Remove this Banner Ad

Carlton's "Bottom Six"

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

M

Murphy2Judd

Senior List
Joined
Aug 26, 2009
Posts
163
Reaction score
0
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Carlton
I remember towards the end of last season, all the hoo hah going on about Carlton's bottom six players, how they weren't good enough, didn't want it enough etc.

But fast forward to 2010 and i think our depth will now be what eliminates that problem. The bottom six players on the ground every week can not afford to not perform. They can not afford to not give 100%. We now have a full tier of younger players that are ready to take these players spots if they're not willing/able to perform. Players like Browne, Lucas, Davies, Garlett etc. are all talented enough to perform at AFL level.

The MC need to get the message across that we now have more depth than we have in ten years, and we that we can and will take advantage of that. If players know that their spot in the side is on the line then i guarantee you they will give 110% for the club, and if they don't, then they're not the kind of player we want at the club anyway.

My two cents.
 
Murphy2Judd said:
I remember towards the end of last season, all the hoo hah going on about Carlton's bottom six players, how they weren't good enough, didn't want it enough etc.

But fast forward to 2010 and i think our depth will now be what eliminates that problem. The bottom six players on the ground every week can not afford to not perform. They can not afford to not give 100%. We now have a full tier of younger players that are ready to take these players spots if they're not willing/able to perform. Players like Browne, Lucas, Davies, Garlett etc. are all talented enough to perform at AFL level.

The MC need to get the message across that we now have more depth than we have in ten years, and we that we can and will take advantage of that. If players know that their spot in the side is on the line then i guarantee you they will give 110% for the club, and if they don't, then they're not the kind of player we want at the club anyway.

My two cents.
Click to expand...

Means little if they're not good enough.
 
Depends on:

  • How our bottom 6 from last year have improved?
  • Have additional players come up to compensate for the departure of Fev & Stevens?
  • Are some players getting towards the end of their careers and will therefore be on the decline compared to last year (ie. Houla, Scotland) which means our bottom six is in fact a bottom 8 or 9, if you get my drift?

At day's end, some of those mentioned by Walls in our bottom six didn't deserve to be there, ie. Thornton, but at day's end there is a need to make sure our bottom 6 at least matches those from other clubs that play in finals.

Also, as to our depth, still reckon that is problematic, ie. depth players like Fish, Wiggins (yes, great club man but that doesn't mean he can kick) are not really what you want as depth players. And guys like Lucas, Browne, etc, although talented, have yet to prove themselves at AFL level.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Murphy2Judd said:
I remember towards the end of last season, all the hoo hah going on about Carlton's bottom six players, how they weren't good enough, didn't want it enough etc.

But fast forward to 2010 and i think our depth will now be what eliminates that problem. The bottom six players on the ground every week can not afford to not perform. They can not afford to not give 100%. We now have a full tier of younger players that are ready to take these players spots if they're not willing/able to perform. Players like Browne, Lucas, Davies, Garlett etc. are all talented enough to perform at AFL level.

The MC need to get the message across that we now have more depth than we have in ten years, and we that we can and will take advantage of that. If players know that their spot in the side is on the line then i guarantee you they will give 110% for the club, and if they don't, then they're not the kind of player we want at the club anyway.

My two cents.
Click to expand...

Let's count our depth once they have proven that they have what it takes to make it at the highest level.
 
Malifice said:
For a 'bottom' six:

Chris Johnson, Brad Fisher, Simon Wiggins. All in serious trouble at years end.

Anderson, Ellard and Browne need to step up this year or be in a little strife as well.
Click to expand...

I imagine that The Chief & Browney would be looking a lot safer than Houlihan & Betts right now
 
Where did this term come from? Is it the same as 'lesser lights'. Are they the underrated players. The role players. I think the concept is redundant. They don't exist. You have champions [Doull, Nicholls, Kerhahan, Bradley etc]. You have those who 'turn it on' more often than not [Stevens, Lappin, Fevola, etc]. Then the tough nuts follow [A McKay, Dean, Crane, Brown, Spalding etc]. You then finish with the 'good ordinary' footballers [Hogg, Manton, Rice, Pinnell etc]. No room for this bottom six. If you can't make the above categories you're just not good enough.
 
BlueTongue said:
I imagine that The Chief & Browney would be looking a lot safer than Houlihan & Betts right now
Click to expand...

Betts is safe.

Hoops sits somewhere between being a good AFL player and being an Elite VFL player.

The Bloke is just too skilled to delist (notwithstanding any other faults *cough softness cough* in his gameplay).

Of course these blokes **** up again and it could be very good news for some of our lesser lights who might otherwise have found themselves in strife at years end.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Malifice said:
Betts is safe.

Hoops sits somewhere between being a good AFL player and being an Elite VFL player.

The Bloke is just too skilled to delist (notwithstanding any other faults *cough softness cough* in his gameplay).

Of course these blokes **** up again and it could be very good news for some of our lesser lights who might otherwise have found themselves in strife at years end.
Click to expand...

My point wasn't about skills but rather the Club's 'Tough New Stance' on Alcohol & public behavioral issues.
Hoops & EB are very good players but their repeat offences (most, if not all are alcohol related) have ensured that they will be made an example of if they offend again.

I guess 'This is how the Club Rolls' now. :D
(been dying to get that one in)
 
My definition would be the worst 6 in the 22. As I posted in the 'top 10 players' thread, it's really the top 10 outside the best 22 that need to put pressure on those resting on their laurels.

Remember we did lose Hartlett, Bentley, Cloke and Bannister in the off-season. Wiggins, Johnson and Fisher I'd no longer rate in our best 22 so it's a moot point as to whether they're bottom 6 of 22 or of 38. Consequently, I think we've reduced it to a bottom four. ;)

Of those outside our best 22 in '09, I think Robinson, Grigg, Browne, McLean, Henderson, Warnock and Austin will have very big years. Watch out bottom four!
 
Malifice said:
Betts is safe.

Hoops sits somewhere between being a good AFL player and being an Elite VFL player.

The Bloke is just too skilled to delist (notwithstanding any other faults *cough softness cough* in his gameplay).

Of course these blokes **** up again and it could be very good news for some of our lesser lights who might otherwise have found themselves in strife at years end.
Click to expand...

As much as I love him (really, massive man-crush) Carrots is in the same boat. Truly dominates when he gets dropped to VFL, but is just a face in the crowd at AFL.
 
The "Bottom Six" is a very interesting term and in fact is a little contradictory to what the game is about. "Bottom Six" for me is a particular rating of individuals in one of the most team oriented sports on the planet. The so called "Bottom Six" can vary from game to game, are we rating them on out put measurements as far as possessions, marks, tackles and 1%er's? or are we rating them on their role within the team.

For example a player may have the role for a particular game of leading and creating space in the forward line for other players, or a player may be needed to pull an opposition player away from the ball for the beneift of the team. Both of these examples mean little in the form of Champion Data or stats, but to the team it can mean the difference between winning and loosing.

My point is without knowing the specific roles of each player every game it is very difficult to gauge our bottom six based on relative outputs. Attitude amongst the team mates, committment to the team and the game plan is what makes the difference in my opinion.
 
Lawnchair said:
As much as I love him (really, massive man-crush) Carrots is in the same boat. Truly dominates when he gets dropped to VFL, but is just a face in the crowd at AFL.
Click to expand...

Carrotts is a classic case of a role player and is one of our better players at this. His descipline to a task is fantastic and when you do want him to get the ball he can..........he dominates at VFL because he becomes the go to man with other players working for him.
 
Malifice said:
For a 'bottom' six:

Chris Johnson, Brad Fisher, Simon Wiggins. All in serious trouble at years end.

Anderson, Ellard and Browne need to step up this year or be in a little strife as well.
Click to expand...

Brad Fisher was extremely lucky to still be on the list. His body is gone.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

BlueFeaver said:
The "Bottom Six" is a very interesting term and in fact is a little contradictory to what the game is about. "Bottom Six" for me is a particular rating of individuals in one of the most team oriented sports on the planet. The so called "Bottom Six" can vary from game to game, are we rating them on out put measurements as far as possessions, marks, tackles and 1%er's? or are we rating them on their role within the team.

For example a player may have the role for a particular game of leading and creating space in the forward line for other players, or a player may be needed to pull an opposition player away from the ball for the beneift of the team. Both of these examples mean little in the form of Champion Data or stats, but to the team it can mean the difference between winning and loosing.

My point is without knowing the specific roles of each player every game it is very difficult to gauge our bottom six based on relative outputs. Attitude amongst the team mates, committment to the team and the game plan is what makes the difference in my opinion.
Click to expand...

The bottom 6 Wallsy was talking about last year, were those lower tier players who don't contribute enough compared to the rest of the team.

For example, players who I'd say would qualify for the "bottom 6" at Carlton would be:

1 Houlihan
2. Fisher
3. Johnson
4. Walker
5. Grigg
6. Setanta

Its these type of players where you're just not sure what you're going to get. Over the course of the year, it is the contribution and consistency of effort you get from these bottom 6 players which makes the difference.

Teams like Geelong and StKilda have been able to get better contributions and output (not just stats) out of their "bottom 6" than other teams have. :)
 
GoBlues! said:
The bottom 6 Wallsy was talking about last year, were those lower tier players who don't contribute enough compared to the rest of the team.

For example, players who I'd say would qualify for the "bottom 6" at Carlton would be:

1 Houlihan
2. Fisher
3. Johnson
4. Walker
5. Grigg
6. Setanta

Its these type of players where you're just not sure what you're going to get. Over the course of the year, it is the contribution and consistency of effort you get from these bottom 6 players which makes the difference.

Teams like Geelong and StKilda have been able to get better contributions and output (not just stats) out of their "bottom 6" than other teams have. :)
Click to expand...

GB,

This why I struggle with the term.

The players you have named, except for Houihan [20 games], played 12 games or less. Injuries were the major cause of missisng games. You can't blame them if they didn't play.

Of those who played

Houlihan 22
Armfield 17
Hampson 15
Russell 20
Scotland 17
Wiggins 13

The bottom six?

I think you lose when your better players under perform.
 
Um where to start people bag the like of russel and fisher but they are much better players in my oppion than armfield and brown.
These 3 armfield and brown and even joe anderson not up to afl level.

so once the match commitee work that out and not play them the bottom 6 wont be as bad
 
bbolt1 said:
Um where to start people bag the like of russel and fisher but they are much better players in my oppion than armfield and brown.
These 3 armfield and brown and even joe anderson not up to afl level.

so once the match commitee work that out and not play them the bottom 6 wont be as bad
Click to expand...
What?

Browne for one wasn't even in the side last year, so how you think he's in the bottom six makes no sense to me at all, and secondly he is a very talented player, this will be his third year on the list and might be the year that he really steps up.

And secondly how is Fisher better than Browne? Browne is younger, more skilled and is in better shape physically. Browne's career has only just started, where as Fisher's is just about over.

Also who mentioned Joey? He didn't play a single game last year, he performed well in the VFL but how can he be in the bottom six of our best 22 without even playing a game?:rolleyes:
 
bbolt1 said:
Um where to start people bag the like of russel and fisher but they are much better players in my oppion than armfield and brown.
These 3 armfield and brown and even joe anderson not up to afl level.

so once the match commitee work that out and not play them the bottom 6 wont be as bad
Click to expand...

dreamin'...
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom