Sydney Blue wrote



The club is more important than Bondi. I'm being ideallistic.

The net result would be more important to the players. Playing in the seconds against quality players striving to break into the Carlton Seniors would do more for the kids development than playing in the Ants' thirds.

At least they would be playing a more elite level; after all, the majority of the kids in the Ants' thirds would not be TAC level. Sure there may be an few bigger bodied and mature players in there, but they would be 'hacks'.

Raise the bar....and give our Carlton kids abetter chance to develop....preferably in a CARLTON JUMPER!!

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue

Not necessarily. What I like is the idea of concentrated player development on an individual basis to assist their needs. Look, I hate the 12/10 rule (I understand why it is there), but we cant afford a full Communications department let alone a stand-alone footy team to achieve this.

I'd like a CFC logo on the top of the Bullants jumper but the business opportunity / need is all about player development and subsidising of costs / effort. The fact that our more powerful opponents (geesh that hurts to say) are in a similar position tells me that the analysis is clearly cost effective for the benefit.

I think the far bigger positive for 2007 is the end of the go-to players, bondi. Our list structure in 2006 was all wrong (Jarusa will tell me its about maximising 2006ND draft choices) and a handful or more players who will not play AFL again are now gone to give real opportunity to our appropriately young list. 2007 the Bullants may decline but Edwards will play CHB at times, o'hailpin A will play permanent ruck and Raso will play all over the field. This is appropriate development at a subsidised cost for a struggling footy club.

M

Molsey this part of your post is bit flakey for mine:



....Yes or no?

good idea...but what about when they put the theory into practise in the thirds, and there's noone of importance to see them, let alone the person individually training them is not there to judge their behaviour/performance?

So you hate it too!...?...!...? That's what I am saying. How can you be saying that too? We already know about the financial constraints. How are we going to improve the situation if we don't find a better way? Saying the you hate it and not giving an alternative is accepting the situation. Sitting on the pine stuff.

...so we're always going to be the poor little brother are we in the land of multi millions? If we don't have a wish list, and we wont be poor forever, then when we do have adequate fiunds and no wish list what are we going to do? Build another legends stand?

...and the fact that the CFC have cut back marketing $$$, and skimped on development coaches, and have not spent a dollar on our training facility can also be constued as cost effective. But does it make it the right choice?

I follow this part...



Yes that will help a bit, and I will enjoy watching the future when I watch them, but we'll still have players playing in the thirds, alienated from their teammates and their individual coaches.

Anyway my questions still stand, as I don't know whether you like the current state of our Team's set up with the VFL or what you want other than a CFC logo on a red Ants jumper:



Simple. It's a wish list...it may go somewhere one day...when/ if we get back to the financially sound powerhouse we once were.

Come on Molsey...what about the bluebirds? Exciting? If not, I'll find a place for you live in Sydney's east.

When we start winning premierships again, and supporters ask...well what's next?...I know what I'll want happening.

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue

Flakey? No, I'm more about substance than form. If we cant afford the form then I'll vote for substance every time.

I attend most of the Ants games and would definitely prefer a Carlton reserves team - but not at the monetary cost.

As far as some of the common complaints are concerned:
1. The 12/10 rule only applied against Pt Melb & Frankston plus finals.
2. In the other games, most of the guys in the Ants reserves were there until they could earn a place in the seniors - not an unreasonable expectation and I generally agreed with the selection process.
3. About the only exception was Aisake but he got more benefit from playing a full game in the ressies than half or less in the seniors.
4. Selection for the finals (as well as the other games) was pretty much left to Barry Mitchell. The make up of the team was not forced on him.

_________________
Hey Rocky; there are too many rabbits ... in China.