Strategy 2017 Forward Line

Remove this Banner Ad

Spazz Cat said:
How come you want Blitz at CHB?
He's never shown anything to prove he could be a decent key defender, not a good contested mark and it would waste he's greatest strength which is his endurance.
Also Gardner is showing really good signs at FB in the VFL.
Also Kolo is also about the same size as Rance who is the best FB in the league.
Click to expand...
I know nothing...
But he needs a role, he is teachable, fit, tall, decent mark, and worth considering
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Nakia said:
I reckon he'll debut at some stage next year too.
Click to expand...
He should play 1 or 2 games.
I really like how the club is developing him and also Bews.
Taking it slow and teaching them to be super defensive first and slowly giving them confidence to attack a bit.
Every VFL game I see they seem to have added just a little bit to their game each time. Will pay off I think.
 
Spazz Cat said:
How come you want Blitz at CHB?
He's never shown anything to prove he could be a decent key defender, not a good contested mark and it would waste he's greatest strength which is his endurance.
Also Gardner is showing really good signs at FB in the VFL.
Also Kolo is also about the same size as Rance who is the best FB in the league.
Click to expand...

Blitz never showed anything to prove he could be a ruckman prior to Round 1, 2013 either....
 
winty said:
Blitz never showed anything to prove he could be a ruckman prior to Round 1, 2013 either....
Click to expand...
Yeah but we had no rucks then.
We've got a few elite key backs.
Dunno maybe you're right but it doesn't seem like a good idea to me.
 
Turbocat said:
I believe we went down the "Freo" path last year , a method that has shown it can generate wins thru season but has generally failed against the best when it counts. Controlling the ball from the back half to prevent embarrassing our backmen getting caught out of position when they would roll the dice and run forward, so we seemed to be more focused on tempo , using the boundary in a way that could generally get the ball forward but frequently developed poorer chances. Add that we removed players of elite creativity in the last couple of years , it was on Menzels reappearance that gave our forwardline a better chance of manufacturing goals. Add when Linc played well , we then looked more balanced. One our best games for the year was against the Crows who also were aggressive in getting the ball forward , it allowed us to run it into ours.

So sure more emphasis on speed into the forwardline would be good ...but as you say not at the cost execution . We need players that finish of that run forward by either kicking the goal or hitting someone up. Even if we just increase speed , it will give our forwards more of a chance. Hawkins , one out 30 out can flummox defensive sets and it should create more chances for small forwards.

On the AFL site forwardline... having at 7 .. I think this is rather an overrate of us. Henderson at CHF , shows how dishevelled our forwardline is... He played most of his footy , his best footy back last year. I think GC forwardline looks just as dangerous if not more with Lynch and Wright. Cockatoo potentially could change it for us I guess.
Click to expand...
Great post, never saw the Fremantle comparison but makes a lot of sense.
 
Spazz Cat said:
Yeah but we had no rucks then.
We've got a few elite key backs.
Dunno maybe you're right but it doesn't seem like a good idea to me.
Click to expand...

No harm in trying it over the pre-season though. If it works out, great.
 
winty said:
Blitz never showed anything to prove he could be a ruckman prior to Round 1, 2013 either....
Click to expand...
Some here would argue that he still hasn't!
 
Partridge said:
The question is will he be better than Taylor, Lonergan or Henderson? If not, why would you do it?

Perhaps it's more important that he gets a spot rather than having a balanced side.
Click to expand...
Of course he won't be.

People just can't handle the thought of him not being in the team for some reason.

I don't see why so many people insist on needing to find new positions for people rather than not have them in the team.

It's simple.. players need to play the position they are proven in, if they aren't good enough or there are better options then tough t***ies go back to the VFL and be so good you can't be ignored.

I want us to be ruthless, this also refers to our selections.. send a message, reward players for playing well.. none of this picked on 'potential' nonsense.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Willo_ said:
Of course he won't be.

People just can't handle the thought of him not being in the team for some reason.

I don't see why so many people insist on needing to find new positions for people rather than not have them in the team.

It's simple.. players need to play the position they are proven in, if they aren't good enough or there are better options then tough t***ies go back to the VFL and be so good you can't be ignored.

I want us to be ruthless, this also refers to our selections.. send a message, reward players for playing well.. none of this picked on 'potential' nonsense.
Click to expand...

Spot on. To be fair, this doesn't just apply to Blicavs either. I'd argue it's also occurred with a number of our midfielders as they've gotten older. It happened with Corey, it happened with Kelly, and it happened with Bartel. Instead of making the tough but correct choice of moving those guys on, they were shuffled to either the backline (Corey and Kelly), or both the backline and forward line (Bartel). The result was at best they broke even, and more frequently it hurt the team. With Kelly and Bartel, it hurt the team in knockout finals.

What's frustrating is that the same coach did make tough but correct decisions at selection in his first year with Mooney and Milburn. You could argue neither deserved to be dropped on form, and certainly in Mooney's case his replacement was not clearly better when promoted. But both proved to be right. For whatever reason, those kinds of decisions just don't get made now. Senior players rarely get dropped, and veterans just don't play VFL. I'd love to know why.

There seems to be a philosophy now that it's ok for certain players to get unlimited games, irrespective of actual value to the team, while those who pound the door down in the VFL don't deserve a look in. Have yet to find any kind of justification for this that makes sense.

Your final sentence is absolutely spot on. Motlop last year was the most egregious but not the sole example.
 
Or some simply see a valid role for Blicavs to play. Not even slightly shocked the "he's gifted games crowd" ignore that. Some see him as being in the best team. I certainly do, as the 2nd ruckman.
 
Partridge said:
Spot on. To be fair, this doesn't just apply to Blicavs either. I'd argue it's also occurred with a number of our midfielders as they've gotten older. It happened with Corey, it happened with Kelly, and it happened with Bartel. Instead of making the tough but correct choice of moving those guys on, they were shuffled to either the backline (Corey and Kelly), or both the backline and forward line (Bartel). The result was at best they broke even, and more frequently it hurt the team. With Kelly and Bartel, it hurt the team in knockout finals.

What's frustrating is that the same coach did make tough but correct decisions at selection in his first year with Mooney and Milburn. You could argue neither deserved to be dropped on form, and certainly in Mooney's case his replacement was not clearly better when promoted. But both proved to be right. For whatever reason, those kinds of decisions just don't get made now. Senior players rarely get dropped, and veterans just don't play VFL. I'd love to know why.

There seems to be a philosophy now that it's ok for certain players to get unlimited games, irrespective of actual value to the team, while those who pound the door down in the VFL don't deserve a look in. Have yet to find any kind of justification for this that makes sense.

Your final sentence is absolutely spot on. Motlop last year was the most egregious but not the sole example.
Click to expand...

Really??
We STILL hear crap about moving Chappy, SJ and others on.
Truth is it has happened almost every year since 2011.
Other than that I agree, IMO Blicavs best position next year is VFL learning a role that would actually fit the AFL team and not being in the AFL team trying to manufacture a role to keep him in there.
 
Doctor Gero said:
Or some simply see a valid role for Blicavs to play. Not even slightly shocked the "he's gifted games crowd" ignore that. Some see him as being in the best team. I certainly do, as the 2nd ruckman.
Click to expand...

Except Stanley shits all over him as second ruck, what Stanley averaged last year is better than anything Blicavs has ever actually produced as a second ruck.
Stanley at a point through the year was our best ruck and went forward to kick multiple goals on more than 1 occasion.
If Blicavs could get to that point then sure but otherwise our best ruck setup is Smith and Stanley hands down.
 
Mad_Hatter said:
Really??
We STILL hear crap about moving Chappy, SJ and others on.
Truth is it has happened almost every year since 2011.
Click to expand...
makes you look forward to footy season doesn't it :D
 
Mad_Hatter said:
Except Stanley shits all over him as second ruck, what Stanley averaged last year is better than anything Blicavs has ever actually produced as a second ruck.
Stanley at a point through the year was our best ruck and went forward to kick multiple goals on more than 1 occasion.
If Blicavs could get to that point then sure but otherwise our best ruck setup is Smith and Stanley hands down.
Click to expand...
I disagree. Stanley is far too inconsistent for me, Blicavs less so.
Probably moot anyway as Stanley and Blicavs will be picked and likely both split the role given Stanley will spend time up forward. I still think Smith/Blicavs is the best combo and his detractors won't sway me.
 
Partridge said:
Spot on. To be fair, this doesn't just apply to Blicavs either. I'd argue it's also occurred with a number of our midfielders as they've gotten older. It happened with Corey, it happened with Kelly, and it happened with Bartel. Instead of making the tough but correct choice of moving those guys on, they were shuffled to either the backline (Corey and Kelly), or both the backline and forward line (Bartel). The result was at best they broke even, and more frequently it hurt the team. With Kelly and Bartel, it hurt the team in knockout finals.

What's frustrating is that the same coach did make tough but correct decisions at selection in his first year with Mooney and Milburn. You could argue neither deserved to be dropped on form, and certainly in Mooney's case his replacement was not clearly better when promoted. But both proved to be right. For whatever reason, those kinds of decisions just don't get made now. Senior players rarely get dropped, and veterans just don't play VFL. I'd love to know why.

There seems to be a philosophy now that it's ok for certain players to get unlimited games, irrespective of actual value to the team, while those who pound the door down in the VFL don't deserve a look in. Have yet to find any kind of justification for this that makes sense.

Your final sentence is absolutely spot on. Motlop last year was the most egregious but not the sole example.
Click to expand...

You make quite a few arguments to be answered but in the spirit of this thread I choose to answer -

while those who pound the door down in the VFL don't deserve a look in.

Who, in your opinion was knocking the door down to be selected in the fwd line..? I did see a few of the VFL games live and no1 was screaming out 'pick me.'

House was good and deserved his selection in the draft.
 
Doctor Gero said:
I disagree. Stanley is far too inconsistent for me, Blicavs less so.
Probably moot anyway as Stanley and Blicavs will be picked and likely both split the role given Stanley will spend time up forward. I still think Smith/Blicavs is the best combo and his detractors won't sway me.
Click to expand...
His detractors from last year have obviously swayed you that he ain't going to be a star midfielder given you want him to play a position we already have covered. Let's pick this up next year when you claim your detractors won't sway you that he should be our third tall defender after having a poor season as a second ruck. No third man up to pad his hit out stats now.
 
Seeds said:
His detractors from last year have obviously swayed you that he ain't going to be a star midfielder given you want him to play a position we already have covered. Let's pick this up next year when you claim your detractors won't sway you that he should be our third tall defender after having a poor season as a second ruck. No third man up to pad his hit out stats now.
Click to expand...
Cool Seeds.
 
Shai said:
You make quite a few arguments to be answered but in the spirit of this thread I choose to answer -

while those who pound the door down in the VFL don't deserve a look in.

Who, in your opinion was knocking the door down to be selected in the fwd line..? I did see a few of the VFL games live and no1 was screaming out 'pick me.'

House was good and deserved his selection in the draft.
Click to expand...
He wasn't talking about the forward line but going with the spirit of the thread I'd say no one really in the fwd line.
Bar Mitch Clark for a little period.
Also I guess you could say Lang. He hit great form toward the end of the year but was playing mainly mid.
I thought Cocky looked great when he got back right at the end but he was playing more mid really.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

newcs
  • Locked
Good luck getting to the game from Melbourne. V/Line and VicRoads are at it again.
Replies
1
Views
170
cats_09
cats_09
J
Season on the line next week
2 3 4
Replies
96
Views
3K
BotsMaster
BotsMaster

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top