View Full Version : Roughead - Forward or Back?
philhawk
19 May 2006, 16:44
Roughead IMO has been one of the shrewdist recruitment decisions made by the Hawks in a long time. He was recruited as a CHF style player, but seems to fit in swimmingly down back. Given his attributes, good agility, strong pack mark, solid kick, should he be groomed in the long term as a CHF or a CHB? Given our lack in depth in the Forward department, I think we need to compromise our backline strength to ensure we develop some talented fowards. With Dowler also in the wings, I feel our Forward line should develop into something like ...
HF: Franklin Roughead Williams
FF: Miller Dowler Little/Murphy
With the Forward Pockets obviously something we need to work on.
Our backline isn't all that shabby, but once again we just need that big KPP backmen to strengthen things. The ploy of using Croad in the forward line just isn't working. He was AA CHB, so he should stick there. Our other backmen in Jacobs, Dawson, Smith, Guerra and Brown are all solid players in their own rights (OK maybe giving Dawson too much credit), but Jacobs is the tallest player of that lot and I dont think he is taller than 190/192cm?
FB: Jacobs Dawson Guerra
HB: Brown Croad Smith
That seems a reasonable backline, but if could just inject some more talls into there then we'd be on our way.
I suppose if we insist with using Roughy down back, then he could groom into a quality CHB. But while Croad is still around, he should stick to the position he is best at ...
Thoughts?
atm - back - let him get confidence and an understanding of the game.
in future - forward - he is a big boy who can take a grab and his kicking is pretty good.
Back Pocket Rocket
19 May 2006, 17:07
Without getting too far in front of ourselves (and not allowing for future draft picks, ie Full Back this year) This could look ok:
Miller Dowler Williams
Little Roughead Franklin
Ellis Hodge Bateman
Birchall Croad Smith
Brown Dawson Jacobs
Bailey Mitchell Lewis
Muston Campbell Murphy Vandenburg
This would be assuming that Everitt and Crawf have retired. We would be hard and tough in the middle with runners coming from everywhere.
Herbs hawks
19 May 2006, 17:21
Lets skip forward to 2008.
FB: Brown Dawson Guerra
HB: Crawford Croad Ellis
C: Young Mitchell Bateman
HF: Birchell Roughead Franklin
FF: Williams Dowler Little
R: Campbell Hodge(c) Muston
Inter: Bailey, Lewis, Sewell, Ladson
Emg: Thurgood, Tuck, Clarke
Rest of list: Taylor, Miller, Boyle, Kane, Mcglynn, Vandenburg
GOne: Smith, Everitt, Dixon, Ries, Murphy, Brennan, Ball, Barker.
What do you think..........?
Back
I like him at both ends, but he seems to be a natural backman.
FCAGJAT
20 May 2006, 02:46
He looked great in the forward tonight. He's one of your more exciting players to watch and he did a great job but unfortunately he didn't get much opportunities with the deliveries to him. Will be a gun :thumbsu:
Gary Shadforth
20 May 2006, 15:01
Roughies' potential is huge. But I have one question about his game last night.
Has anyone stats on how many marks he dropped? Total please and in two catagories, a breakdown of contested and uncontested.
This is not a criticism of the kid as he has all the attributes of being an AFL great of the future. Just that I would like to see him hold onto grabs, vice-like.
As for the thrust of this thread, I feel he can play back or forward. Would like to see him settle into CHF with Croady back at CHB. We desperately need someone standing-up / dominating in both those postions on a very regular basis, just like all top teams.
Hawk Dork
21 May 2006, 00:37
Lets skip forward to 2008.
FB: Brown Dawson Guerra
HB: Crawford Croad Ellis
C: Young Mitchell Bateman
HF: Birchell Roughead Franklin
FF: Williams Dowler Little
R: Campbell Hodge(c) Muston
Inter: Bailey, Lewis, Sewell, Ladson
Emg: Thurgood, Tuck, Clarke
Rest of list: Taylor, Miller, Boyle, Kane, Mcglynn, Vandenburg
GOne: Smith, Everitt, Dixon, Ries, Murphy, Brennan, Ball, Barker.
What do you think..........?
HH bit hard on Murphy and not hard enough on Vanders
Lets skip forward to 2008.
FB: Brown Dawson Guerra
HB: Crawford Croad Ellis
C: Young Mitchell Bateman
HF: Birchell RougheadFranklin
FF: Williams Dowler Little
R: Campbell Hodge(c) Muston
Inter: Bailey, Lewis, Sewell, Ladson
Emg: Thurgood, Tuck, Clarke
Rest of list: Taylor, Miller, Boyle, Kane, Mcglynn, Vandenburg
GOne: Smith, Everitt, Dixon, Ries, Murphy, Brennan, Ball, Barker.
What do you think..........?
Miller, Boyle and possibly Clarke or Ladson won't be on our list in 2008.
Muston will most likely be a forward flank/wingman.
a spine of...
Dawson
Croad
Hodge
Roughead
Dowler
Looks very good for the future.
Gary Shadforth
21 May 2006, 10:24
a spine of...
Dawson
Croad
Hodge
Roughead
Dowler
Looks very good for the future.
Love it!
tomthetiger
21 May 2006, 10:35
Funny, you could easily swap him and croad. However, when Croad is gone, Roughead > CHB.
Mitchell Madness
21 May 2006, 16:44
at the moment i think roughy should stay down back, he seems far more combfortable then he does up forward. But who knows, int he future he may make a good CHF, but its a fair way off in my opinion
Bantum9
22 May 2006, 17:36
You win premierships with gun CHF. Roughie forward for mine.
CyberKev
22 May 2006, 17:59
Roughead, for mine, would be better suited to FF with Dowler operating out of CHF.
Roughead has the natural tendency and willingness to attack the pack and you get considerably more of those gathering just out from goal.
Given patience and a more targetted oportunity from our midfield, Roughead could monster sides out of the square. As a bonus, he has good recovery and fab handball skills.
Buster the hawk
22 May 2006, 18:15
Roughead is undoubtably the best recruiting decision made by the club in the last five years other than Luke Hodge and like Croady ,he looks as though he is going to become more than capable at either end of the ground but unfortunately due to the inconsistency of our team at the moment (as has been the case for the last five years)he has to be used on an as needed basis which means he is never really settled in a set position as yet.Hopefully this will all change soon because at the moment after Friday night's woeful performance we don't look to be much more further advanced as a team than what we were before he was recruited.
philhawk
22 May 2006, 21:04
Roughead, for mine, would be better suited to FF with Dowler operating out of CHF.
Roughead has the natural tendency and willingness to attack the pack and you get considerably more of those gathering just out from goal.
Given patience and a more targetted oportunity from our midfield, Roughead could monster sides out of the square. As a bonus, he has good recovery and fab handball skills.
Fair point Kev, but the crux of the matter is that we drafted Dowler as a pure Full-Forward, something we havn't had at Hawthorn since Dunstall. While Roughy would probably be a better exponent of the pack mark, I think we just need to stick him at CHF for 3-4 rounds and see how he goes.
burner1
22 May 2006, 22:02
Im not sure if you can pigeon hole dowler as a ff just yet. Remember reading some of the draft threads last year and some were arguing that dowler would probably make a better chf, supposedly has a great tank and presents well. In his one game for box hill senoirs seemed to present and link up very well playing at chf.
While roughie may make a great chf i see him operating best in the hotspot area between ff and chf as brown and hall do, with dowler leading further up the ground providing an option. Agree that roughie should play chf at present till we get some more support.
Regardless of what happens would be nice having key fwds who can interchange between the 2 key fwd posts.
cschreuder61
23 May 2006, 13:39
Roughead, for mine, would be better suited to FF with Dowler operating out of CHF.
Roughead has the natural tendency and willingness to attack the pack and you get considerably more of those gathering just out from goal.
Given patience and a more targetted oportunity from our midfield, Roughead could monster sides out of the square. As a bonus, he has good recovery and fab handball skills.
Agree with CK here.
Guys like Brown, Hall, Tredrea these days are playing from the square leading to about 40 from goal. That's where the one on one contests are still happening now and then. Roughead looks to be able to do this. He creates good space, and leads in the right areas. Once he starts holding his marks he'll be a real force around the square.
CHF is getting harder to play. You almost need two CHF's with the amount of ground you have to cover and how quickly the ball moves. Having Dowler at CHF, and Buddy on the flank also leading up the ground would create two mobile targets on half forward 'potentially' and then bomb long to the square or kick to the leading Willo.
I think we have a fair few options developing for us up forward. This is why Boyle only playing as a forward is surprising me at the moment, when its the backline that we are little short of developing players.
I'll presume Croad will be moved back at some stage, and he'll be the key player back there. Then you'd have Jacobs, Smith, Guerra and Sewell as the smaller guys, and Thurgood Murphy Dawson the developing players.
CyberKev
23 May 2006, 14:11
Agree with CK here.
Guys like Brown, Hall, Tredrea these days are playing from the square leading to about 40 from goal. That's where the one on one contests are still happening now and then. Roughead looks to be able to do this. He creates good space, and leads in the right areas. Once he starts holding his marks he'll be a real force around the square.
CHF is getting harder to play. You almost need two CHF's with the amount of ground you have to cover and how quickly the ball moves. Having Dowler at CHF, and Buddy on the flank also leading up the ground would create two mobile targets on half forward 'potentially' and then bomb long to the square or kick to the leading Willo.
I think we have a fair few options developing for us up forward. This is why Boyle only playing as a forward is surprising me at the moment, when its the backline that we are little short of developing players.
I'll presume Croad will be moved back at some stage, and he'll be the key player back there. Then you'd have Jacobs, Smith, Guerra and Sewell as the smaller guys, and Thurgood Murphy Dawson the developing players.
:thumbsu:
Good post, Schreuders.
I don't know where the idea that we drafted Dowler as a pure FF came from?!
From what I can gather, he played predominantly as a CHF, spending sometime at CHB during his TAC days.
Depending on where we finish this season, I can't see us overlooking one of the big five talls on offer.
The development rate of other talls (along with the usual injury issues) may well determine who plays where in future.
What I like about Roughead, Croad & Dowler is that they all have the capacity to play across the park, which is fantastic from a flexibility standpoint. This is the key point that is usually lost in the take KPP high or get by taking them low debate.
Almost invariably, if you want KPP to be able to play well forward and back, you have to get the elite young talls in the draft. If you're happy enough with just trying to mold a young tall into a key defender, you may be able to make a fist of it with your second rounder.
The one thing we should look for in the next KPP we pick up is a bit of 'mongrel'. Whether they play back or forward doesn't matter as we could swap roughie or croad to suit, but we need a CHF/CHB in the mold of Brown or Archer(deosn't every team?) who have the ability to intimidate. Roughie has shown a little bit of this......but I want more!
philhawk
23 May 2006, 16:26
:thumbsu:
Good post, Schreuders.
I don't know where the idea that we drafted Dowler as a pure FF came from?!
From what I can gather, he played predominantly as a CHF, spending sometime at CHB during his TAC days.
Depending on where we finish this season, I can't see us overlooking one of the big five talls on offer.
The development rate of other talls (along with the usual injury issues) may well determine who plays where in future.
What I like about Roughead, Croad & Dowler is that they all have the capacity to play across the park, which is fantastic from a flexibility standpoint. This is the key point that is usually lost in the take KPP high or get by taking them low debate.
Almost invariably, if you want KPP to be able to play well forward and back, you have to get the elite young talls in the draft. If you're happy enough with just trying to mold a young tall into a key defender, you may be able to make a fist of it with your second rounder.
Just wondering where you see Buddy fitting into the scheme of things Kev. At this stage I do think he is best suited up in the forward line, though that being said i've never actually seen him play as a Back?
Having 4-5 marquee forwards is what we would love. Hopefully, if Dowler, Franklin, Roughy and Buddy can be a success at the highest level (tall order to ask for), then we should be right in the years to come.
CyberKev
23 May 2006, 16:37
Just wondering where you see Buddy fitting into the scheme of things Kev. At this stage I do think he is best suited up in the forward line, though that being said i've never actually seen him play as a Back?
Having 4-5 marquee forwards is what we would love. Hopefully, if Dowler, Franklin, Roughy and Buddy can be a success at the highest level (tall order to ask for), then we should be right in the years to come.
Buddy is very crucial to the mix.
Obviously the most likely place for him is as a mobile and creative third tall of a HFF.
That said, he could work well as a back-up CHF and also carries capacity as an outside midfielder.
It is this diversity that will provide us with the capacity to take another 2 talls come the next draft.
In an ideal world, Sydney will offer their first round pick for Everitt, we'll say "no worries", lift McEntee of the rookie list, use our first round pick on one of the gun talls and Sydney's on a quality outside midfielder. From there we can use the 2nd round pick on the best available key defender type and our third pick on Joshua Kennedy.
Were this to eventuate, it wouldn't surprise to see Franlin dropped back to a wing (in the interim) to allow the new young gun tall some debut play of a HFF sometime in 2007.
Obviously this is all highly speculative, but I like the cut of my own jib :D
Buster the hawk
23 May 2006, 23:14
The one thing we should look for in the next KPP we pick up is a bit of 'mongrel'. Whether they play back or forward doesn't matter as we could swap roughie or croad to suit, but we need a CHF/CHB in the mold of Brown or Archer(deosn't every team?) who have the ability to intimidate. Roughie has shown a little bit of this......but I want more!There is a young CHB playing for Gippy Power ATM by name of Lachlin Hansen ,top age this year but has been in the U/18 comp since the age of 15 and throughout the whole time apparently has intimidated and thrown his weight around whilst still featuring among the best players most weeks and if we keep up the current form of last Friday night we might well get a crack at him come draft time.Even lives within our old traditional recruiting zone of Nar Nar Goon.
Gary Shadforth
23 May 2006, 23:20
Even lives within our old traditional recruiting zone of Nar Nar Goon.Oh if we could have our old recruiting zones back again. If they hadn't done away with that system we would have remained a power.
Becoming a national comp put paid to it.
Buster the hawk
23 May 2006, 23:48
Oh if we could have our old recruiting zones back again. If they hadn't done away with that system we would have remained a power.
Becoming a national comp put paid to it.Interesting Gary ,our old recruiting zone was primarily west gippsland which when you look at a map doesn't include a lot of high regional population centers compared with say Carlton who recruited from bendigo or St.Kilda who recruited from ballarat or even Footscray who had the pick of traralgon and sale,yet from small farming towns we got such players as Knights from longwarry and Russo and Jenke from Pakenham,Rowlings from Moe.Makes you wonder was it the disciplined coaching and Kennedy style discipline of the time or might there have been something in the water in west gippy that got us over the line for all those successful years?
superstar
24 May 2006, 00:01
:thumbsu:
Good post, Schreuders.
I don't know where the idea that we drafted Dowler as a pure FF came from?!
From what I can gather, he played predominantly as a CHF, spending sometime at CHB during his TAC days.
Depending on where we finish this season, I can't see us overlooking one of the big five talls on offer.
The development rate of other talls (along with the usual injury issues) may well determine who plays where in future.
What I like about Roughead, Croad & Dowler is that they all have the capacity to play across the park, which is fantastic from a flexibility standpoint. This is the key point that is usually lost in the take KPP high or get by taking them low debate.
Almost invariably, if you want KPP to be able to play well forward and back, you have to get the elite young talls in the draft. If you're happy enough with just trying to mold a young tall into a key defender, you may be able to make a fist of it with your second rounder.
Excellent post. I'd look to develop a Sydney-like forward structure, with guys playing similar roles to...
Roughead = Hall
Williams = Davis
Franklin = O'Loughlin
I actually like Campbell Brown up forward too. His defensive pressure and presence up there was crucial early in the season.
CyberKev
24 May 2006, 10:12
Excellent post. I'd look to develop a Sydney-like forward structure, with guys playing similar roles to...
Roughead = Hall
Williams = Davis
Franklin = O'Loughlin
I actually like Campbell Brown up forward too. His defensive pressure and presence up there was crucial early in the season.
Cheers SS,
The push for quality KPP goes on for us, and while it tends to stagnate short-to-medium term side development somewhat, I'm confident it will reap big dividends at some point.
I also like the look of Campbell Brown up forward, even if his poor discipline on night's like last Friday, does tend to grate. He adds grit and physicality and can be good at ground level.
I'm thinking of a 2007 forward line that looks something like this...
Bateman, Roughead, Williams
Franklin, Dowler, Brown
Hopefully Ellis & Muston will come on and free the need to be running with Bateman out wide. Bateman's skills can let him down at times, but I think he might just be an answer for us as a crumbing forward pocket, particularly as he can find a goal.
Mind you, I'd like to see Matthew Little get a run across half forward (sooner rather than later) to see whether he could be part of the bigger picture.
I'm very disappointed with Boyle to this point (although he may still have a life as a back-up tall) and would rather see little get a go at this point off a HFF.
cschreuder61
24 May 2006, 12:09
Its still early days for Boyle, and he is playing one of the toughest positions, and he's struggling.
I'm not sure we are doing the right thing by him. He's either not playing, or playing CHF. We need to ease him in as a third tall down back or up forward IMO, not throw him straight to CHF. Roughead has struggled when asked to do it. Unfortunately we can't ease him in when there aren't any other options.
I'm still a bit each way on him, and we need to give him an opportunity first, but there are some worrying signs I spose at this early stage (when the ball hits the ground for example).