Welcome back to the club Brett Goodes (Rookie pick 57)

[Testekill]

So you don't view Cordy favourably because we were able to secure him with Pick 62, as a result of Fremantle placing a bid with Pick 51, but you'd prefer we'd overlooked players that we deemed the best available, to select any available tall - let's say Oscar McDonald, who wasn't selected until Pick 53?

I know you don't like smalls, and frankly I'd have taken a different approach to the draft too, but at least try to apply the same criteria to the players we did and didn't pick up.

On the topic of Goodes, I can see the sense in keeping him on, but I'd still prefer we didn't. He's not going to play enough AFL footy to warrant sacrificing a rookie spot, and as much as I already regret rolling this cliche out, one that could secure us a player of the calibre of Boyd, Dahlhaus, Campbell, and so on. I'd be more than happy to keep him on at Footscray, because he's a great footballer at that level and his off-field presence at the club can't go unmentioned, but maybe somebody like Keitel was worth a look (I'm unsure about him, and draft watchers that I converse with believe that he's s**t, but how can you lose with a rookie spot?) rather than spending it on what is effectively an insurance policy - no disrespect to Goodesy.

Or McKenzie who wasn't selected until pick 77. Or Keital who was not selected at all.

 

[Zgope1]

glad dalrymple said in the video that he's midfield depth. just needed that clarification and now i'm happy.

 

[paul scholes]

Yep needed talls went small

Pretty simple really and that may not be horrible but it isn't great and spin it anyway you want.

Talls take longer than smells so to heavy load a poor rebuilding list with smalls is counterproductive to improvement.

And we are also not taking small, we are talking tiny, footballers as a rule are getting bigger not smaller

But I'm not saying these blokes won't make it they might, but without talls to help we are going no where fast

Every recruiter talks spin, so let's put that out there.
Clearly they don't rate the tall backs, so hence why they didn't get picked up. Kytel didn't even get picked, so what would the point be picking up a tall back for the sake of it?

 

[paul scholes]

Or McKenzie who wasn't selected until pick 77. Or Keital who was not selected at all.

Dead right. The best ones go early, and I'd put the house on posters here going ballistic if the key back looks all at sea. Must be taken into account that Wood can play on bigger opponents as well

 

[AFDogs]

I thought it was obvious they would keep Goodes.

How much experience walked out the door? Goodes was delisted before all that occurred. Naturally, you need some seasoned heads in a footy team. A bunch of 18-22 year olds running around the park does NOT work and never will. Goodes will bring maturity and experience to an extremely lacking WBD team.

 

[Mattdougie]

Every recruiter talks spin, so let's put that out there.
Clearly they don't rate the tall backs, so hence why they didn't get picked up. Kytel didn't even get picked, so what would the point be picking up a tall back for the sake of it?

Exactly the same as picking a small just coz you think he is next best

The whole thing is a gamble so gamble for what u need not what you already have

We gambled on the tiny bloke who CANNOT play in the same team as Dahl Hunter Honey Hrovat. So we now have 5 blokes who at best we can play 2 possibly 3 in the same team.

This automatically limits the list. It's poor recruiting by any stretch of the imagination. Don't tell me there wasn't a bloke 188+ that we could have gambled on at that pick or lower picks.

Ok we didn't necessarily need to go big but we could have one medium at least

 

[AFDogs]

Exactly the same as picking a small just coz you think he is next best

The whole thing is a gamble so gamble for what u need not what you already have

We gambled on the tiny bloke who CANNOT play in the same team as Dahl Hunter Honey Hrovat. So we now have 5 blokes who at best we can play 2 possibly 3 in the same team.

This automatically limits the list. It's poor recruiting by any stretch of the imagination. Don't tell me there wasn't a bloke 188+ that we could have gambled on at that pick or lower picks.

Ok we didn't necessarily need to go big but we could have one medium at least

Maybe we plan on using Dal or Hrovat as Trade bait into luring talls? That's one way to do it.

I'm sure the panel has a good idea on what they're doing.

 

[timtamWB]

Yeah, so the thread title says "Welcome back to the club BRETT GOODES"

If we could talk about that, well that'd be awesome.

 

[Bulldocker]

Great decision to pick him up again. Adds some much needed leadership to a battling backline. I was stunned when he was dropped in the first place - perhaps a victim of the 2014 regime???

Maybe off topic, but quite surprised Panos was not given another crack somewhere as a rookie too.

 

[timtamWB]

Great decision to pick him up again. Adds some much needed leadership to a battling backline. I was stunned when he was dropped in the first place - perhaps a victim of the 2014 regime???

Really you were surprised when he was dropped? He wasn't performing well in the AFL team at all, especially as a HBF'er.

 

[paul scholes]

Exactly the same as picking a small just coz you think he is next best

The whole thing is a gamble so gamble for what u need not what you already have

We gambled on the tiny bloke who CANNOT play in the same team as Dahl Hunter Honey Hrovat. So we now have 5 blokes who at best we can play 2 possibly 3 in the same team.

This automatically limits the list. It's poor recruiting by any stretch of the imagination. Don't tell me there wasn't a bloke 188+ that we could have gambled on at that pick or lower picks.

Ok we didn't necessarily need to go big but we could have one medium at least

What the hell has a players height got to do with football capabilities?
Been players ( Brian royal springs to mind) who are better grabs than bigger players.
Not even a ball kicked in anger and you're already sticking the boots in.

 

[Bulldocker]

Really you were surprised when he was dropped? He wasn't performing well in the AFL team at all, especially as a HBF'er.

I was actually speaking of him being dropped off the list TT. But in all honesty, the Bullies backline was just awful in many games when that fantastic young midfield were swimming against the tide to keep them in it. Murphy and Morris could have done with another bigger-bodied/clearer thinking player to help out IMO. After 2013 I would have thought he was a best 22 player..... though I do concede I saw next to nothing of his VFL games. You may be able to set me straight.

 

[timtamWB]

I was actually speaking of him being dropped off the list TT. But in all honesty, the Bullies backline was just awful in many games when that fantastic young midfield were swimming against the tide to keep them in it. Murphy and Morris could have done with another bigger-bodied/clearer thinking player to help out IMO. After 2013 I would have thought he was a best 22 player..... though I do concede I saw next to nothing of his VFL games. You may be able to set me straight.

Ah ok. But still, it wasn't overly surprising. He was one of the first ones that was gone, right after Howard.

You're right in that our backline wasn't too flash, but Goodes contributed to that. He performed great in the VFL, winning the best and fairest, but he did this while playing in the midfield. If he were to make it in the AFL, it would be as a midfielder, because he's just not that good at playing in the backline.

 

[Bulldocker]

Ah ok. But still, it wasn't overly surprising. He was one of the first ones that was gone, right after Howard.

You're right in that our backline wasn't too flash, but Goodes contributed to that. He performed great in the VFL, winning the best and fairest, but he did this while playing in the midfield. If he were to make it in the AFL, it would be as a midfielder, because he's just not that good at playing in the backline.

Cool.
I did watch the Dogs list culling with some interest and even noted it on the Freo board when he got cut to see if there was any interest in bringing him west.

Would like to see him back in your team though.

 

[Tommycash]

Sensible considering who we have lost. Should be able to play about 10+ games this season and if he is cut at the years end he'll give us another rookie spot. The other three probably will last more than 1 year.

 

[Metal]

Goodes occupies the last spot on our list......and it doesn't really matter if we don't have yet another young player. We've got more than enough of them, many with bodies not yet ready for AFL footy. It's going to be an exhausting, wearing year for a number of our players because of the loss of experience from our list. His presence will be a huge benefit for those just starting out. He's a role model, a counsellor, a positive spirit, a hard worker, a willing learner and teacher. His bigger, more durable body gives us the option of playing him rather than a younger body not deemed ready.

 

[GrandBlue]

Someone explain why he's a better option than Kyle Hardingham or Jared Petrenko?

Those guys are younger, at their peak, and even though they're not world-beaters, they showed a lot more at AFL Level last year than Brett Goodes. On top of that, they fill needs for us, whereas Goodes is being talked up as an inside midfielder, where he'd be the 10th string at very least.

 

[immortalmike]

Someone explain why he's a better option than Kyle Hardingham or Jared Petrenko?

Those guys are younger, at their peak, and even though they're not world-beaters, they showed a lot more at AFL Level last year than Brett Goodes. On top of that, they fill needs for us, whereas Goodes is being talked up as an inside midfielder, where he'd be the 10th string at very least.

I'm not exactly enamoured with the decision but I guess the reasoning is he's cover for Boyd. I.e., a mature leader in the midfield, who knows the systems and can keep the young guys on track.

Honestly, though I don't think either Petrenko or Hardingham would've been any better. Both are terrible.

 

[timtamWB]

Someone explain why he's a better option than Kyle Hardingham or Jared Petrenko?

Those guys are younger, at their peak, and even though they're not world-beaters, they showed a lot more at AFL Level last year than Brett Goodes. On top of that, they fill needs for us, whereas Goodes is being talked up as an inside midfielder, where he'd be the 10th string at very least.

Because Hardingham and Petrenko are absolute duds, and don't have a bone of leadership in their bodies. While Goodes might not be much better than them on the field, he brings a heck of a lot more leadership, and a lot more maturity and wherewithal.

 

[GrandBlue]

Because Hardingham and Petrenko are absolute duds, and don't have a bone of leadership in their bodies. While Goodes might not be much better than them on the field, he brings a heck of a lot more leadership, and a lot more maturity and wherewithal.

It's easy to label them duds, but who's to say they wouldn't thrive under a different system or a different coach? There are plenty of examples of rejects going onto be very handy players; sometimes stars.

My problem with Goodes is that we recruited him as a 1-year quick-fix. If we were in a Premiership Window and just lost an experienced player, I wouldn't have a problem, but as a developing club, I don't see the logic in recruiting anyone who won't be a part of our long-term future. If leadership is so important, we should at least recruit a leader with a few good years left in him, or at very least someone who wasn't very poor at AFL level last year.

 

[timtamWB]

If leadership is so important, we should at least recruit a leader with a few good years left in him, or at very least someone who wasn't very poor at AFL level last year.

Honestly, it's not an if. It is very important. If we cast aside leadership, we become Melbourne.

And I get what you're saying. But, who exactly is that player? Goodes was one of the best performed in the VFL, so there's no guarantees any VFL player would be better than him. Plus they wouldn't know the boys around the club like Goodes would. He's the best option.

 

[VitalDread]

Goodes
4time vfl primership player
Natural leader
Welfare officer
Ripping bloke to talk too
Age bracket that can help the younger players
Elite player in the vfl

 

[GrandBlue]

Honestly, it's not an if. It is very important. If we cast aside leadership, we become Melbourne.

And I get what you're saying. But, who exactly is that player? Goodes was one of the best performed in the VFL, so there's no guarantees any VFL player would be better than him. Plus they wouldn't know the boys around the club like Goodes would. He's the best option.

I know leadership in general is important, but considering he's unlikely to play a game & will only be on the list for a year, the leadership he brings is somewhat negligible.

I don't know exactly who 'that' player is, but surely there's at least one gun VFL player who's leadership material and has age on his side. Even if he's no guarantee to be a success, you never know til he's tried, he could be the next Michael Barlow. On the other hand, Brett Goodes was so far off the pace last year it was ridiculous; I don't think he has anything to offer at AFL Level besides leadership.

I still think Kyle Hardingham would've been a better option. Not a quality player, but could be that handy, tough, versatile C-B Grader who fills a role; whether it be a Mitch Hahn/Max Rooke-style defensive forward or a medium sized shut-down defender to give Easton Wood a run for his money. Still only 26 so chances are he could've stuck around for our window. I don't know, it just seems to make more sense to me.

 

[paul scholes]

Goodes occupies the last spot on our list......and it doesn't really matter if we don't have yet another young player. We've got more than enough of them, many with bodies not yet ready for AFL footy. It's going to be an exhausting, wearing year for a number of our players because of the loss of experience from our list. His presence will be a huge benefit for those just starting out. He's a role model, a counsellor, a positive spirit, a hard worker, a willing learner and teacher. His bigger, more durable body gives us the option of playing him rather than a younger body not deemed ready.

Very good points . If we do get an injury to one of the senior citizens ( not many left) Is the only way he'd get a game .

 

[bontshow]

Why Mattdougie is still allowed to post here blows my mind. He corrupts the entire forum with relentless and argumentative negativity with no regard to the topic of the thread.

Picking Goodes again doesn't inspire me with hope for the future, but when it comes to pick 57 in the rookie draft and the last spot on the list, what's so wrong with giving the best player in the VFL Grand Final another year?