All midfield super team.

[Mead]

Ive been thinking abtou the way we've been playing lately with small fowards, and came to the following conclusion.

We've been winning games by taking a smaller, more pacey team, which means we eschew marking in favor or the other smaller ****. And some would say we paid the price for not having enough tall targets.. but i reckon there actually is anotehr way around this.

Imagine the following team.

F: Matera, Chick, Sampi
HF: Jones, Hunter, Chambers
C:Fletcher, Cousins Wirrpunda
HB: Wooden, Embley, Morrison
B: Read, Green, Banfield

R: Gardiner Kerr Judd
Int: Braun, Cox, Humm, Munro

Basically, it'd rip teams to shreds, simply by pace.. Sure they couldn't take a mark to save their lives, but that doesn't matter if you're prepared to run.. Basically, we'd haave at least 12 players at every contest, so we'd win all the stoppages, and as the game wore on we'd run over any opposition. At least htats what i reckon,.

 

[ozzult]

Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

 

[Mead]

Originally posted by ozzult
Your theory sounds interesting, and I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

If you're over 18 and have $45 to spend on getting ****ed off your nut, then you can subsribe

 

[ozzult]

They key is to having a balance. Providing a focal point up the spine, with a tall marking player, and with other smaller quicker, guys with run, playing front and square of the contest.

What we desperately need is two superstar tall defenders.

 

[Mead]

Originally posted by ozzult
They key is to having a balance. Providing a focal point up the spine, with a tall marking player, and with other smaller quicker, guys with run, playing front and square of the contest.

What we desperately need is two superstar tall defenders.

see thats the thing..teams have been trying to do that for ages, and it doesntt work. Or at least not very well. Everyone trys it, and they just end up back where they started because the opposition does it as well. Football is headed towards teams taking extra running types so why not go the whole hog and play as many midfielders as possible.. if u play more midfielders than the oppostion, you'll have more people fit and quick enough to get to the contests, which means you'll always win the contests. Basically, 2 always beats 1 regardless of the size disparity. Get more numbers to the contests than the oppositon and you'll win!

 

[Kenny_01]

I have thought of this before but it would never work.

All the opposition would have to do is stick a tall forward in the goalsquare, and they would be guaranteed of a goal every time they go forward.

A good blend is the key.

Interesting theory, nonetheless.

 

[Eagle_Fan]

I see it heading towards a team of players in the Andrew Embley type mould. The type of team we're on the verge of, a breed of 6'4'' quick, strong marking brunettes that the commentators can't tell apart.

So, the question is which superstar tall defenders? Lynch can play HB right? Who's going to be on the market?

 

[Mead]

Originally posted by Kenny_01
I have thought of this before but it would never work.

All the opposition would have to do is stick a tall forward in the goalsquare, and they would be guaranteed of a goal every time they go forward.

.

Not necessarily... If you have the extra fitness bonus from having so many midfields thne i'd think it evens out. How many times do you see someone like Lloyd take a mark when contested by 3-4 players.. Because you'd always be quicker and fitter than the opposition, you'd always have numbers back to defend, which would prevent the big marking forwards from getting a clean run at the ball

 

[jod23]

It's an interesting theory but guys like Tredrea, Richardson, Brown would tear us to shreds. Going in with an ultra small forward line and midfield is fine, but IMO you always need at least 1 tall backmen.

 

[Sera]

There is no way we would try something so radical during the regular season, perhaps during next preseason? I think you could still find a place for Haynes in this team even though he isn't a midfielder.

 

[The Passenger]

Interesting theory - but it would have to work on the basis that we bring the ball to ground at every contest, otherwise we'd get ****ted on.

We don't need two superstar tall defeners. We need two tall defenders that can do the job well. I'd rather put more emphasis on attack than defence and it's a much more positive frame to be in - we want to score more than the opposition, not concede less.

A good balance is the key, but I'm very happy with a prodominately small set up that we have at the moment.

 

[The Passenger]

Originally posted by jod23
It's an interesting theory but guys like Tredrea, Richardson, Brown would tear us to shreds. Going in with an ultra small forward line and midfield is fine, but IMO you always need at least 1 tall backmen.

Yea thats the thing - you can't come in with a small backline when the opposition has a tall forward line. Each team's backline has to be a mirror image of the oppositions forward line pretty much - all the matchups must fit otherwise you'll get torn a new arseh*le up there.

 

[ozzult]

I didn't mean "superstar" ala Trent Croad.

What I really think is that guys like McDougall, Gaspar, Glass and possibly also Lynch need to take that next step up, and become really solid forwards/defenders.

 

[Mead]

umm, just disregard everything i said last nite....

 

[superstar]

Originally posted by Eagle_Fan

So, the question is which superstar tall defenders? Lynch can play HB right? Who's going to be on the market?

Jon Hay?

 

[RzrBlade]

Originally posted by superstar
Jon Hay?

hmmm..nah. i feel if we went after a quality backman we went after ben graham

just imagine him and wirra torpedoing us all the way deep into the 50m attacking zone off two kicks