It might be the game's new buzzword, but rebuilding an AFL list ain't easy

Slane - The blues have brought in Williamson this week in place of Smedts - this kid has great speed and running capacity so while not expecting much on debut it at least looks like an attempt to address the run out of defence.

Slane, I can't remember Essendon ever playing Hooker, Hurley and Carlisle (along with Fletcher) together on the backline. Hurley was playing on the forward line but kept getting injured and the theory was that he was more natural back where he would be less likely to be injured. I thought moving Hurley back coincided with Carlisle going forward.

Agree... although in Carlton's case there is no choice now. But there's been years of talk about the weak list that brought us to this. I'm starting to wonder. Here's my quick off-the-top-of-my-head best 22 from the weak list - players who have worn the Navy Blue and are currently either still wearing it or ex-Blues playing elsewhere. It's not as simple as this of course, cos my team includes players we picked up because we lost others... but the number of ex-blues from the "weak list" period who are currently in the best 22 of other teams just makes me wonder: Backs: Henderson, Weitering, Marchbank HB: (i'd love to have Yarran but Malthouse killed his career) Robinson, Tuohy, Simpson C Docherty, Gibbs, Pickett HF Wright, Bell, Menzel FF Betts, Kennedy, Garlett Followers: Kruezer, Cripps, Murphy IC Hampson, Curnow, Waite, Armfield, Petrevski-Seton, Emergencies, MacKay, Silvagni, Laidler, Plowman Sure Mitch R and Bell would muck up occasionally, but there would be the grunt factor from Mitch to compensate and two good crumbers to work of Bell's dropped marks. Waite would have play off the bench because otherwise he'd spend half each season injured, but would be a good person to through into the forward line to change the balance when needed. I'd like to get games into MacKay and Plowman but with injuries they would get their chances. Any number of other variations possible, and this team may not win the premiership, but it's got some youth and some experience and it could well make the finals this year....

Yeah I understand and largely agree - I would also say that there are basically 2 things that make the blues look too tall - one is that they have a 195cm midfielder in Cripps plus are trying to develop a 194cm mid in Curnow which immediately means they will play more blokes over 190 than a lot of other teams and the second is they are wanting to develop the 196cm MacReadie as a key defender but don't want him to be playing on the players Rowe has taken in the first 2 rounds - eventually MacReadie will take over from Rowe or McKay coming in will mean Weitering takes over from Rowe and the balance looks a whole lot better.

Happy to agree with you here, Macca. If Mattyb used the words ' extremely unbalanced' I would disagree with him. But I think you understand my position without going into it again. I would also point out that when Essendon were trying to play Hooker, Hurley and Carlisle in the same backline it also made the Dons seem a bit top-heavy until they moved Carlisle forward.

Slane - I would also say this - if Buckley doesn't come in another young running defender who is pushing his case for selection in Tom Williamson who stands 189cm - some would argue that being so close to 190cm the blues are to top heavy but he is a running machine.

"they’re have been figures mentioned here without even putting names to those figures,how does that work?" I deliberately left the names off because I knew you actually had no idea who was in the carlton side. As for you questions about Essendon - why don't you answer them for Carlton.

Salne - obviously there is room for improvement and I am not saying more run and carry wouldn't be a good thing - if Rowe goes out this week with concussion I would love to see Buckely come in for that exact reason - my point is that the blues side is hardly "extremely unbalanced for the fast paced modern game” - one or 2 changes and the problem is largely rectified.

Well there you go Macca. All the young talls are playing well, all the old talls are playing well, there is more than enough run and carry, and all the veterans are having great seasons. Flag hopefuls?

Aransan,we need more than just those raw figures,or I do anyway. What positions are these Essendon players playing? How many are all being lumped in the defensive half? What percentage of each section of the ground is each group of talls taking up? Is it effecting Essendons run out of defence? How many talls are playing out of position because there are already to many talls in that part of the ground? Let's not fall into the figures trap with figures only. they're have been figures mentioned here without even putting names to those figures,how does that work? At least your figures have names granted. There are also mobile players,lumbering players of all heights by figures. Maybe Essendon are a bit top heavy also.

Mattyb - I am allowed to point out that your opinion doesn't marry up with available evidence - if you don't want to get into an argument don't, let the facts speak for themselves.

Slane - The blues have 7 players under 6ft (183cm) & only 4 above 195cm - They do have 2 200cm or over but considering they are sharing ruck duties that isn't unusual. Also as Aransan points out 190cm isn't exactly big these days 11 players (not 12) above that height would not be unusual, as Aransan said the bombers had 10. Also of the players over 190cm you have Cripps (195cm) C Curnow (194cm) & Smedts (190cm) all of who run through the middle while Weitering (195cm) Plowman (191cm) & Marchbank (193cm) are playing key positions.

Not to mention there’s no guarantees in anything in life – clubs could easily start out on a rebuild and go nowhere. And it takes time. You're looking at 2-3 years where you're not even in contention for finals.

Agree 100% with you there Aransan. As I mentioned to Macca twice now, I think that Carlton only really lost their first two games because the Blues were vulnerable when the ball hit the ground. The tall backline is plucking plenty of intercept marks when the opposition kicks a hopeful highball into their forward 50 but the same backline is being pulled apart when the opposition brings the ball to ground or lowers their eyes. But as you said, aransan, the height isn't really the ossue if they can still run and carry the ball. It's just that right now I see too much tall and not enough run when I watch Carlton play. Macca has already replied to my comment when I said as much after last week. In Maccas opinion some of Carltons recent midfield draft picks will probably push some of the talls out of the team in the coming seasons.

I agree on the Swans' imperative not to bottom out Antony but few other clubs had the luxury of COLA to keep them contending - now the academy will do that job for them.

Slane, there are two players 200cm or taller which I agree is on the big side, but with 195cm midfielders these days i wouldn't call 190cm especially big -- they are the modern day six footers (183cm). I did my calculations on 191cm which makes a difference but even 193cm these days may not be considered to be especially tall, it depends on how mobile they are.

Aransan, I count 12 players over 190cm in that list that Macca just provided. 3 of them over 200cm.

Slane, Carlton had 10 players 191cm or taller as did Essendon in the last round: Watson 191, Daniher 200, Gleeson 191, Goddard 193, Hurley 193, Hooker 197, Ambrose 193, Langford 191, Hartley 198, McKernan 196.

Macca,I've asked you not to quote me numerous times but you keep doing it. Numerous posters think it would also be best if we don't reply to each other at all,and I agree. You've been pumping up the blues for years now and abusing anyone who doesn't think they're the best. I'm not interested in what you say and numerous posters have no interest in listening to us disagree. It's time to forget about having the last word and showing some respect. Thank you and good day.

I feel like you are setting mattybs up with this question, but half the team are taller than 190cm. I know you say that these are the best 22 currently, but surely no other best 22 in the comp includes 11 players over 190cm.