What is emphasised for me above all is the importance of a dominant midfield both inside and out.

Forget everything else without a dominant midfield you cannot win premierships.

Thats what really annoys me about missing out on Cotchin etc.

codswallop...and totally dependent upon two assumptions:

1) JK would have developed to the same level at CFC
2) Big K blowing out a knee, stalling his career.

If you'd seen big Kroooze dominating for the Knights you wouldn't even be entertaining that thought.

I think Jim is just trying to highlight the fact that everything is easier after the fact.

Pretty sure Jim is a Krooz and Judd fan.

codswallop...and totally dependent upon two assumptions:

1) JK would have developed to the same level at CFC
2) Big K blowing out a knee, stalling his career.

If you'd seen big Kroooze dominating for the Knights you wouldn't even be entertaining that thought.

Ted is a big fan of Ted.

Ok, but why bother?........hindsight arguments are usually so flawed they add nothing. Unless a clear error (on the available evidence) was made.....then you learn lessons.

I guess Ted is qualified to be a footy manager, CEO and President on TC...

Its a bit late for us know but its interesting (and I agree) that Roos, Malthouse and Matthews would not take a ruck man with early picks. They go for skilled midfielders. Their theory is that ruck man take longer to mature, are harder to judge as a junior (look how many rookies have become top ruck man) I still believe Jacobs was our best pure ruck man, and you go and recruit a top ruck man when they are ready to dominate. Jolly, Mumford, Ottens come to mind. Look at a lot of the sides now.

Collingwood (Jolly) Adelaide (Jacobs) Hawthorn (Hale) Richmond (Maric) Freo (Griffin) Port (Renouf) GWS (Giles) Lions (Hudson). Geelong have been struggling since losing Ottens.

Over the past three years we have developed Hampson, Kruezer, Jacobs (Gone) and still recruited for a lot of money and low draft pick Warnock.

Doenst make a lot of sense.

..i may be wrong here, but wasn't the ol' Malty coach when pies took fraser with 1st pick?, and they traded a 1st rounder for wood remember,, and lethal was happy enough to grab luey with pick 2 as well.. ..and grabbing rucks that are ready to go can cost you in terms of picks traded and wage $$s..

..Hale went to the hawks cos he wasn't thought of as much, and rightly so.. ..it's the hawks ruck problems, and their usually good coaching that makes him get games and look better than he is.. ..Maric was cast off pretty much and is playing out of his skin, i doubt even the tigers most optimistic hopes were as high as his form [for how long? with such a big workload].. ..Griffin is so-so, and not helping freo's woeful clearance record.. ..renouf and giles are ruck rejects on seriously limited time [again], and hudson is now an honest battler playing for his nestegg..

..only a few years back we were playing setanta and kennedy in the ruck, traded in cloke [a bloody cloke], ackland anbd mclaren.. ..French tried hard for us and we're always appreciative.. ..we got Hampson, a high potential projecty type.. ..Jacobs was a longshot rookie that luckily came good, but many more fail than win in those scenario's.. ..krooze was very young, came on well but possible doubt as to whether we needed him more in ruck or as a kpf had us chase warnock the following year..

..make no mistake, having a good, deep ruck brigade is an asset for any team to have, and harder to orchestrate [and keep] than accumulating mids..

Ted Hopkins is being a bit cheeky. He knows there is no one stat that correlates with wins.
But if a team wins Contested possession, disposal efficiency and tackles, they win 95% of games.
Use the first 2 only and its almost 90%.

So the ideal player is really a contested ball winner with high disposal effiiciency. Not an endurance athlete or a speedster. These days you need a combination of all things but someone like Joel Selwood would have the first 2 covered but isnt particularly quick or known for his enormous aerobic capacity.