View Full Version : Vacancy - FF
Bojangles17
27 Apr 2008, 23:06
with Richo playing his "slide rule" role up and down the wings it leaves a gaping hole at the pointy end of our front end..Lets look at the candidates
Polak...dissapoints me, if played like the opposition were Freo ea game he'd be a champ, he doesnt and is bordering on being dropped.
Jack R..is looking more like a support act than a FF..will continue to improve but will be better as a foil than the focal point
Sarge...prefer his work as a CHB where he seems to reinvented himself had added bulk to a lightweight back half and now puts body online..is ok at a pinch but back is his go
Hughes...Would like to see him given more chances, reports are that his workrate is impressive at Burgs and has kicked a few bags..lets persevere with him
Putt...This si the kid that I reckon will surpise, with his frame and speed if he can apply himself , just might be the enswer we're looking for in 12 mths time
Gourdis..strangely they are developing him as a backman..wont see him this year in any case...12 months we will see what he has to offer
CoggaRules
27 Apr 2008, 23:08
with Richo playing his "slide rule" role up and down the wings it leaves a gaping hole at the pointy end of our front end..Lets look at the candidates
Polak...dissapoints me, if played like the opposition were Freo ea game he'd be a champ, he doesnt and is bordering on being dropped.
Jack R..is looking more like a support act than a FF..will continue to improve but will be better as a foil than the focal point
Sarge...prefer his work as a CHB where he seems to reinvented himself had added bulk to a lightweight back half and now puts body online..is ok at a pinch but back is his go
Hughes...Would like to see him given more chances, reports are that his workrate is impressive at Burgs and has kicked a few bags..lets persevere with him
Putt...This si the kid that I reckon will surpise, with his frame and speed if he can apply himself , just might be the enswer we're looking for in 12 mths time
Gourdis..strangely they are developing him as a backman..wont see him this year in any case...12 months we will see what he has to offer
Spot on...Now you know why Cogga was sccreamng for Fev BJ. Where to now dude???
I would go as far as to say we would win these games with a FF. We got it to the last kick but we didnt have "that" target dude. ;)
Spot on...Now you know why Cogga was sccreamng for Fev BJ. Where to now dude??? ;)
So you knew Richo would be played on a wing? Fev is not what we need :thumbsd:
Give Hughes a shot but I think we'll stick with Polak.
Bojangles17
27 Apr 2008, 23:11
Spot on...Now you know why Cogga was sccreamng for Fev BJ. Where to now dude??? ;)
aghh %^$# Fev cogg...too old, dont forget we had 24 less Inside 50s than the Hawks, always going to be hard to win games with that lack of midfield penetration
Bojangles17
27 Apr 2008, 23:12
So you knew Richo would be played on a wing? Fev is not what we need :thumbsd:
Give Hughes a shot but I think we'll stick with Polak.
Not sure why, has kicked 1 goal in a few weeks of footy with a handful of assists , im losing patience with him, not hard enough for mine:o
CoggaRules
27 Apr 2008, 23:13
aghh %^$# Fev cogg...too old, dont forget we had 24 less Inside 50s than the Hawks, always going to be hard to win games with that lack of midfield penetration
yeah but with a FF then we might have more inside 50s because we would get it to the wing and "THE FF", not "a ff" would make that lead that couldnt be ignored.
Get with the program dude. Its a simple formula. You have ball sport played by a team and the winner wins because it "scores" more goals. i.e is more accurate with its chances, the highest paid player is the player that can convert and create chances to convert, 8 times out of 10.
We ____ed it up with the other extrovert, Plugger but we never learn from our mistakes do we????
I am not going to harp on it, whats done is done. But if he wants to leave the blues for a 3 year contract then get him!!!!!!! He is contesting the coleman in a shit side FFS, right now we aint shit, we are ok and we need a FF!!!! ;)
metallichris
27 Apr 2008, 23:16
Agree with Polak. Just can't seem to find him a position in this side. When he is our FF he can't seem to get the ball, and when he isn't out focal point up forward he goes missing like today. Having said that, I would rather him up forward than in defense.
Riewoldt is too young and raw to take on such a role.
I would love for Schulz to play up forward but I think that he has found his niche in the backline. Possibility to pinchhit once Rance cements himself down back.
My vote would be for Hughes, has shown some signs that he could play that position, and is starting to hit that age where he needs to stand up and say 'this is my position'.
Putt I know little about. Have heard he isn't a bad athlete for his height. I would've thought he'd suit as a ruckman who rests forward though. A way off.
Same with Gourdis, don't know much about him but it seems that people rate him quite highly. If our defense really molds and cements itself in the next twelve months then we will have no choice but to try him as a forward, which is his natural game I think?
carn tigez
27 Apr 2008, 23:26
yeah but with a FF then we might have more inside 50s because we would get it to the wing and "THE FF", not "a ff" would make that lead that couldnt be ignored.
Get with the program dude. Its a simple formula. You have ball sport played by a team and the winner wins because it "scores" more goals. i.e is more accurate with its chances, the highest paid player is the player that can convert and create chances to convert, 8 times out of 10.
We ____ed it up with the other extrovert, Plugger but we never learn from our mistakes do we???? ;)
Isn't that the reason we are playing Richo up the ground? Because he "couldn't be ignored" and the players kicked it to him too much.
CoggaRules
27 Apr 2008, 23:28
Isn't that the reason we are playing Richo up the ground? Because he "couldn't be ignored" and the players kicked it to him too much.
yeah but Fev cant be ignored too, but he kicks bags 8 out of 10 times and contest Colemans. The end. ;)
Im starting to lean to Bowden. Great mark, great footy smarts/skills built up over the years, plays tall, beautifull kick.
With the reversal of positions and playing style in the last 3 weeks, i wouldnt be surprised at all. We have tried the others with no success. And he has been playing up foward for the Burgers a fair bit.
Bojangles17
28 Apr 2008, 15:05
Im starting to lean to Bowden. Great mark, great footy smarts/skills built up over the years, plays tall, beautifull kick.
With the reversal of positions and playing style in the last 3 weeks, i wouldnt be surprised at all. We have tried the others with no success. And he has been playing up foward for the Burgers a fair bit.
JB also has a few more strinbgs to his bow than simply mark and kick with both MM and JR playing that role we are seriously lacking in a little creativity up forward which is exposed big time when playing a good side...Both Pettifer and Bowden should be in the side
Let's not go down the Schulz at FF path again. tried that one and it didn't work. Seems to be holding his own at CHB. It's not broken, so no need to fix that one.
I'd like to see Polak given a proper chance at FF. Put him there and leave him there instead of playing him in a million positions. Has the marking tools.
Don't mind the idea of JB playing there either.
Let Jack learn his craft where he's at for the time being.
Cleve? Maybe. Running out of time for this kid. Needs to dominate a few games in the VFL before being considered.
Ruanaidh
28 Apr 2008, 15:26
Im starting to lean to Bowden. Great mark, great footy smarts/skills built up over the years, plays tall, beautifull kick.
With the reversal of positions and playing style in the last 3 weeks, i wouldnt be surprised at all. We have tried the others with no success. And he has been playing up foward for the Burgers a fair bit.I'm for JB at FF. Let Patto, Simmo and Polak share ruck duties with one on duty, one resting in the FP and one on the bench. The rest of the Forward line can consist of : Jack, Browny, Morton and Deledio. Cleve Hughes has to start consistently kicking bags in the seconds if he is to be promoted. Putt will be a prospect in the near future. Oh, and please keep Shulzy down back where he is needed.
Wallaby
28 Apr 2008, 15:43
Hmm - tough one. I don't think we want a dominant FF - we want a range of options (we've had only one target for the last 15 years. and you can't really say it worked). When our midfield is making a forward 50 entry, they need long, short, medium, left and right targets.
I always wanted to see Bowden down forward, but it may be too late for that now - we have Riewoldt, Brown, Morton - not much room for another of those type. He is a good spoiler - not so much a good mark.
We do need a big target as the last resort -it will probably be Polak, but I could throw out a Wild-card here - Patto? He's still a bit small for a ruck, but he is a good size, takes a fair grab, Ok kick, and has that indefinable quality of 'good things happen when he goes near the ball'. Good defensive pressure.
Maybe not quick enough as a key forward, but as I said, we are looking for a 3rd-or-4th choice target here. He and Simmons changing in the Goalsquare?
I'm just thinking out loud.........
Bojangles17
28 Apr 2008, 17:24
long and short of it is we dont have an immediate answer, whilst we're sorting one we can ill afford to have Bowden spectating, there's been more than a few that have suggested he may have been the diff in last couple of matches
CoggaRules
28 Apr 2008, 17:31
get with the program dudes. We will be at the point where we can afford to get a ready to roll answer to our problems. He is out of contract, he wants more than the pissy one that the tankers are offering, we need a spearhead for at least the next 3 years he is 24? 25? and he is the answer. do not let this opprotunity pass us by again tigers. We need a top line FF who can kick them from anywhere and Fev is that. I am back on the Fev bandwagon....LMAO;)
Bojangles17
28 Apr 2008, 17:45
get with the program dudes. We will be at the point where we can afford to get a ready to roll answer to our problems. He is out of contract, he wants more than the pissy one that the tankers are offering, we need a spearhead for at least the next 3 years he is 24? 25? and he is the answer. do not let this opprotunity pass us by again tigers. We need a top line FF who can kick them from anywhere and Fev is that. I am back on the Fev bandwagon....LMAO;)
Im not, Id rather keep R1 & 2 draft picks:thumbsd:
Patto and Putt were both recruited as key forwards. TW seems to like the idea of building our own Gorilla.
Gourdis is being pushed back because he's *very* quick, but probably not big enough...Not sure I agree with the thinking. Could be they're just trying him there so he doesn't get in the way of Putt/Hughes for Coburg, and/or they're trying to teach him a few things ( he is a 'project' player after all ).
Bowden...Could probably do it, but not exactly a long term option.
I think Polak needs to be dropped to Coburg put in front of the goals and left there until he just dominates and intimidates the opposition and keeps getting the ball when double or triple teamed. He's big, reasonably mobile and takes a good grab, but can't seem to get his head around being 'The Man' rather than 2nd or 3rd guy up.
As for Fevola...What would we have to pay to get him? We're not going to come last this year, so wont get him easily through the PSD, and I doubt we'd be willing to pay the price Carlton would ask.
CoggaRules
28 Apr 2008, 17:54
Im not, Id rather keep R1 & 2 draft picks:thumbsd:
no probs, i would rather keep round 2 pick for the next draft. And build on what we have with R1 and R2 the year after. If we find a FF with them then we have "options". Now we only can only hope we find "an" option with draft picks. KPPs that win Colemans and are in the mix for Colemans year in year out, dont grow on trees. Go and ask the cats why they took a "risk" and went for a Cam Mooney, back before they made their big push. Or why the dogs opted for Aker. We didnt purely because our window was a long way away. Things have changed and our window is closer than what we thought it was. You said it yourself by starting this thread. Vacancy for a FF. Get him on a 3 year deal, put the right clauses in place to keep him on the straight and narrow and he can joind his best man in Newman and win a flag together. ;)
Mario Speedwagon
28 Apr 2008, 18:05
yeah but Fev cant be ignored too, but he kicks bags 8 out of 10 times and contest Colemans. The end. ;)
Only needs one more ____ up and he could be ours!:thumbsu:
Nah...:o
Im not, Id rather keep R1 & 2 draft picks:thumbsd:
I to would love a sober Fev, but, and its a big but, we carnt waste early draft picks this year with the Gold Coast and soon to be West Sydney getting a big slice of that pie in the following seasons. So im with you, must keep 1 and 2 at all cost.
Tigersman
29 Apr 2008, 01:45
If we dont use our early draft picks what could we offer that might get a bite from the blues?
Pettifer and ?
Its to early to be doing the trade speculation so going on our list right now I would like to see Polak play second ruck with Hughes/Patto playing forward. Add to that Bowden on the bench as a fall back option.
Bowden has to be in the side. He is a great utility player coming off the pine. Can play a role in the midfield rotations and then go forward if Hughes or Patto didnt fire. Same with the backline.
Mario Speedwagon
29 Apr 2008, 02:40
I to would love a sober Fev, but, and its a big but, we carnt waste early draft picks this year with the Gold Coast and soon to be West Sydney getting a big slice of that pie in the following seasons. So im with you, must keep 1 and 2 at all cost.
I take it your referring to the provisional announcement made last week about the new teams and the draft? Mate...trust me won't happen...unless the AFL really want a SuperLeague style war with the established clubs....probably led by Fast Eddie himself in an unholy alliance with Tricky Dicky Pratt, the Swanettes and Far North Fitzroy....:eek:
Lord-Venn
29 Apr 2008, 08:02
yeah but with a FF then we might have more inside 50s because we would get it to the wing and "THE FF", not "a ff" would make that lead that couldnt be ignored.
Get with the program dude. Its a simple formula. You have ball sport played by a team and the winner wins because it "scores" more goals. i.e is more accurate with its chances, the highest paid player is the player that can convert and create chances to convert, 8 times out of 10.
We ____ed it up with the other extrovert, Plugger but we never learn from our mistakes do we????
I am not going to harp on it, whats done is done. But if he wants to leave the blues for a 3 year contract then get him!!!!!!! He is contesting the coleman in a shit side FFS, right now we aint shit, we are ok and we need a FF!!!! ;)
This is nto quite true... IM not sure if you watched the game, But we scored more goals than Hawthorn but still lost.....??????
I take it your referring to the provisional announcement made last week about the new teams and the draft? Mate...trust me won't happen...unless the AFL really want a SuperLeague style war with the established clubs....probably led by Fast Eddie himself in an unholy alliance with Tricky Dicky Pratt, the Swanettes and Far North Fitzroy....:eek:
Yeah, it was the leagues negotiating position, not the final decision, but the fact remains the league will want to ensure they're competitive reasonably quickly for PR and team/crowd building reasons....Of course that means established players, not 'just' draft picks.
What worries me more is the plan to have West Sydney in the following year, which will mean 2 sets of 'extra' picks (etc) running at the same time. THAT could be truely nasty.
CoggaRules
29 Apr 2008, 11:22
This is nto quite true... IM not sure if you watched the game, But we scored more goals than Hawthorn but still lost.....??????
time for a lesson dude.
Basketball - NBA - highest paid players are?? yep the ones that score the points. The rest of the team get it to them and they finish the job. Kareem, Shaquille etc.
Soccer - highest paid players over the stretch have been? yep Ronaldo, Van Basten, and any other strikers you want to name? the rest of the team get the ball to them and they get paid the big bucks because they slot the pill into the net.
Hockey, Netball, you name it, the one thing they all have in common is that they all have the "STRIKER" that gets the ____ing job done.
Footy is no different, and fast becoming exactly the same with the new basketball type rules, that are hell bent on making the game an attackng game. ;)
Wallaby
29 Apr 2008, 13:34
Disagree Cogga - A gun Full-forward has never been an instant passport to the promised land.
In the late 60's and 70s there were three multi-100 goal season full-forwards - Hudson, Mckenna, Wade. Hudson was a member of one flag-winning side, and Wade had to leave Geelong to go to North for his Flag.
In recent years, Gehrig has kicked the ton - no premiership.
Sure there have been some 100-goal forwards in a premiership team (Dunstall, Roach, LLoyd, Sumich?), but look at the opposite:
Capper, Lockett, McKenna, Beasley, Donohue, Modra (Adelaide did not win the flag when he kicked 100 goals).
You need a good midfield and multiple avenues to goal these days.
Put all your eggs in the one key forward - hey, it's Richmond with Richo at FF!
CoggaRules
29 Apr 2008, 13:43
Disagree Cogga - A gun Full-forward has never been an instant passport to the promised land.
In the late 60's and 70s there were three multi-100 goal season full-forwards - Hudson, Mckenna, Wade. Hudson was a member of one flag-winning side, and Wade had to leave Geelong to go to North for his Flag.
In recent years, Gehrig has kicked the ton - no premiership.
Sure there have been some 100-goal forwards in a premiership team (Dunstall, Roach, LLoyd, Sumich?), but look at the opposite:
Capper, Lockett, McKenna, Beasley, Donohue, Modra (Adelaide did not win the flag when he kicked 100 goals).
You need a good midfield and multiple avenues to goal these days.
Put all your eggs in the one key forward - hey, it's Richmond with Richo at FF!
agree to disagree. You dont pass up 80 goals a season minimum when they become available. Its just a debate hey? If they do they do, if they dont they dont. ;)
richoatthedisco
29 Apr 2008, 15:39
yeah but with a FF then we might have more inside 50s because we would get it to the wing and "THE FF", not "a ff" would make that lead that couldnt be ignored.
Get with the program dude. Its a simple formula. You have ball sport played by a team and the winner wins because it "scores" more goals. i.e is more accurate with its chances, the highest paid player is the player that can convert and create chances to convert, 8 times out of 10.
We ____ed it up with the other extrovert, Plugger but we never learn from our mistakes do we????
I am not going to harp on it, whats done is done. But if he wants to leave the blues for a 3 year contract then get him!!!!!!! He is contesting the coleman in a shit side FFS, right now we aint shit, we are ok and we need a FF!!!! ;)
Agree Cogga. To think we baulked at paying him $400K just 2-3 years ago. The d*ckhead factor is a concern but Newman is his best mate and would keep him in line.
Tigersman
29 Apr 2008, 23:48
Agree Cogga. To think we baulked at paying him $400K just 2-3 years ago. The d*ckhead factor is a concern but Newman is his best mate and would keep him in line.
After paying Holland more!
Mario Speedwagon
30 Apr 2008, 02:14
With Fev & Richo in the same team, get ready to learn the new RFC theme song ...everybody, repeat after me : I know all there is to know about the crying game...
Richmond 2014
30 Apr 2008, 18:41
With Polak taking Kozi and McGuane/Thursty/Moore on Reidwolt i think Jay Schulz FF because Richo will be on the wing and Jack acting as CHF leading up the ground because he is a great kick inside 50.
Shultz can out mark Hudgton any day..
Goldust
30 Apr 2008, 18:45
Disagree Cogga - A gun Full-forward has never been an instant passport to the promised land.
In the late 60's and 70s there were three multi-100 goal season full-forwards - Hudson, Mckenna, Wade. Hudson was a member of one flag-winning side, and Wade had to leave Geelong to go to North for his Flag.
In recent years, Gehrig has kicked the ton - no premiership.
Sure there have been some 100-goal forwards in a premiership team (Dunstall, Roach, LLoyd, Sumich?), but look at the opposite:
Capper, Lockett, McKenna, Beasley, Donohue, Modra (Adelaide did not win the flag when he kicked 100 goals).
You need a good midfield and multiple avenues to goal these days.
Put all your eggs in the one key forward - hey, it's Richmond with Richo at FF!
I THINK back to the days of Kelvin Templeton and Bernie Quinlan kicking bags of goals in pure crap teams.
And not so certain St Kilda were a finals team on a few occasions when Lockett cracked the ton!
CoggaRules
1 May 2008, 10:32
I THINK back to the days of Kelvin Templeton and Bernie Quinlan kicking bags of goals in pure crap teams.
And not so certain St Kilda were a finals team on a few occasions when Lockett cracked the ton!
yeah and we must have been mad to just about him sign on the dotted line and the swans were totally insane getting him to sign on the dotted line. Get Real dude, you are going to tell me that if we had a plugger at the tigers straight after we missed out on him, that we would have not kicked butt? our 95 team would have gone close to the flag with a FF of plugger proportions...even with a Johhny Howat in the side. ;)
yeah and we must have been mad to just about him sign on the dotted line and the swans were totally insane getting him to sign on the dotted line. Get Real dude, you are going to tell me that if we had a plugger at the tigers straight after we missed out on him, that we would have not kicked butt? our 95 team would have gone close to the flag with a FF of plugger proportions...even with a Johhny Howat in the side. ;)
Hey, great. you get me early-90s Plugger and I'll jump through all the hoops for you. But you said Fevola. And Fevola is not going to do a huge amount for our club. Lockett vs Fevola is a bit of a mis-match.
Fev's OK - if Carlton dump him and we can pick him up for nothing, then, yeah.
Swap for a draft pick? - say about 30-40. Depending on the Brain scan.
jackson_rules
1 May 2008, 19:17
Isn't that the reason we are playing Richo up the ground? Because he "couldn't be ignored" and the players kicked it to him too much.
no were playing richo up the ground so we can find his replacement before he is gone completly;)
yeah and we must have been mad to just about him sign on the dotted line and the swans were totally insane getting him to sign on the dotted line. Get Real dude, you are going to tell me that if we had a plugger at the tigers straight after we missed out on him, that we would have not kicked butt? our 95 team would have gone close to the flag with a FF of plugger proportions...even with a Johhny Howat in the side. ;)
I was merely pointing out - as the previous poster did - that not ALL 100 goal full forwards came from premiership teams.
It could and probably still can be done - a player in a lowly side kicking a ton, as I stated.
Simply alluding to the fact it works both ways.
As to your questions......were the Swans insane trying to sign Plugger? No. Were we? No.
Would we have gone on to premiership glory with Plugger in the line-up in 96......well we'll never know. It wasn't a simple case of adding Plugger to a preliminary final side.
The asking price if I recall was two or three of either Knights, Campbell, Maxfield or Daffy and a draft pick.
Given the first three were our leading on-ballers of the time, we may very well have had supply problems.
Would I have been happy to offload Daffy and Campbell and Maxfield....sure!!
But it wasn't just a case of adding one player to an existing preliminary final team, there was a price that had to be paid.
But back to my point, it just astounds me that a guy like Templeton could head the league in 78 with 118 goals when the Bulldogs finished 11th!!!