn't work out for Toumpas that lashing out will be pointed in his direction (almost by default) It's happened to TJ, McLean, Sylvia, Watts, Morton & Trengove. Not nearly enough people here will blame the system

There is a very good chance that Toumpas wouldn't have been mentioned in this thread if the thread wasn't derailed

Big picture If you analyse the drafts from 1986 - 2007, not one of those drafts is even semi-accurate - 5 years down the track. You need to look at this from an unemotional & dispassionate viewpoint.

Wyl I've never called the draft a "complete" lottery ... there are many truths to the draft The issue is the recruiters trying to put the draftees in an order where that order will be accurate 5 years down the track It's an impossible task

Hope you're right rjay I've never really gone in to making big calls on young players but from what I've seen from Hogan & Brayshaw so far, our luck might be finally turning ... and there is a fair slice of luck involved with drafting teenagers

So you'd do a swap for Brayshaw with De Goey now ... right. You can't pick the bloke who's done his knee - that's way too convenient rjay Also, you can't have De Goey in "reserve" either ... not allowed :-)

It would be great if one of these harry hindsight types could show some foresight (now) and name the player we should have picked if either Petracca or Brayshaw aren't A graders

Wrong If you take out Daniher, Emma had Toumpas at 3 & Wines at 7

Chris Grant was pick 105 Captain hindsight required - please explain

So we should base our future drafting policy on the back of other draftees "mates"? Sort of like what happens at suburban cricket level. How utterly ridiculous.

Hope you're right If they do appeal it will be fascinating to see the reaction from the media, Bomber fans and the wider football community. Suddenly everyone will be getting up to speed on the CAS and the likely consequences of an appeal. If they don't appeal I'm expecting ASADA & WADA to cop a pounding from all and sundry (including many who have been on ASADA & WADA's side) I doubt I'll be venting but I would need a reasonable explanation on why there isn't an appeal.

So what are the chances that WADA appeal? Does anyone know whether WADA has a history of pulling the trigger at the last moment or "going early"? (when they do appeal in these matters) I reckon we'll find out by the weekend - maybe Friday.

Many people have been brought up with the draft and it's all they know. They don't question it enough possibly because the draft as a whole doesn't get questioned enough by the clubs and the footy media. Roos himself has had some damning things to say about the whole drafting process but he doesn't influence my thinking. These 2 early threads on Lucas contains a number of complimentary appraisals Franky (a few detractors as well it must be said) Lucas Cook (I) & Lucas Cook (II) And this thread on Jordan ... This Week's Rising Star = Jordan Gysberts .

I get the whole venting thing - we've all done that to varying degrees. But to continue on without eventually applying logic and common sense is just silly. I've read the threads on those 3 players and what you are saying wasn't necessarily being said at the time (at least by the large majority here on this site) Lucas Cook didn't have too many detractors (initially) IIRC ... after all, he was an AA CHF in his final TAC year. Some here were calling Gysberts a future A grader after his first couple of games. A select few might have got it right but I've yet to ever come across anyone who can make these calls and continue to get it right. They all get it horribly wrong at least half the time but they'll rarely admit as much. Like a gambler who will only tell you about his or her wins. Trying to explain all the vagaries of the draft is a fruitless exercise. The science that goes into drafting is much better these days than in it's fledgling years but it's still far from being a perfect system. Strangely enough, even though I knock the draft, I have come to terms with it's inconsistent outcomes. My point about conventional thinking with Prendergast was specific to Scully & Trengove - were we ever going to trade away either pick? The same could almost be said about Petracca & Brayshaw but we can never be absolutely sure - my guess is we would have needed a super offer to trade away from snaring both those 2 players and that offer never came. .

Yet good old Barry snared T-Mac with pick 53 in the 2010 draft (he also picked Jeremy Howe with pick 33 in the same draft) Pure luck or an inspired choice? Hell, I even got caught up in all the hype with Scully & Trengove (for a short time) Just about all the football world was convinced that we'd struck gold with those 2. Picking both those 2 was the very definition of a no-brainer. Prendergast was never going to go against conventional thinking ... that's the issue - conventional thinking when it comes to drafting in the AFL is flawed. Going against conventional thinking also has it's flaws. It's a risk either way ... those wanting perfect results from an imperfect system really need to do a re-think.

Unless there is a complete overhaul of the drafting system it stands to reason that we will continue to draft busts ... all the clubs will. Even a complete overhaul won't fix things completely. To make criticisms of choices in the draft requires an almost complete buy-in to the current drafting process - why would anyone do that? .