List Management

[Horace]

I’m rather troubled by the apparent decision of our List management people to tell Higgo that they can’t guarantee him a spot on our list when his current contract expires at the end of next year. I know there is a caveat insofar as we have to get a good deal out of a move to another club and hopefully that good deal won’t eventuate. I think he has ability to really contribute in the next few years as we (hopefully) move up the ladder.

But why wouldn’t they tell him that, unless his form or injuries are below par, we will give him another year. And beyond that, the same to apply.

Let’s call that the Boomer Rule. 1 year contracts for as long as your form and fitness/injuries are up to scratch. Obviously only applies to above average players and Higgo is well and truly in that category.

So who might we have not drafted in the years 2010 through to 2019, if Higgo had have been in the same position in each of those years and we had gone with him instead of one of our last 2 spots in the National Draft?

2010 Pick 98, Ben Speight, 20 games, delisted 2013
Pick 71, Ben Mabon, no games, not sure when he was delisted

2011 Pick 84, Cam Pederson, 16 games then off to Godees at end of 2012
Pick 74, Luke Delaney, 26 games then to Saints end of 2013

2012 Pick 103, Majak Daw, 54 games delisted this year
Pick 91, Aaron Mullett, 85 games then to Carlton end of 2017

2013 Pick 47, Ben Brown, 130 games, who knows what’s next
Pick 30, Trent Dumont, 99 games and still with us (I hope, crosses fingers etc.)

2014 Pick 36, Ed Vickers-Willis, 21 games still with us, injury cursed
Pick 25, Daniel Nielsen, 7 games, delisted 2018 (sadly never got the chance to get even with Hooker)

2015 Pick 60, Declan Mountford, 12 games, delisted 2018
Pick 43, Corey Wagner, 8 games delisted 2017

2016 Pick 73, Nick Larkey, 24 games and still with us
Pick 36, Josh Williams, 2 games, delisted 2018

2017 Pick 77, Billy Hartung, 13 games delisted 2018
Pick 72, Tristan Xerri, 4 games still with us

2018 Pick 69, Joel Crocker, No games just delisted
Pick 49, Bailey Scott, 15 games still with us

2019 Pick 35, Flynn Perez, 3 games still with us
Pick 34, Jack Mahoney, 10 games still with us

Players names named who are still on the list are in bold.

Its too early to judge players drafted in the last 3 years, although Hartung and Crocker are already gone

Two players stand out on that list, being BennyB and Froggy, With luck Nick Larkey will continue to develop and join them.

But BennyB and Froggy, at picks 30 and 47, are not what you would call speculative picks at that spot in the draft. Majak, could have/should have produced more but the bridge incident wrecked his career. Ed at Pick 36 was not what you would call a speculative pick either with injuries derailing his career so far. He is young enough though to still produce some good football.

My question is who out of Speight, Pederson, Majak, BennyB, Vickers-Willis, Mountford, Larkey, would have been better choices than Higgo, albeit for a 1 year deal,.

I have long held the view that late draft picks are far more speculative, far less likely to deliver the goods in their entire career, than giving a very good footballer another year when they look to still have good football left in them, in that extra year.

I think list management people/recruiters are wooed far too much by the young shiny but unproven models, than they are the skilled. tried and true older models. Not to mention the value of the guidance and mentoring that a bloke like Higgo will provide. Just my opinion.

 

[Passmore]

I'm not sure we should be guaranteeing 34yos, which Higgins will be in 2022, spots on the senior list. By all means if his form is there, but what if he falls off a cliff?

 

[CharlieMortdecai]

Surely this fits the "Boomer policy" anyway? Being up front with Higgins that there are no guarantees and giving him the opportunity to seek a better deal. If he wants to stay there's nothing to say he won't get another one year deal if form and injuries (or lack thereof) merits it.

 

[Carlos Herrrnandez]

Higgins expressed his displeasure at playing on the flank, and Rhyce explained he wanted the kids to get more time in the middle.

This is a Higgins led decision, which the club seems to be supporting.

 

[Horace]

I'm not sure we should be guaranteeing 34yos, which Higgins will be in 2022, spots on the senior list. By all means if his form is there, but what if he falls off a cliff?

If you read the post that is what I said.

But why wouldn’t they tell him that, unless his form or injuries are below par, we will give him another year. And beyond that, the same to apply.

We may be right up there contending in 2022 and if his form warranted him getting another year at the end of 2021, in my view he would a vert handy player in that situation.

Instead, if Geelong offers him 2 years, and us a reasonable trade, he will be gone. Lost in a developing year next year. and not around when who knows where we may be.

And what will we construe to be a decent trade? A late 2nd rounder or a mid 3rd rounder?

 

[Passmore]

If you read the post that is what I said.

But why wouldn’t they tell him that, unless his form or injuries are below par, we will give him another year. And beyond that, the same to apply.

We may be right up there contending in 2022 and if his form warranted him getting another year at the end of 2021, in my view he would a vert handy player in that situation.

Instead, if Geelong offers him 2 years, and us a reasonable trade, he will be gone. Lost in a developing year next year. and not around when who knows where we may be.

And what will we construe to be a decent trade? A late 2nd rounder or a mid 3rd rounder?

What is the issue then? We're not guaranteeing him a new contract, and you're saying we shouldn't. Seems to be what is happening.

It seems that we've told him if he can get another club to guarantee him an extended then we'll look at it. Which is probably fair enough since the goal posts have moved since we signed him up previously. He's been a good servant of the club for 6 years so we'll give him that opportunity.

 

[Horace]

What is the issue then? We're not guaranteeing him a new contract, and you're saying we shouldn't. Seems to be what is happening.

It seems that we've told him if he can get another club to guarantee him an extended then we'll look at it. Which is probably fair enough since the goal posts have moved since we signed him up previously. He's been a good servant of the club for 6 years so we'll give him that opportunity.

In my opinion there is a subtle difference in how the conversation should be, as opposed to how it is playing out in the media. My perception is we are encouraging him to leave, rather than instead saying to him, the only thing that would prevent us giving you another year, is if injuries or your form do not warrant it.

Within the football public, in my opinion at least, we are showing up as a club more intent on getting draft picks than retaining older but still very good players who still have quality football left in them. It shows us up as being very mercenary, which I don't think is such a good thing for our younger developing players to observe. As I said it is just my opinion.

 

[Harvs29]

If you read the post that is what I said.

But why wouldn’t they tell him that, unless his form or injuries are below par, we will give him another year. And beyond that, the same to apply.

We may be right up there contending in 2022 and if his form warranted him getting another year at the end of 2021, in my view he would a vert handy player in that situation.

Instead, if Geelong offers him 2 years, and us a reasonable trade, he will be gone. Lost in a developing year next year. and not around when who knows where we may be.

And what will we construe to be a decent trade? A late 2nd rounder or a mid 3rd rounder?

In my opinion there is a subtle difference in how the conversation should be, as opposed to how it is playing out in the media. My perception is we are encouraging him to leave, rather than instead saying to him, the only thing that would prevent us giving you another year, is if injuries or your form do not warrant it.

Within the football public, in my opinion at least, we are showing up as a club more intent on getting draft picks than retaining older but still very good players who still have quality football left in them. It shows us up as being very mercenary, which I don't think is such a good thing for our younger developing players to observe. As I said it is just my opinion.

I read this a little differently Horace. I read it that perhaps we were able to get Higgins to sign on to the last contract on the understanding of the direction we were taking. That has since changed and, knowing that there might be some value for both parties, we are prepared to entertain a trade for him. Sort of along the lines of what Clarkson offered to Mitchell and Hodge. What's startling to me is the difference in how we are approaching this to how we have handled Brown.

 

[Psicosis]

It's all about the maintaining balance Horace.

(a) Balance of Young Vs Senior, so that the kids aren't fed to the sharks and have strong senior figures around them to help support & grow.

(b) Balance of Trading Senior Players When They Have Value Vs Trading When Their Value Is Diminished, so you can get value from them.
_________

(a) I think this is something that would be front of mind for Brady, we've seen examples of how this can go wrong and he has said that he would look at retaining 4-5 of the senior players. I still think we can afford to get rid of 2-3 of Polec, Brown & Higgins, whilst retaining Goldstein, Tarrant, Cunnington, Ziebell, Anderson, without exploding.

(b) Personally I think this is something that we do horrendously, remains to be seen what we get for these senior players this year, however I do have an issue with letting them go for peanuts.

 

[Thndr]

I’m rather troubled by the apparent decision of our List management people to tell Higgo that they can’t guarantee him a spot on our list when his current contract expires at the end of next year. I know there is a caveat insofar as we have to get a good deal out of a move to another club and hopefully that good deal won’t eventuate. I think he has ability to really contribute in the next few years as we (hopefully) move up the ladder.

But why wouldn’t they tell him that, unless his form or injuries are below par, we will give him another year. And beyond that, the same to apply.

Let’s call that the Boomer Rule. 1 year contracts for as long as your form and fitness/injuries are up to scratch. Obviously only applies to above average players and Higgo is well and truly in that category.

So who might we have not drafted in the years 2010 through to 2019, if Higgo had have been in the same position in each of those years and we had gone with him instead of one of our last 2 spots in the National Draft?

2010 Pick 98, Ben Speight, 20 games, delisted 2013
Pick 71, Ben Mabon, no games, not sure when he was delisted

2011 Pick 84, Cam Pederson, 16 games then off to Godees at end of 2012
Pick 74, Luke Delaney, 26 games then to Saints end of 2013

2012 Pick 103, Majak Daw, 54 games delisted this year
Pick 91, Aaron Mullett, 85 games then to Carlton end of 2017

2013 Pick 47, Ben Brown, 130 games, who knows what’s next
Pick 30, Trent Dumont, 99 games and still with us (I hope, crosses fingers etc.)

2014 Pick 36, Ed Vickers-Willis, 21 games still with us, injury cursed
Pick 25, Daniel Nielsen, 7 games, delisted 2018 (sadly never got the chance to get even with Hooker)

2015 Pick 60, Declan Mountford, 12 games, delisted 2018
Pick 43, Corey Wagner, 8 games delisted 2017

2016 Pick 73, Nick Larkey, 24 games and still with us
Pick 36, Josh Williams, 2 games, delisted 2018

2017 Pick 77, Billy Hartung, 13 games delisted 2018
Pick 72, Tristan Xerri, 4 games still with us

2018 Pick 69, Joel Crocker, No games just delisted
Pick 49, Bailey Scott, 15 games still with us

2019 Pick 35, Flynn Perez, 3 games still with us
Pick 34, Jack Mahoney, 10 games still with us

Players names named who are still on the list are in bold.

Its too early to judge players drafted in the last 3 years, although Hartung and Crocker are already gone

Two players stand out on that list, being BennyB and Froggy, With luck Nick Larkey will continue to develop and join them.

But BennyB and Froggy, at picks 30 and 47, are not what you would call speculative picks at that spot in the draft. Majak, could have/should have produced more but the bridge incident wrecked his career. Ed at Pick 36 was not what you would call a speculative pick either with injuries derailing his career so far. He is young enough though to still produce some good football.

My question is who out of Speight, Pederson, Majak, BennyB, Vickers-Willis, Mountford, Larkey, would have been better choices than Higgo, albeit for a 1 year deal,.

I have long held the view that late draft picks are far more speculative, far less likely to deliver the goods in their entire career, than giving a very good footballer another year when they look to still have good football left in them, in that extra year.

I think list management people/recruiters are wooed far too much by the young shiny but unproven models, than they are the skilled. tried and true older models. Not to mention the value of the guidance and mentoring that a bloke like Higgo will provide. Just my opinion.

 

[Roo Love]

I’m rather troubled by the apparent decision of our List management people to tell Higgo that they can’t guarantee him a spot on our list when his current contract expires at the end of next year. I know there is a caveat insofar as we have to get a good deal out of a move to another club and hopefully that good deal won’t eventuate. I think he has ability to really contribute in the next few years as we (hopefully) move up the ladder.

But why wouldn’t they tell him that, unless his form or injuries are below par, we will give him another year. And beyond that, the same to apply.

Let’s call that the Boomer Rule. 1 year contracts for as long as your form and fitness/injuries are up to scratch. Obviously only applies to above average players and Higgo is well and truly in that category.

So who might we have not drafted in the years 2010 through to 2019, if Higgo had have been in the same position in each of those years and we had gone with him instead of one of our last 2 spots in the National Draft?

2010 Pick 98, Ben Speight, 20 games, delisted 2013
Pick 71, Ben Mabon, no games, not sure when he was delisted

2011 Pick 84, Cam Pederson, 16 games then off to Godees at end of 2012
Pick 74, Luke Delaney, 26 games then to Saints end of 2013

2012 Pick 103, Majak Daw, 54 games delisted this year
Pick 91, Aaron Mullett, 85 games then to Carlton end of 2017

2013 Pick 47, Ben Brown, 130 games, who knows what’s next
Pick 30, Trent Dumont, 99 games and still with us (I hope, crosses fingers etc.)

2014 Pick 36, Ed Vickers-Willis, 21 games still with us, injury cursed
Pick 25, Daniel Nielsen, 7 games, delisted 2018 (sadly never got the chance to get even with Hooker)

2015 Pick 60, Declan Mountford, 12 games, delisted 2018
Pick 43, Corey Wagner, 8 games delisted 2017

2016 Pick 73, Nick Larkey, 24 games and still with us
Pick 36, Josh Williams, 2 games, delisted 2018

2017 Pick 77, Billy Hartung, 13 games delisted 2018
Pick 72, Tristan Xerri, 4 games still with us

2018 Pick 69, Joel Crocker, No games just delisted
Pick 49, Bailey Scott, 15 games still with us

2019 Pick 35, Flynn Perez, 3 games still with us
Pick 34, Jack Mahoney, 10 games still with us

Players names named who are still on the list are in bold.

Its too early to judge players drafted in the last 3 years, although Hartung and Crocker are already gone

Two players stand out on that list, being BennyB and Froggy, With luck Nick Larkey will continue to develop and join them.

But BennyB and Froggy, at picks 30 and 47, are not what you would call speculative picks at that spot in the draft. Majak, could have/should have produced more but the bridge incident wrecked his career. Ed at Pick 36 was not what you would call a speculative pick either with injuries derailing his career so far. He is young enough though to still produce some good football.

My question is who out of Speight, Pederson, Majak, BennyB, Vickers-Willis, Mountford, Larkey, would have been better choices than Higgo, albeit for a 1 year deal,.

I have long held the view that late draft picks are far more speculative, far less likely to deliver the goods in their entire career, than giving a very good footballer another year when they look to still have good football left in them, in that extra year.

I think list management people/recruiters are wooed far too much by the young shiny but unproven models, than they are the skilled. tried and true older models. Not to mention the value of the guidance and mentoring that a bloke like Higgo will provide. Just my opinion.

I think you are spot on, Horace. I am concerned about the so-called clear direction Brady keeps referring to (having just moved on his older brother from the coaching ranks). I just do not know what that is, especially when the pre-season chatter was about finals and now it is more about rebuilding.

 

[Tas]

I’m rather troubled by the apparent decision of our List management people to tell Higgo that they can’t guarantee him a spot on our list when his current contract expires at the end of next year. I know there is a caveat insofar as we have to get a good deal out of a move to another club and hopefully that good deal won’t eventuate. I think he has ability to really contribute in the next few years as we (hopefully) move up the ladder.

But why wouldn’t they tell him that, unless his form or injuries are below par, we will give him another year. And beyond that, the same to apply.

Let’s call that the Boomer Rule. 1 year contracts for as long as your form and fitness/injuries are up to scratch. Obviously only applies to above average players and Higgo is well and truly in that category.

That is the Boomer rule, we couldn't guarantee him a contract since he hit about 32, he was on one year deals for a few years before we pulled the plug, Waite was given 1 year extension in the end, we wanted him to go again but his body was cooked.

When you are given a 1 year deal it means they can't guarantee they will offer you another contract after that year.

Why would we tell him that? Because respect is a two way street, he has been a great servant since coming over from the Dogs and we will tell him the truth about where we think he is at, and where the club is at. We said we would try and get a deal done IF he managed to get an offer that goes beyond 2021. So Geelong would have to offer him a 2-3 year deal for us to think about letting him go.

So who might we have not drafted in the years 2010 through to 2019, if Higgo had have been in the same position in each of those years and we had gone with him instead of one of our last 2 spots in the National Draft?

2010 Pick 98, Ben Speight, 20 games, delisted 2013
Pick 71, Ben Mabon, no games, not sure when he was delisted

2011 Pick 84, Cam Pederson, 16 games then off to Godees at end of 2012
Pick 74, Luke Delaney, 26 games then to Saints end of 2013

2012 Pick 103, Majak Daw, 54 games delisted this year
Pick 91, Aaron Mullett, 85 games then to Carlton end of 2017

2013 Pick 47, Ben Brown, 130 games, who knows what’s next
Pick 30, Trent Dumont, 99 games and still with us (I hope, crosses fingers etc.)

2014 Pick 36, Ed Vickers-Willis, 21 games still with us, injury cursed
Pick 25, Daniel Nielsen, 7 games, delisted 2018 (sadly never got the chance to get even with Hooker)

2015 Pick 60, Declan Mountford, 12 games, delisted 2018
Pick 43, Corey Wagner, 8 games delisted 2017

2016 Pick 73, Nick Larkey, 24 games and still with us
Pick 36, Josh Williams, 2 games, delisted 2018

2017 Pick 77, Billy Hartung, 13 games delisted 2018
Pick 72, Tristan Xerri, 4 games still with us

2018 Pick 69, Joel Crocker, No games just delisted
Pick 49, Bailey Scott, 15 games still with us

2019 Pick 35, Flynn Perez, 3 games still with us
Pick 34, Jack Mahoney, 10 games still with us

Players names named who are still on the list are in bold.

Wut? I don't get the logic of this, at all. We have a whole gaggle of people we can shove out the doors exclusive of if we do or do not keep Higgins.

Its too early to judge players drafted in the last 3 years, although Hartung and Crocker are already gone

Two players stand out on that list, being BennyB and Froggy, With luck Nick Larkey will continue to develop and join them.

But BennyB and Froggy, at picks 30 and 47, are not what you would call speculative picks at that spot in the draft. Majak, could have/should have produced more but the bridge incident wrecked his career. Ed at Pick 36 was not what you would call a speculative pick either with injuries derailing his career so far. He is young enough though to still produce some good football.

My question is who out of Speight, Pederson, Majak, BennyB, Vickers-Willis, Mountford, Larkey, would have been better choices than Higgo, albeit for a 1 year deal,.

I think the flaw in your analysis is that you have turned it into an either or Higgins for someone else scenario. I'd prefer to have Boomer back playing next year than most of the people on that list, but clubs do not just look at their list from a next year perspective. If you want to be in a certain place in 5 years time, list-wise, you have to start preparing now. That includes who plays and what roles they play during those years. We already have put one of Higgins feet in the grave by moving him out of his preferred position for LDU and Simpkin. We would do better to leave Higgins in his best role, but it would kill any chance we have in the future for a marginal improvement in the present.

It is all about the big picture. It doesn't mean the club is always right or executes effectively though.

I have long held the view that late draft picks are far more speculative, far less likely to deliver the goods in their entire career, than giving a very good footballer another year when they look to still have good football left in them, in that extra year.

Yes, they are far more speculative. It is an extremely low probability of us getting anyone as good as Higgins in the 3rd or 4th round.

However, we probably aren't looking to replace Higgins with a 5th rounder, we are hopefully going to replace him with a 1st rounder. You need a good core of 30 players to succeed, you hope that you can find some good players later in the draft to fill those last 10 or so spots.

Larkey was taken in the 5th round, Zurhaar as a rookie in 2016, they are best 22 players. I don't think Larkey will ever be a #1 full forward and Zurhaar will probably plateau short of being a star, but they are pretty good quality for where they have been taken and if you can get good quality players from later in drafts it takes a lot of pressure off.

The issue is if we go into 2021 and beyond with playing Cunnington, Higgins, Anderson, Dumont and Polec for as long as humanly possible then where is LDU going to play? Simpkin? Thomas? Scott? etc. McDonald's career stalled because he was just played in fringe roles. It took him until he was 25 to get his career back on track and if he wasn't a first round pick he would likely have been let go. Durdin was shot between the eyes at 24 and he wasn't shocking at AFL level, the lack of pathways can really stunt and ruin careers, it is why GWS is generating a mountain of horrible footballers from top 10 picks because their early careers are stalling because they can't play at a higher standard of football in prominent roles. They only give kids a go when a senior player is poached or injured.

I think list management people/recruiters are wooed far too much by the young shiny but unproven models, than they are the skilled. tried and true older models. Not to mention the value of the guidance and mentoring that a bloke like Higgo will provide. Just my opinion.

It is not that they are wooed by youth, it is the fact we do not have a good enough mature group to win a flag and we are not going to produce enough good players to do much more than tread water if we just fill the team with plodders and wait for the one or two players per year to come good when they hit 24+.

We've been in this holding pattern for two decades and we have sent two generations of faithful players to retirement without any premierships to remember their time as professional footballers.

If we want a hope of doing better, we have to do something different.

 

[Psicosis]

That is the Boomer rule, we couldn't guarantee him a contract since he hit about 32, he was on one year deals for a few years before we pulled the plug, Waite was given 1 year extension in the end, we wanted him to go again but his body was cooked.

When you are given a 1 year deal it means they can't guarantee they will offer you another contract after that year.

Why would we tell him that? Because respect is a two way street, he has been a great servant since coming over from the Dogs and we will tell him the truth about where we think he is at, and where the club is at. We said we would try and get a deal done IF he managed to get an offer that goes beyond 2021. So Geelong would have to offer him a 2-3 year deal for us to think about letting him go.



Wut? I don't get the logic of this, at all. We have a whole gaggle of people we can shove out the doors exclusive of if we do or do not keep Higgins.



I think the flaw in your analysis is that you have turned it into an either or Higgins for someone else scenario. I'd prefer to have Boomer back playing next year than most of the people on that list, but clubs do not just look at their list from a next year perspective. If you want to be in a certain place in 5 years time, list-wise, you have to start preparing now. That includes who plays and what roles they play during those years. We already have put one of Higgins feet in the grave by moving him out of his preferred position for LDU and Simpkin. We would do better to leave Higgins in his best role, but it would kill any chance we have in the future for a marginal improvement in the present.

It is all about the big picture. It doesn't mean the club is always right or executes effectively though.



Yes, they are far more speculative. It is an extremely low probability of us getting anyone as good as Higgins in the 3rd or 4th round.

However, we probably aren't looking to replace Higgins with a 5th rounder, we are hopefully going to replace him with a 1st rounder. You need a good core of 30 players to succeed, you hope that you can find some good players later in the draft to fill those last 10 or so spots.

Larkey was taken in the 5th round, Zurhaar as a rookie in 2016, they are best 22 players. I don't think Larkey will ever be a #1 full forward and Zurhaar will probably plateau short of being a star, but they are pretty good quality for where they have been taken and if you can get good quality players from later in drafts it takes a lot of pressure off.

The issue is if we go into 2021 and beyond with playing Cunnington, Higgins, Anderson, Dumont and Polec for as long as humanly possible then where is LDU going to play? Simpkin? Thomas? Scott? etc. McDonald's career stalled because he was just played in fringe roles. It took him until he was 25 to get his career back on track and if he wasn't a first round pick he would likely have been let go. Durding was shot between the eyes at 24 and he wasn't shocking at AFL level, the lack of pathways can really stunt and ruin careers, it is why GWS is generating a mountain of horrible footballers from top 10 picks because their early careers are stalling because they can't play at a higher standard of football in prominent roles. They only give kids a go when a senior player is poached or injured.



It is not that they are wooed by youth, it is the fact we do not have a good enough mature group to win a flag and we are not going to produce enough good players to do much more than tread water if we just fill the team with plodders and wait for the one or two players per year to come good when they hit 24+.

We've been in this holding pattern for two decades and we have sent an entire generation of faithful players to retirement without any premierships to remember their time as professional footballers.

If we want a hope of doing better, we have to do something different.

Wish I could like this twice.

Just so spot on.

 

[fusion]

I'm not getting too riled up by what's been reported. I'm still hoping no one offers Brown the 4 years @ 750k that his manager supposedly was holding out for at the start of the year, and he returns. And that we do what you mentioned and keep Higgins on rolling 1 year deals, with trigger incentives (eg play 12+ games or top 10 in B&F and get automatic extension).

We've seen Melbourne trade everyone out and had no leadership. That's not the way forward. The best chance on success is more to do with luck - converting one or both of our first round picks into a superstar like Dustin Martin, Scott Pendlebury or Joel Selwood. We haven't had a "generational player" for a long time.

Our best players over the last 20 years were lucky to have made the AA squad of 40 - we need to win the lotto and get a 5 time AA midfielder. Then its much easier to bring in other talent from other clubs.

 

[Tas]

I don't think it is appropriate for the club to comment publicly until after the trade period, but I do think the club has to give a lot more information to the supporters about where it is at and where it is heading if they do not want to alienate some supporters. Currently, it looks like the club is Bipolar with massive mood swings from one extreme to another, it is hard for anyone to read what exactly is going on at so many levels.

 

[Passmore]

I'm not getting too riled up by what's been reported. I'm still hoping no one offers Brown the 4 years @ 750k that his manager supposedly was holding out for at the start of the year, and he returns. And that we do what you mentioned and keep Higgins on rolling 1 year deals, with trigger incentives (eg play 12+ games or top 10 in B&F and get automatic extension).

We've seen Melbourne trade everyone out and had no leadership. That's not the way forward. The best chance on success is more to do with luck - converting one or both of our first round picks into a superstar like Dustin Martin, Scott Pendlebury or Joel Selwood. We haven't had a "generational player" for a long time.

Our best players over the last 20 years were lucky to have made the AA squad of 40 - we need to win the lotto and get a 5 time AA midfielder. Then its much easier to bring in other talent from other clubs.

The only player that we may be offloading who offers any real outward leadership is Higgins. Brown maybe does, Polec you'd say doesn't. We've still got Ziebell, Tarrant, Goldstein, Cunnington as experienced bodies. It's time for the next generation like McDonald, Anderson and Dumont to take over the mantle. Then there's an emerging player like Simpkin who appears to have been earmarked for a role.

 

[Rad Roo]

The only player that we may be offloading who offers any real outward leadership is Higgins. Brown maybe does, Polec you'd say doesn't. We've still got Ziebell, Tarrant, Goldstein, Cunnington as experienced bodies. It's time for the next generation like McDonald, Anderson and Dumont to take over the mantle. Then there's an emerging player like Simpkin who appears to have been earmarked for a role.

I say ziebell is on borrowed time because the only reason we haven't gotten rid of him is becaues he is the captain. Ziebell by his skill doesn't hold down any particular position. He is not even the best player at his role. Zurhaar, Thomas can do better as half forwards. Simpkin, LDU are better midfielders.