Remove this Banner Ad

AFC - Depth Chart 2006

  • Thread starter Thread starter Wallace
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Wallace

Team Captain
Joined
Nov 2, 2005
Posts
364
Reaction score
107
Location
Under the G
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Tennessee Titans
The following is my attempt at a positional depth chart for the AFC 2006 squad. The idea is to try to judge how deep the squad is at relevant positions and is based on how NFL clubs judge their playing squads. I have tried to make it as objective as possible by using the following rating system

A - All Australian or Club Champion (last 3 years)
B - Consistent high quality performer (equivalent to top 10 B&F)
C - Best 22 player - under 21 who has shown good form in appearances
D - Fringe Player
E - Yet to play at AFL Level
U - Dud player
The ratings are based on what the player has achieved to date (not "potential"). The rankings within for evenly graded players within a position are my subjective view.

Position : Key Forward (Contested Mark)
1. S. Welsh - B
2. K. McGreggor - B
3. I. Perrie - C
4. T. Hentschel - C
5. C. Gibson - E

Position : Small Forward (Lead or Crumbing)
1. H. Skipworth - D
2. L. Jericho - D
3. J. Hinge (?) - E
4. B. Vince - E

Position: Key Back (Contested Mark/Spoil)
1. B. Rutten - A
2. N. Basset - B+
3. N. Bock - C
4. M.Stevens - U
5. Obst - E

Position: Small Back (Sweeping Defender)
1. B. Hart - B+
2. J. Torney - B
3. K. Massie - U
4. Pfieffer - E

Position: Utility (player that can be a genuine threat up forward, play as a shut down defender and pinch hit in the midfield)
1. A. Mcleod - A
2. T. Edwards - A
3. G. Johncock - B

Position: Midfield (inside or outside)
1. S. Goodwin - A+
2. M. Ricciuto - A+
3. S. Thompson - B+
4. M. Mattner - B+
5. B. Burton - B
6. B. Reilly - C
7. C. Knights - C
8. M. Bode - D
9. R. Douglas - E
10. J. Porplzia - E

Position: Tagger (Stopper)
1. R. Shirley - C
2. M. Doughty - C
3. N. Van Berlo - C

Position: Ruck
1. B. Hudson - B
2. R. Biglands - C
3. M. Clarke - D
4. I. Maric - E
5. J. Meesen - E
6. J. Griffen - E

As expected - we are very strong in the midfield, but we also look healthy as far as young midfielders go to take over when the A raters retire. The back line is excellent with a great mix of experience and young stars. The key forwards are healthy without having a true go to forward. However, we are in desperate need of a specialist quality small forward. Our utilities are brilliant and can cover this though in the short term. Ruck now has tremendous depth but we need one of Maric, Meesen or Griffen to stand up and demand a spot in the vear future. All in all I think we have one of the better balanced lists in the AFL with solid depth and definite room for improvement.

What do you think?
 
Good effort mate but I think a U is a tad harsh on Massie and a U for M. Stevens despite the fact he's no longer on our list!:confused:
 
Good job. I don't disagree with too much of what you said and I like the idea of having a depth chart on the board.
I do think your grading of Shirley is a bit low (even if he was given a C+ maybe ;)). He is a good, genuine tagger with a good handball to give other more polished midfielders plenty of it. I also don't think we should be grooming VB as a tagging option. He has the talent and pace to be more than that.
 
jo172 said:
Good effort mate but I think a U is a tad harsh on Massie and a U for M. Stevens despite the fact he's no longer on our list!:confused:
Massie will be history after next year, and I presume M Stevens should read S Stevens - both well and truly U's at this stage.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

dyertribe said:
Shirley > Reilly by a long way.

Otherwise a very solid analysis.
you cant be serious what makes u think that the shirley the tagger is in any way shape or form a better player than the silky skilled pacy brent reilly?

seriously dude i cant believe u would say that
 
showdownhero said:
you cant be serious what makes u think that the shirley the tagger is in any way shape or form a better player than the silky skilled pacy brent reilly?

seriously dude i cant believe u would say that

Reilly "silky skilled"?
Reilly "pacy"?

I've heard this a lot over the past four seasons, but I'm yet to see any hard proof.

Shirley on the other hand was absolutely terrific last season, so much so that the loss of Stenglein was barely felt at all. He's tough, in and under, and along with Hudson allows the prime movers to get on with the business of driving us forward.
 
Shirley was a good player for us last year. He would be picked before Rilley at the moment.

I think you were hard on both Massie & Stevens. I would have rated them as depth players.

I think it would be a good idea to have an "long term injury" catagory as well. Hudson may well be a B but he wont be winning any taps for a while.

Good idea matey
 
showdownhero said:
you cant be serious what makes u think that the shirley the tagger is in any way shape or form a better player than the silky skilled pacy brent reilly?

seriously dude i cant believe u would say that
I Reilly is pacy then I am a speedy gonzales.

As of right now Shirley's has shown a LOT more than Reilly. Reilly has shown flashes but for a player who is entering his 5th year in 2006, he has shown sweet ******** all.
 
Stiffy_18 said:
I Reilly is pacy then I am a speedy gonzales.

As of right now Shirley's has shown a LOT more than Reilly. Reilly has shown flashes but for a player who is entering his 5th year in 2006, he has shown sweet ******** all.
Now thats harsh


He hasn't played 50 games yet - and many of those games he has played he's spent time on the bench...........so he's relatively inexperienced.


Unfortunately everyone judjes him on his draft position.............do you forget how long Edwards took to develop?
 
Wayne's-World said:
He hasn't played 50 games yet - and many of those games he has played he's spent time on the bench...........so he's relatively inexperienced.

You could've made the same case for Luke O'Sullivan going into his tenth year.
 
dyertribe said:
You could've made the same case for Luke O'Sullivan going into his tenth year.
:D


Great clubman that bloke;)
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Wayne's-World said:
Now thats harsh


He hasn't played 50 games yet - and many of those games he has played he's spent time on the bench...........so he's relatively inexperienced.


Unfortunately everyone judjes him on his draft position.............do you forget how long Edwards took to develop?
And why do you think he spent that much time on the bench?
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom