Bombay Airconditioning

I read comments on here like "player x's disposal is improving after 6 years on the list". At Hawthorn if you can't kick the footy you don't even get bloody drafted. And don't use Frawley as an example.

Shocking how? Do the Hawks academy players or COLA?

Article on AFL website about Hampton from GWS. I hope we don't chase him. He has pace and can be elusive as we weaves his way through congestion but his disposal from what I've seen is a disgrace, it's that bad. Wayward up and under kicks into the fwd line, kicks missing their target by 1-2 metres(he might fit right in). We can't afford any more players that can't dispose of the footy.

Ive put us in the north/Richmond basket when it comes to betting. No large head to head bets. Just take them each way in a small priced multi. I cannot pick those three teams.For what's it worth I think Freo will beat Richmond come Saturday. It may not be pretty but they will get the job done. There's two at $1.90 to get things started.

Im still getting over the fact we broke the Cattery hoodoo before that one.

Been working heaps....missed it....what did he say?Cheers

What are you talking about? Are you suggesting we trade Salem? A highly skilled left-footer, who is tough at the contest and makes good decisions. He'd fit in nicely at Hawthorn and he fits in perfectly at Melbourne.

Whats he going to achieve with a third year under Roos that he could with the last two?Ask Pendlebury, Beams and Swan about Neeld. The time for excuses is over.

Great post. Nailed it. Just don't forget Salem. Time to let go of a few more.

In this thread we have identified what makes the Hawks the side they are. Things like skilled players, players that can play multiple positions, ability to stand up when it counts, footy smarts. You then flick to the "changes for next week thread" and read the proposed changes. We are so far off the pace yet some people still can't let go.

Essential criteria for players drafted - natural competitors - elite user of the footy - footy smarts/decision making Non essential criteria - basketball background - ability to public speak - captain of a junior rep side - have attended a private school

If Roo is out and they are the odds they're worth a look.

And that's your response? I will happily say I thought Grimes may not get a game. He's played five, and yes he's been injured. But he was fit to play last week and wasn't rushed back into the side....why? Why was dropped twice? Why wasn't he in the round 1 side? You said yourself he was in the side until he got injured. Are you sure you've got the right year?

If the end of year chat doesn't go well with the coach he may ask to be traded. Who would take him and why?

All good Nasher, no offence taken, don't mind a bit of friendly banter.I think Parker came on quicker than most expected, even Sydney. The trick would be to offer a deal to good to refuse and get him to request a trade. Having said that most likely won't happen. You get the feeling whatever happens will blindside everyone.

To be honest DC I think Grimes isn't part of Goodwins plans, many won't agree but if the last year of his contract is minimal I wouldn't be surprised if they try to offload him or pay him out. Do we keep him as a depth player? As it stands kids are getting a look in before him with Salem still to come back. I think what is hurting Grimes is his inability to run through the midfield. As we know successful teams have skilled midfielders playing on back and forward flanks. The role of being an exclusive tagger is dying. If freeing up his spot on the list unearthed another VB I don't think too many would complain.As much as I bang on about Grimes I did have high expectations for him at the start of his career. My best mate was involved with him in a coaching capacity for a period off time whilst he played TAC cup.

Abuse? Calling him an idiot?

"Grimes was in the team until injured"....What are you going on about? Round 1 Grimes didn't play despite being fit.Jack Grimes 2015 games. Rd 1 Not selected. Rd 2 Not selected. Rd 3 Not selected. Rd 4 Not selected. Rd 5 Played. Rd 6 Dropped. Rd 7 Played. Rd 8 Played. Rd 9 Played. Rd 10 Dropped....again. Rd 11 Played and sustained an injury. Rd 12 Injured. Rd 13 Injured. Rd 14 Injured. Rd 15 Injured? I think he was available, can't remember. Rd 16 Not selected. What I find amusing is that when people give their reasons as to why he should be in the side things like "leadership" and "great speaker" are thrown up, never "elite disposal", decision making", "defensive pressure", "ability to take the game on". Regardless of whatever reason you choose to believe as to why Grimes hasn't become the footballer we all thought he would be is irrelevant. Fact is he's had plenty of opportunities(years) and judging by his lack of games this year it could safe to assume that the coaching panel as a whole have identified him as a player that doesn't have the ability to take us forward. Come years end if Roos//Goodwin went into trade week and told 17 others clubs you can have Grimes for a pick in late 50's/60's all you have to do is pick up his wage, how many takers would there be? Honestly, Not sure if Carlton would want him, Brisbane might due to the state of their list. In recent seasons we have targeted ready made/mature players,(fringe players at other clubs/players from state leagues)players like Michie, Newton and VB. Stating the obvious they may not all work out, but we at least we've tried. If VB makes it and the other two don't that's not a bad result. I think they were all given an initial two year contact. Those that don't make the grade get moved on and we try again. Yet for some reason many think Grimes is the exception. "His disposal has dramatically improved", so he's gone from diabolical to average/below average. You only have to look at the Hawks/Swans game to understand how far we are behind the Swans and how far they are behind the Hawks. Feel free to hang on. My uneducated comments....you idiot.

Thanks for that. Time to offer a deal to good to refuse.

I don't know why Grimes name keeps getting mentioned, been on the list for years and has continually struggled. Can't get a game over a 32 year old or an 18 year old. People continually name him on the bench, as what, part of midfield rotations? Both our bank flankers should be able to play midfield as well. Grimes was gifted too many games, at least Newton is made to earn his. I would like to see him given another run before the year is out.

I can see how that may be funny. My thinking is there is a kid in the draft who is a clone of Michael Hurley named Kieran Collins who will definitely go top 10, possibly top 5 depending on a clubs needs. He is ready to play AFL next year. Swans would have to be close to having salary cap issues. If you trade a star player for a star player nothing's changed, the same problem remains. But a star player for a gun kid that fits your needs, it levitates the problem somewhat. You could then argue there's no guarantees the player will develop, well that's just footy isn't it. This is the bit I'm not sure on, say the Swans finish 2nd again, they can than pick up another academy player with the potential to go top 5 with pick 17. If they trade for another first round pick(say pick 5), does the academy player then have to be selected with pick 5 or can they still use 17? Because if they don't it lessons the blow somewhat. Two top 5 picks for picks 5 & 17. Fitzy was thrown in as someone who Horse might think he can develop. Change it to Garland/Spenser I'm not really fussed. We are possibly in a position to pay overs one more time to land a established midfielder before our young talent develops and start demanding more dollars.

Richmond won't win a final.

Would be great but what odds are you giving?

Our first pick and Fitz for Parker

Luke Parker anyone?