rjay

Probably not such a good idea, and speed is more important over the first 5 to 20 rather than 100 and also in decision making which is where Stef falls down IMO.

Can't agree with you on this one mate, unless it is the senior side winning. He is a class above at VFL level and won't gain anything from playing out the year there, win or no win. Keep him working from defence where he is now and the experience earned will be invaluable. If a player spends too much time at a lower level they tend to adapt to that level, this is not what we want.

Tynan is injured and hasn't played for a month and Couch hasn't played for 3 weeks. The question is who can come in for Green with no Casey games for the last 2 weeks, probably Bate or Petterd maybe Morton. Moloney should go and I would love to see Taggert but he has not had enough football after missing most of the pre season. I'm sure he would account for himself better than Moloney but they are managing his work loads as they say. Sheahan is another one I want to see before the end of the year, he has been consistant at Casey, is a rookie, is a tall with a lot of class. Would do better than recycling the usual suspects.

What really gets me is that we are comparing ourselves to the Tiges of 2010. Our great spin doc CEO was BSing on about it today on the radio. Fact is in 2010 we were on our way as the next big thing, years ahead of Richmond in our rebuild and heading into 2011 with a chance of making the 8. It has all come crashing down and our rebuild is into it's 5th year, the Tiges are well ahead of us. Can we really trust the same CEO to take us into another rebuild?

...and I think you will find that Tapscott was playing forward all game.

Spot on about the Tige defense Adam, was only saying the same thing to a mate at the game today. Their defenders are getting a lot of praise in the press at the moment but when you have a midfield like they have it makes the job so much easier. Our guys have so much pressure on them because of our poor midfield. Frawley, Rivers, Garland and Tommy Mac are doing a massive job under enormous pressure. Watts has added a bit of class dowm back and all I would like to see is for Col Garland to get some confidence back in his run and carry. Come on Col it's not your fault, it's your teammates up the ground, he seems to take it all on his shoulders at times.

Not true mate, as Barry Hall said recently they all thought Adam Goodes was really soft in his early years. Not now. There is way too much garbage talked here about Watts, I would like to see him take the game on a bit more and I think he will. arrrr...it was a bad kick, it was cut off for f...sake, not his fault. You may well be right here Ben, I also see the similarity to Gibbs. Let's see if he can develop the contested side of his game, with Neeld and now Malthouse in his corner he just might but as you say at least he is clean with the ball.

The upside for Jurrah and Watts is too big to trade. Neither is yet to play 50 games, it's crazy to talk trade. The others don't give much value except for Silvia and maybe there is some trade value. It could be a win/ win, perhaps Col will play good football elsewhere and maybe another club will see enough in him. Moloney is a free agent and as such can't be traded, the way he is playing at the moment and on future potential he will be lucky to get an offer from another club and we should seriously look at de listing him.

Honestly mate, no one was playing loose today it was man on man. Watts was ok he got a fair bit of ball and when he gets the ball he hits targets, 87% disposal efficiency again today. He is the least of our problems.

Taggert

Who did they play?

My thoughts exactly Jose

I will say he will be going to who ever does the best deal, then again knowing how Lyon likes to develop young talent he may not have played a senior game by then. The deal may not have to be to great.

Very united last year with the admin and football department loving each other and the players united behind Schwab and Connelly. The place was falling apart and has yet to fully recover. Change was needed and only time will tell if it was the right change.

I was hoping this would be dealt with and we could move on, but I am resigned now that with some luck it will be when contracts are due later this year. Then we can really get rolling. Also agree with Hardnut that some on the board may be a problem. A strong president and top class CEO really set the platform for a strong club. I don't know about McLardy yet but I would be throwing everything at Cook to get him to the club.

Build our own. Good draft, good system now, go down the Geelong path. We have our Ottens.

Not to nit pick but Rucci is actually a Crows hating journo, but as a Port man he was leading the charge to get Primus out last week, all the usual stuff about his training methods, people management, he has lost the players etc. and needed another crusade this week after they made him look like a goose on the weekend. I certainly would be taking most things Rucci says with a grain of salt... and anyway true or not at the time we appointed Neeeld a lot of the so called footy experts were saying we got the best of the assistants. They are back tracking now and hopefully will again in the next few years with Neeld a success.

He also recognised that if we had have gone along the same path that whilst we may have picked up a couple of wins we were likely to go backwards this year under Bailey.

If he were fit I think Gary might have been pretty handy in 2000 though Jackie but the draft picks and fine were a big loss to the club, not Gary's doing. I do think the influence of too few has had a detrimental effect on the club and somtimes the loyalty Gary has given to mates has been a problem. I also don't see him as being a rubber stamp for Schwab, Gary has been strong on getting a defensive mindset into the club for a while now and may have had too narrow a focus. Having said that he may have made some very good appointments this time around, lets hope so. Time will tell.

My biggest problem with the media coverage is that it does not get to the bottom of the issue here. Greg Denham at least pointed to it this morning on KB's program and I know he has cheap shots at us but even he said the article offered nothing new, a little like his article a week or so earlier that also offered nothing new. A caller, not a Melbourne supporter he said, laid blame for the clubs position with the CEO and his failure previously with this club and at others and now again at this club. KB rightly pointed out that the admin can't get a kick but as Greg pointed out they are responsible for a lot that goes on at the club, particularly when they get their hands dirty with football department matters. This is a hard issue for KB and to his credit he hasn't put the boots in to Schwab who was part of the group that sacked him. My personal belief is that Mark Neeld is coaching with one had tied behind his back and that we can't fully judge him unless the board takes action to clear the decks. We finished bottom 3 in 1999, after our CEO resigned the next year we played off in a Grand Final it maybe a conincidence but the 2nd & 3rd round draft picks we lost in 2000 are the senior players we so badly need now, players of the calibre of Hunt, Cassisi, Newman and Cross and that is not a coincidence. http://demonwiki.org/1999 These articles would have been read before I'm sure and I know a lot of you don't have time for Pat Smith or Greg Denham. In my mind Pat is a top class journalist, he can be infuriating at times but he pretty much always has a considered opinion even if it is not mine. Greg I think takes to many cheap shots however the way our club has evolved lends itself to this. Even Malthouse has said the club has been involved with everything but football. http://www.slatterymedia.com/uploads/store_items/kb---a-life-in-football/files/The_Australian_Wednesday_August_3.pdf http://www.theaustralian.com.au/sport/demons-boss-cameron-schwab-offered-as-a-sacrifice/story-e6frg7mf-1226106999777 The easy way out is to pot Neeld, but the club has stalled since a promising 2010 season, he has some responsibility for season 2012 not what went on before. I know a lot will think I'm letting the players off lightly but I don't and haven't in the past. Some of them are struggling with ageing bodies others are just not up to it and at years end I'm sure we will see big changes to the list but to me this will address only part of the problem.

I don't get this talk of recruiting athletes to the club. I know that recruiting has been and remains a big issue but where are these athletes, we are the slowest, least athletic team in the competition.

Just repeated Caro's article with less detail. Well, I guess I shouldn't have expected much more.

Let's wait and see what's in the article, maybe for a change there will be some constructive critisism and some good ideas put forward. I just hope he doesn't go on and re hash the stuff about winning 8 games last year, or the coach has lost the players. 3 coaches have lost the players over the last year. They didn't play for Bailey, Viney and they don't appear to be playing for Neeld. No matter what the club says something is wrong, things changed after the 2010 season and Neeld can't be held responsible for 2011. Lets see if Mike can shed some light before we get stuck into him.

Rucci is trying to deflect after what he was saying about Primus and the campaign he was running to oust him stalled leaving egg all over his face last weekend. He is in a race with King for the Acker of the year trophy although I think Acker himself is still running favourite after his Jimmy comments.

David King, the new Acker!