Analysis Talia & Roberts our future back line

[cleveland]

I don't remember saying that(I may have) BUT i do remember saying he wasn't going very well(wasn't the only one) and that Macca should be moved to that role

Which I still believe wholeheartedly

Got u mixed up with black pup sorry

 

[immortalmike]

Personally I'd like to see a backline with Roberts playing on the number one bigs, Talia on the athletic talls with Roughead playing third tall on the resting ruck and zoning off helping out. Wood plays on the dangerous athletic smalls while Darley and JJ provide drive.
This would be the setup I'd be planning for.

 

[Dannnnnnnnnn]

Personally I'd like to see a backline with Roberts playing on the number one bigs, Talia on the athletic talls with Roughead playing third tall on the resting ruck and zoning off helping out. Wood plays on the dangerous athletic smalls while Darley and JJ provide drive.
This would be the setup I'd be planning for.

How does this lineup change when the resting ruck is an athletic beast? I'm thinking a Zac Clarke, Paddy Ryder, Tom Nicholls, Stef Martin, etc. type. My issue with Roughead is that I don't know whether he has the flexibility to work in this sort of lineup.

 

[Mofra]

How does this lineup change when the resting ruck is an athletic beast? I'm thinking a Zac Clarke, Paddy Ryder, Tom Nicholls, Stef Martin, etc. type. My issue with Roughead is that I don't know whether he has the flexibility to work in this sort of lineup.

Worse - what happens when there are only two legitimate talls?
Roughy struggles with the mobile types, and not every club is going to be stupid enough to kick the ball high and long in the forwardline when the opposing backmen are taller.

 

[Dannnnnnnnnn]

Worse - what happens when there are only two legitimate talls?
Roughy struggles with the mobile types, and not every club is going to be stupid enough to kick the ball high and long in the forwardline when the opposing backmen are taller.

Yes, this is another issue I see as I mentioned with Port's lineup in my earlier post. The only feasible solution is to move Roughead or Roberts forward, but that's making a pretty massive structural change in my opinion. What if our forward structure is working perfectly? You can't really disrupt it by throwing another tall in there imo.

Where do you see Roughead slotting in then Mofra? Or perhaps Roberts instead?

 

[doggies ftw]

Personally I'd like to see a backline with Roberts playing on the number one bigs, Talia on the athletic talls with Roughead playing third tall on the resting ruck and zoning off helping out. Wood plays on the dangerous athletic smalls while Darley and JJ provide drive.
This would be the setup I'd be planning for.

Yeah you could also set them up like this which is probably the best we'd get. Roughy with the freedom to cut across and take intercept marks and get big spoils in like he so often does, and he uses the ball so well for a tall that you'd like the ball in his hands. All depending on match ups of course but I just reckon this line up has a hell of a lot of flexibility. Sure he might get beaten on the athletic talls but he's really not that slow/immobile, just horribly out of form. Those athletic talls would be posing the biggest threat in the air where he could absolutely go with them, with a bit of help they wouldn't be too hard for him to control. And really besides maybe a couple of players in the AFL, what teams athletic 2nd ruck is going to rip you to shreds, Blicavs for example might get on top of him but he's not going to win the game for the other team.

Yes, this is another issue I see as I mentioned with Port's lineup in my earlier post. The only feasible solution is to move Roughead or Roberts forward, but that's making a pretty massive structural change in my opinion. What if our forward structure is working perfectly? You can't really disrupt it by throwing another tall in there imo.

Where do you see Roughead slotting in then Mofra? Or perhaps Roberts instead?

Footscray.

If theres no match up don't take all 3 into the team its as simple as that really, if we want to be a good side we will need a quality list of 30 odd players who can come in and play well, if theres no match up for certain players just rotate them out.

 

[immortalmike]

How does this lineup change when the resting ruck is an athletic beast? I'm thinking a Zac Clarke, Paddy Ryder, Tom Nicholls, Stef Martin, etc. type. My issue with Roughead is that I don't know whether he has the flexibility to work in this sort of lineup.

I don't have a problem with Roughead playing on that type. But for arguments sake you swap Roberts onto them who is a smart enough footballer to make up for their slight athletic advantage.
Honestly though I think too many people are looking at the broken down Roughead of the last three months. Have another look at his early year form. A very different player when healthy.

 

[Dannnnnnnnnn]

Footscray.

If theres no match up don't take all 3 into the team its as simple as that really, if we want to be a good side we will need a quality list of 30 odd players who can come in and play well, if theres no match up for certain players just rotate them out.

I do see your point but if we want to be a good side we need to have key structures that aren't meddled with and are kept relatively constant. How many of the top teams cycle out their key defenders week-to-week? It doesn't happen as they're massively important key pillars that you structure the team around. In my opinion the solution you've suggested is feasible in some circumstances, but a long, long way from ideal. Seeking a key defensive trio that can handle a variety of circumstances is a much better way than cycling guys out when we can't find a matchup for them. In my opinion we can't become a top-line side without settling our key position trio at both ends.

I don't have a problem with Roughead playing on that type. But for arguments sake you swap Roberts onto them who is a smart enough footballer to make up for their slight athletic advantage.
Honestly though I think too many people are looking at the broken down Roughead of the last three months. Have another look at his early year form. A very different player when healthy.

The difference between Roughead then and Roughead in this hypothetical scenario is that he was taking the brutes early in the year, yet that may not be an option if you throw Roberts in as well. I'm not reading too much into his form, but it's moreso that I don't see the duo being flexible enough to adjust to a variety of circumstances. Regardless, we can't know for sure until we see it in action.

 

[Dogsman16]

I don't have a problem with Roughead playing on that type. But for arguments sake you swap Roberts onto them who is a smart enough footballer to make up for their slight athletic advantage.
Honestly though I think too many people are looking at the broken down Roughead of the last three months. Have another look at his early year form. A very different player when healthy.

If Roughead was broken down then surely Roberts would have come into the starting line up instead of him. We cannot make excuses for the fact that the past 2 months Roughy has been pretty poor, particularly on the lead and keeping up with the more agile forwards. If he does have a shoulder niggle it doesn't explain why KPF's are able to get seperation from him at will. To be honest Austin and Roughead should have either been in different positions or playing in the 2's and Talia and Roberts should have been rewarded rather than letting Moz play undersized on the likes of Franklin, Carlisle etc. Moz can't really do much more but hope he gets a chop out.

 

[black pup]

Mattdougie, may go on a little, but he also makes a lot of sense on many subjects.
I think a few on BF don't like being told how it is, sometimes the truth or facts hurt. I don't think anybody should but the boots into Mattdougie, BF NEEDS MATTDOUGIE, OR AT LEST I DO. GO DOGGIES.

Don't listen to Mattdougie's BS. He just says random crap and hopes some of it sticks.

 

[lachy]

Versatility is critical with KPP's as all teams have differing structures.

Both Roberts and Roughhead can play either end. If all three are up to AFL standard we need only one more KPP to have the right balance. Then 4 more developing or ready to come in for form or injury.

In defence, Roughhead more for the Gorilla's and rucks resting forward, Tallia defend the key forward type and Roberts the third tall or rotate with either Roughy or Tallia as he is the most flexible of the 3

 

[Mofra]

Yes, this is another issue I see as I mentioned with Port's lineup in my earlier post. The only feasible solution is to move Roughead or Roberts forward, but that's making a pretty massive structural change in my opinion. What if our forward structure is working perfectly? You can't really disrupt it by throwing another tall in there imo.

Where do you see Roughead slotting in then Mofra? Or perhaps Roberts instead?

Personally I think for Roughy - R2 role/swingman.
He needs to be able to play at both ends because at times I simply don't believe there will be a match up for him.
We tend to forget he is a natural tap ruckman as well so being released to be able to run through the middle helps us when Minson/Campbell (as first ruck) are resting.

 

[black pup]

I would like to see Roughead play key forward, and play Roberts and Talia in AFL in key defence posts, ruck Cambell and Cordy and rest forward. Trade Will Minson, he must have value, Austin not AFL standard.

I do see your point but if we want to be a good side we need to have key structures that aren't meddled with and are kept relatively constant. How many of the top teams cycle out their key defenders week-to-week? It doesn't happen as they're massively important key pillars that you structure the team around. In my opinion the solution you've suggested is feasible in some circumstances, but a long, long way from ideal. Seeking a key defensive trio that can handle a variety of circumstances is a much better way than cycling guys out when we can't find a matchup for them. In my opinion we can't become a top-line side without settling our key position trio at both ends.



The difference between Roughead then and Roughead in this hypothetical scenario is that he was taking the brutes early in the year, yet that may not be an option if you throw Roberts in as well. I'm not reading too much into his form, but it's moreso that I don't see the duo being flexible enough to adjust to a variety of circumstances. Regardless, we can't know for sure until we see it in action.

t

 

[Dannnnnnnnnn]

Personally I think for Roughy - R2 role/swingman.
He needs to be able to play at both ends because at times I simply don't believe there will be a match up for him.
We tend to forget he is a natural tap ruckman as well so being released to be able to run through the middle helps us when Minson/Campbell (as first ruck) are resting.

In that case how would you handle Roughead next year? Play him at FB? Play him at FF? Use Roberts and Talia as our key defensive stocks (with Morris and Wood in the pockets) and play Roughead at FF in the VFL? It's an interesting case: he's our best FB at this point in time but if he is going to struggle with match ups with Talia and Roberts in the side - as we both think he will - it might be time to attempt to bring the forward/ruck play back into his game.

 

[lachy]

I would like to see Roughead play key forward, and play Roberts and Talia in AFL in key defence posts, ruck Cambell and Cordy and rest forward. Trade Will Minson, he must have value, Austin not AFL standard.

t

Don't mind most of this. Would like to see the rest forward no more than 10 minutes a quarter combined. In other words on of Cordy/Campbell in the ruck, other on the bench. Bench player comes on after 5 minutes to deep forward for 5 minutes then ruck goes off to bench for break after 10 minutes in the ruck. Continue rotation for 3 quarters then determine sub if that still remains or continue till 4th quarter then if working continue, if not rotate through the bench.

Trade Will, not sure, if it means a B grade at least KPP, then yes

 

[Mutt]

Personally I think for Roughy - R2 role/swingman.
He needs to be able to play at both ends because at times I simply don't believe there will be a match up for him.
We tend to forget he is a natural tap ruckman as well so being released to be able to run through the middle helps us when Minson/Campbell (as first ruck) are resting.

Roughy is perfectly suited to that role rather than Full-back imo. Playing in defence has been great for his development but he is not the long-term solution for us.

 

[_Mike_]

Mattdougie, may go on a little, but he also makes a lot of sense on many subjects.
I think a few on BF don't like being told how it is, sometimes the truth or facts hurt. I don't think anybody should but the boots into Mattdougie, BF NEEDS MATTDOUGIE, OR AT LEST I DO. GO DOGGIES.

No facts, just rumors which anyone can post...

I have it on good authority that Higgins and Cooney are going to GWS next year trading for Cameron and Reid (other brother).. Yes it must be true, because I said so..

Rumors arent worth the paper they're written on unless there is something substantial to back it up

 

[lachy]

In that case how would you handle Roughead next year? Play him at FB? Play him at FF? Use Roberts and Talia as our key defensive stocks (with Morris and Wood in the pockets) and play Roughead at FF in the VFL? It's an interesting case: he's our best FB at this point in time but if he is going to struggle with match ups with Talia and Roberts in the side - as we both think he will - it might be time to attempt to bring the forward/ruck play back into his game.

Dann there are very few pure full backs. There are KPP's that are defenders, Forwards or swingmen that take the 1, 2 or 3 forward depending on the opposition structure.

Roughy cannot play on a fast leading KPP, however could pick up the resting Ruck. The thing is you need at least 4 KPP's in your team each weak to either cover or exploit the opposition. All 3 can comfortably play in a team with one more KPP and where they play is determined by whether you are stopping or exploiting the opposition.

 

[Mattdougie]

Trading Will Minson is an awful idea

The bloke has been thrown under a bus his year and basically coached into having an awful year. After an AA year last year teams were going to spend a lot more time on him and most have used at least 2 ruckmen on him and run him into the ground and Macca has given him what help?? Basically zero not even subbing him off when it was clear he was cooked.

Thinking that Campbell and Cordy are our rocks going forwards scares me coz I don't think either are great but if they are they are a few years away. So trading Mino gives the coaches more excuses to "take longer" to develop the team and as u all know I'm sick to bloody death of excuses.

Instead of trading out we need to trade in a rucks I help Mino for a year or so while the others come they, as I've said earlier maybe Cox or Pike could help

 

[Mattdougie]

No facts, just rumors which anyone can post...

I have it on good authority that Higgins and Cooney are going to GWS next year trading for Cameron and Reid (other brother).. Yes it must be true, because I said so..

Rumors arent worth the paper they're written on unless there is something substantial to back it up

I have something to back this up mike

That's why I state it

And I know this will get the boo boys going but I'm not saying how coz then I basically give my source out and I'm not doin that

 

[lachy]

Trading Will Minson is an awful idea

The bloke has been thrown under a bus his year and basically coached into having an awful year. After an AA year last year teams were going to spend a lot more time on him and most have used at least 2 ruckmen on him and run him into the ground and Macca has given him what help?? Basically zero not even subbing him off when it was clear he was cooked.

Thinking that Campbell and Cordy are our rocks going forwards scares me coz I don't think either are great but if they are they are a few years away. So trading Mino gives the coaches more excuses to "take longer" to develop the team and as u all know I'm sick to bloody death of excuses.

Instead of trading out we need to trade in a rucks I help Mino for a year or so while the others come they, as I've said earlier maybe Cox or Pike could help

Even if it meant a quality young KPP, which with another drafted and a solid though not great KPP from trading another draft choice or player gives us structure for the next 6 to 10 years?

 

[lachy]

Trading Will Minson is an awful idea

The bloke has been thrown under a bus his year and basically coached into having an awful year. After an AA year last year teams were going to spend a lot more time on him and most have used at least 2 ruckmen on him and run him into the ground and Macca has given him what help?? Basically zero not even subbing him off when it was clear he was cooked.

Thinking that Campbell and Cordy are our rocks going forwards scares me coz I don't think either are great but if they are they are a few years away. So trading Mino gives the coaches more excuses to "take longer" to develop the team and as u all know I'm sick to bloody death of excuses.

Instead of trading out we need to trade in a rucks I help Mino for a year or so while the others come they, as I've said earlier maybe Cox or Pike could help

Also I don't think Campbell or Cordy are forwards that is why combined I would not want them there in total more than 30% of any time in the first 3 quarters and unless it is working on a given day, not at all in the 4th quarter

 

[Mattdougie]

Even if it meant a quality young KPP, which with another drafted and a solid though not great KPP from trading another draft choice or player gives us structure for the next 6 to 10 years?

Nope

We cannot go backwards next year and trading Mino would confirm this will happen(even though I think it will anyway)

Even the most patient fan will start to be unhappy if we don't obviously progress next year.

Macca needs to move this team forward next year no more excuses will be accepted and can't be if we want to stop being irrelevant as we plainly are.

 

[Mutt]

No facts, just rumors which anyone can post...

I have it on good authority that Higgins and Cooney are going to GWS next year trading for Cameron and Reid (other brother).. Yes it must be true, because I said so..

Rumors arent worth the paper they're written on unless there is something substantial to back it up

There is now nowhere on this board that doesn't degenerate into a shitfight about how piss-poor some think the Coach is and how every imaginary made up issue is somehow Brendan McCartney's fault.

 

[cleveland]

No facts, just rumors which anyone can post...

I have it on good authority that Higgins and Cooney are going to GWS next year trading for Cameron and Reid (other brother).. Yes it must be true, because I said so..

Rumors arent worth the paper they're written on unless there is something substantial to back it up

and our first rounder?