Player Watch Adam Oxley (Delisted 2018)

[Manic Magpie]

Very difficult to have a big impact when you start as sub in your debut game. From memory though, he did kick a lovely inside 50 pass to Swan (on his left foot too) which resulted in a goal. The kid has some sublime kicking skills.


Edit: Damn, Rob Millar beat me to it!

You need to pay attention! Go back a page.

 

[jackcass]

People seem fixated with the Ox being a defender, I think he's got a lot more scope than that. Played HFF at seniors when he got his opportunities so I think the club also think this way. Played mainly defense at VFL level because we didn't have a lot of alternatives for that 3rd tall position. Think he showed enough in 2013 to earn some time, will he make it... who knows. But equally you could say the same about half our list.

 

[Apex36]

You need to pay attention! Go back a page.

Hah, yeah I replied without reading the whole thread. My bad, but that kick deseved to be linked again anyway. Was a belter!

 

[THATSGOLD]

Glad we've all found a place in the best 22 for Oxley in 2015 then. If you haven't he more than likely getting the axe starting 16.

 

[Apex36]

Glad we've all found a place in the best 22 for Oxley in 2015 then. If you haven't he more than likely getting the axe starting 16.

Not every player who's not starting best 22 is automatically axed at the end of the year. Pull your head out of your arse.

 

[THATSGOLD]

Not every player who's not starting best 22 is automatically axed at the end of the year. Pull your head out of your arse.

Go over how many delistings we make each season. 4-5 players Ave will get cut. He'd be in the gun and would want to become a regular 22 to keep his spot on the list by the end of the season.

 

[Apex36]

Go over how many delistings we make each season. 4-5 players Ave will get cut. He'd be in the gun and would want to become a regular 22 to keep his spot on the list by the end of the season.

4-5 players out of a list of over 40 means if you're regarded as best 35 and you have potential improvement then you're safe.

You're being ridiculous saying he needs to be regular 22 or out the door.

 

[THATSGOLD]

4-5 players out of a list of over 40 means if you're regarded as best 35 and you have potential improvement then you're safe.

You're being ridiculous saying he needs to be regular 22 or out the door.

Not at all, if he's only just playing in the VFL for most of 2015 he'll get cut. He needs to find a regular place at senior level.

 

[Gone Critical]

Next game statless and dropped.

He was the sub in both games he played. Came on in the 3rd Q both games and picked up 6 disposals 1st game and 4 for the 2nd v Dogs.

Going off the stats nothing terrible there. If you want to barrel a Collingwood player you should have you facts right at least.

 

[mike123]

 

[76woodenspooners]

4-5 players out of a list of over 40 means if you're regarded as best 35 and you have potential improvement then you're safe.

It's difficult to get a sense of how that will play out.

What you've described was largely the case up until 2011. Since then, our vacancies have generally come from retiring players (Maxwell, Ball, Jolly, Didak, Krak, Clarke, Lynch, etc).

So our list turnover (ignoring trades) effectively looks like this ...

Out: Maxwell, In: Moore
Out: Ball, In: Maynard
Out: Lynch, In: Goodyear

... So by the time we get to a player like Ramsay or Oxley, he'll be replaced by an 18 year old late draft pick ... May as well hang onto what we have.

It'll be interesting to see our list management strategy end of 2015. With very few natural retirements coming up, will out strategy be to have a low list turnover? Or will Buckley cut deeply into the non-performing youngsters?

 

[Ketchup]

Oxley will well and truly forgotten by the end of the year when hes playing local footy.

 

[popin]

You need to pay attention! Go back a page.

Go back to the first page

 

[Apex36]

It's difficult to get a sense of how that will play out.

What you've described was largely the case up until 2011. Since then, our vacancies seem to have generally come from retiring players (Maxwell, Ball, Jolly, Didak, Krak, Clarke, Lynch, etc).

So our list turnover (ignoring trades) effectively looks like this ...

Out: Maxwell, In: Moore
Out: Ball, In: Maynard
Out: Lynch, In: Goodyear

... So by the time we get to a player like Ramsay or Oxley, he'll be replaced by an 18 year old late draft pick ... May as well hang onto what we have.

It'll be interesting to see our list management strategy end of 2015. With very few natural retirements coming up, will out strategy be to have a low list turnover? Or will Buckley cut deeply into the non-performing youngsters?

Highly doubtful there will be deep cuts at the end of the year to be honest. We have a very young list, and they need time to gel as a playing group.

As you said, we don't have a lot in the way of natural retirements coming up. I think we may only have 3-4 changes to the list at years end, and it's going to be impossible to say who's in the gun until the season has played out.

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

Hope he makes it through. He's silky. We need more silk. Too much pleather in that backline.

 

[Gone Critical]

It's difficult to get a sense of how that will play out.

What you've described was largely the case up until 2011. Since then, our vacancies have generally come from retiring players (Maxwell, Ball, Jolly, Didak, Krak, Clarke, Lynch, etc).

So our list turnover (ignoring trades) effectively looks like this ...

Out: Maxwell, In: Moore
Out: Ball, In: Maynard
Out: Lynch, In: Goodyear

... So by the time we get to a player like Ramsay or Oxley, he'll be replaced by an 18 year old late draft pick ... May as well hang onto what we have.

It'll be interesting to see our list management strategy end of 2015. With very few natural retirements coming up, will out strategy be to have a low list turnover? Or will Buckley cut deeply into the non-performing youngsters?

Agree it is hard to know for players like Oxley because there are so many variables involved. We have a biggish group of 3-5 year players who are not established best 22 and for various reasons have excuses for why that hasn't yet happened. Clearly for Oxley missing a year is a big reason. Still not all these players can make it and as cruel as it is some will be cut in 2015 even without a good go at establishing themselves. It will be a real dog eat dog year for these guys. We have to do some delisting at season end and these will make up the bulk of that group

I am thinking Oxley, Ramsay, Gault, Karnezis, Sinclair, Thomas, Dwyer, Crisp , Seedsman. It will be a bit like musical chairs for these guys. You dont want to be missing that seat when the music stops playing.

 

[THATSGOLD]

He was the sub in both games he played. Came on in the 3rd Q both games and picked up 6 disposals 1st game and 4 for the 2nd v Dogs.

Going off the stats nothing terrible there. If you want to barrel a Collingwood player you should have you facts right at least.

I stated he was sub. Nevertheless he was dropped and didn't play again.

 

[Gone Critical]

I stated he was sub. Nevertheless he was dropped and didn't play again.

No you said "Next game statless and dropped" which was wrong. He had stats.

He was more a victim of team selection than being dropped for poor performance. After his 1st match he was omitted from the initial selection but got a late call up when Ball hurt a calf and then after the 2nd game he made way for Ball who was fit to return.

 

[jackcass]

Go over how many delistings we make each season. 4-5 players Ave will get cut. He'd be in the gun and would want to become a regular 22 to keep his spot on the list by the end of the season.

It's actually been closer to 10-11 over the last few years which probably means we're getting to a point where the minimum 3 occurs. From memory 29 of the 45 on our list have played less than 50 games so at some time you just have to take a breath and see if they can develop. Can't imagine the club will impose arbitrary cut off deadlines so don't see why we should.

 

[Robroy22]

It's actually been closer to 10-11 over the last few years which probably means we're getting to a point where the minimum 3 occurs. From memory 29 of the 45 on our list have played less than 50 games so at some time you just have to take a breath and see if they can develop. Can't imagine the club will impose arbitrary cut off deadlines so don't see why we should.

You mean we don't actually run the club? OMG....I thought the guru's here did all that stuff....how will Bucks survive now?

 

[jackcass]

Oxley will well and truly forgotten by the end of the year when hes playing local footy.

At a minimum, it'll be VFL (barring injury) and I'm sure he'll be at the forefront of peoples thinking when they're submitting their list management doctrine and formulating their drafting strategies.

 

[popin]

THE OX STRIDING IN THE MIDDLE DOING LOW INTENSITY RUN THROUGHS WITH THE BOYS

 

[jackcass]

THE OX STRIDING IN THE MIDDLE

He appears to be the only 1 wearing runners. I wonder if that's a management thing.

 

[popin]

He appears to be the only 1 wearing runners. I wonder if that's a management thing.

yeh seems that way from having ankle surgery late 2014

 

[No SPIN]

Kyle Martin is the one guy from the VFL I wouldve liked to see process at senior level this season at senior level but that's not going to happen.

Why - who is he better than on our current list
Who does he take game time from?