Bluemour Melting Pot XXIX

[blueboy25]

We will 100% be making up numbers if we somehow scrape into the 8.

But it's not about that. Think of the confidence boost it will bring to this playing group if they're able to make it. The momentum going into next year and belief will be at an all time high for this group.

More to gain by making it than not.

But you're right, we definitely should be focused on beating North first.

Essendon will be making up the numbers if they make it as well but I bet they don't see it that way.

 

[BringFevBack2021]

The itk posters have repeatedly refuted those numbers.

Yet people like to cling on to them because it's 'proof' that they can point at the player in question and have tantrum yelling "he's paid too much, paid too much. Mummy, he's paid too much. Waaaaaaaaaaaa".

I believe the ITK's haven't said exactly what he is on BUT they have said cryptic things such as "Oh and you know that for sure do you?" regarding the Gov being on $800k.

I'm not surprised. I can't imagine him being on $800k. His best return was 32 goals in the most stacked forward line you've ever seen:
Adelaide 2016
Betts: 75
Jenkins: 62
Tex: 47
Lynch: 42
McGovern: 32
Cameron: 20

In the forward line, he takes the 5th or 6th defender. Of course he was going to get chances.

I don't know why we assume people in clubland are idiots that know nothing about Football. Of course, they envisioned him as a 3rd tall and were acutely aware of the potential of McKay and Curnow. You don't pay 3rd talls $800k. He'd be on $500-$600k IMO.

 

[Blue_Fusion]

Shouldn't that make it even more important for them to play the kids...?

I don't really watch the Hawks closely but I'd assume they are aren't they? Can't have a side completely full of kids.

What's Burgoyne added for them this year?

 

[Jeremias]

Murphy will get to 300 if fit. It’s that simple IMO.

They won’t play him if injured but every chance they nurse him through as the sub.

Melbourne and Hawthorn have both carried club champions to significant milestones this year. Neither ‘deserved’ to get there on form but that’s not the only factor to consider.

And funnily enough, getting them there hasn’t had even the slightest negative impact on their fortunes.

Whether or not certain supporters believe he deserves it on output this year is largely irrelevant.

My guess is he gets there. And it won’t have even the slightest impact on selection integrity, the mindset of others pushing for selection or anything else being put forward here.

 

[Blue_Fusion]

We shouldn't need a kid to come in to "ignite the side". We're a game and a half outside the 8 with a favourable draw for the next 5 weeks. We've got Walsh making a late charge for the Brownlow, Harry holding a commanding lead in the Coleman, guys like Kennedy playing for their careers, young blokes like Dow and Stocker starting to hit their straps. There's plenty for the boys to play for, for themselves, for their teammates, and for the team/club as a whole. There's also an external review still underway, in case they need some extra motivation.

It's not about extra motivation. It's about the energy they bring, it can turn the momentum in matches. Parks' tackle on Tippa perfect example. There's no doubt they were fully motivated to beat our biggest rivals, but the momentum of the game was squarely in their favour until that moment.

I hear you on your concerns about Murph's hunger. I've been suspicious of it myself, and will gladly admit that months ago I was advocating that he be dropped and told to find it again. He was dropped to the sub, dropped to the reserves, performed well and earned a recall, then got injured in the first quarter. The spot is arguably still his. I'd play him over Fogarty, I'd definitely have him replace Newnes if his back keeps him on the sidelines. I'd also give a little bit of thought to playing him ahead of Cottrell, and there's potentially some sense in giving Owies a spell for at least one week after a few quieter games, though I'd rather we encourage him to work through a dry spell in the seniors.

Fog got dropped anyway and deservedly so. Newnes and Cottrell both play wing. Cottrell's running ability is what keeps him in the selectors good books. Murph's form prior to injury wasn't great. It was ok, but nothing that says he's a certain starter. Again, it's like the Setters call up against the Cats. Even Jack Martin, he's taken what? 6 weeks to play a decent game?

I'm also not debating that Murph isn't past his best, just that his current level is still more than adequate for senior footy. I'm sure some will latch onto that word, adequate, and good for them. But ultimately Murph is a capable role player, which is all we should be asking of him anyway.

I'll happily agree with you that we shouldn't get him to 300 regardless of form. I do think he'd be a viable sub if he's fit but maybe not quite cherry ripe. And I'll double down on giving him the opportunity being the right thing to do. Put it on him. 5 rounds, 4 games to play, go out with 4 quality games or fall short with 1-2 lacklustre efforts. Over to you, Murph.

Yeah I see your point. So we're pretty much debating whether he should come straight in, not whether he needs to come in and stay in for the sake of getting to 300. Look, if he comes back in and plays well enough to keep his spot, as I've said, fine. But there's also the chance he comes in and plays subpar after keeping guys like Ramsay and Honey in the 2's all year...

Because I care more about developing Honey and Ramsay properly than I do in "fixing" Murph. If the development coach says these guys aren't quite there, then we should accept that. Give Murph his chance, if he fluffs it that's on him, and then we look to "gifting" games to kids instead to give them a taste ahead of the preseason.

Fair enough.

 

[Blue_Fusion]

Either you trust him to be making the right decisions - and one of those decisions would concern Honey's readiness, regardless of the statistics he's putting out there in the VFL or in scratch matches - or you don't.

That is not to say that you cannot question; this place would be awful boring (or relaxing?) if all we did was just assume the club knew what they were doing and trusted them to do it.

Just, there has to be a reason why Honey is being held back. It'd be nice to know it, but them's the breaks.

Doesn't the head coach make the final call anymore?

Teague has been extremely stubborn and things have only changed once the review was announced. Barker gone, players getting opportunities...

Let's see what happens this week with selection..

 

[NavySteel]

I believe the ITK's haven't said exactly what he is on BUT they have said cryptic things such as "Oh and you know that for sure do you?" regarding the Gov being on $800k.

I'm not surprised. I can't imagine him being on $800k. His best return was 32 goals in the most stacked forward line you've ever seen:
Adelaide 2016
Betts: 75
Jenkins: 62
Tex: 47
Lynch: 42
McGovern: 32
Cameron: 20

In the forward line, he takes the 5th or 6th defender. Of course he was going to get chances.

I don't know why we assume people in clubland are idiots that know nothing about Football. Of course, they envisioned him as a 3rd tall and were acutely aware of the potential of McKay and Curnow. You don't pay 3rd talls $800k. He'd be on $500-$600k IMO.

Maybe when both Charlie and H are destroying defenders McG will have more opportunities... kind of like Rohan is now for Cats with Tom H and Jeremy C.

Charlie might be the missing link in the forwardline in more ways than just scoring goals himself. He probably takes 1st/2nd tall defender leaving an easier match up for McG.

 

[El Topo]

Either you trust him to be making the right decisions - and one of those decisions would concern Honey's readiness, regardless of the statistics he's putting out there in the VFL or in scratch matches - or you don't.

That is not to say that you cannot question; this place would be awful boring (or relaxing?) if all we did was just assume the club knew what they were doing and trusted them to do it.

Just, there has to be a reason why Honey is being held back. It'd be nice to know it, but them's the breaks.

I think the concern is that it's out of his hands - Power wouldn't be the first football person at the club to be (allegedly) overruled

 

[Blue_Fusion]

Murphy will get to 300 if fit. It’s that simple IMO.

They won’t play him if injured but every chance they nurse him through as the sub.

Melbourne and Hawthorn have both carried club champions to significant milestones this year. Neither ‘deserved’ to get there on form but that’s not the only factor to consider.

And funnily enough, getting them there hasn’t had even the slightest negative impact on their fortunes.

Whether or not certain supporters believe he deserves it on output this year is largely irrelevant.

My guess is he gets there. And it won’t have even the slightest impact on selection integrity, the mindset of others pushing for selection or anything else being put forward here.

Only if fit?

So why was he dropped earlier in the year?

Nurse him through as the sub is such a hollow way of achieving a milestone...

 

[Gethelred]

I think the concern is that it's out of his hands - Power wouldn't be the first football person at the club to be (allegedly) overruled

I don't see how one comes to that conclusion, though. Teague/Barker shows a genuine resistance to promotion of junior players and an aversion from using them in the clearances; Teague/Power shows a willingness to trust these junior players now that they are considered fit and ready to play, and this has lead to improved output through the midfield of the ground.

The thing that has changed here is not Teague. Would any change have been observable if they were just going to overrule Power?

 

[Blue_Fusion]

I don't see how one comes to that conclusion, though. Teague/Barker shows a genuine resistance to promotion of junior players and an aversion from using them in the clearances; Teague/Power shows a willingness to trust these junior players now that they are considered fit and ready to play, and this has lead to improved output through the midfield of the ground.

The thing that has changed here is not Teague. Would any change have been observable if they were just going to overrule Power?

Teague the person hasn't changed. Teague's mindset possibly has though...

 

[chunkylover53]

I believe the ITK's haven't said exactly what he is on BUT they have said cryptic things such as "Oh and you know that for sure do you?" regarding the Gov being on $800k.

I'm not surprised. I can't imagine him being on $800k. His best return was 32 goals in the most stacked forward line you've ever seen:
Adelaide 2016
Betts: 75
Jenkins: 62
Tex: 47
Lynch: 42
McGovern: 32
Cameron: 20

In the forward line, he takes the 5th or 6th defender. Of course he was going to get chances.

I don't know why we assume people in clubland are idiots that know nothing about Football. Of course, they envisioned him as a 3rd tall and were acutely aware of the potential of McKay and Curnow. You don't pay 3rd talls $800k. He'd be on $500-$600k IMO.

SOS essentially admitted they were desperate to land some sort of big name for PR purposes.

I reckon the Williams, Saad, Martin contracts are embellished, but I reckon McGovern is accurate - given at the time we needed to fill cap space too. If we were silly enough to sign such an injury prone player for so many years, we are silly enough to overpay him too imo.

Anyway doesn't matter, shitty contracts can be overcome.

 

[Gethelred]

Teague the person hasn't changed. Teague's mindset possibly has though...

Think you've misinterpreted what I said there, BF. If Power was being overruled by Teague, there would not be Dow, Kennedy, and SPS in the ones.

I don't think I'll get disagreement from you when I say that Barker was a huge impediment to those blokes, and him leaving has resulted in improved output.

 

[Jeremias]

Only if fit?

If he’s fit he‘ll play. If he can’t play he won’t play.

So why was he dropped earlier in the year?

He wasn’t playing well enough.

Nurse him through as the sub is such a hollow way of achieving a milestone...

Oh please. That’s just rubbish.

Burgoyne has been the starting sub twice this year. Once he didn’t even make it on the field.

Does anyone think the 400 game achievement is a hollow one as a result?

Will anyone even remember in a few years?

 

[El Topo]

I don't see how one comes to that conclusion, though. Teague/Barker shows a genuine resistance to promotion of junior players and an aversion from using them in the clearances; Teague/Power shows a willingness to trust these junior players now that they are considered fit and ready to play, and this has lead to improved output through the midfield of the ground.

The thing that has changed here is not Teague. Would any change have been observable if they were just going to overrule Power?

I think that Teague trusts and empowers his assistants, and this has been both a strength and a weakness. There's also a pattern of selecting 'name' players irrespective of fitness or positional fit, which hasn't changed since the bye - that's either Teague (bad) or someone over his head (worse).

 

[Arr0w]

Don't think the personnel has changed much, apart from when Cripps was out injured last game.

Although, setups have changed

 

[marleyblue]

I believe the ITK's haven't said exactly what he is on BUT they have said cryptic things such as "Oh and you know that for sure do you?" regarding the Gov being on $800k.

I'm not surprised. I can't imagine him being on $800k. His best return was 32 goals in the most stacked forward line you've ever seen:
Adelaide 2016
Betts: 75
Jenkins: 62
Tex: 47
Lynch: 42
McGovern: 32
Cameron: 20

In the forward line, he takes the 5th or 6th defender. Of course he was going to get chances.

I don't know why we assume people in clubland are idiots that know nothing about Football. Of course, they envisioned him as a 3rd tall and were acutely aware of the potential of McKay and Curnow. You don't pay 3rd talls $800k. He'd be on $500-$600k IMO.

While we don't know the size of the contract, it's well documented the club have had significant salary cap space for years and have been front-loading major contracts including the big recruits (McGov, Martin and likely Saad and Williams to a lessor extent). My bet is that McGov will be on a relatively average wage($300-400k) for the last 2 years of the contract.

As for the $800k figure - highly unlikely we gave him 5 years at $800k. What is more likely is $800k+ for the first couple of years of a heavily front-loaded deal, but the media get a better headline with a half-truth 'Injury plagued forward's $800-$900k/y contract weighing on Carlton's ability to resign Cripps/Walsh/McKay.

 

[Stamos]

Don't think the personnel has changed much, apart from when Cripps was out injured last game.

Although, setups have changed

Not necessarily changes made when Barker left, but regular players from earlier in the year who haven't been in for weeks: Pitto, Levi, Murphy, Gibbo

All injured, so not selection choices, but have definitely changed up the make-up of the team. And then Ed moved out of the centre square.

 

[NavySteel]

SOS essentially admitted they were desperate to land some sort of big name for PR purposes.

I reckon the Williams, Saad, Martin contracts are embellished, but I reckon McGovern is accurate - given at the time we needed to fill cap space too. If we were silly enough to sign such an injury prone player for so many years, we are silly enough to overpay him too imo.

Anyway doesn't matter, shitty contracts can be overcome.

That would be terrible list management and use of cap space to fulfil a "PR agenda".....

 

[rp84]

Maybe when both Charlie and H are destroying defenders McG will have more opportunities... kind of like Rohan is now for Cats with Tom H and Jeremy C.

Charlie might be the missing link in the forwardline in more ways than just scoring goals himself. He probably takes 1st/2nd tall defender leaving an easier match up for McG.

I guarantee you don't have Stewart zoning off Charlie to take uncontested marks...

 

[Gethelred]

Don't think the personnel has changed much, apart from when Cripps was out injured last game.

Although, setups have changed

The setups have certainly changed, but going from no Dow and Kennedy to Dow and Kennedy would be a pretty significant difference between Barker and Power, I'd have thought.

 

[Juddalenko]

Personally, I think McGovern should be played as 3rd tall backman. I like the sound of McKay, Curnow & JSOS as key fwds. I feel the fwd line would be too tall with Mitch (especially if there’s a resting ruckman too). Mitch feels like excess currently (which I felt when he was recruited). I feel his best chance may be to battle Marchbank for a 3rd tall backman role.

 

[rp84]

Personally, I think McGovern should be played as 3rd tall backman. I like the sound of McKay, Curnow & JSOS as key fwds. I feel the fwd line would be too tall with Mitch (especially if there’s a resting ruckman too). Mitch feels like excess currently (which I felt when he was recruited). I feel his best chance may be to battle Marchbank for a 3rd tall backman role.

I entirely agree. Other than his body, main issue is staying involved.

Reads the ball in the air well and can kick, so would be perfect 3rd tall defender

 

[chunkylover53]

That would be terrible list management and use of cap space to fulfil a "PR agenda".....

'

He said it last year in his bombshell interview on trade radio.

 

[BringFevBack2021]

Personally, I think McGovern should be played as 3rd tall backman. I like the sound of McKay, Curnow & JSOS as key fwds. I feel the fwd line would be too tall with Mitch (especially if there’s a resting ruckman too). Mitch feels like excess currently (which I felt when he was recruited). I feel his best chance may be to battle Marchbank for a 3rd tall backman role.

I like JSOS in a Tom Lynch (ADL) high half forward role. Can hit targets and can grab the footy. I reckon JSOS is a staple in our side at this point and is one of the first magnets on the board every week.