View Full Version : Ted Richards
stander
15 May 2006, 14:59
I said 2 weeks ago week that Sheedy has been ego tripping for years and the medicos need a nursing home- and just a reminder that Ted Richards keeps playing for the Swans week in an week out, and Roosy will eventually get the best out of him. Sheedy would have dropped him three times already. Dyson shows a bit yesterday but Sheeds will drop him at the first opportunity. Reynolds is played out of position and will be sacrificed, but at least shows some grunt. Sheedy should do the right thing by the club and let O'Donnell take over. Some of yesterday was like the day Sheedy recruited Doc Whieldon-and like the day he played Brad Fox on Tony Lockett- there is more.
Longy413
15 May 2006, 15:11
25 years, you're bound to make a few mistakes.
What did you think of Dempsey yesterday?
stander
15 May 2006, 18:58
25 years, you're bound to make a few mistakes.
What did you think of Dempsey yesterday?
Dempsey has a future at the club- doesn't need Sheedys input to confuse him like he has done with Dyson Richards etc.
By the way Longy, what did you think of the Raines and Richardson deal, orchestrated by K.Sheedy ?
Longy413
15 May 2006, 19:19
Dempsey has a future at the club- doesn't need Sheedys input to confuse him like he has done with Dyson Richards etc.
Richards was never good enough, we now have someone who will be better in Dempsey.
Essendon supporters sooked for years that McGrath wasn't given a chance. He, like Richards wasn't good enough. Make no mistake, Ted Richards is just going at the moment.
Your comments on Dyson are completely unjustified and Dyson's game on the weekend actually goes against your arguement, it doesn't support it.
He played 11 games in his debut year. He played 10 games last season, including the last 8 games straight. He was given every opportunity.
This year his two early senior games were terrible. He lacked confidence, he didn't run with the footy, he didn't put himself in positions to win the footy often enough. He was rightly sent back at Bendigo to find form and confidence. As soon as he did that he was promoted back into the seniors and played very good football. He benifited by the decision to drop him, he wasn't held back.
By the way Longy, what did you think of the Raines and Richardson deal, orchestrated by K.Sheedy ?
Probably not as good as the deal done to get McPhee, Cupido and Pick 17 for Blake Caracella. Or the deal to got us Laycock for Heffernan.
Nor was it as good as the deal to get a first round pick for Ted Richards, or Pick 6 for Jacobs. Denham (and Ryan O'Connor) for Barnes, Barnard and Wellman for Salmon, Andrew Bomford trade to Sydney for the pick that got us Jason Johnson. Trading Delaney, Ridley, Williams and Kickett to Fremantle in a deal that got us Lloyd and Lucas. Trading Olarenshaw for the pick that got us Rama.
Like I said, in 25 years you're bound to make a few mistakes. But sometimes, just sometimes he gets the odd thing right.
Nuts4Bolts
15 May 2006, 20:35
Ted Richards would off made no difference to our season this year. I've seen Dempsey for 2mins and already know who I want to play for us.
stander
15 May 2006, 20:43
Richards was never good enough, we now have someone who will be better in Dempsey.
Essendon supporters sooked for years that McGrath wasn't given a chance. He, like Richards wasn't good enough. Make no mistake, Ted Richards is just going at the moment.
Your comments on Dyson are completely unjustified and Dyson's game on the weekend actually goes against your arguement, it doesn't support it.
He played 11 games in his debut year. He played 10 games last season, including the last 8 games straight. He was given every opportunity.
This year his two early senior games were terrible. He lacked confidence, he didn't run with the footy, he didn't put himself in positions to win the footy often enough. He was rightly sent back at Bendigo to find form and confidence. As soon as he did that he was promoted back into the seniors and played very good football. He benifited by the decision to drop him, he wasn't held back.
Probably not as good as the deal done to get McPhee, Cupido and Pick 17 for Blake Caracella. Or the deal to got us Laycock for Heffernan.
Nor was it as good as the deal to get a first round pick for Ted Richards, or Pick 6 for Jacobs. Denham (and Ryan O'Connor) for Barnes, Barnard and Wellman for Salmon, Andrew Bomford trade to Sydney for the pick that got us Jason Johnson. Trading Delaney, Ridley, Williams and Kickett to Fremantle in a deal that got us Lloyd and Lucas. Trading Olarenshaw for the pick that got us Rama.
Like I said, in 25 years you're bound to make a few mistakes. But sometimes, just sometimes he gets the odd thing right.
Longy you underestimated the damage done with the Raines/Richardson deal- poor old Steve Carey. The Dodger was a shocker to Brisbane too. Trevor Spencer was going to be a great full forward according to Sheeds. Daryl Cunningham was a legend at Essendon too. The point is Sheedy has been, and is now even more dispensable; there are better options out there. He did a good job resurrecting the team after 1990, and grabbed a flag in 93 with Baby Bombers MK 2 who played with zeal. Since then, he has left his best behind him. There is little cunning left. Dyson should be left in the team- not dropped after one poor game.
Slattery can be put into the list of performing players to be in and out of the side. the kid has done nothing wrong this season and got dropper for some stupid reason.
all that is doing is destroying his confidence
Longy413
15 May 2006, 21:54
The point is Sheedy has been, and is now even more dispensable; there are better options out there.
I thought this was about Ted Richards, not something that happened 20 years ago.
Ted Richards didn't get games because we have players that were better than him.
There is little cunning left.
Getting a first round draft pick for Ted Richards was pretty cunning.
Dyson should be left in the team- not dropped after one poor game.
It wasn't one poor game. It was six weeks of poor footy.
Longy413
15 May 2006, 21:55
Slattery can be put into the list of performing players to be in and out of the side. the kid has done nothing wrong this season and got dropper for some stupid reason.
Do you know the reason he got dropped?
He did a good job resurrecting the team after 1990, and grabbed a flag in 93 with Baby Bombers MK 2 who played with zeal. Since then, he has left his best behind him.
if he left his best behind him in 93 then what was it he did to have the best team from 99-01?
Bomaz_Magic
16 May 2006, 00:55
Reynolds and Bradley must go and Solomon and Welsh must also be dropped.
stander
16 May 2006, 09:25
if he left his best behind him in 93 then what was it he did to have the best team from 99-01?
You hit the nail on the head Angus- we had the best team in 99-01 and like many bomber supporters have said, should have won more than one flag- Matthews got 3 in a row with the best team in 02 -03. Even Timmy is calling for heads to roll- "fish rots from the head first" Ted Richards would fill some nice gaps in the back line now that Kepler has been totally confused about his role in the team.
stander
16 May 2006, 10:07
Andrew Bomford trade to Sydney for the pick that got us Jason Johnson. Trading Delaney, Ridley, Williams and Kickett to Fremantle in a deal that got us Lloyd and Lucas. Trading Olarenshaw for the pick that got us Rama.
Like I said, in 25 years you're bound to make a few mistakes. But sometimes, just sometimes he gets the odd thing right.
You forgot the trade that let us pick up Ben Doolan, another one for the bad trade archives. Listen Longy, you and I can go :D:D:D for Tat with this, although if I trawl through the records since 1981 I think we had more bad than good. The point is, Sheedy is no longer the only option for us to move off the bottom, and you don't recognise that. By the way, Sheedy didn't play Saltbush Andrews in the 83 grand final against Hawthorn- thrashed by 78 points.
Longy413
16 May 2006, 10:45
I'm pretty sure Ben Doolan wasn't traded for, but happy to be corrected.
Just because Sheeds isn't the only option, doesn't mean he isn't the right one. And if you have to go back to 1983 (Wallis ahead of Kickett worked) to add support to your arguement, you are battling. At the end of the day the deal to get Lloyd and Lucas to the club outweighs anything else he has done negative during trade week.
We did the right thing trading Richards. He isn't a very good footballer, averaging less than 10 disposals a game. I'm very, very happy with Dempsey thanks.
Both of you forget about recriminations and look to the future and to facts.
We need to treat this year as a year of learning. Who will take us forward and who will not. As for Sheeds he has another year of his contract and there is no question that it should be honoured. There is also no question that next year should be his last year of coaching. The challenge I would put to Kevin is to leave a young list to his successor that has promise and a genuine shot at glory. Kind of like the list he inherited which contained Danihers, Watson, hawker, Madden, Merrett, Van der Haar, Heard and Nobby Clarke. This years draft is extremely strong and we will get the opportunity of obtaining a classy youngster. i would love to see Hansen or Gibbs in our jumper next year. We should also have the opportunity to obtain a strong free agent as we will have salary cap room. Our club is in a transition stage, accept it and look to better days.
stander
16 May 2006, 12:10
Agree FOJ. There are better times ahead- the club is strong. I am a supporter of the club- have been since 1965. Have ridden the highs and lows- but experience and inside knowledge tells me we are better off without Sheedy. Some people just won't accept it.
Longy413
16 May 2006, 12:15
It's not about accepting it, how can you accept something that is neither here nor there? Something that can't possibly be quantified. It's called an opinion. So you can stick your "inside knowledge."
Like it or not, Sheeds has another 18 months to go. And he'll see it out and what he does in that 18 months will determine what happens beyond that, for him and the club.
You're are right, the club is strong. Ask yourself why.
And I'll maintain again, the trading of Ted Richards was a fantastic move.
Daytripper
16 May 2006, 12:36
Agree FOJ. There are better times ahead- the club is strong. I am a supporter of the club- have been since 1965. Have ridden the highs and lows- but experience and inside knowledge tells me we are better off without Sheedy. Some people just won't accept it.
Getting rid of the coach will do nothing but destabalise the club. Do we really want to be like Richmond in the 90s ?
Should Collingwood have gotten rid of Malthouse last season when they were performing just as badly ?
It's not about accepting it, how can you accept something that is neither here nor there? Something that can't possibly be quantified. It's called an opinion. So you can stick your "inside knowledge."
Like it or not, Sheeds has another 18 months to go. And he'll see it out and what he does in that 18 months will determine what happens beyond that, for him and the club.
You're are right, the club is strong. Ask yourself why.
And I'll maintain again, the trading of Ted Richards was a fantastic move.
Longy- Ithink Dempsey has a lot to like about him but do you think Richards was given the opportunity to blossom at Essendon? I would have liked to see him treated the way Kevin walsh or even Brian Winton were treated by Sheedy.
Longy413
16 May 2006, 13:25
Longy- Ithink Dempsey has a lot to like about him but do you think Richards was given the opportunity to blossom at Essendon? I would have liked to see him treated the way Kevin walsh or even Brian Winton were treated by Sheedy.
Ted was hurt because he played a position at the time that we had depth in. Lloyd, Lucas, Hird and even Hille and Laycock. Down back we had Fletcher, Wellman, McPhee and later on Bradley and Lovett-Murray.
He played the last 10 games (from memory last year) down back and he was far from outstanding. He was okay, just a goer. Ultimately he left because he saw himself as a forward and wanted to play in the forward line. He wasn't going to get that opportunity at Essendon. Where did we fit him in?
I just don't think he was good enough. One of those blokes that was good at VFL level but not good enough at AFL level. I like the kid, I hope he makes it at Sydney, but I honestly don't think he will because I really believe he isn't much chop. He can't still kick. I've seen them play probably 4 times this season and I'm suprised he's in their side.
So you can stick your "inside knowledge."
Says one who`s "stock and trade" is implying it on a regular basis himself ;)
Maybe it`s you Longy ? ..... (attracting all the dills that is )
Longy413
16 May 2006, 13:51
Says one who`s "stock and trade" is implying it on a regular basis himself ;)
I've never once said I have inside knowledge and anytime I've been questioned on it, I've denied it. I just post what I know, or give an opinion, but never once said my opinion was greater than someone else's or the definitive answer.
Perhaps next time you can try and stay on topic, but thanks for having a crack anyway.
Pevers-Legend
16 May 2006, 14:04
a few points:
Q. Would Richards have helped on the weekend?
A. gtiven he was playing FB until he asked to be traded - I think the answer is yes.
Q. Was the Richards trade good?
A. In terms of what we got, yes, in terms of what we lost, no. And here is the crux of it:
Look at our tall backs:
Fletch, Bradley, McPhee, Solomon, NLM, Henneman, Bolton, Lucy, Lee.
Only one is a proven kpp, McPhee is a hlaf back as is NLM as is Solomon. Bradley doesn't have a position currently - he was drafted as a tall midfielder and will never become a natural backman. Lucy and Lee are kids which leaves us with the real hole, Bolts and Henno. The two players that Richards finally got ahead of to have a crack at the seniors and did well late last year. These guys are still on the list yet provide us with no support down back when we lose a few players.
This is where I am critical of Sheedy. He can not, and will not recruit a tall strong backman. Who does he pick, slightly built athletic types - see Ryder, Laycock, Bradley, hell even Lloyd and Lucas aren't that big. We need a big strong backman and we don't have it.
Richards would fill the hole currently till we have either Lee or Lucy up to speed (assuming one of them makes it).
The problem Richards has at Sydney is that he is a better backman than forward now, but Roos wants him as a forward.
Longy413
16 May 2006, 14:23
a few points:
Q. Would Richards have helped on the weekend?
A. gtiven he was playing FB until he asked to be traded - I think the answer is yes.
He wouldn't have had the pace to go with Fevola when he was getting delivery like he was. Fev still would have kicked a bag. At least Reynolds provided a contest nearly every time, Ted wouldn't have been able to do that.
The two players that Richards finally got ahead of to have a crack at the seniors and did well late last year.
We didn't get rid of Ted, we didn't trade him against our will. He played the last 10 games of the year down back and left because he wanted to play as a forward. He wanted out, because he didn't see himself as a backman. He said himself, he was leaving because he wanted to play forward and Roos was going to give him that opportunity. What else are we do in that situation?
This is where I am critical of Sheedy. He can not, and will not recruit a tall strong backman.
There aren't that many around. Even playing now.
Michael, Harris, thats about it.
Lee is already only a few kg's off the likes of Glass and Scarlett who are probably the next biggest. You can only draft what is available, and the fact of the matter is the TAC Cup and the like aren't full of monster full backs. Toovey (now at Collingwood) was one of the better full backs in last years draft, he is only 187cm's.
We've drafted two of the better key backs available in the last two drafts in Lucy and Lee. We just have to wait. Lee won't be too far away.
I've never once said I have inside knowledge and anytime I've been questioned on it, I've denied it. I just post what I know, or give an opinion, but never once said my opinion was greater than someone else's or the definitive answer.
Perhaps next time you can try and stay on topic, but thanks for having a crack anyway.Sage words grasshopper ... sage words .
I will keep trying to catch the fly with the chopsticks
... but if a tree falls in the forest and no-one hears it ... does it make any sound at all ?
Longy413
16 May 2006, 14:34
... but if a tree falls in the forest and no-one hears it ... does it make any sound at all ?
I left a tape recorder, but the batteries ran out before the tree fell.
Or maybe it just didn't make a sound. I don't know anymore.
I left a tape recorder, but the batteries ran out before the tree fell.
Or maybe it just didn't make a sound. I don't know anymore.Finally a sense of humour :thumbsu:
Keep up the good work my friend ... till next we meet
jules101
16 May 2006, 23:23
Ted Richards would off made no difference to our season this year. I've seen Dempsey for 2mins and already know who I want to play for us.
Would have made a difference on Sunday in the backline
Pevers-Legend
17 May 2006, 13:16
He wouldn't have had the pace to go with Fevola when he was getting delivery like he was. Fev still would have kicked a bag. At least Reynolds provided a contest nearly every time, Ted wouldn't have been able to do that.
I think Ted showed late last year he could have done alright. Sometimes it is the quality of the opponent that can make a simpleton like Fevola walk taller.
We didn't get rid of Ted, we didn't trade him against our will. He played the last 10 games of the year down back and left because he wanted to play as a forward. He wanted out, because he didn't see himself as a backman. He said himself, he was leaving because he wanted to play forward and Roos was going to give him that opportunity. What else are we do in that situation?
He walked. Yes he did. But lets be honest. If he was getting a regular gig in our team week in, week out instead of guys who didn't earn their spot, perhpas he would have had more allegiance to our club. Stop blinding following the club Longy. Its alright to admit Sheedy fire trucked up.
There aren't that many around. Even playing now.
Michael, Harris, thats about it.
Perhaps I wasn't specific enough, but I was talking KP backmen in general. Guys like Egan, Harris, Roberts-Thompson, Bock, Rutten, Glass, Brown (Nth), we never ever recruit them. They are the ones that can play on the big guys. Until we get someone like that, we are giong to have manufacture CHBs like Wallis and Harvey, and heaven forbid when Fletch retires. I just pray Lucy or Lee come on.
Lee is already only a few kg's off the likes of Glass and Scarlett who are probably the next biggest. You can only draft what is available, and the fact of the matter is the TAC Cup and the like aren't full of monster full backs. Toovey (now at Collingwood) was one of the better full backs in last years draft, he is only 187cm's.
We've drafted two of the better key backs available in the last two drafts in Lucy and Lee. We just have to wait. Lee won't be too far away.
Lee was drafted as a CHF/FF. I remember reading this. Lucy was our last pick in the draft. I hope he is a gem like Harris was for the dogs, but chances are he won't make it. As for Lee, wasn't Sheedy talkign of playing him up forward. What is he, a FB or a forward. Better decide soon as playing him at both ends consistently will do nothing for his confidence, if we want him to have an impact this year.
Daytripper
17 May 2006, 13:38
Perhaps I wasn't specific enough, but I was talking KP backmen in general. Guys like Egan, Harris, Roberts-Thompson, Bock, Rutten, Glass, Brown (Nth), we never ever recruit them. They are the ones that can play on the big guys. Until we get someone like that, we are giong to have manufacture CHBs like Wallis and Harvey, and heaven forbid when Fletch retires. I just pray Lucy or Lee come on.
Bradley, Lee and Lucy are being developed and I dare say Henneman was drafted with the intent of him being a key position backman.
It takes a long time for these types of players to come good.
Glass, Brown, Rutten and Harris had been in the system a long time before they finally made it.
Supporters have to be patient with these guys.
Lee was drafted as a CHF/FF. I remember reading this. Lucy was our last pick in the draft. I hope he is a gem like Harris was for the dogs, but chances are he won't make it. As for Lee, wasn't Sheedy talkign of playing him up forward. What is he, a FB or a forward. Better decide soon as playing him at both ends consistently will do nothing for his confidence, if we want him to have an impact this year.
Most (nearly all) AFL defenders spend their junior career as forwards. A lot of them have to start from scratch playing as a defender.
Pevers-Legend
17 May 2006, 13:53
Bradley, Lee and Lucy are being developed and I dare say Henneman was drafted with the intent of him being a key position backman.
It takes a long time for these types of players to come good.
Glass, Brown, Rutten and Harris had been in the system a long time before they finally made it.
Supporters have to be patient with these guys.
Most (nearly all) AFL defenders spend their junior career as forwards. A lot of them have to start from scratch playing as a defender.
problem is, what happens when you draft Bolton, Henno, Richards and Hunt? You are in our predicament of when Fletch goes down we are :D:D:D:Ded.
Longy413
17 May 2006, 13:54
He walked. Yes he did. But lets be honest. If he was getting a regular gig in our team week in, week out instead of guys who didn't earn their spot, perhpas he would have had more allegiance to our club. Stop blinding following the club Longy. Its alright to admit Sheedy fire trucked up.
He was a developing tall that wasn't that good. He didn't demand a position week in, week out. He wasn't good enough. Too slow, can't kick and wasn't a great mark of the footy. His most admirable charteristic was that he had a crack. But he isn't a good footballer, I honestly believe that.
We got a great deal for Ted and I still believe Fevola would have done the same damage playing on Richards. I'm more than happy to admit mistakes, our only mistake with Ted Richards was drafting him ahead of Guy Richards.
Lee was drafted as a CHF/FF. I remember reading this. Lucy was our last pick in the draft.
We played a fair bit of footy down back for Tassie. CHF/CHB.
Lucy was our last pick in the draft, he was also just about the best FB in the draft. AA Full-Back last year. There aren't that many around mate.
The blokes you mentioned earlier, Rutten, Brown etc. They were all drafted as forwards. From memory Rutten kicked three goals with his first three kicks in AFL footy. Even Richards was drafted as a forward. Rutten and Bock were both rookie list picks.
You can't draft big backmen if there aren't any. We drafted Hunt, Henneman, Lucy and Lee. Not to mention Zantuck (ok, lets not mention Zantuck)
Your point would have merit if we were consistently over-looking quality key defenders. We aren't, they aren't there and the ones that are, are a gamble.
As for Lee, wasn't Sheedy talkign of playing him up forward.
Only threw his name up when Lloyd went down. He's been playing back for Bendigo.
Pevers-Legend
17 May 2006, 14:01
He was a developing tall that wasn't that good. He didn't demand a position week in, week out. He wasn't good enough. Too slow, can't kick and wasn't a great mark of the footy. His most admirable charteristic was that he had a crack. But he isn't a good footballer, I honestly believe that.
We got a great deal for Ted and I still believe Fevola would have done the same damage playing on Richards.
I agree Richards isn't a great footballer, but he had a crack (more than some are dong this season) and he provided run out of the backline (would help out NLM for sure).
We played a fair bit of footy down back for Tassie. CHF/CHB.
Lucy was our last pick in the draft, he was also just about the best FB in the draft. AA Full-Back last year. There aren't that many around mate.
The blokes you mentioned earlier, Rutten, Brown etc. They were all drafted as forwards. From memory Rutten kicked three goals with his first three kicks in AFL footy. Even Richards was drafted as a forward. Rutten and Bock were both rookie list picks.
You can't draft big backmen if there aren't any. We drafted Hunt, Henneman, Lucy and Lee. Not to mention Zantuck (ok, lets not mention Zantuck)
Your point would have merit if we were consistently over-looking quality key defenders. We aren't, they aren't there and the ones that are, are a gamble.
How are we not consistenly over looking good key-posi players? Rutten, Egan, Harris, we could have drafted all of them but didn't. Sheedy instead goes for Laycock, Ryder and Bradley. None of which are naturally huge, all flakey more skilled players (I know Keps can't kick). I know players take time to develop, but we have a hole because we picked these types of players and don't have what we need.
Only threw his name up when Lloyd went down. He's been playing back for Bendigo.
Glad to hear it as I had heard he was playing forward. How has his form been?
Longy413
17 May 2006, 14:15
How are we not consistenly over looking good key-posi players? Rutten, Egan, Harris, we could have drafted all of them but didn't.
But we didn't over look good KPP's. We overlooked (like 16 other clubs) average KPP's that developed into good ones. They were guess work.
Sheedy instead goes for Laycock, Ryder and Bradley. None of which are naturally huge, all flakey more skilled players
We drafted those blokes because they were the best available. It would be a waste to do otherwise. There were no tall backs in those drafts that were worthy of going inside the top 10. Ryder was the best player available in the draft when we had our pick, Lucy was the AA Full-Back. 193cm, 91 kg, big and strong. But not worth of a 1st Round pick. Mind you, Laycock is big and strong, he's huge, but he has skills as well.
I understand your point mate, it has merit and I agree we have a weakness in that area that needs to be fixed. The thing is with those type of players is it's all guess work, there is a severe lack of depth in tall strong players in the TAC Cup. Harris was as much of a guess as Sam Hunt, Aaron Henneman was. Ben Cosgriff was of a similar type.
Some work, some don't. There aren't that many out there, Rutten, Harris, those types are rare. It would be great to find one, but my point is, they are rare.
Glad to hear it as I had heard he was playing forward. How has his form been?
He went forward for a bit against North Ballarat a few weeks ago when we couldn't kick a goal, but he'd been very impressive down back in that game before moving forward. Played on Josh Kennedy a couple of weeks ago, Kennedy kicked 3 but a couple of those from memory weren't Lee's fault. One from a free that wasn't against Lee. Lee was named in the best. He's going well, if I was on the selection committee I'd be insisting he replaces Kep this week.
i think there are limits to drafting best available - i undertand the philosophy behind it but not necessarily agree with it.
We cant keep drafting ruckmen with our top picks when we could likely pick up gun midfielders. With the midfield you need 7-8 quality players rotating. Plus if you have more then (say 10-12) they can play on the flanks or in the pockets. But you only need two ruckman on the park at most. As long as we dont continue to build our midfield there is no hope. I know you may be able to get a decent mid further down (2nd,3rd round) in the draft. But in the 1st round your chances of getting a future champion midfielder are much higher.
We have used top picks on Laycock, Bradley, Ryder. But how are these 3 and Hille going to fit in the one team, i think it is going to be way too top heavy. If we decide to offload any of these (apart from Hille) in the future we probably won't get what we paid out for them (ie first rounders) because they probably havent made it with us so we have lost and opposition teams are then ahead.
Personally I hope this year we get good mids and guys who are just genuine kpp's not trying to turn big athletic guys ( who are most suited for the ruck) into kpps.
jokiKan
17 May 2006, 16:34
Ted Richards is starting to find his feet at the Swans. Roos started off with him in defense but as the season has gone on, its become obvious that the guy is more valuable as a tall marking option up foward. At least for spurts during a game and he's been used that way. Ted is really a good mark. He's a dangerous (and valuable) weapon to have and has replaced Dempster in the side (4th tall defender) probably because of these offensive abilities. He's also a very fit man, can run off half-back and never stops running and trying.
I think there is no doubt with Hird and Lloyd out with injuries, that he would have been a good marking option up forward with you guys. While I'm not convinced that he can hold down a KP role, I think the Richards trade was very good for us and he is definately a nice luxury to have atm.
I'm pretty sure Ben Doolan wasn't traded for, but happy to be corrected.
Just because Sheeds isn't the only option, doesn't mean he isn't the right one. And if you have to go back to 1983 (Wallis ahead of Kickett worked) to add support to your arguement, you are battling. At the end of the day the deal to get Lloyd and Lucas to the club outweighs anything else he has done negative during trade week.
We did the right thing trading Richards. He isn't a very good footballer, averaging less than 10 disposals a game. I'm very, very happy with Dempsey thanks.
Ben Doolan was drafted with the 20th pick in the 1993 PreSeason Draft.
They left Austinn McCrabb on the board by taking Doolan.
Shame on Sheedy.
Courtnay Dempsey will be of better value to Essendon by next season.
Ted Richards is just ordinary. And he's at his best right now.
Dempsey might actually be a player.
All this crap about Richards not getting a go :rolleyes: Geez. To put it simply until last season he wasnt ready football wise or body wise to get a regular gig in the seniors. He can blame himself for not getting enough games last season. He was dropped for a number of weeks after the Lions game for his very poor effort in side stepping Brown rather than trying to tackle him. If he was more comitted that night he would have played 15 or so games rather than the 10 or so he played.
People keep having a go at Sheeds for not giving blokes a go but you have to look at players like Merret , GOD and JJ to name a few who where not hurt by playing a fair bit of seconds footy until they where ready for a regular gig.
i think there are limits to drafting best available - i undertand the philosophy behind it but not necessarily agree with it.
We cant keep drafting ruckmen with our top picks when we could likely pick up gun midfielders. With the midfield you need 7-8 quality players rotating. Plus if you have more then (say 10-12) they can play on the flanks or in the pockets. But you only need two ruckman on the park at most. As long as we dont continue to build our midfield there is no hope. I know you may be able to get a decent mid further down (2nd,3rd round) in the draft. But in the 1st round your chances of getting a future champion midfielder are much higher.
We have used top picks on Laycock, Bradley, Ryder. But how are these 3 and Hille going to fit in the one team, i think it is going to be way too top heavy. If we decide to offload any of these (apart from Hille) in the future we probably won't get what we paid out for them (ie first rounders) because they probably havent made it with us so we have lost and opposition teams are then ahead.
Personally I hope this year we get good mids and guys who are just genuine kpp's not trying to turn big athletic guys ( who are most suited for the ruck) into kpps.
We wont draft another ruckman this year anyway.They have got the ruck division set for a number of years now. Just on drafting mid fielders yes i do think we needs to draft another quality young mid this year but we do have a number of young blokes to try this year in Lonergan , Hocking and Firman. Lonergan and Hocking have had injury set backs but both have shown some promise.