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

[Testekill]

The thing is that nobody ended up picking up Keitel. When a tall KPP gets passed on by everyone (including Fremantle who still have nobody to be FF after Pavlich leaves) then maybe he's just not good enough.

 

[boydsno1]

Well put. Must be a reason why no one even rookied him.

 

[bontshow]

You would hope neither , but I would have preferred kietel over goodes

Me too, but out of hope for the unknown quantity, not for any rational reason

 

[Hrovat24]

Me too, but out of hope for the unknown quantity, not for any rational reason

And his height

 

[dogwatch]

And his height

Hey will BF let you change to Hrovat13?

 

[Hrovat24]

Hey will BF let you change to Hrovat13?

Haha why cause you are sick of hrovat24 or because he has changed numbers ?

 

[timtamWB]

Haha why cause you are sick of hrovat24 or because he has changed numbers ?

We're sick of you

Nah he's changing to 13.

 

[Hrovat24]

We're sick of you

Nah he's changing to 13.

A few would be sick of me

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

Hey will BF let you change to Hrovat13?

They so should

 

[bontshow]

Hey will BF let you change to Hrovat13?

Haha why cause you are sick of hrovat24 or because he has changed numbers ?

We're sick of you

Nah he's changing to 13.

Ant_

 

[BRWB]

The thing is that nobody ended up picking up Keitel. When a tall KPP gets passed on by everyone (including Fremantle who still have nobody to be FF after Pavlich leaves) then maybe he's just not good enough.

Like Podsiadly?

Like Dean Cox slipping through to the rookie?

Like Crameri?

Without knowing the full story I would have thought its a bit difficult to comment specifically on Keitel, but a broad generalisation saying if players aren't picked then maybe they aren't good enough isn't backed up with a multitude of passed over players carving out pretty good careers. Have a look at the passed over guns at our club who weren't drafted (Crameri, Dalhaus, Morris and Boyd for example.)

 

[immortalmike]

Like Podsiadly?

Like Dean Cox slipping through to the rookie?

Like Crameri?

Without knowing the full story I would have thought its a bit difficult to comment specifically on Keitel, but a broad generalisation saying if players aren't picked then maybe they aren't good enough isn't backed up with a multitude of passed over players carving out pretty good careers. Have a look at the passed over guns at our club who weren't drafted (Crameri, Dalhaus, Morris and Boyd for example.)

Most of those guys didn't go through the elite pathway Keitel did. If every recruitment team in the AFL passed on him and didn't even see fit to pick him with a late rookie pick, fair chance he just isn't good enough.

 

[Testekill]

And of course, the big one is Freo passing up on him. McPharlin and Pavlich both do not have long left in them and Keitel is a local tall that can go at either end. For them to overlook him is a massive sign.

 

[VitalDread]

And of course, the big one is Freo passing up on him. McPharlin and Pavlich both do not have long left in them and Keitel is a local tall that can go at either end. For them to overlook him is a massive sign.

nar mate
i ain't using commmon logic, goodes is still a crap pick bruh
like srs
we just rookie listed a mature player that is a great leader and has the ability to help the young kids with problems on and off the field
nar stuff him

 

[Some Idiot]

Most of those guys didn't go through the elite pathway Keitel did. If every recruitment team in the AFL passed on him and didn't even see fit to pick him with a late rookie pick, fair chance he just isn't good enough.

Podsiadly was delisted from two rookie lists in his time. Some of them like him and Dahl did come through the pathway and weren't seen as good enough.
But eh, I don't think its worth thinking about much at this point.
If he's good enough he'll dominate a state league in a few years to show it.

 

[immortalmike]

Podsiadly was delisted from two rookie lists in his time. Some of them like him and Dahl did come through the pathway and weren't seen as good enough.
But eh, I don't think its worth thinking about much at this point.
If he's good enough he'll dominate a state league in a few years to show it.

Fair chance that rejection may have also been a wake up call for them, i.e., what made them into AFL footballers.
Also the fact is they were both still drafted. Keitel has gone undrafted and not even rookied. Very different scenarios.

 

[ErnieSigley]

Goodes is a good VFL player, d-c grade AFL player, but is putting Goodes back on the Rookie list any different with what we did with Hahn when he could no longer play? Nothing more than a stop gap for some maturity.

Don't cut your nose to spite your face

Hahn could play and had 150+ AFL not VFL games behind him. At the time he was also younger than Goodes is now

 

[_Mike_]

Hahn could play and had 150+ AFL not VFL games behind him. At the time he was also younger than Goodes is now

Hahn could play, however at the time Hahn was rookie listed he was shot and a liability. IMO Goodes will likely end up a permanent VFL player and I dont see him getting a run next year

 

[Mofra]

Hahn could play, however at the time Hahn was rookie listed he was shot and a liability. IMO Goodes will likely end up a permanent VFL player and I dont see him getting a run next year

I see Goodes getting games as a midfielder - elite runner and our kids will need breaks.

 

[ErnieSigley]

Hahn could play, however at the time Hahn was rookie listed he was shot and a liability. IMO Goodes will likely end up a permanent VFL player and I dont see him getting a run next year

Hahn could play but Goodes never could play and never will.
If the plan is to play him permanent VFL then thats just a waste. Just give him a vfl contract.
No risk because there is nothing to gain here. We could have tried our luck with at least some hope of finding a player.

 

[_Mike_]

No risk because there is nothing to gain here. We could have tried our luck with at least some hope of finding a player.

Agree to a point, I believe its more the case of by the time we got around to it there was noone. Maybe the pre season draft might land us a decent find. Who knows.

 

[black pup]

I find these posts re Goodes amazing, I saw all VFL games last season,this is what I observed re Goodes.
1. Goodes is one of the best footballer's in the VFL, he is hard, strong, and a very good proctector in particular of our younger player's. One game stick's in my mind, we were playing Port at Port, Honeychurch was dominating the game, he had kicked 5 goals, he decided to hit a Port player who was over the ball head high. Port players game from everywhere, Goodes and Lower were first in, nobody got to Honeychurch, having played at Port a few times I can tell you you cannot put a price on that. If we did not list Goodes, he would have received huge offers from Williamstown, Port, North Ballarat to name a few, we could not matched those offers, our salary cap is full with Lower Etc.
Rookie listing Goodes is a very smart move, it allows us to pay him a rookie wage, and pay him a development wage as well.
From a list management point of view, If we cannot afford to list him at pick number 44, there is something wrong. People have got to relize we have 8 eighteen year olds starting off this season playing against men for the first time.
I congratulate the Football Department on a very smart Draft move, forget about Goodes playing AFL he has a lot bigger job to do developing our Juniors.
Goodes is already our best draft pick. GO DOGGIES.

 

[timtamWB]

Goodes is already our best draft pick.

I think you might be extracting the urine a bit with this part

But the rest of it is spot on.

 

[TheHoneyBadger]

I find these posts re Goodes amazing, I saw all VFL games last season,this is what I observed re Goodes.
1. Goodes is one of the best footballer's in the VFL, he is hard, strong, and a very good proctector in particular of our younger player's. One game stick's in my mind, we were playing Port at Port, Honeychurch was dominating the game, he had kicked 5 goals, he decided to hit a Port player who was over the ball head high. Port players game from everywhere, Goodes and Lower were first in, nobody got to Honeychurch, having played at Port a few times I can tell you you cannot put a price on that. If we did not list Goodes, he would have received huge offers from Williamstown, Port, North Ballarat to name a few, we could not matched those offers, our salary cap is full with Lower Etc.
Rookie listing Goodes is a very smart move, it allows us to pay him a rookie wage, and pay him a development wage as well.
From a list management point of view, If we cannot afford to list him at pick number 44, there is something wrong. People have got to relize we have 8 eighteen year olds starting off this season playing against men for the first time.
I congratulate the Football Department on a very smart Draft move, forget about Goodes playing AFL he has a lot bigger job to do developing our Juniors.
Goodes is already our best draft pick. GO DOGGIES.

Spot on.

We brought guys like Lower and Goodes in to enforce this cultural change - look after your mates, for crying out loud. We're starting to see that come through in the young guys. Hunter, Honeychurch, Hrovat, Stringer, Clay Smith, Libba, Koby and JJ, just to name a few, are all very protective of their teammates.

I'll admit I wasn't too impressed when we re-rookied Goodes given that we had the opportunity to roll a dice on a young player, but your post makes a hell of a lot of sense. Enjoying your contributions this off-season.

 

[Dogs_r_barking]

The reason its so bad is we are making the sane mistake again!

Freudian slip?