Macca

With the Super Bowl rematch between the Seahawks and Broncos coming up on Monday (7mate ... 6.25am) it might be worth having a look at the soundbites and highlights of the Super Bowl played between these 2 teams (produced by NFL films) Seattle / Denver 1st half (approx 8 mins) Seattle / Denver 2nd half (approx 9 mins)

TV games ... Friday 10.25am Tampa Bay at Atlanta (ESPN) Monday 3.00am - 9.30am RedZone (ESPN ... "Every Touchdown From Every Game") 3.00am Washington at Philadelphia (7mate) 6.25am Denver at Seattle (7mate) 10.30am Pittsburgh at Carolina (7mate & ESPN) Tuesday 10.30am Chicago at NY Jets (ESPN) All the week 3 games BS Report

Fixed There's nearly always around 3 new teams that make the playoffs ... often any of those 3 are teams that have played playoffs more recently. Can't remember the last time Buffalo made it though. Big game for your blokes this week @ Arizona - an early in the year ... "season definer?"

Yep, our first emotional attachment should always be to the club. Those who are at the club right now are mere custodians and in many ways, they're passing through. That includes everyone - no one is not expendable unless they're a "great" or at least extremely valuable. However, you don't want your good players leaving and a club should always try and keep their good players but ... if they're hell bent on going, you do the deal and you try and get the best deal. A club always needs to have a plan post an exit of a "great." Clark isn't in that category. The Hawks can win the flag this year without Franklin. At worst (in my opinion) they'll at least be playing in a GF and are well set up post Buddy.

In practical terms we should try and get as much as we can for Clark because ... 1) We possibly don't want him ourselves anyway 2) We need to bring as much talent into the club as possible 3) There's a chance we can get Lumumba in a straight swap 4) We're playing with house money anyway (a month ago most of us thought Clark was finished) I can understand those that might want to let him take his chances in the PSD but how does that help us apart from standing on principle? If things are viewed in a clinical way without any emotion, then we'd be crazy not to try and get something for him. Besides all that, we've already had a win with the saved salary we would have had to have payed him this year & next year. Not paying him his full salary this year has almost certainly contributed to the club projecting a small profit this year. We're still in the black. The freed up salary cap room for next year allows us to bring in an established good player in a trade (possibly apart from Lumumba - if we get him of course ... Clark was on reasonably big money)

Nice to see you finally got a win. My Hammers got a point (we're trying to get to 40) You'll need to pick up a number of points against your rivals but in the meantime your next 4 aren't too tough ... @ Leicester, vs West Ham, vs Everton & @ West Brom. Could win all 4 and then you'll be right back on track. The Toffees are always tough opposition though. I originally picked you to finish 2nd with Chelsea 3rd and City winning it but Chelsea are looking good ... Diego Costa is rampant.

Handouts? What is happening right now is that we're doing the handing out (in a roundabout way) 1) Other clubs make a lot more money (tens of millions over the years) because they continually get excellent fixturing at the expense of our poor fixturing. In turn, we're forced into selling off at least a couple of our 8 or 9 non profitable home games. I'm not expecting things to change so we can expect more of the same. That puts us at a big disadvantage. 2) We're losing our free agents to other clubs - which they get for nothing ... more handouts. We can't even bring in free agents for fear of damaging our compensation ... another disadvantage. 3) Priority picks which were previously handed out to poorly performed teams has not happened for our team. Under the post 2005 revamped system where a club needed to have 2 poor years in a row (4 wins or less to qualify for a PP) we, in theory, should have received a PP last year and another one this year. As it stands, we've now had 3 poor years in a row and the likelihood of receiving a PP is virtually zero ... another disadvantage. Many other clubs got their PP's after only having one poor season ... again, we've had 3 poor years (10 wins in total) and we will probably receive no draft assistance. As far as I'm concerned, any advantage we can get helps us but we're getting next to no help at all. Many of the other clubs do have those advantages so therefore, it's not a fair competition. I don't know what's worse - the biased fixturing or the lack of compensation (draft assistance) for being a poorly performed team. On top of that we're losing free agents every year. All 3 areas are hurting the club. The AFL needs to give us an opportunity to have a fair crack at it.

Yeah, Luck has already slipped into that role where we don't sort of notice him unless he does something special. He's very good though, all the same. That's a huge win for your blokes in the whole scheme of things ... especially when considering your rivals in your division. The Cowboys might be your only competition the way it's shaping up but really, it's yours to lose. The Giants look woeful and RG3 could be out for quite some time (although I've heard he may not need surgery) In my division, the NFC North, Green Bay go to Detroit then Chicago in the next 2 weeks whilst Detroit and Chicago both visit the Jets over the next 2 weeks as well. The Vikes are at New Orleans and then host Atlanta. I mentioned previously that 9 wins might win the NFC North as I don't believe there's a standout side. Detroit promise much but rarely deliver, Chicago always seem to get a lot of injuries and the Packers leak too many points. The Vikes without Peterson are obviously not as strong. It's up for grabs. The NFC West could get interesting if Arizona keep winning ... the Cards next 6 games are ... vs 49ers, @ Denver, vs Washington, @ Oakland, vs Eagles & @ Dallas. They could win 4 of them and be 6/2. And New Orleans better get a hurry on in the NFC South ... the Panthers look good and already have a 2 game lead over the Saints and ... Atlanta have some winnable games coming up. And how 'bout those Bills & Texans? Week 3 games

Top game to watch and an excellent win by the Eagles. McCoy & Sproles were terrific and Foles had a good game. The Colts could have won it but that interception was costly. Luck was good for the most part and I thought Richardson had a very good game. Anyway, there were 7 road winners and I went 0/3 in the comp. Typical. The points tally 0 - Everyone (joint leaders)

Let's not forget that Port Adelaide were given a 9 million dollar "grant" to cover the 2011, 2012 & 2013 seasons. This grant was given to them to supplement their "lost" income from having to play their home games at footy park. Diddums. Of course, we're given 6-7 home games on a consistent basis against interstate teams where it's difficult to turn a dollar. No such "supplement" is forthcoming in our direction when we're disadvantaged in a similar way. GWS & the GCS are continuing to receive obscene amounts of money so the AFL can have a "presence" in the Northern states whilst we continue to get diddly squat. The average punter screams like a banshee when we received our measly 1.3 million last season yet hardly a word about these interstate clubs getting helped out in a large way. You won't read about it in the mainstream media but the Suns are years away from standing on their own 2 feet. They have a membership of about 13,000 only - about 21,000 less than us. And then there's GWS. Watch for the Lions to get a leg up sooner or later - apparently they're 12 million in the red.

Making the big call on a young player is fraught with danger ... either way. As long as a club has got the right sort of FD, they are in a far better position to judge a player who has only been in the system for a few years. A draftee obviously needs to "show something" but the way the game has advanced has made it harder for a 1st or 2nd year player to step straight in. Some do of course but not nearly as many as some might think. The jump from under 18 footy to AFL level is enormous. The other notable thing was that Nathan was 2nd in our B&F in his 2nd year (2007) but there were still some here who wanted to trade him (at the end of 2008)

2008 Player Review - #2 Nathan Jones Keep in mind that 2008 was Jones' 3rd season.

It's up to the clubs to provide the right environment in order to keep their good players ... and, even that is often not enough to keep a player. Money talks. Franklin & Ablett both left excellently run clubs. The clubs will need to re-sign their "potential" free agents with longer contracts in order to not lose those free agents at a later date. The same can be said for any top player really - whether he's a free agent or not. We're going to see lengthier contracts as the years roll on. Welcome to the new AFL and one thing's for sure, it ain't going back to the way it was.

Eagles to win in a barnburner!

Re SNF ... Kaepernick didn't have his best night ... the 49ers seemed to be off their game whilst the Chicago D was very good. The game was mainly decided by the 3 interceptions gained by Chicago and there were penalties galore in an ugly game. Because of that, it's hard to draw a line through the game. Cutler was good though - stepped it up and credit to him. The niners ran the ball 3 times from 5 yards out at one stage and I found that to be a bit baffling. As expected the Bears are 1/1 but they've done it in an opposite way to how most would have thought. Maybe Buffalo are decent? The NFC North is certainly up for grabs with my Packers winning ugly and we certainly need to get our game together. Rodgers & Nelson had big games but not much else to report. Detroit did as expected - failed miserably in a big game. I can see 9 wins being enough to win the NFC North - all the teams have a reasonably tough schedule and there's no standout team (at this stage) Divisional games will almost certainly decide things. A few other surprise results with the big one being the Chargers win (and Seattle losing) & the Browns defeating the Saints ... both results destroyed any chances of anyone picking up the points in the tipping comp - whooda thunk-it. All 9 of us are still on zero points - happy days KC had their chances & the Bills might be a playoff chance. Arizona could challenge for the NFC West and Dallas had a surprise win (8/8?) Cinci & the Panthers look like being challengers again and the Ravens looked good last Friday. The Rams got on the board and Houston are another 2/0 team. The RG3 injury looked awful and he might end up missing the rest of the season if he needs surgery - he can't take a trick.

The reality is that despite having a diabolical fixture ("another" 7 home games against interstate clubs) we still look like posting a profit. It's a minor miracle.

Found it ... quite a talent ...

Roos came out before the season and talked about our young blokes being developed properly through the 2nds or more importantly, not being exposed to too much senior footy too early. Salem played half the games but mainly as a sub, JKH ended up with 14 games but played as a sub on occasions and Toumpas played mainly in the 2's with a few games in the seniors (he may well have played a few more games late in the season if not for his appendix complication) Kent only played about a dozen games and Hogan didn't play at all (of course, he was injured, but he may not have played all the games even if he was fit) Out of all the young blokes, it was only Viney who played all year and it could be argued that a spell in the 2's wouldn't have harmed him either. Barry played 5 games only. All things considered, Roos was true to his word. The top sides bring their draftees through with far more patience and I believe that Roos is trying to do the same thing.

All things considered, that is a fantastic result. Just imagine the bottom line if we were a finals team with prime time games? Even a 10 win season would boost the coffers immeasurably.

Trying to avoid any of the scores is turning into an artform for me ... I've banned at least 3 people from texting or ringing me on a Monday (that is absolutely true by the way - I'm hard work sometimes) Other people I know who have a bit of an interest in the sport know not to blurt out results. Then there's the radio, work colleagues, internet, this thread, being extra careful with the TV .. it's hard work and it takes a great deal of concentration Anyway, here's Bill Simmons' latest column ... The Sports Guy’s Week 2 NFL Picks

So ... if we pass on Petracca and pick another player not rated in the top 5, those who want to go against the conventional way of thinking will be ok with that? (that would be a Toumpas/Wines type scenario by the way) Even to the point where if Petracca turns out to be an 'A' grader and the bloke we picked outside the top 5 turns out to be a 'C' grader? That's still ok? You see, this whole hype surrounding Petracca almost forces a team to pick him with their early pick. It's the same nearly every year. Kreuzer, Gibbs, Scully, Watts/Natanui etc etc. It must be remembered that Petracca is no guarantee to turn out to be an A grader despite what all the experts and pundits think. There's a lot of grey area here - it's confusing, chaotic & not all is what it seems. Where was the hype about Fyfe (20), Stevie J (24) Chapman (35) Robbie Gray (55) Goodes (43) Dangerfield (10)? There's a stack of other champs who were picked late.

Well yeah, but people like me always recognised that it was Todd's decision ... and, in my case, I'm comfortable with his decision.

Picket Fence said ... But the "go home" factor was your only knock on him ... you fail to mention any other factors. And again, it's too late now to add anything extra. So ... if Jimmy doesn't go home, can we assume that you're happy with the decision to draft him?

Neeld on Toumpas (it's not much but there's a bit there) In my opinion, Viney wanted Toumpas and Neeld went with the decision. Or, they were both in sync with the decision. It's highly doubtful that Neeld would have overruled Viney. What is noticeable about those who wanted Wines (mostly in hindsight) is that they generally only want to talk about the "decision" - not who made the decision. The decision didn't just magically happen. Some have pointed the finger at Neeld but that's a cop out. I've yet to see the finger pointed at Viney by anyone, yet he was the person charged with making the decision on Toumpas. Regardless, Toumpas was touted as the 2 pick from that 2012 season and definitely top 5 whereas Wines wasn't regarded as a top 5 pick.

I had reasonably high hopes for Col based on his natural talent but that natural talent was probably more suited to the footy we saw played in the 80's & 90's. I also had reasonably high hopes for a number of others who didn't make it. However, because it didn't work out, I'm not going to complain about it. The game started changing dramatically from the mid 2000's and Col wasn't the only one to be left behind. You could say the same about a lot of our players. And, many players from other teams. We just seemed to have more of them and our coaching played a big part as well. Interestingly enough, under 18 footy is often not played in the same way that the AFL is. Flooding is frowned upon and there's nowhere near the same amount of players around the ball. In effect, the clubs are still recruiting players that are in some cases, more suited to a style of footy from yesteryear.