Macca

I can almost guarantee that "at the time" most Demon fans would have been happy and excited to snare a player of Sylvia's talents. I keep stressing "at the time" because that's the most important aspect with all this revisionist stuff. We can't change what we thought at the time ... have a read of the Toumpas thread if you get a chance, rjay ... there's not that much said about Wines as compared to now. My view is to make the best of what you've got. Plus, in my view it's a flawed system we're talking about so it's largely academic. I came to terms with the draft a long time ago In the end, we got a win by "virtually" swapping Vince for Scully. Against that is that we might have snared a decent young prospect with the Vince pick (pick 23) Then again, we might have picked another kid with that pick who may not have made it.

In essence, we agree but for slightly different reasons. I'm happy to go with that. I can't remember that far back but I can't remember any reports on Sylvia saying he was "lazy" or "didn't work hard enough" (at the time) If it were nowadays, I still believe he'd be a standout junior with big raps on him ... buyer beware hey? With a 10 year sample size, I've worked out that the odds of of snagging an A grader with a top 5 pick sits at 7-2. Not bad odds but not great either. There are no guarantees and Sylvia is living proof on that.

He had more than a few good traits in his last under 18 year, rjay. He was a standout junior. That's why he went at no.3 in the 2003 draft. But the draft is not an accurate measure of 17 year old talent and is flawed. Given that being the case, how on earth is it Sylvia's fault if he didn't become a star? It is what it is.

If Sylvia was taken at pick 23, 35 or even pick 63 instead of pick 3, this thread probably wouldn't even exist. The draft is flawed. It's a long way from being an accurate measure and always will be. It's quite laughable how so many have bought into the draft the way they have. Astonishing really. Just accept it for what it is and view every draftee as a recruit only ... with no number attached to his name. Sylvia was always going to turn out the way he did - of course, we weren't to know that when he was only 17 years old. Move on.

... Poll mixed on Goodell keeping job and again, the TV games ... Monday 3.00am - 9.30am RedZone (ESPN ... "Every Touchdown From Every Game") 3.00am Detroit at Carolina (7mate) 6.30am Kansas City at Denver (7mate) 10.30am Chicago at San Francisco (7mate & ESPN) Tuesday 10.30am Philadelphia at Indianapolis (ESPN) ... All the week 2 games and ... The BS Report (podcast with Bill Simmons) The most interesting of the TV games for me is the Eagles/Colts match-up. I give KC a sneaky chance as well and if Detroit are going to step it up, they need to win games like these @ the Panthers. Me, I'm already hooked on redzone

Wyl, I'm not stating my case to make myself "feel better" ... I don't think that way. This club has made a number of monumental blunders in the last 8 or so years and I've previously posted here about those monumental blunders. However, whenever I've critiqued the club, I've always tried to look at all the data available (at the time) In this instance, I'm not so much focusing in on letting the club off the hook but more focusing in on how the draft in general is often a lottery. These kids are too young to evaluate with any sort of accuracy and the results back that up. There are "busts" left, right & centre and too many gun players are picked up late in the draft. I get it, this club can frustrate even the most staunch supporter but in this instance, I'm firmly of the belief that the club made the right call on Toumpas (at the time) Besides all that, Jimmy could still end up being quite a good player for us - or he may not. That's what the draft does. I accept the draft for what it is. I once dubbed it a "glorified lucky dip" as a way of coming to terms with it all. Am I wrong?

The argument must centre on the thinking at the time - none of this hindsight rubbish. Poll - Wines or Toumpas WELCOME TO THE MELBOURNE FOOTBALL CLUB - JIMMY TOUMPAS In all manner of fairness, those who believe we "should have" picked Wines have an obligation to read the 2 threads I've posted above. When you do, get back to us with your thoughts. However, I don't expect any of the incessant "moaners" to read those threads because (A) They've made up your mind already and (B) They won't change their mind because that will mean they'd have to stop moaning. The facts and the data was all in at the time and for our club to pick Wines over Toumpas would have gone against the conventional thinking at the time. Now, because the draft is flawed anyway, it's all rather academic isn't it? Oh, and by the way, Robbie Gray (who was arguably best on ground last night) went at pick 55 in the 2006 draft. Again, if you want to remain consistent, you need to moan just as much about that "supposed" mistake. Maybe more so but this time, can you include every club - including his own club. Let's broaden the argument instead of narrowing things down to suit an agenda. There's Goodes at 43, Black at 31, Chapman at 35, Stevie J at 24, Dangerfield at 10 ... it's a very very long list. With regards to picking Toumpas, we made what was perceived to be the right decision at the time and that's all that matters. Nothing can be changed back and if a similar scenario were to happen again, I'd expect history to repeat itself. Should we pass on Petracca? Finally, anyone who doesn't think that the draft isn't at least slightly flawed is delusional. I firmly believe that the draft is a lot more than slightly flawed and the evidence is right there in front of us.

Yeah, but does he bother to tell us about all the predictions that he gets wrong? We all make the big calls and we all get some things right and we all get some things wrong. Anyone who thinks they never get anything wrong with these big calls is having a lend. The great part about these forums is there is nowhere to hide when someone gets it horribly wrong ... some of the older threads are hilarious. The search function reveals all

Including most here ... Poll - Wines or Toumpas Toumpas was rated no.2 for most of the 2012 season and was always tipped to go in the top 5 ... Wines, on the other hand was tipped to not get picked up in the top 5. And guess what? That's what happened. It's akin to passing on Petracca and picking someone else outside of the top 5 "popular" picks. By the way, Robbie Gray went at pick 55 in the 2006 draft ... who do we blame there and where do we start?

Great game - the finals have been terrific

Fair point ... I'll concede on that one rjay. I still believe that certain stars are going to have their game time "managed" going forward and that can and will effect a teams percentage. Every year the game gets a little faster and more brutal and because of that, the stars are more likely to be protected once the heat has gone out of a game. Let's not forget that they only lost by a kick last night - they were far from disgraced. I'm not ruling a line through them yet as a finals chance ... like us, they might have grand plans to improve their list immeasurably.

All year, many were "concerned" about Geelong's percentage but they still won 17 games and for that, they got 2 home finals. I'm just not as enamored with the whole percentage thing as others might be. More and more, coaches are going to "rest" their game breakers when the game is won. Why thrash them? It happens in a lot of overseas sports and there's no reason why it won't happen here. The game is brutal and we've already got the players association wanting more byes and certain teams are now giving their players a game off here and there when they can. Years ago, many of the players never came off the ground and they were never "rested" from games. It's an exhausting game to play these days. In reference to the bit I've highlighted, it's a lot harder to climb back up the ladder than it was even 5 years ago. You need the right people in place and even with all that, there's a whole lot of hard work needed. And luck plays a big part also, especially with those draft picks

You make some good points rjay but there are examples in pro sport where teams just don't drop away. The cynic in me wonders how all these financially secure clubs are going to spend their excess dollars (the Pies made a profit of 16 million last year and are 31 million in the black) Free Agency can help any team but the way it's been set up, it tends to favour the teams who are well set financially and who are successful on the field. We're not even in the game and we need to be. The gap therefore can remain. If we lose Frawley to the Cats then one could interpret that as a bottom club giving 2 of their better players to a top club and the top club gives up nothing. The Port game I mentioned because the commentators were banging on about Hinkley not being happy about the drop off in intensity by his team. Personally, I don't reckon he gave a rats. The next game was all that mattered to him when the scoreline was 80 to 8.

Interesting articles rjay ... of course, we had our own master recruiter in Jim Cardwell back in the day. It takes many parts to make a great footy club and Checker Hughes and Ivor Warne-Smith also played a big part in our 50's dominance (from what I've gathered) Plus, you need a great coach, administration and Board. If a club can tick all the right boxes with the Pres, CEO, chief recruiter, footy manager, coach & captain then it is well on it's way. I'm probably over generalising things when I call the draft a lottery. In a lot of ways it is a lottery but there are a number of "truths" attached to the draft, the draftees & the recruiters. Anyway, Roos at one stage called it a 'ridiculous lottery' so there you go ... Flawed is a better way to describe the draft but I often chuckle when I see the same recruiter "lauded" for a great pick and then "chastised" for another pick. A lot of the time there's a lot of luck involved. Stephen Wells also missed on a number of his picks but he's got a lot "right" over the years.

Whilst I don't feel sorry for AP, I do feel for the Vikes fans such as yourself. I can only imagine how I would feel if it were Rodgers instead. Hopelessly conflicted and not wanting to believe it's true plus, the natural reaction is to try and play it down. The Rice thing complicates matters but if Rice had been dealt with properly at the time, this latest episode with AP would be a lot more clearer. As it stands, Peterson is in fair bit of strife, regardless. I don't always know how all these things work in the States ... First or 2nd time PED users carries with it only a 4 game penalty and a 2nd time marijuana user can cop a whole season.

How long has Wells been at Geelong? He doesn't have a wiki page so I don't have the answer. I'm assuming he's been there for 15+ years but I stand corrected. He's certainly got an eye for talent outside the top 5 picks. Since 1996 and probably further back, they have never had a top 5 pick. They've also only had a handful of picks between 6 & 10 (of which they've snared Corey (8), Mackie (7), Bartel (8) & Selwood (7) Sure, they got lucky with their F/S (Hawkins, Ablett & Scarlett) but often, you make your own luck. ... the following players were also snared in various drafts ... Josh Hunt (44) Wojcinski (24) Chapman (31) Ling (38) Enright (47) Kelly (17) Stevie J (24) Lonergan (23) Egan (61) Varcoe (15) Stokes (61) Taylor (17) Motlop (39) Taylor Hunt (49) Duncan (28) Christensen (40) Guthrie (23) Podsiadly (58) ... and then there's the trades that they've arranged (Caddy, Ottens etc) Now there's free agency to keep clubs like Geelong up (Rivers has been an acquisition and so might Frawley if he goes there) ... and, who's to say that their more recent draftees won't shine in the future ... as most know, it usually takes between 3 & 5 years for a draftee to start showing his real worth. They've got a good track record of developing their players well. There overall list management and recruiting has been first rate and I can't see all that reversing all of a sudden and them bottoming out. They're too good a club and we can only wish that we were as well run (we might be on our way with PJ & Roos) If Frawley goes to the Cats then that is James' decision alone. No one is forcing him to do anything - if he leaves, it's on him.

Where I believe it's "mainly" a lottery, rjay, is in the top 5-10 picks (or the "popular" picks) After those top 10 or so picks, a good recruiter really comes to the fore. Prendergast actually did ok with a number of later picks (albeit, he didn't unearth a gem or an 'A' grader) ... Bad Luck or Bad Recruiting As a general rule, the expectations surrounding a draft pick number varies wildly as well and because of that, we (the footy public) aren't looking as closely at the picks outside the top 10-15 ... the recruiters are. As for Geelong, I've stated that they're not a premiership threat right now but I don't believe that they will bottom out either (which was the crux of my original argument) They've got too many good people in place for that to happen and in the meantime, nothing is stopping them from bringing in established talent. After all, isn't that what we're planning to do? They'd mainly have to do that with free agency, astute trading and identifying talented players later in the draft but doing all that is entirely possible. That's the case for any club but not every club has a Stephen Wells. I can understand people "wanting" Geelong to fall away but I don't view sport that way. As for percentage, footy has changed and clubs will put their cue in the rack more and more once they've won games. Port did it last week against the Tigers.

I'm not forming my views based on past glories alone. You assume wrong. They've got the right people in place ... are you saying that Cook, Scott, Wells, Balme & Carter aren't up for the job? The 5 positions that these men occupy are the most important in a club and there's one more very important position - the captain (Selwood) They're set up better than most clubs but they do need a number of good players if they're going to challenge seriously in the next 5 years. That can happen the same as other clubs that are thereabouts could challenge.

The Cats will continue to play finals and that keeps them within striking distance ... they are a club that is extremely well run and because of that, they almost certainly won't bottom out. If he leaves, Frawley will improve them and there will be other free agents that they can sign in the future. Also, they develop their draftees well. Caddy can play and they can trade for more players like him. They're not going away in a hurry ... they may have been the first team to go through a season without being overly concerned about their percentage ... wins are all that matter when aiming for a top 4 spot. They're not exactly a premiership threat right now but they have a great culture, are well coached and they have Balme and Cook ... and, they've got (arguably) one of the best recruiters in the business in Stephen Wells. They tick a lot of boxes.

It just gets worse ... Peterson facing arrest, deactivated

If Goodell has viewed the "2nd" video as early as April this year, he's in trouble. It would then almost certainly involve a cover-up and given the nature of the incident, it would be viewed as a terribly poor piece of judgement on his part. A lot of the lobby groups have a lot of strength in the US and rather than being sacked, I can see him resigning if the above scenario was to be proven. Goodell has come out and said that he hasn't viewed the video until now so not only might there have been a cover-up, the denials would be damning as well. Of course, if he hasn't seen the 2nd video until now, questions would have to be asked about why he hasn't seen the video previously. A man in his position can't afford to be negligent or incompetent considering what the 2nd video revealed. A lot is going to depend on whether the tape was actually sent to the NFL and whether it was viewed at the time (by the NFL) and this ... Sources: Rice told NFL he hit fiancee

Bonus points up for grabs this week (2 points) but I'll do well to trouble the scorers ... New Orleans Seattle Miami

If we view things in a practical sense, EH, the draft age probably won't change in the foreseeable future (that's not to say that the draft age shouldn't be raised) I doubt that raising the draft age would be high on the AFL's agenda. My solution would be to raise the draft age gradually ... say, 3 or 6 months per year over 6-7 years until the players are finally evaluated and then drafted when they are 20 years old. At the same time I'd like to see an Australia wide under 20 or under 21 competition started up (the AFL could afford to subsidise a competition like the one I'm suggesting but a competition like that might end up paying for itself if it's done properly) The issues surrounding raising the draft age are what to do with the 17/18 year old's who are "ready to go." Players like Daniel Rich, Ollie Wines & Lewis Taylor have all made the transition to senior footy with relative ease but again, there are plenty of draftee's who are predicted to make that transition early who never do. When the draft first started, many complained that we'd never see another "Timmy Watson" (Watson made his debut when he was 15 years old) but that type of argument is never heard of these days. With the system that we've got right now, the simple solution is to lower one's expectations and be far more realistic. I guess having that view stifles debate and negates those who want to complain but ... it's a far more sensible way of looking at things.

Jimmy was rated as the no.2 choice for most of 2012 - by many recruiters and pundits. Later on, the general footy public including many Melbourne supporters joined in on the hype. It happens almost every year - this year it's Petracca who is all the rage. The hype surrounding Scully was enormous - as it's turned out, he's a C grader. Fiora, Tambling, Morton and countless others were highly rated. Have a read of all the Morrish Medal winners over the years to see how many didn't go on with it. A lot of them were given a try-out of course, some made it, many didn't make it. I treat the draft like an imposter. There are too many inconsistent factors involved for the draft to be taken too seriously. Too many busts and too many champs slip through (Fyfe 20, Dangerfield 10, Goodes 43, Black 31 etc etc) The draft is not an accurate measure of the available 17 year old talent and it's doubtful that it ever will be either. It's a lottery and if you want a highly respected 2nd opinion, ask Paul Roos ... Roos slams draft as a 'ridiculous lottery'

TV games (unfortunately 7mate haven't got the Friday game listed) Another excellent line-up of live games, all the same ... Friday 10.00am Pittsburgh at Baltimore (ESPN) Monday 3.00am - 9.30am RedZone (ESPN ... "Every Touchdown From Every Game") 3.00am Detroit at Carolina (7mate) 6.30am Kansas City at Denver (7mate) 10.30am Chicago at San Francisco (7mate & ESPN) Tuesday 10.30am Philadelphia at Indianapolis (ESPN) ... All the week 2 games and ... The BS Report (podcast with Bill Simmons)