View Full Version : HIghly rated but miss out-WHY?
Some rated talent missed out. Most of the listed names bellow was predicted as first or second round picks. They did not get a guernsey. Why?
Callum Burges
Jacob Surjan
Will Gayfer
Herrington
Davey
Furfaro
Pfitzner
Joel Campbell
Cosgriff
Ben Clifton
Paul Daffield
Adam Bentick
Stewart
Are there others that missed out?
Originally posted by irel
Some rated talent missed out. Most of the listed names bellow was predicted as first or second round picks. They did not get a guernsey. Why?
Callum Burges
Jacob Surjan
Will Gayfer
Herrington
Davey
Furfaro
Pfitzner
Joel Campbell
Cosgriff
Ben Clifton
Paul Daffield
Adam Bentick
Stewart
Are there others that missed out?
Beat me to it irel;)
footyman
22 Nov 2003, 17:55
Originally posted by irel
Some rated talent missed out. Most of the listed names bellow was predicted as first or second round picks. They did not get a guernsey. Why?
Callum Burges
Jacob Surjan
Will Gayfer
Herrington
Davey
Furfaro
Pfitzner
Joel Campbell
Cosgriff
Ben Clifton
Paul Daffield
Adam Bentick
Stewart
Are there others that missed out?
Worth giving some thought to I guess.
- Surjan is very short
- Burges a smokie talked up a bit by the press but really all that hype was perhaos over the top.
- Gayfer missed games with injury during the year perhaps that didn't help him
- Herrington a short marking forward who is a bit of a one trick pony
- Davey is lightning quick but not physical
- Ben Cosgriff would be one of the strongest 18 year olds around, and clubs probably saw him as a strong player against boys who will lose that advantage when playing against men
- Ben Clifton is a forward who doesn't present well enough, and I was critical of it all year when he played for Calder.
- Bentick may be seen as too slow
- Stewart is bottom age and query over his attitude.
I don't know some of the interstaters well enough.
In saying all that they are the weaknesses I reckon these players have. They do have many strengths and I thought many of them would be taken cos I felt those strengths outweighed those weaknesses.
I would add Michael Johnson and Paul Richardson
Originally posted by irel
Callum Burges
Clubs might gamble on a key-position schoolboy like McPharlin, but a midfielder is a bigger gamble. He skipped a lot of the draft camp tests. Clubs will not have seen enough to justify selecting him, but will be watching him next season.
Originally posted by irel
Jacob Surjan
All the comments seem to be that he is quick on the athletic track, but doesn't show it on the field. Maybe they wonder about his decision making in particulat his tendancy to run into traffic as oppossed to away from it. Good rookie chance.
Originally posted by irel
Will Gayfer
Such a good footballer's footballer. Really though he would go, and go early. I thought he was one where the lack of athleticism would be overlooked because of the football smarts. In the end they seem to say he is too slow, has no leap and doesn't take enough marks.
Originally posted by irel
Herrington
Not a player type that the AFL clubs can really use. He is a 178cm full-forward. Took a while for clubs to figure out how to combat him, but once they had his impact diminished.
Originally posted by irel
Davey
Only really talked up by those who had seen some VFL and got excited without seeing the bigger picture. The fact that the Roos preferred to draft Sansbury speaks volumes.
Originally posted by irel
Furfaro
Not a key position player, not a quick rebounder. Really a specialist mid-size backpocket. Clubs just aren't interested in that player type.
Originally posted by irel
Pfitzner
Not such a huge surprise. He was only OK in the championships and they expect a bit more for a top-age guy.
Originally posted by irel
Joel Campbell
Probably being from NT counts againt him. Could be a good rookie list chance.
Originally posted by irel
Cosgriff
The big surprise for me. He has great qualities for modern football.
Originally posted by irel
Ben Clifton
Considering how often the ball came his way, he simply doesn't take enough marks. Is not particularly mobile.
Originally posted by irel
Adam Bentick
Slow, hard-working but not overly dynamic. Was overlooked last year as well and didn't really show a heap of improvement on good form from last season. Would be a good soldier for a state-league team.
Originally posted by irel
Stewart
For mine despite his talent, he is beaten one-on-one too often. Will be one they watch next year.
scooter600x
22 Nov 2003, 23:37
Originally posted by Weaver
Will Gayfer
Such a good footballer's footballer. Really though he would go, and go early. I thought he was one where the lack of athleticism would be overlooked because of the football smarts. In the end they seem to say he is too slow, has no leap and doesn't take enough marks.
Didn't you have him at 2 in an early phantom draft?
BigCat1
23 Nov 2003, 01:18
Originally posted by Weaver
Burges
Clubs might gamble on a key-position schoolboy like McPharlin, but a midfielder is a bigger gamble. He skipped a lot of the draft camp tests. Clubs will not have seen enough to justify selecting him, but will be watching him next season.
Steward
For mine despite his talent, he is beaten one-on-one too often. Will be one they watch next year.
Get him on the same plane as Spencer and test him out properly over the pre-season. Geelong took a kid last year in the PSD with Brent Maloney and it has payed off. Hopefully we will do it again and not waste time on hacks like Motlop.
Same goes with Steward who has tons of potential. Get them into the club and assess them there. It takes the risk out of picking up guys when you've seen them at close range for a month.
footyman
23 Nov 2003, 11:13
Originally posted by BigCat1
Get him on the same plane as Spencer and test him out properly over the pre-season. Geelong took a kid last year in the PSD with Brent Maloney and it has payed off. Hopefully we will do it again and not waste time on hacks like Motlop.
Same goes with Steward who has tons of potential. Get them into the club and assess them there. It takes the risk out of picking up guys when you've seen them at close range for a month.
I think both Stewart and Burges are too young for the pre-season draft. Next year for them.
Originally posted by footyman
I think both Stewart and Burges are too young for the pre-season draft. Next year for them.
You mean the rookie list, not the pre-season draft.
GOALden Hawk
23 Nov 2003, 12:23
Agree with most of Weaver's assessments. Still think a few of them should have been taken.
Gayfer staggers me. Apparently he turned up to draft camp in less than perfect shape and struggled. But his performances on the field over the last 2 years have been good enough surely.
Cosgriff is the other one. I know he is the prototype athletic tall that clubs love, but anyone who saw him play would love the way he goes about his footy. He has that Hamill like toughness and attack on the footy.
Stewart and Herrington could struggle from here. Usually if you have a good season and are eligible you will be picked up. You have to do something extraordinary the following year because you can't really impress any more than you have already. David Kellett is an example of this.
BigCat1
23 Nov 2003, 18:36
can you draft 17 year olds in the preseason draft? eg burges or Steward
holdencaulfield
23 Nov 2003, 19:18
no
Originally posted by holdencaulfield
no
I think they can, but not the rookie list.
Worth giving some thought to I guess.
- Surjan is very short
In saying all that they are the weaknesses I reckon these players have. They do have many strengths and I thought many of them would be taken cos I felt those strengths outweighed those weaknesses.
180cm is not very short (Jacob Surjan) smaller players have been drafted, and been great champions!!