Lutz

It's an indictment on the quality of leaders at the club, and Yze, not leadership groups themselves.

It's actually 2 playing chiefs, under a non-playing big chief. I don't think it's necessary to go through the organisational breakdown structure, but the leadership group is vertically and horizontally structured. The leadership group provides structure and leadership for the playing group, acts as a conduit for communication between the coaching dept and the playing group (and the board), and empowers the players to an extent. The value of empowerment should not be underestimated. The leadership group acts to form and cultivate the club culture. Anyway, whether you understand it or not, all clubs in the AFL have long ago embraced the concept of leadership groups and can see the clear benefits, and it defies logic for any of them to go back to the dark ages. *and the function of a leadership group goes far beyond the 22 onfield on match day. The 44% figure is misleading and disingenuous.

Rubbish topic. No club would be stupid enough to "buck the trend" and not appoint a leadership group. That'd be like "bucking the trend" and going back to not doing preseason training anymore and encouraging the players to get [censored] together after a match.

Totally agree, in case you missed that.

And Brock was a good ordinary footballer, but the game passed him by when the physical demands changed as his physical abilities diminished. Still not many in that draft you'd take in place of Brock, when you compare their output to date.

We actually nabbed Morton at 4

Really..? What do you want? Neeld to give him a cuddle and sit with him for a few hours? Honestly, some people...

btw, not only will Gysberts be an absolute jet (not far off it now), but Morton will prove a lot of people wrong. Bookmark it.

You fail to see that much of this list is irrelevant. Most of it came down to bad luck (or bad tanking if you like) in that the picks we got simply weren't in the best drafts, or we weren't well enough positioned in those drafts. We never had the option to choose the bolded players, and the ones in italics we didn't get because we opted for Scully and Trengove (once again, if you foresaw that Scully would leave, i'd like you to PM me next week's lotto numbers... and btw, he was a mid). If you'd prefer the remaining few over Watts, that's your prerogative, but there are only 2 players on that entire list we could have chosen and it wouldn't have cost us either Watts, Trengove or Scully... Farren bloody Ray and Jarrad Grant. Ones not even a mid, nor looks like being a great player, at that. I mean, it's like you're working against yourself here...

Rhino pretty much said it all, but I agree with rjay - awareness and decision-making are his biggest deficiencies. And being able to kick the ball a long way is very different to hitting targets at that distance. I think you'll find he often just bombs long or takes the obvious short option. Finding an option when they're hard to find, is not one of his tricks (few can, but if we're talking about "stars" or the "elite"...)

I like BH don't think Beamer can ever become "elite". He can be a bullocking clearance machine, but outside of a stoppage he just doesn't have enough. What qualities do you think he possesses that would allow him to become elite You can't be elite with big holes in your game.

A few problems with this post. The AFL didn't do anything for us -- we "earned" those pick with our win-loss records. Each of the first 3 picks might look bad, but they were the best options for mids at the stage of those drafts. The only player of note in 2003 after those named, would be David Mundy, picked around 30-40 and after Freo had already had 2 picks themselves. Rioli, Dangerfield & Grimes came after Morton, but not much else, and they aren't really mods (yet, at least). And if you could have foreseen Scully leaving back on draft day, then I'd appreciate next week's tattslotto numbers while you're at it.

Disagree - he'll never be a nobody. He'll always be the little sod that chased a truckload of money and never lived up to the hype.

For that matter, we may just be in for GWS / GC recruits from Victoria who are keen to head home. Prestia, Mav Weller or Caddy would be ideal (although I think they've signed). Same with a Dylan Shiel or Tom Bugg. This coming draft/trade period looks to be almost as highly anticipated as those following our 2008 & 2009 seasons.

"Guns" or "gun mids" are subjective terms. Collingwood has/had Swan, Ball, Pendlebury, Thomas, Sidebottom, Beams, Didak, Wellingham, Johnson, Krakouer, Shaw, O'Bree/Blair/Buckley/Davis... Geelong has/had Corey, Selwood, Bartel, Chapman, Ling, Wojcinski, Johnson, Kelly, Enright, Ablett/Duncan, Menzel/Christensen/Hogan/Prismall/Byrnes/Guthrie/Smedts... Even Carlton has Judd, Gibbs, Murphy, Scotland, Robinson, Yarran, Simpson, Carazzo, Curnow/McLean, Lucas/Collins/Garlett/Russell... Not all superstars, but many of them at least the equal of any of our mids right now. Clutching at straws to get a full dozen, but didn't expect "a dozen" to be taken so literally either, and some of them are not pure mids but spend time running through there. For our benefit we could probably include guys like Garland who will venture upfield at times. But I'm talking in more general terms, before you try to turn it into a mathematical equation.