He gets a lot of recieves, but was amongst our best for intercept possessions too. Contested ball is part of what he needs to work on. By no means is he the perfect player, but there’s little doubt at this point that he can forge a long term career.
Agree here. The hype is crazy for a guy that never mans up.
The way the game is played, there are a lot of opportunities to out number opponents and intercept mark. He does that very well, he’s clever and a good user of the ball.
Crisp, Crouch, Merrett and Brown are the obvious ommisons by all clubs. I still based on what we’ve seen with Freeman and Shaz, they were solid picks at 6 and 10. You can’t predict injury issues such as these. I thought Freeman was going to be a Brownlow medalist, really big shame he can’t get on the park. Many have fallen in that category Rusling, Williams...it’s just bad luck.
His role as an outlet player because Of his good skills I grant you, inflate his stats. I should have said his contested ball capacity . I see Langdon and Howe well ahead of him for the same player type role. I think he will find it tough to maintain a best 22 spot because of this.
Apex your emotive response highlights why I put the comment up. I said ball getting not ball receiving skills are poor. His cp to total possession ratios highlight this point, especially when compared to his 2 competitors for a spot in the best 22 in Langdon and Howe. his pressure stats are very poor relative to those 2 , and he is a lot slower than either of them to the point where it makes him a far less versatile defender, given he really can't mark the small quicker forwards.
So a 15 gamer who’s only just regaining confidence in his body isn’t up to the contested standard of a 50+ and 100+ gamer. I am just so shocked. Clearly he will struggle to make 50 games.
At least you got that right.
He’s really not that far behind at all, and unbiased observers from other teams seem to think pretty highly of him. Perhaps what you think is an unbiased view is actually a common problem with Collingwood supporters, who write players off prematurely because they’re not instant stars.
^See, this is crap. I challenge you to find a post from even the most positive Scharenberg fan over the past 12-18 months saying he is going to be a superstar. Most acknowledge that his development has been hurt and he’ll probably never be the player we hoped he’d be when drafted, but at the same time he is perfectly capable of being a long term player.
Cut the condescending bullshit. I’m well aware of his contested ratios etc and I’ve already said multiple times in the past few pages that he needs to improve his contested work.
Collingwood syndrome. If they don’t walk in and play like a superstar from game one then they’re a bust that will struggle to reach 50 games
Not so sure about that. There were a lot of grumbling over the Freeman selection at the time. I was furious we didn’t choose McCarthy.
He will be an awesome utility once fully developed into senior footy.
So you don't come to the Collingwood Board that often then?
I tend to agree with this, at worst he will be a very serviceable player, the upside is huge.
No they didn't. Knightmare was very critical of Freeman at pick 10. He didn't believe he won enough of his own ball or that he got enough possessions. He also felt that he ran in straight lines. And I am sure there were a few people concerned about Scharenberg's toes which were going to require an operation before he played. So concerned that he dropped from contention at number 3 to six in the draft.
But isn't the upside limited by his lack of pace and hardness at the contest?
You could say that about many players on any list.
True. So Scharenberg has got to show skill factors that compensate for his deficiencies - be Pendlebury like for instances.
Same. McCarthy seemed the logical choice.
