Macca

Hardtack Conspiracy theories are usually underneath the surface We're being conspired against in quite an open fashion To me, the sort of fixturing we see can hurt a club in the short term and the long term. We'll no doubt survive but I'd rather see us prosper

AFL ... "If you're a big club with lots of supporters then we're going to give you lots of home fixtures where you can make a great deal of money" "But, if you're a smaller club with not many supporters, don't expect to get the same deal. In fact, we're going to give you as bad a fixture as we can think up and if you don't like it, bad luck" "We're interested in maximising crowds" That's the truth of it and it's been that way for close on 20 years ... the fixture is not necessarily performance based either. When we were playing finals, we continually received the same type of fixture that we've been receiving in recent years. If they ever bring in any sort of fair equalisation measures, we need to be well catered for. However, I'm not expecting that to happen - the equalisation measures probably won't be done properly. But that doesn't mean we should roll over and give up.

Congratulations for editing and therefore taking one comment I made about one team totally out of context. Us being a poor team shouldn't therefore mean we receive a fixture that hurts us financially. Off field effects on field and vice-versa but we shouldn't be conspired against. Anyone who believes we're getting a fair crack at things with regards to the fixture is not looking at things closely enough. We should all want what is best for the club. You and others sound like you want the club and our supporters to be further punished for being a poorly performed team. Isn't being down the bottom of the ladder enough for you?

Yep, rjay, the fixture is largely based on how popular the clubs are and how big their support bases are. I can fully understand the broadcasters wanting a big say in the 'prime time' games but It's not those games that I'm concerned with. The fact is that we just don't make any "real" money when playing our home games against low drawing teams. Next season we've been handed 10 home games against 10 teams who are in the bottom 11 in terms of drawing numbers at the gate (for our home games specifically) And, that happens nearly every year. Give that sort of schedule to Collingwood for 10 years and we'd see their profits drop (obviously, they'd still make money but not as much) Oh, and how about we get the Pies schedule for 10 years? ... this year they've got home fixtures against Geelong, Hawthorn, Carlton, Richmond, Essendon and us ... all with a potential million dollar+ profit attached ... and, that happens nearly every year. Collingwood also only play 3 home games against interstate teams next season ... we again play 7 home games against interstate teams (27 in total in the last 4 years)

Is there another league in the world (in any sport) that has a "deserve" factor when their schedules are released? I've never heard or come across anything that compares with how the AFL manipulates things. EPL ... Crystal Palace, Leicester, Burnley & Hull get to play home games against Man City, Man Utd, Chelsea, Tottenham, Arsenal, Newcastle & Chelsea ... Every.Single.Season. The NFL scheduling is about as fair as it comes. Same goes for the NHL, NBA & MLB. All the teams get a fair crack at it with regards to being able to make excellent profits from their home games. We've been getting rubbish fixtures for close on 20 years. When we played finals, the same sort of thing was happening. We're the designated club to play H&A against the interstate clubs whilst the "big" Victorian clubs get to play each other H&A every season. All because of the AFL's manic desire to "maximise" crowds.

What has "deserve" got to with anything? Have people here been so brainwashed that they're now believing the carp that comes from the AFL and the media? The AFL has the most "fixed" fixture in world sport. Fact. If it wasn't for our poker machines, we'd be in all sorts of trouble as a club. Last financial year we made just over 3 million from our home games (which, coincidentally, contained 7 home games against interstate teams. In that same financial year, Collingwood made a clear profit of over 16 million dollars. These are real numbers and as time goes on, we're falling further and further behind. We are severely disadvantaged against with regards to the fixture. Those clubs that are "advantaged" by the fixture are able to grow their club in ways that we can't. Some examples ... We've rarely been able to pay 100% of the salary cap in recent years. We were stuck with substandard training facilities for far too long. Football department spend - often a lot less than the "profitable" clubs. Previously, we haven't had the money to splash on free agents or a top line coach. There are other examples. Money is key in pro sport ... the bygone days are over with.

From a financial viewpoint, the fixture is a disaster. It's almost a carbon copy of previous seasons. 7 home games against the interstate clubs and only one home game (again) where we can make some real coin (QB clash) The Victorian clubs who have home games against us would all probably prefer if we had those home games ... they'd be looking at their home games against us as we view our home games against the Doggies or North. Conversely, we would welcome those home clashes against Richmond, Hawthorn, Carlton, Essendon & Geelong. Who we play in terms of winnable games doesn't concern me all that much ... if we're going to play finals sometime in the future, we'll need to defeat all comers. I'd prefer to see the team being tested constantly.

Tough, tough week to find 3 road winners ... a point gained this week will be invaluable Eagles Colts Arizona

Excellent array of TV games this week ... Friday 11.30am New Orleans at Carolina (ESPN) Monday 5.00am - 11.30am RedZone (ESPN) 5.00am Arizona at Dallas (7mate) 8.30am Denver at New England (7mate) 12.30pm Baltimore at Pittsburgh (7mate & ESPN) Tuesday 12.30pm Indianapolis at NY Giants (ESPN) All the week 9 games The BS Report NFL Week Elo Ratings & Playoff Odds

Might do the same ... can only find 3 locks for the division titles and they're all in the AFC. The NFC is a nightmare to figure out - especially in the West

Sounds good to me, Dappa I'll have a go in the next few days whilst it's on my mind. Maybe after Fridays game - that Saints @ Panthers game shapes up as a season definer for that division.

lol ... maybe like the tipping comp - bragging rights and kudos only I'll need a day or so to come up with my final 8 (or 12 if we want to add in the wild-card teams) This year is the most wide open for a long time - I'm not even convinced with Denver yet. There's literally about 20 teams that could make it ... the half way mark of the season seems the right time to have a go at it. Closest to the pin wins hey? If we do the whole 12, I'll be trying to fit Buffalo & Pittsburgh in the AFC & there's gonna be at least 2 decent sides miss out in the NFC.

In reference to Dilfer's "The Update League" I took him as meaning that things can change from week to week in the league (sometimes dramatically so) He was in a discussion surrounding the loss by Dallas and I'm supposing that he maybe now has doubts (again) about the Cowboys. Them losing does keep your blokes within striking distance and Dallas have 3 tough games in their next 4. Romo hurt his back again and may have done some damage - apparently the x-rays came back negative but he's had major back issues previously. Anyway, trying to come up with the AFC & NFC conference championship game contenders is a bit of a task ... I could only go with Denver right now and any number of teams could fill the other 3 spots. Tipping the last 8 for the divisional weekend is even tougher Should we have a dash at it at this early stage, Dappa?

I still wasn't game to pick 'em outright though JV Definite trap game wasn't it? Washington came to play and Dallas didn't deal with that very well. The doubts remain with the Cowboys - the big thing about this sport is the immediate exposed form. All the other teams would have been watching tonight, especially their upcoming opponents. Dallas are at the Jags in a fortnight but surrounding that game they are vs Arizona, @ Giants and then vs the Eagles. Trent Dilfer just described the league as the "Update league" and I reckon he's right on the money.

Brendan is the type of development coach that we've been needing for quite some time and I like how swiftly we acted in securing him. Pity he can't start right now but that might have had something to do with his previous contract (or the settlement of that contract) I'm sure leading up to February there will be a fair bit of "consulting" with him, all the same. Development is key and most here would agree that it hasn't exactly been a strong point at the club.

He's still quite young but you watch your games so I'm tempted to take your word for it. Interesting that Alex Smith went 24/28 with a total of 226 yards for KC - lots of short sharp throws and he plays within his limitations - or at least it seems Reid instructs him to do so.

Damned if you do and damned if you don't - we can also go against conventional wisdom and be sadly disappointed. The truth is we're stuck with a flawed system and whilst we've got this flawed system, not much will change. By the way, the "experts" aren't really experts. They are just slightly better qualified speculators. The more knowledge one can have about all the potential draftees, the more confusing the whole thing can become. Most people like to have a dash at the next big thing or make an overly negative prediction. Me, I can't be bothered trying to make sense of a largely nonsensical system. We'll pick who we pick and hopefully they'll all turn into good players (we might even fluke a star or 2) If not, there will be no recriminations from my part. We can point the finger at the club for a number of unforced errors in the past but when it comes to "top end" draft picks, I blame the system when those top end draft picks don't turn up trumps. The Americans have numerous "busts" with all the drafts across their 4 major sports and often, the draftees are 21-23 years old. We evaluate a lot of our potential draftees when they're only 17 years old - it's any wonder the strike rate is as low as it is.

Any team with a rash of injuries can create a lack of depth in various positions ... and, there are a stack of teams who have a rash of injuries. So, your issue is the same issue that many other teams have. Therefore, it goes without saying in my opinion. I could offer the same reasoning behind our loss to the Saints today but I don't see the point. All teams should be able to cover for injuries as a matter of course ... the difference being if a Brady or a Peyton goes down - these type of players in no way can be covered for. Foles should have been instructed to throw the ball in those last 3 plays so that the throws were well inbounds (say, a couple of yards in) ... he's not an elite QB so therefore he needs to play within his limitations (like Smith @ KC) I still maintain that none of those 3 throws could have been caught inbounds with a degree of certainty. The 'final drive' was excellent work by Foles but I was specifically referencing the last 13 seconds when I referred to "crunch time" ... I actually think he's got a bright future but even the best QB's have a degree of conservatism about themselves. It's one of the reasons why elite QB's generally have a low percentage of interceptions. Re the Saints game ... I'm looking at my team to blow the other mob out of the water and get the quick kill. We leak points as a matter of course so we nearly always need to score heavily in order to beat the better teams. Therefore, keeping pace or doing "ok" just isn't going to cut it. The expectations are to win and win well but I'm more annoyed than disappointed with today's result. We're a lot better than what we displayed today.

We have been through this before but I'm baffled why you even mention injuries when you must know that many other teams have the same issues or worse ... it kinda goes without saying. About the only time I've made mention of an injury on this thread is when Rodgers went down - mainly because without him, we're a 6/10 team at best. Other injuries to many other starters can be covered. If anyone has a right to moan it's probably me about the Packers injuries but ... I don't like making excuses as a general rule. Here's an interesting article ... Packers Injury Luck Among Worst in NFL In Recent Years ... scroll down to the NFC North section for some eye-opening details I disagree with you about the first half in the GB/NO game ... we had 3 rock solid chances for TD's in the first half and could only turn them into field goals ... our way of winning against good teams or on the road is to turn our redzone chances into TD's. The Saints had our measure from the early going and were far too good ... our run defense is woeful and again, I offer no excuses. New Orleans strength is their passing game game so they smashed us in both forms of offense. 44 points is just too many points to allow if we're going to contend. Re Foles ... go back (if you can) and have a look at those last 3 throws again ... not one of them could have been caught inbounds with both feet in. He was trying to thread the eye of the needle and was offline on each occasion. He should have been under instruction to at least make sure a TD could have occurred.

Tom Jackson & Trent Dilfer both reckon it was the correct call but I'm not sure they're able to get all those calls right anyway - it's such a grey area ... there were 13 penalties called in the whole game so maybe they were being consistent. Didn't see much in it to be perfectly honest. Dallas are 9.5 favourites tomorrow but I reckon that line is a little high considering it's (A) a divisional game and (B) this has 'trap' game written all over it for Dallas. Washington have been less than impressive though and it's hard to see them winning, all the same.

I wouldn't be too concerned going forward ... These grassless, somewhat dusty, turning tracks won't be encountered too much in the future ... these type of wickets are a bit of an achilles heal for our blokes but upon checking the future tours program, we won't be encountering these type of decks until mid 2016 (when we visit Sri Lanka for 3 "scheduled" tests) We're scheduled to visit Bangladesh in late 2015 for 2 Tests but I can't see them being too much trouble regardless of the state of the wickets ... not sure the last time that Sri Lanka beat us in a series either (if ever) Early 2017 represents a big challenge when we visit India again for 4 Tests but playing in India has always been a big challenge.

3 of us picked up points in the comp this week ... 2 points as well ... the Packers & Indi let the rest of us down. Points tally ... 3 - JV7, Go the Biff, Georgiou R. R. Martin 2 - Dappa Dan 1 - cowboy_from_hell, pantaloons, Gorgoroth, Macca 0 - others Week 9 games (back to 1 point only ) It's still not too late to join in the comp and with the leaders only being on 3 points, it's anyone's race. Not many surprise results in today's games although the Steelers might be a lot better than many thought ... Big Ben had an immense game and they're only a half a game back in the AFC North ... their next 4 - vs Ravens, @ Jets, @ Titans, vs Saints are all winnable. Detroit might be finally shaking off the choking tag and their next 4 might tell us how good they are ... vs Miami, @ Arizona, @ New England, vs Chicago. Arizona keep winning and the 49ers & Seattle must be getting a bit concerned now ... Buffalo, Miami, KC & Houston all winning keeps those 4 teams within striking distance.

All teams get injuries ... it's not the only reason you're 3 & 5. Your QB just can't get it done on a consistent basis - and, you're stuck with him by the looks of it. You may as well tank the rest of the season now The Saints have been far too good today ... the Packers haven't really looked like it. Rodgers has looked a little incapacitated but we've been outplayed in nearly all areas. No excuses. If New Orleans get their act together, they'll win the NFC South in a canter - trouble is, they're not much chop on the road. Watched your game this morning and whilst Foles numbers looked quite good, he couldn't get it done in crunch time.

I agree with the sentiment of your last paragraph but I do have an issue with various draftees not being able to adapt to the modern game. Some high picks are just not up to speed and never look like getting up to speed. I've watched bits and pieces from a number of TAC games (and the highlight packages) and whilst it may be good to watch, it concerns me that these potential draftees are playing a different style of footy. I fully understand the reasoning behind it all but the "leap" to AFL footy is made harder because of the "relaxed" nature of the games. As an example, I watched the Lever highlights package and to me, the games resembled suburban footy... I couldn't draw a line through it at all so therefore I have no opinion of him. The lack of pressure is obvious and the lack of numbers at the contests is another major difference. To each his own I suppose. TAC footy doesn't do it for me - maybe if they had 36 players in one quarter of the ground for a large percentage of the games my opinion would be different

Has it ever rained in Dubai?