Demons and Dogs -Tigers ?

[Chuck17]

all well and good tucker, if the discussion had been about about who has the most upside or better coach.

but the comment was that melbourne had been consistently better than us, when they have actually been consistently more crap than us.

Let's see how they twist this

[Hard Roar Tiger]

Demons are laughable even with an amazing coach. They had a 4 week burst of decent negative football but play the most awful style of football imaginable.

[Chuck17]

Demons are laughable even with an amazing coach. They had a 4 week burst of decent negative football but play the most awful style of football imaginable.

Would rather watch Elephants mate rather than that crap

[Penelope]

elephants mating is pretty exciting stuff.
nearly as good as dwarf porn.

[Chuck17]

Your a sick man Al

[Hellenic Tiger]

Currently the last two weeks they have been abysmal Al against top shelf opponents but other than their match against West Coast in round 2 and the last few weeks they have been in every game at 3/4 time regardless of the style of footy we play and if we want to take issue with the style of footy we play, we aren't setting the world on fire either.

For Melbourne the level of consistency they needed to find was something along the lines of what they have shown this year so far given where they have come from and the list changes they have made from last year as well as the change of coach and the new style implemented, similar to where we were at the end of 2009. So judging on that you can say that Melbourne have been more consistent if you want to use stats their % was in the low 50's last year and is sitting at 75% now after starting the year with a horrible loss to West Coast and has stabilised after their 3-4 week stretch in May when they won a few games.

As for us our % has only been beefed up by a huge 20 goal win over GWS and beating up on St Kilda and Brissy riddled with some scrappy efforts against Sydney and some woeful efforts against North and Essendon. Our form fluctuates from quarter to quarter based on game tempo and game situation with shows either the coach doesn't know what he's doing or the players are bereft of the ability to put their stamp on a game for longer periods to sway a result their way.

At least with Melbourne atm what you see is what you get. Yes the game style is poor and defensive but the effort is there and whilst the top shelf sides will beat them up as will a few downhill skiers for the most part their efforts against sides 7-12 have been more consistent and level compared to us who play a quarter or a half here or there after a 15-7 season and expect it all to fall into place.

We'll revisit tomorrow al. Hope this answers a few questions from my humble opinion.

[Yeahright]

Roos at least has them playing competitive footy.

Did you see the game today?

I agree they were poor today but they have more upside than us given where our list is compared to theirs.

They have limited young quality coming through and I don't think they bat very deep apart from the obvious ones.

[Hellenic Tiger]

Roos at least has them playing competitive footy.

Did you see the game today?

I agree they were poor today but they have more upside than us given where our list is compared to theirs.

They have limited young quality coming through and I don't think they bat very deep apart from the obvious ones.

They at least are playing many kids unlike us who are playing the same old battlers. They still have Jesse Hogan to get into the side and a few others so at least they are doing the right thing by the club which we did at the comparative stage of 2010. We thought we were on the brink of something big and topped up when we still needed to dip into the draft a few more times rather than fastrack to a quick fix success remedy.

[Yeahright]

I agree they were poor today but they have more upside than us given where our list is compared to theirs.

They have limited young quality coming through and I don't think they bat very deep apart from the obvious ones.

They at least are playing many kids unlike us who are playing the same old battlers. They still have Jesse Hogan to get into the side and a few others so at least they are doing the right thing by the club which we did at the comparative stage of 2010. We thought we were on the brink of something big and topped up when we still needed to dip into the draft a few more times rather than fastrack to a quick fix success remedy.

I agree we should be playing more kids but the fact they are playing more kids doesn't mean their list has more upside. Opinion aside, whether topping up was right or wrong once the season was shot close to the start of the year we should of started playing many more kids

[WA Tiger]

FFS this thread title poos me, the Dees are bent over and getting pumped, they are not even lining up with a forward line at all.

Why does this thread holds the Dees up as something to aspire to.

How many weeks have you had to wait to post this crap??????

Consistently the have been way better than us!!

Well to tell you the truth I have posted the same thing after every single week after the thread was first posted

Yep that's right sorry...total crap every week!!

[Chuck17]

FFS this thread title poos me, the Dees are bent over and getting pumped, they are not even lining up with a forward line at all.

Why does this thread holds the Dees up as something to aspire to.

How many weeks have you had to wait to post this crap??????

Consistently the have been way better than us!!

Well to tell you the truth I have posted the same thing after every single week after the thread was first posted

Yep that's right sorry...total crap every week!!

Thank you for noticing, I am not the Shaun Grigg of OER for nothing

[Penelope]

Currently the last two weeks they have been abysmal Al against top shelf opponents but other than their match against West Coast in round 2 and the last few weeks they have been in every game at 3/4 time regardless of the style of footy we play and if we want to take issue with the style of footy we play, we aren't setting the world on fire either.

For Melbourne the level of consistency they needed to find was something along the lines of what they have shown this year so far given where they have come from and the list changes they have made from last year as well as the change of coach and the new style implemented, similar to where we were at the end of 2009. So judging on that you can say that Melbourne have been more consistent if you want to use stats their % was in the low 50's last year and is sitting at 75% now after starting the year with a horrible loss to West Coast and has stabilised after their 3-4 week stretch in May when they won a few games.

As for us our % has only been beefed up by a huge 20 goal win over GWS and beating up on St Kilda and Brissy riddled with some scrappy efforts against Sydney and some woeful efforts against North and Essendon. Our form fluctuates from quarter to quarter based on game tempo and game situation with shows either the coach doesn't know what he's doing or the players are bereft of the ability to put their stamp on a game for longer periods to sway a result their way.

At least with Melbourne atm what you see is what you get. Yes the game style is poor and defensive but the effort is there and whilst the top shelf sides will beat them up as will a few downhill skiers for the most part their efforts against sides 7-12 have been more consistent and level compared to us who play a quarter or a half here or there after a 15-7 season and expect it all to fall into place.

We'll revisit tomorrow al. Hope this answers a few questions from my humble opinion.

not that i disagree with too much of what you are saying, I just dont see it as showing that melbourne have been consistently better than us, which is the crux of the discussion. particulrily when you take into account that two of those teams we beat up on, melburne lost to.

we have been crap, with some rare patches of good footy, while melburne have been more crap. the only area they have marginally outperformed us has been in scores against, and that is very marginal.Maybe their future does look brighter, maybe it doesn't, but that was not what the original statement was about.

[Rampstar]

rich 5 wins 98.6%  av winning margin 46 losing margin 25
melb 4 wins 74.8% av winning margin 11 losing margin 32

rich lowest 5 scores for the year 51, 52, 69, 72 74
melb lowest 5 score for year - 28, 30, 38, 40,44

rich highest 5 scores for year 154,117,106,98,88
melb highest 5 scores for year 91,83,81,78,78

yep, they have been consistently better than us 

Their list has more upside than us al. Laugh all you want. They have a better coach too but anyway....

I agree with the Fistiki on this. Melbourne are in a much much better place list management wise than us and when they smartly offload Frawley for another early R1 pick to give them 2 top 5 picks in this draft they will be way ahead of us. And yes they have a much much better coach than us. Thats just the reality of it.

[Gigantor]

Coach makes a huge a difference..less than 12 months ago they were an absolute basket case

[yellowandback]

The problem with Melbourne is that they are still doing things by halves.
They have much work to do with the list - I will call it now, they will trade draft picks for players in the off season and it will be a 50:50 to come off.
Vince, Dawes, Cross, Pederson are all limited footballers and Watts, terlich, Tapscott and Frawley have probably peaked in terms of their development.
Roos is gone in 1-2 seasons, so in effect they start again - the apprentice hasn't even started so who knows what happens in a couple of seasons.
They have  no money and are relying on a couple of key people to a lot of heavy lifting.

People who think Melbourne are in a better place than us aren't being objective.
In fact, I would argue if we were in Melbourne's shoes right now those same posters would be hugely critical of their half baked approach to rebuilding the club.