Biglands or Meesen?

[Drummond]

Ok there’s been a lot of talk about what to do at seasons end with our plethora of ruckman. Apparently Hudson is about to re-sign with the club for a 2 years and Ivan Maric recently re-signed. Biglands is currently still under contract and looks set to be retained. I believe Griffin is out of contract at seasons end and as we all know John Meesen is also out of contract and it’s looking like he won’t be a Crow in 2008.

Hudson will be our #1 ruckman in 2008 just as he has been this year. While he’s virtually got no leap he is excellent at winning the hardball gets and winning the clearances. Now with Maric the first of our youngsters to re-sign it would appear he’ll be the back-up ruckman next year.

Now what really bothers me is the Rhett Biglands situation. He turns 30 this time next week and on the back of a knee reconstruction he will be below his best next year. Even at the best of times Rhett isn’t a great ruckman and his decision making and skill levels aren’t exactly top notch. How can we honestly keep Biglands on the list when we have 3 young ruckmen all of which have the potential to be excellent AFL players? Yes it would be harsh dumping Rhett considering he’s worked so hard to come back from his knee injury and he’s maintained such a great attitude, but the tough decision has to be made. The question is, is the AFC prepared to make the tough call, but one that will greatly benefit the club for the future?

There’s no doubt if Biglands is retained he’ll play because he wouldn’t be retained if we didn’t intend to play him. So not only will he hinder the development of the youngsters but he could potentially end Meesen’s or Griffin’s time with the AFC. I’m not saying Biglands is completely useless nor am I saying Maric, Meesen and Griffin will be elite ruckmen next year, but we can’t let Biglands stand in their way. If we decide to retain Biglands and as a result let one of the youngsters walk, it will be one of the worst decisions ever made.

 

[Geoffa32]

Keep Biglands, Trade Meesan.

Maric and Griffen are going to be good as is Meesan. However Meesan would be better Trade Bait. Could be important in luring a forward. I think for our club Maric is the better player in the mix.

 

[mtbkym01]

Hmmm, tough one this, Has Meesen shown enough (struggled to even have an impact at Norward last year, whereas Maric was dominating at Port, I'm led to believe), I know he got injured in the NAB, and would have played a bigger roll this year if not for that. But what I see is that we NEED a key forward target, and do you think it would be possible for one of these guys to become that. Just had a thought while typing this, why not play Biglands up forward permanently, let Hudson teach these young guys how to be effective clearance ruckmen, and be set for ruck stocks for years to come. I was thinking that trading one of these younger guys for a key forward was the way to go but hey why not use them to achieve the same result.

 

[Southerntakeover]

Ok there’s been a lot of talk about what to do at seasons end with our plethora of ruckman. Apparently Hudson is about to re-sign with the club for a 2 years and Ivan Maric recently re-signed. Biglands is currently still under contract and looks set to be retained. I believe Griffin is out of contract at seasons end and as we all know John Meesen is also out of contract and it’s looking like he won’t be a Crow in 2008.

Hudson will be our #1 ruckman in 2008 just as he has been this year. While he’s virtually got no leap he is excellent at winning the hardball gets and winning the clearances. Now with Maric the first of our youngsters to re-sign it would appear he’ll be the back-up ruckman next year.

Now what really bothers me is the Rhett Biglands situation. He turns 30 this time next week and on the back of a knee reconstruction he will be below his best next year. Even at the best of times Rhett isn’t a great ruckman and his decision making and skill levels aren’t exactly top notch. How can we honestly keep Biglands on the list when we have 3 young ruckmen all of which have the potential to be excellent AFL players? Yes it would be harsh dumping Rhett considering he’s worked so hard to come back from his knee injury and he’s maintained such a great attitude, but the tough decision has to be made. The question is, is the AFC prepared to make the tough call, but one that will greatly benefit the club for the future?

There’s no doubt if Biglands is retained he’ll play because he wouldn’t be retained if we didn’t intend to play him. So not only will he hinder the development of the youngsters but he could potentially end Meesen’s or Griffin’s time with the AFC. I’m not saying Biglands is completely useless nor am I saying Maric, Meesen and Griffin will be elite ruckmen next year, but we can’t let Biglands stand in their way. If we decide to retain Biglands and as a result let one of the youngsters walk, it will be one of the worst decisions ever made.

If your thread is about Biglands, Meesen and Griffen, why is it a direct poll between biglands and meese?

 

[bus24]

I really can't fathom why on earth we're keeping Biglands. Sure it's a tough call, but he turns 30 next week and he's coming back from a very severe injury.

We've got some of the best younger ruckman in the competition (Griffin, Maric, Meesen) as well as the Kurt and Sell (Who are more likely to be key forward, but could play in the ruck if needed.

Keeping that in mind, even if Meesen leaves, why on earth do we need to keep 30 year old Rhett Biglands, coming back from an ACL injury. As far as I'm concerned it's ridiculous.

Biglands is an average ruckman. Nothing more. We have 5 guys who all have far superior talent (keeping in mind 2 will probably be key forwards) plus Ben Hudson who'll be around for a few more years yet.

Biglands as mentioned by Drummond has poor skills and poor decision making.

Are we really willing to hinder the playing lists development by playing Biglands. You know the 30 year old who has recently done an ACL. In 2006 he averaged 8.4 possesions and 14.4 hitouts. One or more of the kids who have far more potential, could do no less (and probably more) than that next season, let alone over the next 10 years

 

[Gets!]

It makes no sense to retain Biglands.

 

[Drummond]

Hmmm, tough one this, Has Meesen shown enough (struggled to even have an impact at Norward last year, whereas Maric was dominating at Port, I'm led to believe), I know he got injured in the NAB, and would have played a bigger roll this year if not for that. But what I see is that we NEED a key forward target, and do you think it would be possible for one of these guys to become that. Just had a thought while typing this, why not play Biglands up forward permanently, let Hudson teach these young guys how to be effective clearance ruckmen, and be set for ruck stocks for years to come. I was thinking that trading one of these younger guys for a key forward was the way to go but hey why not use them to achieve the same result.

No because we don’t need another mediocre forward.

If your thread is about Biglands, Meesen and Griffen, why is it a direct poll between biglands and meese?

Because the chances of Griffin staying are far greater than Meesen. You obviously didn’t hear FiveAA last night when they interviewed Meesen. If you did you would agree there’s a better chance of Griffin staying.

 

[jo172]

If you did you would agree there’s a better chance of Griffin staying.

What did they say?

And i'm for trading Biglands (if anyone wants him) if not delisting and attempting to retain Meesen and if not trading him for the best offer avaliable. I think Hudson, Maric and Griffen are enough ruckmen going forward if we lose Meese particularly as although this is a weak draft it does have several quality ruckmen.

 

[Haggard H]

Meesen's name keeps coming up on the Tigers board as good for our ruck shortages, with Schulz or Meyer as possible trades. Both are South Australians and first round picks who've shown they can play, but only sporadically at the moment. They're frustrating the bejesus out of us at the moment. If we trade them they'll be guns wherever they go.

Interested?

 

[Crow Envy]

If they do decide to keep Biglands it must be for only 2 reasons:

1) Hes contracted
2) Insurance in case Hudson was to go down. It would be risky having 3 inexperienced ruckman leading our team for the whole year. You only have to look at the Geelong game.

Dont get me wrong I am no fan of Biglands, but I think the club will take the safe approach.

But if we partner Biglands with Hudson I will personally go down to AAMI and slap Craigy around. There is no way he should be stopping the development of our young ruckman. Having said all of that odds on Meeson goes home anyway, lets hope he has a good finish and increases his worth.

 

[Ferris_rules]

Meesen is gone, lets just hope and pray we get something for him.

I heard 5AA interview on Monday night, you could tell he is leaving, my biggest concern is that Carlton may swoop on him and we will get nothing in return.

I think the Crows will keep Biglands only because he is "ready" to play now but they are not risking him.

The AFC should realise they would not get anything for a guy 30+ having spent the past year recovering from a ACL. Hence it would be the AFC best interest to play him as a wild card for the finals......... if we get there !

 

[21knights]

Biglands still has a contract and Meesen doesn't. It also sounds like AFC want to keep Meesen but he wants to go home. No point keeping a player if he doesn't want to play for the club.

I don't think it's a bad idea to keep two senior rucks on the list. Even if one just spends the year in the SANFL. If hudson went down again we would be in real trouble. Biggles wasn't too bad in the forward line in 2006 either.

 

[Southerntakeover]

Because the chances of Griffin staying are far greater than Meesen. You obviously didn’t hear FiveAA last night when they interviewed Meesen. If you did you would agree there’s a better chance of Griffin staying.

I didnt hear it, im usually training when they do the interviews.

What did they say? If its important background, im suprised you didnt put in the OP.

 

[coast2coast]

could we trade both? biglands would probably appeal to some desperate sucker like st kilda or carlton.

i'd be comfortable with huddo, maric and griff carrying the duties next season.

 

[finn]

adelaide cut ryan fitzgerald after an acl and reconstruction and i'd like to see them do the same with biglands. he was never adelaide's first real choice ruck anyway.
yes, he's big and has some ability but hudson gives a better contest around the ground while griffin and maric have better hands. meesen, i believe, needs some belief - his tap work sems fine but he's still getting used to the pace of the game.
pump gametime into sellar, gill and others - around them is enough ability for adelaide to not bottom out - more go down the port road of rebuilding.

 

[Crowked]

A bit of a no brainer IMO. We would keep Meesen purely on age and potential. Unfortunately I dont think it will be our choice though.

Still i dont understand the almost contemptuous attitude around here for Biglands. Sure he isnt a star ruckman, but he has been a good, servicable and honest player for the club. He's an experienced player with a strong body who IMO would be doing a good job still if he wasnt injured. Could make a significant difference in the finals too. I think the club will keep him on for one more year regardless of the Meesen situation, if for nothing other than insurance.

 

[KUNG FU]

People were calling for Biglands' head last year. I fail to see how he will contribute to our side next year, unless Maric & Griffin really aren't coping and Hudson is injured. Biglands is at best a handy forward option. He'll be coming back from a knee reco, his tap work is mediocre and his around the ground work is non-existent. Clarke made him a lot better last year. But considering he's under contract, I expect him to be retained in a Wakelin role.

We should do everything we can to keep Meesen. Ruckmen with his disposal and skill don't come around very often. Having said that, he will probably go home and we can at least hope we are duly compensated. Griffin would be the ideal player to trade IMO, because he has played a lot this year but Maric eclipses his tap work, athleticism and goal-kicking. But I thought Griff signed earlier this year for 2 years anyway. if not, maybe WCE will be interested, especially if Seaby is supposedly leaving, which I doubt anyway but.

 

[BlackDouglas]

Let’s put a few thing into perspective

Ryan Fitzgerald was delisted because his body was not able to stand up to the demands of AFL, not because he had a knee injury. The knee injury he suffered whilst on the crow’s list was just the final straw. If that knee injury was his first major injury he would not have been delisted but since it was like his 4th or 5th serious injury (2 shoulders and 2 knees) the club lost confidence in his body standing up to the rigours of AFL football.

Rhett Biglands has one more year to run on his current contract and this was his first serious injury. Using Ryan Fitzgerald as precedence is just incorrect because Rhett and Ryan’s situation are completely different.

Looking towards the future the smart move would be to trade or delist Rhett Biglands and make sure Maric/Meesen or Griffin develop into a quality AFL ruckman but I don’t expect Neil Craig to do this. Rhett Biglands will be kept on the list and used as soon as he is match fit. He will spend the first 3 or 4 weeks in the SANFL and since he is too good for the SANFL (but not good enough to be considered a top class AFL ruckman but) his form will dictate he gets selected and his seniority will take place over one of the kids.

I would trade Biglands if any suitable offer was given or move him into the marketing teams and suggest his time has passed. Then suggest to John Meesen that one spot is available for either him, Maric or Griffin and may the best player win. Playing Biglands in 2008 will be a mistake for any long term plans.

If John Meesen still wants to leave, I would look at rookie listing a ruckman for the long term future.

 

[dylan101]

i'd like to keep Meesen but i very much doubt it's gonna happen, i would definitely trade biglands coming back from a knee he is never going to be as good as he was and, well he was never very good anyway

 

[Redline]

Taking Meesen out of the equation for a moment I think if the Crows are really serious about developing their list you would delist Bigglands. With Huddo, Maric and Griff you have enough to cover the rucks and this would allow for the younger guys to develop. Worst case is if a couple go down but when that happened earlier in the year it helped Griffins development and it may do the same for Tippitt or Sellar.

As for Meesen I would try and keep him but as mentioned above if we lose him then I still think we can cover things.

I can't see any real up side to keeping Bigglands, you can form an argument to keep him for insurance but in reality I think it's time to move on.

 

[Mad Dog]

I'm not sure they are like choices.

One is about to enter what will likely be his last AFL season - the other has some potential in the game depending on his ability to develop.

I think Biglands will be retained for 2008 then moved on Clarke/Hart/Roo style.

That leaves Meesen, Maric, Griff, and Tippett potentially twiddling their thumbs - and so I reckon only 3 of the 4 will be there next year.....one will be traded away.

 

[KUNG FU]

If John Meesen still wants to leave, I would look at rookie listing a ruckman for the long term future.

I think Tippett is a more than adequate last chance, back-up option. But yes, sometime soonish we should look at getting another a ruckmen in the system. Maybe this year if there is a good enough prospect.

 

[Drummond]

Are people forgetting that Hudson is 28 and will start the 2008 season as a 29 year-old?

Hudson will be our #1 ruckman in 2008 and the back-up should either be Meesen or Maric (determined on their pre-seasons and NAB Cup form). Griffin should be developed into a key forward next season which therefore allows us to play 3 ruckmen. Unlike many others I don’t have a problem playing 3 ruckmen; 1 rucking, 1 in the forward line and 1 having a spell on the bench.

Retaining Biglands serves absolutely no purpose. Sure we’ll go through some tough times in the ruck with 3 relatively inexperienced guys but I know I’d rather keep our 3 potential 10 year ruckmen instead of having Biglands for another 12 months.

 

[earlsta]

I just hope we move heaven and earth to keep Meesen at AFC.

 

[-VC-]

What I would like to happen: club makes the harsh call on Biglands and can retain Meesen. Biglands has been a good servant to the club, but he's no Luke Darcy and look at how his return was from knee injury. I know it was his second knee, so it's not an exact comparison but all the same I think it's still relevant.

What I think will happen: Meesen will go home no matter what we do with Biglands. Biglands will see out his contract and then go. We take a ruckman late in the draft or in the rookie draft. Hudson is getting on in years, despite his relative inexperience at AFL level. Maric and Griff are on track. Sellar must be groomed as a key forward and the jury is still out on where Tippett should end up playing.

Taking another ruckman in a draft where there is great depth in that position is smart list management because it won't cost us much (a late pick). He wouldn't be ready to play for two or three years but in two or three years by what I think will happen then Biglands and Meesen will both be gone. Sellar and Tippett could be forwards. Hudson will be on his way out, possibly even gone. The cupboard will start looking bare in two years so get one in the system now and get him ready for 2010/11 to back up Maric and Griff. If we're taking a ruckman so late then this is a realistic debut date.