Team Mgmt. 2018 Best 22

[Lord Cotton]

I was pretty adamant on Hooker staying back, but he brings something dynamic to the forward line that McKernan just couldn’t replicate in his few matches.

Maybe Woosh will utilise the depth we have this year and send Hooker back while rotating Stringer or Begley through, that way keeping a bigger body down there to complement JD and Stewart.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[ghostdog]

Ambrose hands down.

If the equation is Hurley and Hooker back then I think Ambrose too. He can spoil a key forward all day and just dish off the handball others to set up. If only Ambrose could kick like Hartley he'd be a dead set weapon.

 

[Lore]

How much better does the backline look with Hooker there. I haven't cared too much about the Hooker back/forward debate but now with Stringer in, it's time to call an end to Hooker's permanency up forward. Swing him forward on occasion to pinch a goal, it should prove an effective attacking tactic but it's time to shore up our D.


& in other news, this club still cant run an up to date website...

View attachment 465863

We bugged them on twitter:

 

[AcuteWhistle]

We bugged them on twitter:

Soooo, it's the AFL's fault!

 

[citizen-erased]

I don't know if its another poor preseason game showing from our backline, but the idea of McKernan @ FF is growing on me

Gleeson Hooker Ambrose
Saad Hurley McKenna
Midfield
MID/HFF* Daniher Tippa
Fantasia McKernan Stewart

*Assuming we role the likes of Stringer, Smith, Parish, Zaka, Langford through the 6th forward position

Really need Hartley to work on regaining his 2016 form
Its odd how with a better backline around him he has taken a step back.

McKernan allows Hooker to take the FB spot and gives us a genuine 2nd ruck that isn't Daniher or Stewart.
Stringer to FF when McKernan is rucking, and we can afford the mids to be small with McKernan mobile enough to be a big body around the ground.

May just work if he can bring his AFLX/JLT1 work ethic to the premiership season

 

[TheGrizz]

I don't know if its another poor preseason game showing from our backline, but the idea of McKernan @ FF is growing on me

Gleeson Hooker Ambrose
Saad Hurley McKenna
Midfield
MID/HFF* Daniher Tippa
Fantasia McKernan Stewart

*Assuming we role the likes of Stringer, Smith, Parish, Zaka, Langford through the 6th forward position

Really need Hartley to work on regaining his 2016 form
Its odd how with a better backline around him he has taken a step back.

McKernan allows Hooker to take the FB spot and gives us a genuine 2nd ruck that isn't Daniher or Stewart.
Stringer to FF when McKernan is rucking, and we can afford the mids to be small with McKernan mobile enough to be a big body around the ground.

May just work if he can bring his AFLX/JLT1 work ethic to the premiership season

I would play Hooker back and not worry about McKernan. Forward lines are becoming increasingly more agile, and I think a tall combination of Daniher/Stewart/Stringer (when not in midfield) would be perfect. You have 3+ guys who are 6'4" or taller and provide marking options (or at least a contest), while all three of which are mobile enough to apply pressure. TBC can rest forward too when Joey rucks so we don't lose our structure.

This would allow Hooker/Hurley/Ambrose to be our three talls which would be fantastic. Gleeson, Mckenna and Saad would complete a very balanced defence both physically and in terms of balance between intercept/attack and stout defending.

 

[citizen-erased]

I would play Hooker back and not worry about McKernan. Forward lines are becoming increasingly more agile, and I think a tall combination of Daniher/Stewart/Stringer (when not in midfield) would be perfect. You have 3+ guys who are 6'4" or taller and provide marking options (or at least a contest), while all three of which are mobile enough to apply pressure. TBC can rest forward too when Joey rucks so we don't lose our structure.

This would allow Hooker/Hurley/Ambrose to be our three talls which would be fantastic. Gleeson, Mckenna and Saad would complete a very balanced defence both physically and in terms of balance between intercept/attack and stout defending.

Maybe, but ours was one of the best in the league last year with a key post @ FF, Stewart playing 3rd tall and Daniher being given free reign.

Perhaps Daniher can sit deeper, Stewart still be 3rd tall, and we play two of Langford, Stringer, Begley, etc across HFF.

But i like the idea of McKernan as FF/#2 ruck.

 

[eth-dog]

Hooker will play forward. He'll kick 45.

 

[hurlygurdy]

Hooker will play forward. He'll kick 45.

I'm not sure what you just contributed the discussion? People are enjoying playing with different structures, nobody is pretending it will happen. Yes it does indeed look like Hooker will play forward and kick 45, but it is a fascinating mental game to play around with a different look at each end of the ground. Who's to say that Hooker kicking 45 is the best outcome for the side anyway? What if he was AA FB this season and Mckernan kicked 35? I reckon the coaches probably feel the same way. It's going to be really tough even retrospectively to know which is the best way to go.

 

[eth-dog]

I'm not sure what you just contributed the discussion? People are enjoying playing with different structures, nobody is pretending it will happen. Yes it does indeed look like Hooker will play forward and kick 45, but it is a fascinating mental game to play around with a different look at each end of the ground. Who's to say that Hooker kicking 45 is the best outcome for the side anyway? What if he was AA FB this season and Mckernan kicked 35? I reckon the coaches probably feel the same way. It's going to be really tough even retrospectively to know which is the best way to go.

Because exactly as you said, "pretending it will happen". What's the point of discussing something that won't happen? It is so obvious that he won't play in defence given last season, even when we only had 2 fit key defenders, he played FF for the entire season. Why would he move back now that we have 4 fit key defenders?

Also, how the ell will McKernan kick 35 goals at AFL level when he can't even kick 30 at VFL level? That is delusion of the highest order. I know people are on a Smack kick right now because he wasn't horrible in the JLT but he's a soon-to-be 28 year old who hasn't kicked more than 10 goals in a season, ever, and averaged 1 goal/game in his career once.

 

[Lore]

Because exactly as you said, "pretending it will happen". What's the point of discussing something that won't happen? It is so obvious that he won't play in defence given last season, even when we only had 2 fit key defenders, he played FF for the entire season. Why would he move back now that we have 4 fit key defenders?

Also, how the ell will McKernan kick 35 goals at AFL level when he can't even kick 30 at VFL level? That is delusion of the highest order. I know people are on a Smack kick right now because he wasn't horrible in the JLT but he's a soon-to-be 28 year old who hasn't kicked more than 10 goals in a season, ever, and averaged 1 goal/game in his career once.

Enjoy the journey a little, Eth. It's not a sig bet thread.

 

[Kakkle]

A forward line of Daniher & Hooker as your one-two punch line along with Stewart & Stringer playing half-forward and Walla & Fantasia as the smalls (Stewart can also play as a small as he is just as good at ground level as the two mentioned) is a seriously filthy forward line.

I think we'll continue to roll with Ambrose-Hartley-Hurley as our 3 'key' defenders and adjust accordingly.

 

[hurlygurdy]

Because exactly as you said, "pretending it will happen". What's the point of discussing something that won't happen? It is so obvious that he won't play in defence given last season, even when we only had 2 fit key defenders, he played FF for the entire season. Why would he move back now that we have 4 fit key defenders?

Also, how the ell will McKernan kick 35 goals at AFL level when he can't even kick 30 at VFL level? That is delusion of the highest order. I know people are on a Smack kick right now because he wasn't horrible in the JLT but he's a soon-to-be 28 year old who hasn't kicked more than 10 goals in a season, ever, and averaged 1 goal/game in his career once.

We might as well close BF right now if we are going to stop discussing things that wont happen.
Mckernan would have a chance of kicking 35 if he was left at FF all season. He probably wouldn't, but i'd give him a 25% chance. This is not an experiment that i'd like to try for the record.

 

[Ambrosia]

A forward line of Daniher & Hooker as your one-two punch line along with Stewart & Stringer playing half-forward and Walla & Fantasia as the smalls (Stewart can also play as a small as he is just as good at ground level as the two mentioned) is a seriously filthy forward line.

I think we'll continue to roll with Ambrose-Hartley-Hurley as our 3 'key' defenders and adjust accordingly.

Agree with this. The only worry is if Stringer doesn't pull his finger out and improve from 2017 then the forward line may be too easy to rebound against.

Also think Mitch Brown is rated higher internally and is a big chance to start over Hartley in round 1.

 

[eth-dog]

We might as well close BF right now if we are going to stop discussing things that wont happen.
Mckernan would have a chance of kicking 35 if he was left at FF all season. He probably wouldn't, but i'd give him a 25% chance. This is not an experiment that i'd like to try for the record.

He's a 0% chance of kicking 35 goals in a season. None, zilch, nada. He has reached double figures once in his career. A career where he has played mostly as a forward.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Forward pressure is a huge part of the game. We actually looked at our most dangerous last year early on when Fantasia, Tippa, Colyer and Green were all buzzing around across half forward - purely for the implied pressure it creates.

If you take it as a given that Stringer will play, I think he alongside Hooker, Daniher and Stewart affects the level of pressure we put on. It depends a bit how you see Stringer I guess... for mine he’s a slightly mobile key forward. That’s what he’s shown across his career. The club still seem to be pushing this quasi-midfielder thing which probably makes some see him as more of a small forward. I’ll believe that if I see it.

I’d prefer a third smallish forward to one of them, and all things considered, Hooker to me looks the most suitable to shift because of what he can do down back.

 

[eth-dog]

Stewart's pressure is better than Green's honestly.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Stewart's pressure is better than Green's honestly.

Disagree, it’s the thing Green was probably most effective at for us early in the season. He has good nuisance factor.

Not dismissing Stewart, just think he’s a different sort of player, a bit higher up the ground.

 

[hurlygurdy]

He's a 0% chance of kicking 35 goals in a season. None, zilch, nada. He has reached double figures once in his career. A career where he has played mostly as a forward.

There's a first time for everything. He's had flashes of brilliance throughout his career, so with maturity it is possible he could gain more consistency. With all opposition heat off him and supply from the likes of Parish, Zach and Smith, it's clearly not impossible particularly when you take into account that he is a good set shot . I'm arguing for the sake of it obviously , but i hate blatantly false categorical statements.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Don’t see McKernan getting a run unless there’s injuries.

We don’t need more key forwards.

 

[eth-dog]

Disagree, it’s the thing Green was probably most effective at for us early in the season. He has good nuisance factor.

Not dismissing Stewart, just think he’s a different sort of player, a bit higher up the ground.

Green's pressure was below average IMO honestly.

There's a first time for everything. He's had flashes of brilliance throughout his career, so with maturity it is possible he could gain more consistency. With all opposition heat off him and supply from the likes of Parish, Zach and Smith, it's clearly not impossible particularly when you take into account that he is a good set shot . I'm arguing for the sake of it obviously , but i hate blatantly false categorical statements.

Blatantly false? McKernan has kicked 34 goals in his career and you say he can kick 35 in a year.

 

[blitzer]

Our forward line looks so much better when Hooker plays. We tend to fall down around the 50-70m zone without him. He's like the only guy that can wrestle with an opponent and then take a mark reliably. We need the ball to spend more time in our forward 50 and he's a big part of that. McKernan isn't even close. He'll kick 2 or 3 goals on a good day and be a complete non factor on a bad day (well except for the frees he gives away).

We'll back in 2 of Ambrose, Hartley and Brown to cover 2 defensive posts with Hurley's support.

We don't need another ruck specialist. We just need one or both of Stewart and Daniher to spend a few minutes each quarter in the middle using their agility against the other second rucks who are mostly key position players anyway in the current game. Even if its Stewart and he loses the hitouts at least he can follow up at ground level. I'd keep Daniher to rucking in forward 50, where occasionally he can kick some freakish goals out of nowhere as well like the West Coast game.

McKernan may be a legitimate option to play when we have no Bellchambers available and we want a 1st ruck. Probably still behind Leuenberger (though I hate Leuenberger's disposal so much and he can't aim his hitouts to save his life).

 

[BrunoV]

I don't understand why so many think our defence is a problem. It's unsettled because there is a query surrounding two of the six positions but even with Hartley struggling and while carrying Baguley it was fine last year.

There were a few times that it was crushed by sheer weight of numbers but that's inevitable for any back 6 when the midfield was getting soundly beaten around the ball.

Scores conceded were, again, a result of field position basically being conceded by the midfield's problems winning the disputed ball.

Point is, if the defence was getting some protection and failing we'd then think about moving Hooker.

I don't want to be inconsistent on this point because I slam Baguley and believe that ultimately defenders have to be able to win 1v1 but that's last resort stuff when the structure isn't there to protect the defence.

I'm far from convinced that Hooker, undeniably an improvement on paper because of his ability to control the air at half back, will improve the fortunes of our defence that much if the midfield continues to get beaten.

We're much better off maintaining our ability to score than we are trying to win games in our defensive 50.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

I don't understand why so many think our defence is a problem. It's unsettled because there is a query surrounding two of the six positions but even with Hartley struggling and while carrying Baguley it was fine last year.

There were a few times that it was crushed by sheer weight of numbers but that's inevitable for any back 6 when the midfield was getting soundly beaten around the ball.

Scores conceded were, again, a result of field position basically being conceded by the midfield's problems winning the disputed ball.

Point is, if the defence was getting some protection and failing we'd then think about moving Hooker.

I don't want to be inconsistent on this point because I slam Baguley and believe that ultimately defenders have to be able to win 1v1 but that's last resort stuff when the structure isn't there to protect the defence.

I'm far from convinced that Hooker, undeniably an improvement in paper because of his ability to control the air at half back, will improve the fortunes of our defence that much if the midfield continues to get beaten.

We're much better off maintaining our ability to score than we are trying to win games in our defensive 50.

My own concerns are due to the forward line, not the backline.

Does anybody not think that Daniher, Hooker, Stringer and Stewart is too big from a defensive forward / pressure point of view? It’s a huge part of the game now.

That’s what’s behind the Hooker back thing, for me anyway.

 

[eth-dog]

I don't understand why so many think our defence is a problem. It's unsettled because there is a query surrounding two of the six positions but even with Hartley struggling and while carrying Baguley it was fine last year.

There were a few times that it was crushed by sheer weight of numbers but that's inevitable for any back 6 when the midfield was getting soundly beaten around the ball.

Scores conceded were, again, a result of field position basically being conceded by the midfield's problems winning the disputed ball.

Point is, if the defence was getting some protection and failing we'd then think about moving Hooker.

I don't want to be inconsistent on this point because I slam Baguley and believe that ultimately defenders have to be able to win 1v1 but that's last resort stuff when the structure isn't there to protect the defence.

I'm far from convinced that Hooker, undeniably an improvement in paper because of his ability to control the air at half back, will improve the fortunes of our defence that much if the midfield continues to get beaten.

We're much better off maintaining our ability to score than we are trying to win games in our defensive 50.

If you look purely at goals conceded/inside 50 POV, our defence was top 6. Comfortably.