List clean out is urgently needed

[ziad]

I wouldn't even consider looking at moving on Rotham, Foley, Waterman or Petch.

Guys like Winder deserve a go. So much dysfunction, mature players letting the kids down.

We'll move on a dozen players or more without breaking a sweat over the next 24 months and will probably turn over half our squad over the next four seasons.

Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk

The kids you speak of will very soon be the mature players. Rotham, Foley, Waterman or Petch have not given an inkling that they will be any better with time. Foley perhaps is ahead of the others given his youth.

 

[Grahame]

Why persist with players like Naish, Witherden, Dixon or Langdon? Few attributes worth persisting with and massive defects in their games that have been exposed to any objective football observer.

Weak contested games need to be rectified by offensive or athletic attributes. I'd add SPS and Nelson to the basket of deplorables.


Id disagree with Jamieson, Rotham and West. Even if they've got limitations they've at least got some strong points in their games.

Better two years of a player coming to the end of their career like Cripps than four years of a Langdon being sub-par. We'll be better off getting the crap off our list ahead of the aged AFL grade footballers.






Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk

I think our weakness is due to the fact over the last few years we had maybe 15 players who were as good as any clubs first 15. It was the peripheral players - who now have about 40-100 games - who have not only being almost a complete bust but they have also stunted the development of those below them.

In that 40-100 game group we have the likes of Waterman, Nelson, Rotham, Petro, Langdon, SPS, Witherden, Cole and JJ (30 games). All might have shown flashes but nothing indicating they'll be 200 game players and/or selected in the first half of the team. So disappointing.

I can't see any point selecting those guys unless there is noone else in the newbies who can fill the position. They are, at best, honest toilers or, at worst, list cloggers. Send them to the WAFL and if they show good consistent form and attitude then sure bring them back. In the meantime it's the full steam ahead for the newbies supported by a mix of the 'champs' - but only on one proviso. That is, the 'champ' is still best 28 or 30 AND has a great attitude.

 

[Patron]

I think our weakness is due to the fact over the last few years we had maybe 15 players who were as good as any clubs first 15. It was the peripheral players - who now have about 40-100 games - who have not only being almost a complete bust but they have also stunted the development of those below them.

In that 40-100 game group we have the likes of Waterman, Nelson, Rotham, Petro, Langdon, SPS, Witherden, Cole and JJ (30 games). All might have shown flashes but nothing indicating they'll be 200 game players and/or selected in the first half of the team. So disappointing.

I can't see any point selecting those guys unless there is noone else in the newbies who can fill the position. They are, at best, honest toilers or, at worst, list cloggers. Send them to the WAFL and if they show good consistent form and attitude then sure bring them back. In the meantime it's the full steam ahead for the newbies supported by a mix of the 'champs' - but only on one proviso. That is, the 'champ' is still best 28 or 30 AND has a great attitude.

I completely agree with this in principle, most of those players really are just cloggers and as such don't have a space on a good list. Our issue is we have just so many of these guys we can't turn them all over fast enough. Therefore, guys like Waterman, Petch, SPS, Rotham and Witherden, who have all shown signs at stages, have had the exposure, but just aren't progressing in the way they should will get a reprieve. There's just too many others on the list even further ahead of them for culling (retirees, langdon, nelson etc.).

We might get lucky and a few of them will turn a corner and show something, but I fear we may just end up with a whole team of McInnes types which we won't be able to be rid of for 4-5 years. We need to really try and go deep in every draft for the next few years and do whatever we can in FA, and through the Mid-season and Pre-season drafts.

 

[Chump Change]

I think our weakness is due to the fact over the last few years we had maybe 15 players who were as good as any clubs first 15. It was the peripheral players - who now have about 40-100 games - who have not only being almost a complete bust but they have also stunted the development of those below them.

In that 40-100 game group we have the likes of Waterman, Nelson, Rotham, Petro, Langdon, SPS, Witherden, Cole and JJ (30 games). All might have shown flashes but nothing indicating they'll be 200 game players and/or selected in the first half of the team. So disappointing.

I can't see any point selecting those guys unless there is noone else in the newbies who can fill the position. They are, at best, honest toilers or, at worst, list cloggers. Send them to the WAFL and if they show good consistent form and attitude then sure bring them back. In the meantime it's the full steam ahead for the newbies supported by a mix of the 'champs' - but only on one proviso. That is, the 'champ' is still best 28 or 30 AND has a great attitude.

This is not it.

This assumes that those peripheral players should develop to replace the "champs". This is not the case and has never been the case.

It works like this:

Champs mostly get replaced by real talent. Typically these players are high draft picks. There names are not Jordan Nelson and Alex Waterman and Petrucelli (I don't even know that campaigner's first name).

Peripheral players - you have a largish pool of these. Few turn out to bonafide guns, some step up and become solid contributors, and the rest stay on the list for a couple of seasons and get turned over for OTHER PERIPHERY PLAYERS.

The players that matter - the ones at the top of the draft. These are the elite players who allow other players to play well. These are the players who can compete against Dusty, Pendles, Wines etc. These are the players who go a long way towards determining if you win or lose a game.

We haven't had a top 10 draft pick for over a decade and you expect these 3rd and 4th rounders to step in Shuey, Yeo, and NicNat's shoes? It just doesn't work like that.

 

[Goroyals22]

This is not it.

This assumes that those peripheral players should develop to replace the "champs". This is not the case and has never been the case.

It works like this:

Champs mostly get replaced by real talent. Typically these players are high draft picks. There names are not Jordan Nelson and Alex Waterman and Petrucelli (I don't even know that campaigner's first name).

Peripheral players - you have a largish pool of these. Few turn out to bonafide guns, some step up and become solid contributors, and the rest stay on the list for a couple of seasons and get turned over for OTHER PERIPHERY PLAYERS.

The players that matter - the ones at the top of the draft. These are the elite players who allow other players to play well. These are the players who can compete against Dusty, Pendles, Wines etc. These are the players who go a long way towards determining if you win or lose a game.

We haven't had a top 10 draft pick for over a decade and you expect these 3rd and 4th rounders to step in Shuey, Yeo, and NicNat's shoes? It just doesn't work like that.

Agree with this and if you think that the periphery players can replace talents then it is wrong. You just want them to become good contributors and solid players.

The issue is our periphery players are that far below average its a joke and with the top tier players completely cooked or out of form these players fall away further and further. I still look at the trade period and how many of these periphery players are offered anywhere elsewhere or even sounded out. Its next to none. Even a number 1 draft pick from 5 drafts ago attracted no interest and cant get a game in a side that has sacked a coach already this year.

 

[Chump Change]

Agree with this and if you think that the periphery players can replace talents then it is wrong. You just want them to become good contributors and solid players.

The issue is our periphery players are that far below average its a joke and with the top tier players completely cooked or out of form these players fall away further and further. I still look at the trade period and how many of these periphery players are offered anywhere elsewhere or even sounded out. Its next to none. Even a number 1 draft pick from 5 drafts ago attracted no interest and cant get a game in a side that has sacked a coach already this year.

I think if we were a top 4 team then some of those periphery players would play a lot better. In saying that, Nelson, Langdon, and a few others are just out and out spuds.

 

[Grahame]

Agree with this and if you think that the periphery players can replace talents then it is wrong. You just want them to become good contributors and solid players.

The issue is our periphery players are that far below average its a joke and with the top tier players completely cooked or out of form these players fall away further and further. I still look at the trade period and how many of these periphery players are offered anywhere elsewhere or even sounded out. Its next to none. Even a number 1 draft pick from 5 drafts ago attracted no interest and cant get a game in a side that has sacked a coach already this year.

You don’t recruit a player with the intention they are only going to be a peripheral player. You hope you got another Judd or Cox. My point is simply we have way too many players who have shown they’re not going to help us to a premiership. And not only have they dragged down what was a very good group of say 15 ‘champs’ but they’ve also stopped those under them getting a chance to show if they have elite talent.

 

[Chump Change]

You don’t recruit a player with the intention they are only going to be a peripheral player. You hope you got another Judd or Cox. My point is simply we have way too many players who have shown they’re not going to help us to a premiership. And not only have they dragged down what was a very good group of say 15 ‘champs’ but they’ve also stopped those under them getting a chance to show if they have elite talent.

I'm not sure about that. Clubs recruit 2nd - 5th rounders to play a law of averages. They hope to jag a Touk Miller with a later pick, and then some other uncut gems who might be a 200 game role player. But they know most of these players are churn.

You say we have all these players who aren't going to get us to a premiership.. Sure, but it's not because of "these" players. It's because we haven't had a top 10 draft pick for 10 years. You can't churn 3rd and 4th rounders every year (for other 3rd and 4th rounders) and think you're going to get a Tracc and Oliver.

You find these players at the pointy end of the draft... and guess we we are come November? It's all about to happen and you're getting upset by some, dare I say it, chump change.

 

[Grahame]

Of course higher draft picks are, on average, likely to be better players. Obviously. But if the only way out of our troubles is on the back of high draft picks then we are going to be rubbish for a long time.

So to me I can see no reason playing guys who have had 30-40+ games to show their wares but show nothing more than a good quarter every few rounds (at best). Thus while I'm not convinced that say West or BWilliams or Clark or Strnadica or Jamieson etc are going to be stars at this stage we just don't know. We do know Waterman, Rotham, Petro, Langdon, Nelson etc have not shown enough, often enough. Thus I'd rather put games into the newbies.

Those with 30+ games can't all be delisted in one go so the club needs to look at trying them in different positions or improving their cardio for speed or bulking them up for inside mids or KPPs. This can be done in the WAFL. And they do not come back to the AFL unless they show sustained performances AND a good attitude.

Just for interest I looked up the draft position of Brownlow medallists since 2000. Most notably, there are a lot who were not top ten draft picks. We need to get the absolute most out of every player who comes into the club regardless of their pick number. And fingers crossed, once in the system they might just surprise.

 

[Chump Change]

Of course higher draft picks are, on average, likely to be better players. Obviously. But if the only way out of our troubles is on the back of high draft picks then we are going to be rubbish for a long time.

So to me I can see no reason playing guys who have had 30-40+ games to show their wares but show nothing more than a good quarter every few rounds (at best). Thus while I'm not convinced that say West or BWilliams or Clark or Strnadica or Jamieson etc are going to be stars at this stage we just don't know. We do know Waterman, Rotham, Petro, Langdon, Nelson etc have not shown enough, often enough. Thus I'd rather put games into the newbies.

Those with 30+ games can't all be delisted in one go so the club needs to look at trying them in different positions or improving their cardio for speed or bulking them up for inside mids or KPPs. This can be done in the WAFL. And they do not come back to the AFL unless they show sustained performances AND a good attitude.

Just for interest I looked up the draft position of Brownlow medallists since 2000. Most notably, there are a lot who were not top ten draft picks. We need to get the absolute most out of every player who comes into the club regardless of their pick number. And fingers crossed, once in the system they might just surprise.

View attachment 1423995

Show me a recent flag team that doesn't have there best players as top 5 draft picks. You could maybe make a case for the Eagles. That's about 1 flag in 8.

Why would you want to take those odds? Do you want to build a flag team? Or just a team that can compete and be mid table?

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

Show me a recent flag team that doesn't have there best players as top 5 draft picks. You could maybe make a case for the Eagles. That's about 1 flag in 8.

Who do the Tigers have besides Cotchin and Martin?

 

[Seadog]

Who do the Tigers have besides Cotchin and Martin?

Vlastuin was a pick 9, as was Prestia, Lynch went at 11, although they didn't draft the latter two thats were they went in the draft..

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

Vlastuin was a pick 9, as was Prestia, Lynch went at 11, although they didn't draft the latter two thats were they went in the draft..

He was talking about top five picks though.

 

[Chump Change]

Who do the Tigers have besides Cotchin and Martin?

That's the whole point - they have Dusty and Cotch. Take those 2 out and I highly doubt they win any of those flags.

It's almost certain that you need some of these players. They come from the top 5 picks in the draft. Winning a flag without them is pretty hard.

 

[Chump Change]

He was talking about top five picks though.

It was my point, but when you're down the bottom of the ladder you get a heap of other high picks to compliment.

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

That's the whole point - they have Dusty and Cotch. Take those 2 out and I highly doubt they win any of those flags.

It's almost certain that you need some of these players. They come from the top 5 picks in the draft. Winning a flag without them is pretty hard.

Cotchin was drafted in 2007. Martin in 2009. They won a flag in 217. So we need to draft a couple of top five picks then wait eight or nine years?

Great.

 

[Chump Change]

Cotchin was drafted in 2007. Martin in 2009. They won a flag in 217. So we need to draft a couple of top five picks then wait eight or nine years?

Great.

The last two gaps have been 12......

I'd take 8 or 9 but hoping we can do it quicker. And hoping we can do more than 1.

 

[Patron]

Cotchin was drafted in 2007. Martin in 2009. They won a flag in 217. So we need to draft a couple of top five picks then wait eight or nine years?

Great.

We are in year 1 of a rebuild, coming from a very low base. As a minimum we are going to need 3 brilliant drafts to get a new core together. The reality is that core won't get us competing until they are 22+ We are 6+ years away if we do well.

 

[Chump Change]

We are in year 1 of a rebuild, coming from a very low base. As a minimum we are going to need 3 brilliant drafts to get a new core together. The reality is that core won't get us competing until they are 22+ We are 6+ years away if we do well.

That's the reality of it. Why people think it's a good idea to grab a few players and start moving up the ladder without the necessary cattle, I don't know. If we endure the pain now, we'll be better for it.

 

[Wild Kelly]

We are in year 1 of a rebuild, coming from a very low base. As a minimum we are going to need 3 brilliant drafts to get a new core together. The reality is that core won't get us competing until they are 22+ We are 6+ years away if we do well.

Who f***ing asked you? We don't need reality around here! Sack Simmo and get rid of all players over 24!

 

[Patron]

Who f***ing asked you? We don't need reality around here! Sack Simmo and get rid of all players over 24!

Nah, when your this bad you need a bit of stability for a while anyway. Keep the more talented leaders like Shuey, Yeo, Nic Nat, Gov, Sheed etc. to shelter the kids and trade the pea hearts like Gaff for whatever we can get. Draft hard and back the kids in. Reassess at the end of next year.

 

[Patron]

That's the reality of it. Why people think it's a good idea to grab a few players and start moving up the ladder without the necessary cattle, I don't know. If we endure the pain now, we'll be better for it.

Totally right, we need to be patient for a few years. It's easier to do when you have a premiership still fairly fresh in our minds. We had our time, time to reload.

 

[FDH16]

Why persist with players like Naish, Witherden, Dixon or Langdon? Few attributes worth persisting with and massive defects in their games that have been exposed to any objective football observer.

Weak contested games need to be rectified by offensive or athletic attributes. I'd add SPS and Nelson to the basket of deplorables.


Id disagree with Jamieson, Rotham and West. Even if they've got limitations they've at least got some strong points in their games.

Better two years of a player coming to the end of their career like Cripps than four years of a Langdon being sub-par. We'll be better off getting the crap off our list ahead of the aged AFL grade footballers.






Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk

Please point out strong suits of Jameson and West?

 

[Chump Change]

Please point out strong suits of Jameson and West?

Spades and Hearts.

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

Please point out strong suits of Jameson and West?

Please find more inventive ways to troll opposition boards.