Player Watch Charlie Edwards - Signed to End of 2026

[GreyCrow]

Playing lesser players over better players would absolutely have an impact on our results

No it wouldnt

The 23rd player picked should not be the difference maker

(both Smith and Murphy were in more wins than losses, but some were pretty close).

This has no relevance. Its a statement that means nothing because its unprovable

And while we would have seen where Edwards was at, the Club would have gained nothing from it,

Wrong again. We would have seen where Edwards was at . Thats the whole point.

Obviously the club has certain things they want to see a player do in an AFL game - if Charlie hits a few you think ok and if he doesnt he goes back with his notes and works on those things or he never plays again. But you know and the club knows

That should be in the Coaching Manual on page 14

And do we also play Welsh, Turrey and Gallager?

Were they burning it up in the SANFL? Stupid comparison and strawman

 

[Pugsley]

I don't think Smith and Murphy getting AFL games is the issue that some people think it is.

I didn't feel the need to continue reading from that point.

 

[George CantStandYa]

Playing lesser players over better players would absolutely have an impact on our results (both Smith and Murphy were in more wins than losses, but some were pretty close).

And while we would have seen where Edwards was at, the Club would have gained nothing from it, other than a potential loss.

And do we also play Welsh, Turrey and Gallager?

Umm, how about Dowling over Murphy? Nank?

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Umm, how about Dowling over Murphy? Nank?

Literally playing anyone else!

 

[Daniel6]

Playing lesser players over better players would absolutely have an impact on our results (both Smith and Murphy were in more wins than losses, but some were pretty close).

And while we would have seen where Edwards was at, the Club would have gained nothing from it, other than a potential loss.

And do we also play Welsh, Turrey and Gallager?

Who?

You know it’s the off season as I literally don’t know who any of our players are.

 

[Scorpus]

I would have liked to see Gallagher get a game over Murphy

 

[Syd Crow]

I would have liked to see Gallagher get a game over Murphy

or Balme.....

 

[Big Dub]

I thought my post might get a few replies.

Worell didn't get AFL games when he wasn't at AFL standard, and it didn't hurt his development. Plus all of the other examples I gave where not getting maximum games early didn't hurt. The same applies to Edwards.

Which means that none of the 37 players preferred to Edwards this year have hurt his development. That includes Smith (11 games) and Murphy (5). Happy to agree to disagree here if you believe that isn't true.

As previously stated, the Club doesn't need to see Edwards play AFL to see where he's at. Edwards will get a game when he's ready. Of the 79 players who have been on the Crows list under Nicks, only 4 were cut without playing an AFL game (Ace Taylor, Brett Turner, Newchurch and Gallagher). Edwards is better than those blokes. The Club can give him his work-ons in the SANFL until then.


Murphy was a non-event this year, which is why he only got 5 games. But he was serviceable in 2023 and 2024 (where the bulk of the "last 50 games" referenced comes from), even if not a great player at any time in his career. As were the fringe players from 2025 that we similarly don't believe won't "make it", like Berry (19), Taylor (17), Pedlar (9) and Crouch (6). So, to be consistent, we wouldn't be playing those guys either.

I agree with the point made by GreyCrow . If the kid and the older player are at a similar standard, you might as well play the kid as there will be little difference in the output.

But Edwards isn't our 23rd best player. Based on who did and didn't get games this year, he's our 38th best player. Playing Dowling and Edwards (with more games for Draper) instead of Berry, Crouch and Taylor would create a noticeable drop in performance.

Playing Edwards instead of Smith wouldn't have created as big of a difference, but it would have been noticeable. It might have been enough to turn one of the tight wins against Brisbane, Melbourne, Hawthorn or Collingwood (Smith played in each) into a loss. And if there was no benefit to Edwards anyway, why even bother?


And if you are playing the kids instead of fringe players who won't make it, each of the kids under 21 plays. Ryan played some good games in the SANFL, Turray (Toby Murray) showed a bit too. But Cook kicked 6 in the SANFL one week and stank it up in the AFL shortly afterwards. There's a big step up from SANFL to AFL. The Club didn't think Edwards was ready for that jump. Yet.

And if the competing selection philosophy doesn't include giving games to the other kids, we are just investing in the best of the kids. Which is exactly what I'm advocating for, we're just apart by one player. A player that Bigman hasn't exactly been talking up this pre-season.

 

[Big Dub]

Umm, how about Dowling over Murphy? Nank?

I'd have liked to see Dowling get Murphy's games. But that wouldn't have helped Edwards any more than playing Murphy.

 

[adelaidecrows]

I'd have liked to see Dowling get Murphy's games. But that wouldn't have helped Edwards any more than playing Murphy.

I think the criticism stems from ignoring a glaring midfield issue by refusing to play young midfielders to bring in the next generation.

Also Nicks may have played nearly every new player on the list but fun fact only 10 reside in the best 22. Everyone else is a trade or played under Pyke. Thats not the best stat really is it? The rest fill the Sanfl and some of those players have been on the list for 5 and 6 years.

 

[Big Dub]

I think the criticism stems from ignoring a glaring midfield issue by refusing to play young midfielders to bring in the next generation.

Also Nicks may have played nearly every new player on the list but fun fact only 10 reside in the best 22. Everyone else is a trade or played under Pyke. Thats not the best stat really is it? The rest fill the Sanfl and some of those players have been on the list for 5 and 6 years.

Again I'll agree to disagree that you need to play kids to develop them. But we have played Draper, Curtin, Soligo, Rachele, Taylor, Rankine, Berry, Dowling, Schoenberg, Hately.

But absolutely sitting guys on the list who aren't good enough to play is the much bigger issue, as it prevents us from putting a late/ rookie pick on the list who could be the next Neale/ Fyfe/ Charlie Cameron. Not freeing up a third list spot in 2024 cost us Alex Dodson. This is something that we haven't done as well as the successful rebuilding sides.

What hurt us a lot more than retaining AFL level Smith and Murphy was retaining guys like Gollant, Davis, McPherson, Borlase, Strachan and potentially Cook. Trading in Burgess the same. They added nothing to the present as well as nothing to the future.

 

[adelaidecrows]

Again I'll agree to disagree that you need to play kids to develop them. But we have played Draper, Curtin, Soligo, Rachele, Taylor, Rankine, Berry, Dowling, Schoenberg, Hately.

But absolutely sitting guys on the list who aren't good enough to play is the much bigger issue, as it prevents us from putting a late/ rookie pick on the list who could be the next Neale/ Fyfe/ Charlie Cameron. Not freeing up a third list spot in 2024 cost us Alex Dodson. This is something that we haven't done as well as the successful rebuilding sides.

What hurt us a lot more than retaining AFL level Smith and Murphy was retaining guys like Gollant, Davis, McPherson, Borlase, Strachan and potentially Cook. Trading in Burgess the same. They added nothing to the present as well as nothing to the future.

But it speaks to Nick's want to have ready to play senior body players. I agree with you mostly. Murphy was still a mistake.

 

[Big Dub]

But it speaks to Nick's want to have ready to play senior body players. I agree with you mostly. Murphy was still a mistake.

Every team, including premiership teams, play well below average players of the 2024 Smith and Murphy ilk. It's how you win games.

Extending a 24 year old Murphy for 2 years not 1 in 2023 was a mistake, at least in hindsight. Just not the biggest list mistake.

Which doesn't exactly make it easier to take.

 

[skam85]

I don't think Smith and Murphy getting AFL games is the issue that some people think it is.

Worrell played 1 AFL game in his first 2 years at the club and 5 in his first 3. And we were a rubbish team then. He was then a fringe player for 2 more years. This year he was unlucky not to be named all Australian.

Keane was similar (yeah, I get he came from a non-AFL background).

Fog took years to come good.

Each of Thilthorp, Rachele, Soligo and Curtin played a mixture of SANFL and AFL footy in their first year or two.

The only draftee who pretty much played AFL from the start was Max, and I'd say he hasn't done any better than those mentioned above.

That's not saying that Max would be a better player now if he hadn't played AFL from the start. It's saying that thumping AFL games into kids isn't the way to develop them into quality AFL footballers.

Other clubs do the same. For every Ashcroft, thete's a Wilmot or Fletcher.

No rebuilding team who won a flag within a decade of the start of the rebuild invested any more in young players (in number of players or games) than we have.

Yes, I would have liked to see Edwards get a game. But that is about my needs, not Edwards' development. The club doesn't need to see him play AFL to know where he's at. They see him nearly every day for 9 months a year.

If people's arguments against Smith and Murphy getting a game is that they weren't good enough, we gave 37 players a game last year. If the club wanted to give a 38th player a game, it would have.

Smith and Murphy outperformed Edwards in the SANFL too.

I hope Edwards gets a game this year. Because that would mean he was good enough to earn one. Smith and Murphy certainly won't be standing in his way. Just like they weren't last year.

Impressively high amount of words to be utterly wrong

 

[Elder van Berlo]

If Edwards can’t be in or pretty close to the 23 by round 1, you’d have to fear that this season will be his last.

He’s apparently training as a midfielder again. In a 22, we have run 5 mids, so we can expect that in a 23 we will have 5 or 6.

There are three above him in the pecking order who will be unavailable or grossly underdone: Rankine, Curtin and Draper. If he’s not at least an emergency, he’s a mile back, not a good sign for a third year mid.

What does our round 1 midfield even look like?

Dawson and Soligo automatic selections.

It sounds like Rash will be re purposed in there.

It kind of feels like Peatling is always the last mid picked and ends up shunted to half forward a bit, so he will be there.

Berry, I guess. We know he’s trash but the cupboard is bare.

That’s 5. Are there even any other options besides Edwards? Only guys who are obviously preferred in other positions: Keays, Laird, Dowling, Taylor, Pedlar

 

[Banrock]

As much as people bemoan selection integrity and Nicks has somewhat fluffed it, the guys from 24-36 (removing those that clearly need time to develop) need to know that if they perform in the SANFL that they will get an opportunity in the AFL.

You play a kid that isn't in form over a another older player in that bracket will just destroy that groups belief of next man up. Although Smith is older and only one year on his contract, imagine him knowing that no matter what he did he wouldnt get picked. He would no doubt drop his head, not be as vocal or supportive to other players and that can then run through the team.

It is a balancing act and no doubt Nicks hasn't got it completely right (seems to have his favorites) but you have to hope that the selection team are on the whole trying to keep integrity for the betterment of the overall list.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

As much as people bemoan selection integrity and Nicks has somewhat fluffed it, the guys from 24-36 (removing those that clearly need time to develop) need to know that if they perform in the SANFL that they will get an opportunity in the AFL.

You play a kid that isn't in form over a another older player in that bracket will just destroy that groups belief of next man up. Although Smith is older and only one year on his contract, imagine him knowing that no matter what he did he wouldnt get picked. He would no doubt drop his head, not be as vocal or supportive to other players and that can then run through the team.

It is a balancing act and no doubt Nicks hasn't got it completely right (seems to have his favorites) but you have to hope that the selection team are on the whole trying to keep integrity for the betterment of the overall list.

When we have had players with a good patch of form in the sanfl, the selectors have usually ignored them & chosen a more experienced player in worse form.

 

[1970crow]

Impressively high amount of words to be utterly wrong

Kudos for getting through it.

 

[1970crow]

If Edwards can’t be in or pretty close to the 23 by round 1, you’d have to fear that this season will be his last.

He’s apparently training as a midfielder again. In a 22, we have run 5 mids, so we can expect that in a 23 we will have 5 or 6.

There are three above him in the pecking order who will be unavailable or grossly underdone: Rankine, Curtin and Draper. If he’s not at least an emergency, he’s a mile back, not a good sign for a third year mid.

What does our round 1 midfield even look like?

Dawson and Soligo automatic selections.

It sounds like Rash will be re purposed in there.

It kind of feels like Peatling is always the last mid picked and ends up shunted to half forward a bit, so he will be there.

Berry, I guess. We know he’s trash but the cupboard is bare.

That’s 5. Are there even any other options besides Edwards? Only guys who are obviously preferred in other positions: Keays, Laird, Dowling, Taylor, Pedlar

Why is Rankine grossly underdone? You reckon missing round 1, 6 months after the last time any club played will have him a step behind the rest of the competition?

 

[Mr MysteryGuest]

Why is Rankine grossly underdone? You reckon missing round 1, 6 months after the last time any club played will have him a step behind the rest of the competition?

“unavailable or”

We know he won’t be there for rd 1 , so either Rachele or Keays etc move into the midfield or play Edwards .

 

[1970crow]

“unavailable or”

We know he won’t be there for rd 1 , so either Rachele or Keays etc move into the midfield or play Edwards .

Missed that bit, I’m an idiot. And my fingers have managed to engage italics on my iPhone. NFI how I did that.

 

[TRP1996]

Playing lesser players over better players would absolutely have an impact on our results (both Smith and Murphy were in more wins than losses, but some were pretty close).

Yeah, thank god for Murphy's cumulative 8 disposals and mammoth 0.0 in the two close wins against Melbourne and Collingwood. Truly a contribution that could not have been equalled by a younger player.

 

[FR0GGY]

Playing lesser players over better players would absolutely have an impact on our results (both Smith and Murphy were in more wins than losses, but some were pretty close).

And while we would have seen where Edwards was at, the Club would have gained nothing from it, other than a potential loss.

And do we also play Welsh, Turrey and Gallager?

That’s the problem when people and coaches only look at the now.

 

[FR0GGY]

I would have liked to see Gallagher get a game over Murphy

And Liam at that.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

As much as people bemoan selection integrity and Nicks has somewhat fluffed it, the guys from 24-36 (removing those that clearly need time to develop) need to know that if they perform in the SANFL that they will get an opportunity in the AFL.

You play a kid that isn't in form over a another older player in that bracket will just destroy that groups belief of next man up. Although Smith is older and only one year on his contract, imagine him knowing that no matter what he did he wouldnt get picked. He would no doubt drop his head, not be as vocal or supportive to other players and that can then run through the team.

It is a balancing act and no doubt Nicks hasn't got it completely right (seems to have his favorites) but you have to hope that the selection team are on the whole trying to keep integrity for the betterment of the overall list.

Charlie Cameron didn't do anything special in the SANFL. Neither did Curtin for that matter. Certainly not an extended period of quality performances that demanded selection at a higher level.

Some players are just good and a coach(ing staff) with balls and some intuition just picks them anyway.

Sure, they might jump the selection integrity queue which ruffles a few feathers internally, but remember:

Malcolm Blight: "I'm not here to make friends."

SANFL form should be practically meaningless by itself, unless we believe that James Battersby and Patrick Wilson are quality AFL players deserving of game time.

Pleasingly we've sometimes made bold, intuitive, good selection calls in the past (like Cameron and, after a small delay, Curtin) but it feels like we will usually only make these decisions if the team is utterly shithouse and out of finals contention.

We'd rarely look to upgrade or improve a team that's doing okay.