You came around to the right way of thinking eventually!
Dropping Jack would be North Melbourne like.
Plus, it was suggested last year, then he took the best mark of his career and had another 50 goal season.
I understand, and even sort of agree, with your logic regarding Jack, Lynch and Balta.
But there are other ways around it. I would much rather Lynch on a wing than Castagna. And he tried it for 5 minutes to a relative level of success on the weekend.
Even if we don't change anything, our forward line is not really an issue. They are doing their job. Number one at scoring from centre clearance. Our backline is the real concern. Opposition talls are tearing us apart. I really, really want Balta forward, but there's maybe an opportunity there.
Jack is still better than any forward we have at VFL level, and a more consistent goal scorer than any forward we have at AFL level.
I think there's a discussion about how to most effectively use our tall forwards. But that's why Hardwick gets paid the big bucks. Drop Jack is not a good solution.
Not for morale. Not for the future. And not for now. You need to honour your champions. It's how you turn a dynasty into a legacy. Especially while they still contribute.
So Jack plays. As does Cotch. As does Edwards.
And here's where we differ significantly. If we play finals, the above is doubly true.
You want your three time premiership, three time Coleman Medallist on the field come finals.
I am genuinely conflicted on this issue.
On the one hand, yes Jack proved himself last year and yes, retaining him might well be good for cultural fabric.
But is it really?
Let’s say your name is Maurice. You’ve been plying your trade in the VFL for multiple years and might feel you deserve a crack at a senior game or two.
The seniors are losing most weeks and Dimma is persisting with a three-pronged forward line because he doesn’t want to drop Jack.
Elsewhere in that F50 we have Castagna and Baker, neither of which are natural small forwards.
Wider still, our turnover game plan is being picked apart and exploited right across the ground.
And Jack himself ain’t contributing much. He isn’t leaping like he used to and gives away free kicks in frustration.
How does Maurice Jnr feel? Does he think ‘it’s ok, let’s give Jack a year long victory lap’. Or does he think ‘that forward line needs reinvention, it’s too top heavy and slow. Me, Clarke, we’re being denied a chance to advance our careers.’
I am not normally so conflicted when it comes to footy matters.
Right now I think we are carrying some senior players and we shouldn’t be. It sends the right message to fans but the wrong message to other players.
Of course, we could still finish bottom four with Jack out of the team, but at least the likes of MRJ and Clarke would’ve seen a few games each and rapidly advanced their progress.
My question is this - does a jubilee year for Trent, Jack and Shane hurt us more in the end?
Where do you draw the line? Does someone like Tom Lynch get afforded the same courtesy if his form drops further? I don’t think he would. The line is arbitrary.
Nah, *smile* that. Jack should be dropped if he does little against Melbourne.
Culture can take many forms. In this case, the club is above all. Senior games are a privilege.
Jack won’t be gifted games if his form continues. He will retire and it will be the right decision.
