Ricky P

I still reckon we'll get our 10. I think we'll beat GC and Carlton and one more. I actually reckon we're a chance this week - West Coast are pretenders.

8 hours ago, america de cali said:

I would change my mind and say we have improved if we manage to beat one of Hawks, Adelaide, Geelong or a still alive Port on the cusp of the finals. I don't think it will happen because stirring upsets against teams that want and need to win does not seem to be in our DNA. That is the bench mark I apply to acknowledge  improvement. Just effing beat a team that plays to win and not just the cheap wins against poor teams that have issues and distractions.

 

 

We basically cost Geelong a spot in the finals last year. Also beat the Tigers (5th) and Doggies (6th). In 2014 we beat Adelaide in Adelaide.

1 minute ago, stevethemanjordan said:

Yes, because Tom McDonald himself will be the determining factor as to whether or not we can win a final over the next 10 years.

Brilliant.

You don't reckon a quality key defender can't be the difference between winning and losing a final? Really?

2 hours ago, goodwindees said:

Two pieces of info I found it yesterday is that Dees have a 5 year ofer on the Table for Prestia. I wasn't told how much, just how long. 

I was was also told that Tom Mac wants $700,000 per season.  

Watch some numpty journo report this in the next couple of days as a "rumour from a Melbourne insider".

1 hour ago, Diamond said:

Pedo wasn't playing

The post you were responding to was from April.

I reckon he'll be an absolute gun.

54 minutes ago, Demon Jack said:

Almost forgot Mark of the Year exsisted. Seemed like the only thing Howe was good for back in his day. Anyway, Viney's mark was terrific. Perfect balance between courage and skill. 

Don't forget Jooce!

17 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Not if we keep losing games like yesterday. 

That was a season killer

Managers will be on the phones today...

The only free agent we have who hasn't signed is Grimes. I reckon his manager might've already been on the phone!

8 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Trouble is Free Agency will continue to erode our "Good" experienced players each year....

Haha I can't see us losing anyone we'd want to keep in the next few years.

I'd also argue we've done pretty well out of free agency. We got Vince for Sylvia, Brayshaw for Frawley. Who'd we get for Rivers?

I just voted. It takes about 14 seconds. I reckon we should all vote and get Jack the nomination. He dragged us back into the game through sheer willpower yesterday. A lot of us on here have rightly vented our frustration that yesterday the players went missing when the going got tough. Would surely be a bit hypocritical if we, the fans, did the same thing ;). 

5 hours ago, AngryAtCasey said:

After a loss like yesterday, this thread always helps me look at things in perspective.

Melbourne ranked 16th in each filed on the weekend with an average age of 23 years 10 months and games experience of 65.8.  Saints were 8th & 9th at 24 years, 11 months and 92.5 games experience.

These results will happen.  It's annoying, but the inexperience of the teams we're putting out there leaves this open.  Dunn & Garland's fall from grace, Lumumba's injury and Dawes inability to get back to some of his 2013/early 2014 form has meant we're playing a lot younger then most of us expected.

This is true. The fact is, we have a younger team now than when Roos started. More than a quarter of the team that played yesterday has played less than 20 games. Yesterday was disappointing for me because I thought we had taken the next step and could go on and have a crack at the finals, but clearly we are still a young and inconsistent team. That doesn't diminish my belief that we'll be a formidable team in the next couple of years.

In 2 or 3 years we'll have 4 Jack Vineys running around - Track, Oliver, Brayshaw and the original. I reckon we'll be a fair side when that happens.

Another stupid bloody thread.

Absolute disgrace of a thread.

Absolutely shattered by that.

We're in much better shape percentage-wise than the saints. 

North getting pumped. It's all coming together folks! #deesfinals2016

53 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

We went 8-0 in '71 and missed out

That was tiger ridley coaching wasn't it? What happened in the second half of the season? Injuries?

3 minutes ago, stuie said:

Really?

We were flat against Essendon, Roos said as much. We're a better team than them. We lost.

We beat GWS at Etihad in the one game we've won there in 24 tries with a fresh, small and quick team, we didn't do any of that against the Saints. We're a better team than them. We lost.

Bulldogs are clearly a better team than us. Might not have made a difference.

We're probably even with Port. Once again we didn't go with fresh legs. We lost.

Sure, it's not the only factor that determines winning or losing, but it's hardly "overrated" given it's the players who play the game, and the players you select influence how the team plays.

 

Mindset/attitude cost us against Essendon. Execution of the gameplan cost us against St Kilda. Doggies just better than us as u say. Didn't see the Port game - was overseas.

Put is this way - the hand-wringing over selection that goes on here is in no way commensurate with the influence selection actually has over the outcome.

21 minutes ago, stuie said:

After the Bombers game (We picked underdone players, we'll learn from it), after the Saints game (We picked the wrong players for the ground, we'll learn from it), after the Bulldogs game (In hindsight another tall would have been good), After the Port game (I've got to take responsibility for not making more changes for this week. We spoke about it at match committee).

There's 4 examples.

 

Yeah but none of those were the reasons we lost. Selection is overrated as a determining factor in games.

8 minutes ago, brendan said:

Looks a bit like Robbie flower the way he dances around players in that video clip 

We have now officially reached peak #overhypingjayden.

Selection is massively overrated as a factor. We're talking about the 21st/22nd best players. Selection rarely has any bearing on the game.

29 minutes ago, Undeeterred said:

What they might have been planning, given they really wanted to keep Hogan, was to keep bucketloads of cap room for him to sign up, then work out what's left. Or, they could decide that the risk of losing some of the players they are holding off on is bigger than the risk of not having enough left in the cap to pay Hogan what he demands, should he eventually decide to stay.

Not that difficult to comprehend, especially given that earlier in the year they were in discussions with Hogan, and now they're not.

I definitely understood what you were saying. What you were saying was silly. So I made fun of of it. ?

1 hour ago, Undeeterred said:

Interesting to see how this might play out with Hogan. 

I'd have thought they would have waited for him, to see what might be left for Watts, Jetta, Kent, TMac.

It feels like they've decided they can't wait for Jesse, and will sign everybody else they can, then see what's left for Jesse.

While it's great that we're signing these blokes up, each one that drops reduces our flexibility around Hogan.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure that's how they do contracts. Josh Mahoney yells from his office, "First in, best dressed fellas - get em' while they're hot".

Roos has completely transformed our player development.

And, whilst he hasn't actually picked the players, he's heavily influenced our recruitment philosophy - e.g. we want competitors. This has undoubtedly significantly contributed to vastly improved recruitment results during his tenure.

Not to mention the fact that he's hired quality staff in both areas that will hopefully see our improvement continue into the future.

Finally - the season isn't over and we could still make the finals!

2 hours ago, mo64 said:

Spot on. To give credit to Roos for building a list is a massive exaggeration. The cornerstone of our team are Hogan, Gawn and Viney, none of whom were acquired under Roos. And we haven't landed a decent free agent under Roos. Our trading has been passable, but not exceptional. In essence we got Bernie Vince for Matt Crouch. Garlett has been our best trade.

Our recruiting has improved under Jason Taylor. No credit to Roos there.

The list of promising talent (Brayshaw, Petracca, Oliver) was the result of high draft picks due to poor performance. Again, no credit to Roos.

As a coach, Roos has been no different to Bailey in his first 3 years, but his reputation has brought us stability, on and off the field. 

The OP is insulting to Northey and Daniher, and I rate Balme ahead of Roos.

This is basically a post about recruiting where the good stuff is credited to the recruiting staff and the bad stuff is blamed on Roos.