- Jun 10, 2014
- 14,092
- 35,989
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
He may be gone, but it's almost like he is still here. See if you can go a week without typing his name.how about "All the reasons that I miss Alex Waislitz"
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
He may be gone, but it's almost like he is still here. See if you can go a week without typing his name.how about "All the reasons that I miss Alex Waislitz"
I think I can still see him from where he is still living rent-free in your scone.how about "All the reasons that I miss Alex Waislitz"
Also would prefer we stop picking vanilla late picks in their draft year with little prospects of making it when you can get the same player from a state league who's further along in their development.We need recruiting staff to swallow their pride and look at players in the lower leagues that missed out on being drafted initially. We need to dump out the cat B rookies and fill the rookie spots with kids rejected in their drafts, but who have gone on to play footy in the VFL, or the SANFL or the WAFL or the other state leagues.
Also would prefer we stop picking vanilla late picks in their draft year with little prospects of making it when you can get the same player from a state league who's further along in their development.
I don’t pretend to know intricacies of various Cat designations, but if there was no incentives to pursue the overseas or non AFL candidates clubs wouldn’t bother.
As long as there are incentives/benefits, then clubs will go searching, as forlorn a quest as that may seem.
The main argument I can see against the OP is that players in the lower leagues can’t be put on the category B list.
Cox, the irish boys for the most part, Wilson, Roo when he’s even on a list… they are not taking up space that an overlooked VFL player could occupy.
I do agree that we’ve overrated athleticism in talls and underrated it in our smalls and mediums. Our big boys need to know how to mark, where to lead and how to impose themselves on a contest. Our smaller guys need to be able to spread and find space.
Sorry, but that's not correct! You can have 42 on your Primary List and Category A Rookie List combined. You can then have the 2 Category B Rookies outside of that, giving you a maximum of 44.If you use a Category B list spot you potentially have less primary list or Category A list positions available.
View attachment 1379046
The big advantage is the salary is outside the cap - I think anyway.
If you can get a Will Sutherland like that you use it. You might also find a Tuohy or a Blicavs.
Like most things in recruiting it's about talent ID and then development. I don't think you want to be closed minded about any options.
That said I think our balance has been off and we invested too heavily in tall Cat B types (Cox, Keane, Tohill, Wilson, Madgen) in an effort to fix our key position hole and it's created a big list issue.
Without any cat b, the maximum list size is 42, rather than 44. They're an extra two players you can have on the list. Both cat A and B rookies have base wage sitting outside the cap.If you use a Category B list spot you potentially have less primary list or Category A list positions available.
View attachment 1379046
The big advantage is the salary is outside the cap - I think anyway.
If you can get a Will Sutherland like that you use it. You might also find a Tuohy or a Blicavs.
Like most things in recruiting it's about talent ID and then development. I don't think you want to be closed minded about any options.
That said I think our balance has been off and we invested too heavily in tall Cat B types (Cox, Keane, Tohill, Wilson, Madgen) in an effort to fix our key position hole and it's created a big list issue.
The main argument I can see against the OP is that players in the lower leagues can’t be put on the category B list.
Cox, the irish boys for the most part, Wilson, Roo when he’s even on a list… they are not taking up space that an overlooked VFL player could occupy.
I do agree that we’ve overrated athleticism in talls and underrated it in our smalls and mediums. Our big boys need to know how to mark, where to lead and how to impose themselves on a contest. Our smaller guys need to be able to spread and find space.
Sorry, but that's not correct! You can have 42 on your Primary List and Category A Rookie List combined. You can then have the 2 Category B Rookies outside of that, giving you a maximum of 44.
Without any cat b, the maximum list size is 42, rather than 44. They're an extra two players you can have on the list. Both cat A and B rookies have base wage sitting outside the cap.
Don't know why you wouldn't want them, unless your club is cash-strapped
Yeah, you can have 36 + 6, 37 + 5 or 38 + 4 (Primary + Cat. A), to make up the 42. We currently have 36 + 6.I stand corrected!
We'll continue to aim for 36 primary, 6 rookie A and 2 rookie B. Most players that costs the least under the cap. We'd only change from that if there's someone we really rate still available in the draft when our pick for the 37th on the primary list comes around. Or we haven't yet found 2 suitable for cat B list.It's true that we cant put footballers on the cat B list. But my point is that we're getting nothing much from the cat B's and it would be better to concentrate on the footballers in the lower leagues. I think a couple of people have made the point that the problem has been talent identification and if we dont identify the right footballers then it doesnt matter whether we use cat a or b
An exception to this is you can pick up NGA players as Cat. B Rookies as long as no-one takes them in earlier drafts. I believe you have to nominate them prior to the drafts. We could have taken Youseph Dib (multicultural) after he had done rather well for our Reserves side last year, but chose not to. St Kilda have filled their Cat. B spots with two indigenous lads from their NGA.It's true that we cant put footballers on the cat B list. But my point is that we're getting nothing much from the cat B's and it would be better to concentrate on the footballers in the lower leagues. I think a couple of people have made the point that the problem has been talent identification and if we dont identify the right footballers then it doesnt matter whether we use cat a or b
I think the issue for me is AFL offering incentives that effectively are leading clubs down blind alleys, and as you say to waste resource.The incentive is that they're not counted in list size if they are cat b. So it's seen as a free hit when the club is recruiting them. Of course all the resources spent in moulding them, nurse-maiding them etc isnt free. Experts can probably give a better reason
You aren’t going to be finding players in local footy who are good enough for the AFL. Everyone potted Sier for his lack of work rate and desire but what do you expect from local players? Players who are so committed to getting the best out of themselves they stay down in third tier comps instead of trying to get the best out of themselves at state league levelthank god derek can identify the ones that are good enough....
It'd be interesting to see games played per cat b rookie versus category a rookie. I'm not sure there would be much difference.well i still wouldnt bother about the irish and i think the other cat b's arent worth it either.... and i'm not thinking about the list spot only, I'm thinking about the admin and the development and all the other crap. Its a complication that doesnt deliver
It'd be interesting to see games played per cat b rookie versus category a rookie. I'm not sure there would be much difference.
The battle of the Jacks - Frost vs Madgen.
You aren’t going to be finding players in local footy who are good enough for the AFL. Everyone potted Sier for his lack of work rate and desire but what do you expect from local players? Players who are so committed to getting the best out of themselves they stay down in third tier comps instead of trying to get the best out of themselves at state league level
I think the issue for me is AFL offering incentives that effectively are leading clubs down blind alleys, and as you say to waste resource.
All in the name of PR, so that the AFL can brag about the athletes their program is poaching from other sports.
Pathetic really.
If there truly was a gold mine of talent in other sports, the Clubs would not need incentives to do the mining.
They’d be there with Caterpillar excavators.