View Full Version : Ebert
I think i might wait before he even gets a game before i start bignoting the kid.
chris17
13 Dec 2003, 01:14
He is an outstanding prospect, that will play at least 10 AFL games next season. He has the skill and determination to take him far, but obviously that means very little at the start of anyone's career.
I think he'll be a star of the AFL, Brownlow...maybe..long way off yet though. If he is half as good as his old man, then he will be 95% better than any current AFL footballer running around circa 2003.
PAfolwr
13 Dec 2003, 07:12
Hopefully he will get enough gametime to let the football do the talking.
However we know that a fit and firing Ebert will never ever get a game before a 3/4 fit Kingsley and co.
Even less than 3/4 fit for finals.
blackdiamond
13 Dec 2003, 11:28
No need to talk Brett Ebert up as his footy will do the talking.
I don't share your optimism about Brett winning a Brownlow in 2004, however if you want to throw some money my way I will give you what ever odds you like. :D
Looks the goods, but lets not go crazy just yet.
Porthos
13 Dec 2003, 13:01
Brett is very lucky that Nick has left, because Choco's Plan A only has room for one unaccountable midfielder. Well, in the centre square anyway. Hopefully he'll do OK.
Originally posted by Porthos
Brett is very lucky that Nick has left, because Choco's Plan A only has room for one unaccountable midfielder. Well, in the centre square anyway. Hopefully he'll do OK.
Thats the common ground between the crows and power, neither has a plan b or any other, just a plan A !!!!
Originally posted by jc67
You port guys need to straiten out a lot of people on the main board.
Most think that Stevens is a big loss for you, and the common idea is that Franco is to old and wont recover (in the head) from his knee.
They have absolutly NFI about young brett, who he is, how much better than stevens he will be, how long he will play for, how old he is , that he's bagged a Magery, or that he will proberbly be port's first brownlow winner, if he's given a chance next year he will cut up all that take him on.
None of the Vics on the main board will give any respect to anyone who has made it in the SANFL, their tired old line of "Mickey Mouse League" will just come out again. And they have no regard for the name Ebert, even though Russell played every game of the one season he was at North.
Iv'e got $300.00 on him for next years charlie at 200 to 1.
Are you mad? I've got faith in him but quantity as well as quality is needed to win a Brownlow. He'll be lucky to play 10 half games. If he gets a few starts he might snag a vote somewhere.
I'm not a port fan by any stretch (my kids are though) but every south aussie expects young Ebert to become the most accomplished afl footballer ever to come out of SA.
And these POMPUS VICTORIAN W@NKERS HAVE NO *****ING IDEA!
you guys should tell them now so you can rub it in after next season.
Premierships rub it in. Whether Ebert is in the first we get ot not doesn't matter.
Originally posted by mic59
Are you mad? I've got faith in him but quantity as well as quality is needed to win a Brownlow. He'll be lucky to play 10 half games. If he gets a few starts he might snag a vote somewhere.
If he does ok in the wizard cup Chocko will play him from the start of the season.
and my 300 wins $15,000, so its worth a shot.
Imagine what people would be saying if he wasnt listed and was availabe in this years draft!!!! move over cooney!!
Paralowiepower
14 Dec 2003, 09:34
Brownlow??
You should of put it on him to win the Rising Star Award
Santos L Helper
22 Dec 2003, 11:14
Here's a sad, but true, story straight from the inner sanctum at Alberton.
Williams does not rate Brett Ebert very highly and Phil Walsh rates his disposal as poor. If you all knew this then I apologise, but if you were all hoping for a fair run for 'young Brett'.......think again.
I also have heard that many of our assistants are frustrated by the apparent lack of consideration given to them by the senior coach and his moron backup. Only recently we had to change dieticians because his job was compromised by Williams' superior knowledge on the subject.
This year is on track for disaster!
Ford Fairlane
22 Dec 2003, 15:06
Originally posted by Santos L Helper
Here's a sad, but true, story straight from the inner sanctum at Alberton.
Williams does not rate Brett Ebert very highly and Phil Walsh rates his disposal as poor. If you all knew this then I apologise, but if you were all hoping for a fair run for 'young Brett'.......think again.
I also have heard that many of our assistants are frustrated by the apparent lack of consideration given to them by the senior coach and his moron backup. Only recently we had to change dieticians because his job was compromised by Williams' superior knowledge on the subject.
This year is on track for disaster!
It's the no lose year. Anything less than a GF and that's the end of Team Choco, anything more and I guess he's vindicated and we're all happy.
And disaster brings early draft picks as its reward! ;)
An interesting sidelight is that Russell Ebert was highly critical of Camp Deliverance in Middle Earth, especially the dangers placed on the players for questionable benefit. That's a couple of times Russell hasn't towed the party line, being critical of Brett's non selection in the Power side after his Magarey win. Seems the great man is getting a bit narked by some of the goings on ....
Sandola
22 Dec 2003, 16:06
In that case he's a tennis dad. For the sake of his kid and the sake of the PAFC, he should get on board or at the very least shut up. Even if he's right. Especially if he's right.
Kid Dynamite!
22 Dec 2003, 16:15
Originally posted by Santos L Helper
Williams does not rate Brett Ebert very highly.
Given that Adam Morgan was selected over Brett then I'd say that this is quite true.
Given that Ebert may have a few shortcomings, he should still be given a run in the team if for tradition purposes only. Here we have our first player who was selected under the father-son rule, son of arguably(with very little arguement) Port Adelaides' finest player and a Magarey medallist. The team would lift with just him on the bench.
Ford Fairlane
22 Dec 2003, 18:19
Originally posted by Sandola
In that case he's a tennis dad. For the sake of his kid and the sake of the PAFC, he should get on board or at the very least shut up. Even if he's right. Especially if he's right.
I'd classify a tennis dad as a non achiever who lives his successes vicariously thru his son's (or daughter's in the tennis case) achievements. I don't think Russell can be categorised that way. He's also a paid employee of the PAFC and a media commentator so he will be asked his views and, being Russell, he will give them. Fair enough and maybe what we need is some challenging of Williams's ideas from within.
But yes he has used Brett as the vehicle for both of his public criticisms of Port in recent times. While I can appreciate his being a protective father (and he has seen his sons carry some untoward attention because of the Ebert name) I also see how it could become difficult for Brett to have Russell advocating for him too much.
I don't think he should shut up, but maybe he should couch his thoughts a little more generally ...
Porthos
22 Dec 2003, 20:35
Maybe he's getting his media parenting tips from Cornesy.
Ford Fairlane
23 Dec 2003, 12:41
That's not a bad idea ... back in the early stages of Chad and Kanes' time before they established themselves in the Port side (I guess you'd call Kane established by now) crowie supporters would be regularly ringing up 5AA saying how it wasn't fair that they weren't getting regular games and then spouting the self generated rumours that they'd heard that Chad/Kane (insert name here) wanted to join the crows. Graham always maintained a public line that Port was a strong team to break into and you weren't just handed an AFL berth. And he was frustrated by the rumoured switch of clubs, he used to treat those callers quite curtly.
PAfolwr
23 Dec 2003, 15:40
I just bloody hope that Williams gives Ebert (and a few others) every chance to prove himself and then develop.
NOT the Guerra treatment, but proper gametime early in the new year.
Had Williams been Francou's coach when he started up, and given him the Guerra treatment, he would have been lost to the AFL by now.
This year Williams MUST improve in this respect, otherwise a lot more people (including myself) will join the chorus.
It is his final chance to show something. By that I do not mean a GF win, nor a GF appearance.
Mainly show that:
1...He will give young players a chance to develop and not just use them as fill ins for favorite pets irrespective of how good or bad they play.
The way he searches for players from other Clubs. :mad:
HEY the grass is not always greener on the other side. Give your younger players a chance to develop properly.
2...Show some confidence in, and respect to his players. Stevens Vs the Swans smelled of total lack of respect to the player.
Focusing on not losing rather than winning in finals also shows lack of respect to his players.
If he improves in these areas, then he stays. Coming first or sixteenth doesn't matter really as a lot of things out of his control can influence the final outcome.
bruce12
24 Dec 2003, 18:48
All being well, SOG should get a fair amount of time on the ground during the preseason games. I'd hope that if he puts in the performance we'd expect from him, he'll get a jumper for round 1. What happens from there is anyone's guess........
I can't wait to see SOG and Sal on the park next year. The fact that Primus and Francou should both also be on the park, will help those kids no end as well.
Choco took his time blooding Josh Carr, and it's paid handsome dividends I think. I hope these 2 kids do the same.
Ford Fairlane
24 Dec 2003, 21:32
Welcome Bruce12. That name wouldn't have anything to do with 12 being Bruce Abernethy's number when he set out on his league career with Port Adelaide?
bruce12
24 Dec 2003, 22:56
Originally posted by Ford Fairlane
Welcome Bruce12. That name wouldn't have anything to do with 12 being Bruce Abernethy's number when he set out on his league career with Port Adelaide?
Only a Ford could be that smart........
Ford Fairlane
25 Dec 2003, 08:44
More to do with age than smarts I suspect ;) ... a fine choice tho ... ahh to have the young Abba streaming down the wing in this Power side :cool:
Macca19
25 Dec 2003, 10:44
Originally posted by Santos L Helper
Here's a sad, but true, story straight from the inner sanctum at Alberton.
Williams does not rate Brett Ebert very highly and Phil Walsh rates his disposal as poor. If you all knew this then I apologise, but if you were all hoping for a fair run for 'young Brett'.......think again.
For what its worth, Brett should be on the bench for our first Wizard Cup game and probably our first H&A game too.
I dont see how Williams couldnt rate him highly. He is our best youngster on our list. He gets more disposals than any of our other youngsters on our list. And poor disposal? Obviously Phil Walsh has lost the plot or something. He'd be one of the most precise kicks on our list. Him winning the Magarey was no fluke. When Brett was unleashed full time into the midfield in round 9ish he produced one of the best single seasons ive seen.
I would love Brett to play 22 games this year. Its his time to move up. Hes grown out of the pond size SANFL...his second half of the year has shown that and its time for him to be released into the bigger ocean of AFL football.
I have no confidence in Williams anymore and i fully expect Brett to be wasted this year in the SANFL and only play 7 or 8 games.
Santos L Helper
26 Dec 2003, 15:24
Originally posted by Macca19
I have no confidence in Williams anymore and i fully expect Brett to be wasted this year in the SANFL and only play 7 or 8 games.
Sory mate. I feel like the grinch who stole Christmas from you now Macca. :)
Macca19
27 Dec 2003, 09:35
Originally posted by Santos L Helper
Sory mate. I feel like the grinch who stole Christmas from you now Macca. :)
haha its all good. Ive realised Williams reluctance to give any youngsters a fair shot for a while now.
PAfolwr
27 Dec 2003, 10:37
Originally posted by Macca19
haha its all good. Ive realised Williams reluctance to give any youngsters a fair shot for a while now.
The funny thing is that had Guerra been delisted by Essendon, Williams would probably snap him up asap and give him heaps of gametime week in week out.
He does appear to be one of these people that thinks the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence.
Question: If you are a youngster that follows Port Adelaide, what is the easiest way to play heaps of games for the Club?
Answer: Get delisted by Essendon.
It is true that young Brett is a fine player. Still winning a Magarey is a long way from playing consistent AFL. You only have to look at recent winners of the medal which includes numerous AFL rejects.
I think 5-10 games this year is a more realistic expectation.
The Brownlow might be out of the question, but the Rising Star is certainly a prospect.
Originally posted by greg62
Still winning a Magarey is a long way from playing consistent AFL. You only have to look at recent winners of the medal which includes numerous AFL rejects.
I
Noone is saying that the Magarey does = Consistent AFL footy.
And yes, the majority of the winners in the last 10-12 years have been ex AFL players in the twilight of their career. Those players wont improve anymore, they will only decrease as the years pass by.
Brett was 19 this season and only just turned 20. Hes only gonna improve whereas the others wouldnt. He didnt even play the whole year in the midfield. He only played the last 12 or so games in there.
The last 19 year old to win the Magarey was Buckley. Look how good he turned out to be. Hopefully Brett goes somewhere close to emulating Nathan.
I can't see Brett getting much more than 10 games this year. At least it's better than some of the returns players have been given before. But 10 games should be a minimum. And the main reason for this is that our defence and midfield are getting on. Francou, James and Schofield still have a few years but we don't want the players to replace them to be totally green.
But there will have to be a big shift from last years' attitude towards experimental, project or other players. In 2002 there were 39 games played by those who could not be said to be the regular team. In 2003 there were 16. A lot of this could have been said to have been caused by injuries, because whereas in 2002 the low numbers were played by such as M.Stevens and Morgan; in 2003 they were due to injuries to Salopek, Thurstans, Primus and Francou. Mentioning the first two shows that Mark Williams was giving youth a go as they played 9 and 10 games respectively and would have been expected to play about 15 each. Chaplin and Gilham are two who will have to be getting time on the field soon as a replacement for Wakelin will be required in a couple of years. Although Lade has done an admirable job as a loose man in defence in the past.
If Ebert was in this year's draft, he would have most likely have gone as the number one pick.
The Club that would have got him would play him from the very first game, and not as a tagger.
He would be given every chance to establish himself this year and next, and thus given every opportunity to become one of the elite players. If he was to become one or not, it would be entirely up to him but at least he would have that chance.
Here we are talking about him getting at most 10 games with limited to very limited game-time. Some including myself expect him to be tried out as a tagger at some stage.
That is sad! :rolleyes:
As far as the Magarey medal not being as big a deal as it used to be, I think Macca19 answered that very well.
its obvious that many of us port suporters dont believe choco is givin the youth enough chances, so why not try and give him the message!!!!
we need to get choco to start giving the younger kids time in the middle before our list is gone. IT NEEDS TO BEGIN THIS YEAR..
we cant wait till the end of the season and say 'why the f**k didnt u give ebert/sal/white/thurstans/gilham etc an opportunity'..
he has to know that the suporters would rather see the younger kids play, even tho they give away experience and possibly cost us games.
i'm sure choco is smart enough to realise this (fingers crossed), but if he still employs the same methods, he will hurt the club badly...
and on another note, i feel that the game plan should be changed so the midfielders should always go long to tredders at CHF, giving crumbers a chance...not chipping around so that when we stuff up it costs us.
Eddie Woloschek
2 Jan 2004, 07:37
At the 2002 Draft, Choco was all over Salopek, while Gilham got the "oh yeah, him too" treatment. That may have been because Salopek was Choco's target and Gilham was the choice of Stewart and Pelchen.
I have not been too critical of SOF since 2000, but he better get his act together quickly. Camp NZ was an idea from Loserville, so let's hope it hasn't left a scar. Let's face it, not too many clubs in the AFL will be knocking on his door, so a good hard look at himself is long overdue. However, i think he's a bit arrogant for that and we'll see more of the same.
Phil Walsh is clearly a worry. Matt Rendell left because he couldn't stand him (whether that's good or bad, I don't know). Remember Walsh was the bloke who walked out on Collingwood after his first season of VFL football, not to go to his great love Geelong, but because Richmond offered him heaps. He was a dud thereafter.
Choco goes, Walsh goes. So who's our next mentor?
Ford Fairlane
2 Jan 2004, 08:27
Salopek was the unexpected bonus of the draft, while Gilham was second choice for #16 (after Bell). Favourite son syndrome I guess.
Walsh doesn't appear particularly loved by anyone other than Choco. So his fortunes are well and truly tied to that star. Rising or falling? Not long to find out now.
Clarkson would have inside running to take over as gaffer I'd guess. SANFL premiership coach and is already in the Port system. Bucky speaks highly of him, so that must count for something. Otherwise you go into the assistant coach pool - O'Donnell, Harvey etc - and who can tell from that? Or the recycleds (Wallace, Eade etc) ... and they've been out of the system for a while - and maybe for a reason.
Oh and back on topic, I was told 5AA interviewed Brett Ebert this week and he couldn't understand where the comments about Russell's criticisms came from. Apparently Russell helped develop Camp Middle Earth and he was fully supportive of the concept.
St Kilda for one would be mad not to talk to Choco if we ditched him. Minor round success and finals failure? Thats top Saints form.
Plenty of candidates for rookie replacements for Choco, if thats what you're asking, Eddie. Gary O'Donnell and John Longmire are my front runners.
If we're desperate for an experienced coach however, as much as I hate to say it, Rodney Eade would be able to refresh the Port gameplan without having to completely retrain the entire team.
Fullarton Power
3 Jan 2004, 12:57
Originally posted by Kid Dynamite!
Given that Adam Morgan was selected over Brett then I'd say that this is quite true. yeah, that's a very good point. I wouldn't select Adam Morgan over my Grandma, and she's been dead since 1984.
Eddie Woloschek
5 Jan 2004, 08:30
Originally posted by Porthos
If we're desperate for an experienced coach however, as much as I hate to say it, Rodney Eade would be able to refresh the Port gameplan without having to completely retrain the entire team.
Rodney Eade is a madman. Then again, it would make the transition easy. More effective soundproofing of coaches' box and assistants' ears required however.
Santos L Helper
5 Jan 2004, 13:43
Originally posted by Porthos
St Kilda for one would be mad not to talk to Choco if we ditched him. Minor round success and finals failure? Thats top Saints form.
Plenty of candidates for rookie replacements for Choco, if thats what you're asking, Eddie. Gary O'Donnell and John Longmire are my front runners.
If we're desperate for an experienced coach however, as much as I hate to say it, Rodney Eade would be able to refresh the Port gameplan without having to completely retrain the entire team.
I was told I had a srew loose for mentioning Eade, but let's look at a couple of things.
1. You all know I think Choco and Walsh need to go, and at the moment there's no real ideal person within the group to take over. Although I do believe Clarkson will make an excellent coach.
2. Eade is a 'madman' but the average lifespan of an AFL coach is around 5-7 seasons max (?), well Eade is ok until the players get sick of him which appears to be around this length of time.
3. Eade is an excellent tactician! He was the first coach to disect our gameplan (when it was going well) and enable his team of less skiled players to always cause us trouble. He is a thinking coach and also gets a lot from less skilled players.
4. Until he lost the players at Sydney, he was always relaxed and sensible in front of the media. Something we sorely need from our senior coach(es).
5. He coaches with several gameplans in mind. How many times have we come to these boards and lamented the FACT that we have Plan A, and then nothing?
6. If Eade falls apart after five or six seasons, we will still have gotten a good lifespan from a good coach and probably had finals success.
This is my opinion, it's open to comment or criticism.
I guess the only issue with Eade is whether the players would go into pre-season with him thinking he's a nutter. If they do, then he may have to not only prove himself as a master tactician but as a sufficient player motivator and manager.
I also like Clarkson. He has proven to be a premiership winning coach at the level below, with a good understanding of midfield rotations and match ups.
Malcolm Blight went into every season as a nutter. I reckon the players could do with being scared ****less a bit.
Santos L Helper
5 Jan 2004, 14:45
Sog old mate, you don't reckon they're going into this pre season thinking the coach is a nutter?
Let's get serious here. ;)
I definitely think out players could do with being **** scared during preseason. Unfortunately our nutter of a coach isn't that type of nutter. And by god I wish he was.
I reiterate, Clarkson should be the next man for the job I think. He has just that little touch of mongrel that slightly sets him apart from Williams. If not Clarkson then Eade.
Santos L Helper
5 Jan 2004, 15:25
Originally posted by sog35
I definitely think out players could do with being **** scared during preseason. Unfortunately our nutter of a coach isn't that type of nutter. And by god I wish he was.
I reiterate, Clarkson should be the next man for the job I think. He has just that little touch of mongrel that slightly sets him apart from Williams. If not Clarkson then Eade.
I thought you might have learnt from the cricket ground mate.....always listen to Santos!.
;)
Eddie Woloschek
5 Jan 2004, 16:02
Not convinced about Clarkson. Don't know enough about him but sense he is at Port because of what he did out on the Ponderosa. Not sure he'd still have an asst's gig in Melbourne. Eade and Wallace don't excite me. Amongst the untried guys, Gary O'Donnell would be my choice - good playing pedigree and has learnt under Matthews. Cool, calm, collected. I think he'll be in demand at season end, if not before. Not sure that there is much depth about the place, though that's no reason not to make a change if the insipid late season performances continue. Problem being, we're probably good enough to win 17-18 again with the gameplan written on all 15 teams' whiteboards, but when it comes to quality opposition in pressure situations, the only Plan B seems to be to look disconsolate and tell us that "there is huge pain in the guts that won't go away until we atone for this next year." Well, for SOF, there won't be a next year unless he's drinking a champagne spritzer on last Sat in Sept.
First thing he should do is pick the Wiz Cup sides from the bottom, and continue the practice into the season until individuals prove they can't measure up week after week.
We don't expect Salopek or Ebert to be as good as Francou, but we might find Cassissi or someone even lower ranked makes progress quickly.
Port use few players and the ones that don't get used don't get any experience. Perhaps they've realised this and that's why they took Mahoney. Mind you, i think choco has a big inferiority complex about his list - it's a way of avoiding blame. I'd hate to see him open slather on trades. "What's that? Bandy for Tredrea? How about we throw in Schoey to make it fair?"
We must make room for Salopeck, Ebert, Cassisi and Kane Cornes to get huge amounts of gametime between them this year. At least the equivalent of 3 full time players spread amongst them.
Not bench warming time but the full amount of gametime, and not one of them to be used as taggers but full on midfielders. Give Kane Cornes and the others a fair dinkum go as midfielders/playmakers.
We do not have any matchwinning midfielders on our list now that Dew is being used as a forward pocket, and we need to find out if one of these players (or more than one) is capable of being a matchwinner.
Francou, James and Carr are not the matchwinning type that can turn a game on it's head in a few minutes, no matter how good they might be. Neither is Schofield. He has done so occasionally in the past, but that has been when the team as a whole has played well.
Burgoyne can occasionally do so, but that is usually when he is playing in the forward line not midfield.
In the past we had Dew and Francis as a combo, where thanks to their long kicks into the forward line, or their long range shots at goal with good accuracy meant that we could score heaps in just a few minutes. Since then we have had workhorses, runners and taggers. During 2003 finals that went down to runners and taggers only.
That has nothing to do with the quality of these players, just the type of players they are. (If that makes sense)
Eddie Woloschek
6 Jan 2004, 08:19
Originally posted by PAfolwr
We must make room for Salopeck, Ebert, Cassisi and Kane Cornes to get huge amounts of gametime between them this year. At least the equivalent of 3 full time players spread amongst them.
Not bench warming time but the full amount of gametime, and not one of them to be used as taggers but full on midfielders. Give Kane Cornes and the others a fair dinkum go as midfielders/playmakers.
Agreed. We are in desperate need of more class in the midfield and a few gamebreakers. Ebo and Sal look better better bets than Dom and SOPII at this stage, but only opportunity will tell the story.
powernut
8 Jan 2004, 15:04
I don't see Kane Cornes as a playmaker, much the same as Josh Francou. I think Sal and Ebo will be, but not just yet. Kingsley will never be more than a workhorse, if he's fit.
Our playmakers need to come from the Burger boys, Wangas, Rog and Scoey imho. They are the ones who can carry the ball and run through lines.
The other name not yet mentioned is Wilbur. He'll be much better this year. Midfield or backline?? I'd love to see him in the centre square when the going gets tough......Admire his work ethic.
PAfolwr
30 Jan 2004, 20:33
Originally posted by Santos L Helper
Here's a sad, but true, story straight from the inner sanctum at Alberton.
Williams does not rate Brett Ebert very highly and Phil Walsh rates his disposal as poor. If you all knew this then I apologise, but if you were all hoping for a fair run for 'young Brett'.......think again.
I also have heard that many of our assistants are frustrated by the apparent lack of consideration given to them by the senior coach and his moron backup. Only recently we had to change dieticians because his job was compromised by Williams' superior knowledge on the subject.
This year is on track for disaster!
I was reading these two articles, and the way that Ebert was not even mentioned made me think back to this post.
The two or three that Williams could be talking would have to include Kingsley and Wilson. He did say play MORE in the midfield.
From this article (http://www.realfooty.theage.com.au/articles/2004/01/28/1075088088180.html)
But football manager Mick Moylan was optimistic, claiming Stevens was not used exclusively in the midfield, and that last year James was severely hampered by his groin injury, which limited his game time.
"So it really gives the opportunity to players like (Steven) Salopek and (Dominic) Cassisi to really step up and have an impact," Moylan said.
And from this article (http://heraldsun.com.au/footy/common/story_page/0,8033,8519581%255E20322,00.html)
(Williams)"Josh Mahoney's going to be important for us now and two or three others will get an opportunity to play more in the midfield.
topjars
31 Jan 2004, 16:39
Originally posted by Santos L Helper
Here's a sad, but true, story straight from the inner sanctum at Alberton.
Williams does not rate Brett Ebert very highly and Phil Walsh rates his disposal as poor.
Would Williams be erring on the side of caution though?
He's hardly going to be beating his drum too much given his lineage.
I have only seen a little bit of young Ebert so I cant comment as to his ability however he must have inherited some classy stuff from Dad?
One thing that may hold Ebert back a bit in Choco's thinking is the spread of his possessions. Last year, in a few of his high possession games he would have in the last quarter the same number of possessions he had in the first three. Whether that will be viewed as a failing(inconsistent) or a plus(runs the game out) only time will tell. I can't see him in the first game, but after having spent one year on the list and been called interstate, albeit only in an emergency role, I am sure he will play 10-15 games.
I only saw Ebert playing the once last year, and it seemed to me that he played pretty unaccountable footy....which is fine, because he made it work in the SANFL, but Choco would be understandably leery of letting him try and do that at AFL level where the opposition players can actually keep up.
My argument would be that with Stevens gone, Ebert perfectly fills his role in Plan A, but certainly Choco might not see it that way. Being a Son Of himself, he might judge Brett a little harder.
Originally posted by Porthos
I only saw Ebert playing the once last year, and it seemed to me that he played pretty unaccountable footy....which is fine, because he made it work in the SANFL, but Choco would be understandably leery of letting him try and do that at AFL level where the opposition players can actually keep up.
Im guessing that game was the Norwood epic at Alberton you went to? THat was Eberts 2nd game in the midfield for the year and as such didnt really get given an opponent as noone thought he would be a threat. Your right he was a bit unaccountable, but he was BOG and his opponenet didnt do a lot. The week after and each week after that he was given a tag which he subsequently destroyed each and every week for the rest of the year.
I think Porthos is saying the fitness of AFL players is a level above SANFL, and while Ebert might be able to break SANFL tags (esp. in last quarter), the AFL is a different story.
Adrian Shelton
1 Feb 2004, 12:47
Who knows, maybe all the taggers are a year older,slower and dumber! I like the kid, he'll do some good things this year
My problem was that he seemed to spray his kicks under pressure, and they went too high in the air even though he kicks them very flat in training.
But he has improved markedly, and will no doubt do so again.
Originally posted by Macca19
Im guessing that game was the Norwood epic at Alberton you went to?
Yep.
THat was Eberts 2nd game in the midfield for the year and as such didnt really get given an opponent as noone thought he would be a threat. Your right he was a bit unaccountable, but he was BOG and his opponenet didnt do a lot. The week after and each week after that he was given a tag which he subsequently destroyed each and every week for the rest of the year.Yep, and thats all cool, but I don't reckon Choco will have the same high estimation of that SANFL form. Because Brett has done it `easy' in the SANFL, being fairly unaccountable, he's probably more loathe to make him an option because its a) a big perceived jump and b) he wouldn't be able to use him as a tagger to break him in. Really, he's a lot like young Nick Stevens in that he is built to play one position and hasn't had to do a lot else.
There are a few reasonable reasons why Choco wouldn't have big plans for Ebert this year, but I still expect him to get games on the back of these injuries and no doubt others also.
PJ Power
1 Feb 2004, 22:16
The last player whom I can recall cruising to such SANFL dominance and blitzing the Magarey voting was back in 1992 - one Nathan Buckley. The competition was marginally stronger then but so too was the Magpie side he was playing in. I reckon Bucks might have turned 20 that year (he certainly was not a raw 18yr-old), which puts him a year older than Brett for the same achievement.
Gee, I don't know, but people here are talking about a kid like Cassisi playing a vital role in our midfield. If anyone kicks the ball up-and-down on the one spot it would be him, and he certainly does not get anywhere near the weight of possessions that Brett does. Everytime Dom takes a mark or free possession, his instinct is to look sideways....just the thing we are all so resentful of in our gameplan.
Talking about temporal spread of Brett's touches, I do agree that last quarter surges can be deceiving, but this wasn't always the case. I recall several games where he virtually went missing in the last ten minutes after turning on fireworks earlier.
One match which particularly highlighted his maturity and standing as a player of match-changing quality was against Westies at Richmolnd mid-season. He didn't have quite as many touches as usual (maybe 25ish) but he was extremely dangerous when he got the ball and showed an ability to mark inside of 50 and convert, something that Francou and Stevens have never had as part of their repertoire.
I am genuinely excited by this kid. His rate and degree of improvement are what impress me. 12 months ago you could have been excused for thinking that he was a sentimental pick-up as a father-son. Now he has just come off from being clearly the best player in the second best league in the land.
He has a star quality and if you're good enough, then let the opposition players defend against and chase you. We have enough defensive-minded midfielders to supply at least three other clubs. Let's inject some possession gathering and free-spirited brilliance into our pretty unimaginative midfield.
Good post PJ.
What gets me is the way that people are so excited about Cooney, yet Ebert obviously had a much better year despite not being much older or much more experienced to start with.
Cooney is being talked about playing heaps of games this year and definitely all the pre-season cup matches and Round 1, whilst Ebert is being seen as perhaps a future something or other.
I have never seen Ebert play and Cooney only a couple of times on TV, but tell me if Ebert had been in this years draft how would he have gone?
Originally posted by PJ Power
Gee, I don't know, but people here are talking about a kid like Cassisi playing a vital role in our midfield. If anyone kicks the ball up-and-down on the one spot it would be him, and he certainly does not get anywhere near the weight of possessions that Brett does. Everytime Dom takes a mark or free possession, his instinct is to look sideways....just the thing we are all so resentful of in our gameplan.Except when Francou does it. Cassisi is being mentioned because he plays a lot like a young Josh Francou, although it will obviously take him some time to get there. Until then he's still a useful player. Brett would be pretty hard to compare to Francou, I would've thought.
Originally posted by PAfolwr
I have never seen Ebert play and Cooney only a couple of times on TV, but tell me if Ebert had been in this years draft how would he have gone?
Thats a dodgy question, because its usually used as a way to talk up a guy who's had the advantage of AFL training and an opportunity (remember Crows supporters theorizing about Mattner being worth a first round or second round pick last offseason?)
For what its worth, no one drafted Brett in his first draft, and we picked him up in his second. In draft terms, Brett is two years ahead of Cooney and has probably displayed less versatility in roles he can perform. If for some reason he was delisted....he might've gone to Sydney at #16 instead of Willoughby. Maybe.
Originally posted by PAfolwr
...Cooney is being talked about playing heaps of games this year and definitely all the pre-season cup matches and Round 1, whilst Ebert is being seen as perhaps a future something or other....
Wouldn't this have to do with the relative quality of the two sides Cooney and Ebert are coming into?
Or is it just that Cooney's in Melbourne?
Originally posted by Sandola
Wouldn't this have to do with the relative quality of the two sides Cooney and Ebert are coming into?
Or is it just that Cooney's in Melbourne? Well, there's that too.
Same as how the post-draft stories always talk about how its a tragedy that 18 year old Victorians have to go interstate, but their counterparts travelling from SA or WA are really lucky and looking forward to going to Melbourne. This is despite both kids spouting nothing but the usual identical cliches.
The only time there's a counterpart is when they want to take another potshot at their own local paupers like the Dogs or Roos by implying homesick draftees.
Originally posted by Porthos
...Thats a dodgy question, because its usually used as a way to talk up a guy who's had the advantage of AFL training and an opportunity (remember Crows supporters theorizing about Mattner being worth a first round or second round pick last offseason?)...
100% agree, and not having seen him play that is the main reason for asking the question.
How good is his Magary medal win, at such a young age, as an indicator of worth?
Originally posted by Porthos
...For what its worth, no one drafted Brett in his first draft, and we picked him up in his second. In draft terms, Brett is two years ahead of Cooney and has probably displayed less versatility in roles he can perform. If for some reason he was delisted....he might've gone to Sydney at #16 instead of Willoughby. Maybe.
The versatility part is the bit I have absolutely no idea about. When I saw Cooney play in the SANFL finals he didn't play that well, but he had that confidence/arrogance that is usually a good sign.
Originally posted by Porthos
...For what its worth, no one drafted Brett in his first draft, and we picked him up in his second. In draft terms, Brett is two years ahead of Cooney and has probably displayed less versatility in roles he can perform. If for some reason he was delisted....he might've gone to Sydney at #16 instead of Willoughby. Maybe.
Come to think about it, Pavlich got passed up his first time round.
Perhaps the father-son rule saved us this time. :)
Originally posted by PAfolwr
Come to think about it, Pavlich got passed up his first time round. Perhaps the father-son rule saved us this time. :)
First time round Pavlich was 17 and with the one 17-yr-old rule only had 16 chances to be picked up, so that part of the draft's always a bit of a raffle. Brett could have been taken in his first draft but wasn't, not that there was much in the way of SANFL form to go on. Before 2003 he still hadn't shown all that much but I'd have expected him to go if we hadn't claimed him under father-son. Which would have prevented a bit of history, a father and a son both winning Magareys.
portsmouth
4 Feb 2004, 17:18
I'd rather have SOG any day..:cool: