Remove this Banner Ad

Opinion Butcher

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Status
Not open for further replies.
El_Scorcho said:
Butcher would have absolutely and unquestionably been a better selection than 3/4 of our side tonight, and even if you absolutely don't rate him at all, the lack of marking targets was staggering.
Click to expand...

We're playing Matthew f****** Lobbe week in, week out and the coaches mean to tell us (via his non-selection) that Butch isn't deserving of a game? If that isn't enough we've got poor Charlie Dixon stranded in the forward 50 like Tom Hanks in f****** Castaway screaming out for someone to help him. Not to mention Jake-may-as-well-be-our-runner-Neade who inexplicably gets a gold pass while providing absolutely nothing to our team in comparison to what Butch could.

It's not even a question of Butch's ability anymore, rather why has he been on such thin ice over the years when players like Neade and Kane Mitchell (circa 14/15) remain in the side and add virtually nothing to the team?
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

PA88 said:
Is Butcher's position just as a forward or could he be a ruck?
Click to expand...
Drugs, i want yours.
large_be-a-yoda-not-a-grinch.jpg
 
End of 2011, a club on its knees, but from the darkness a light appears..










End of 2015, an embarrassed club demoralised after an expected finals window shuts.. our hero emerges from the ashes..










2016 and times are once again dire.

It's time to press the emergency button Ken.

SUMMONS THE BUTCH

John+Butcher+Port+Power+Training+Session+zefIrG4Zgwyl.jpg
 
TheFVK said:
End of 2011, a club on its knees, but from the darkness a light appears..










End of 2015, an embarrassed club demoralised after an expected finals window shuts.. our hero emerges from the ashes..










2016 and times are once again dire.

It's time to press the emergency button Ken.

SUMMONS THE BUTCH

John+Butcher+Port+Power+Training+Session+zefIrG4Zgwyl.jpg
Click to expand...

John who?
 
Ahhh yeah, highest paid SANFL player ever. Yeah that John. When will he and Charles Dixon be in the said so SANFL forward line? ****ing shortly if i was on the selection panel. And befoe anyone else says who else would you play? ****ing me, me, i'd do a better job than shopping centre mannequins. Give me a shot FFS.
 
I'm still a Ken Hinkley fan, but the one thing about him that shits me above all else is his willingness to give chance after chance after chance to short people like Mitchell, Neade and Gray (at least that one briefly worked out but he seems to be reverting back to type now) and average mature-age depth players like O'Shea and Stewart coupled with his complete lack of willingness to provide the same extended opportunities to young talls. Butcher, Howard, Clurey, whoever. Even Mason Shaw back in 2014 when he was in form.

No team has 22 superstars. Every team is gonna have a few lesser lights to fill out those last few spots. Why the **** do we consistently fill those last spots with out of form short people with little to no upside instead of using one or two of them to develop some young key position players, and offer sone desperately needed structural support to Lobbe/Dixon/Hombsch to boot?

Firstly, risk/reward. We play Kane Mitchell, there's a 90% chance he'll continue to be shit (risk) and a 10% chance he'll play at his peak level which is a short quick outside player with average skills (reward). We play John Butcher, there's a 90% chance he'll continue to be shit (risk) and a 10% chance he'll play at his peak level which is a contested marking beast key forward with superb athleticism for his height and excellent defensive pressure (reward). The risk is the same either way, but one reward is far more valuable than the other.

Secondly, you need to sink time into developing these guys. It's an unfortunate reality. Most KPP's take around 50-100 games before they reach their peak. It's probably already too late. Even if Ken wakes up tomorrow and decides "right, I've had it all wrong, from now on I'm gonna start playing young KPP's", by the time Dougal/Clurey/Austin etc are hitting their peak Boak/Gray/Hartlett/Dixon/Ryder etc will be past their best and nearing retirement.
 
Last edited:
Schulzenfest said:
I'm still a Ken Hinkley fan, but the one thing about him that shits me above all else is his willingness to give chance after chance after chance to short people like Mitchell, Neade and Gray (at least that one briefly worked out but he seems to be reverting back to type now) and average mature-age depth players like O'Shea and Stewart coupled with his complete lack of willingness to provide the same extended opportunities to young talls. Butcher, Howard, Clurey, whoever. Even Mason Shaw back in 2014 when he was in form.

No team has 22 superstars. Every team is gonna have a few lesser lights to fill out those last few spots. Why the **** do we consistently fill those last spots with out of form short people with little to no upside instead of using one or two of them to develop some young key position players, and offer sone desperately needed structural support to Lobbe/Dixon/Hombsch to boot?
Click to expand...

The most dominant team of the last however long in Hawthorn have relentlessly played to a structure and a system. Changes are always like for like and they are never making things up as they go, players play roles they are not individual performers. Out goes Hale, in comes Ceglar. Out goes Roughead in comes Siciliy. Port be like out goes schulz in comes o'shea, out goes Carlile in comes Amon.

We have never got the balance right, ever. Because of this we can't exchange like for like because we don't know what the right structure is or never stick to one. Our list profile is ****ing awful and terribly unbalanced.

Seriously - as of next week. Step 1) play a balanced side where players have obvious positions, roles and matchups.

Not amon to forward, to mid, to half back on the ****ing fly. Not westhoff to forward to mid to back. Not lobbe to ruck to bench to potato farm. Not stewart forward to back to forward.
 
Last edited:

Remove this Banner Ad

Terror said:
The most dominant team of the last however long in Hawthorn have relentlessly played to a structure and a system. Changes are always like for like and they are never making things up as they go, players play roles they are not individual performers. Out goes Hale, in comes Ceglar. Out goes Roughead in comes Siciliy. Port be like out goes schulz in comes o'shea, out goes Carlile in comes Amon.

We have never got the balance right, ever. Because of this we can't exchange like for like because we don't know what the right structure is or never stick to one. Our list profile is ******* awful and terribly unbalanced.
Click to expand...
Another good post. It's not like we don't have options to cover Schulz with structurally. Howard had a shaky debut in the Showdown but to omit him after that performance when others have gone on to keep their spots for the next 3 weeks only to produce more of the same, is ordinary from the selectors.
 
The omission of Howard was iffy to begin with and even worse in hindsight. Incredibly poor coaching and poor message to send. Ken banged on about our form not being the fault of the youngstes and he goes and gives howard the lemonade and sars, get ****ed.
 
Schulzenfest said:
It's probably already too late. Even if Ken wakes up tomorrow and decides "right, I've had it all wrong, from now on I'm gonna start playing young KPP's", by the time Dougal/Clurey/Austin etc are hitting their peak Boak/Gray/Hartlett/Dixon/Ryder etc will be past their best and nearing retirement.
Click to expand...

This. It's depressing.
 
Grandaddy J said:
Butch wouldn't be able to ruck even if he was jumping on a trampoline. Not built for it
Click to expand...

I'm not building a case for Butch to ruck fulltime and I'm only going by the few occasions I've seen him used to pinch hit in ruck in the sanfl. No he's not a ruck but Howard is still lightly framed and if he was to be played every week in backup ruck it could be too tough. Frampton is in the same situation. They are reluctant to roll in Trengove to pinch hit in ruck, Westhoff isn't a ruck either, and I don't want Dixon risked. Butcher's our only remaining mature tall that in small time frames may offer a bit more marking around the ground and second efforts are better than Lobbe. I know I'm hoping more than anything.
I'm just worried about the remaining 2016 until Ryder returns. A bulk of our problems is the midfield unit.
 
Can anyone tell me how he has been playing for the Maggies?
Saw him in round 1 against us and I reckon he had 2 or 3 touches for the night and was putrid. I believe he kicked a couple against the Crows the following week and there has been a bye in there also. If he plays well today he may come into the equation?
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Schulzenfest said:
I'm still a Ken Hinkley fan, but the one thing about him that shits me above all else is his willingness to give chance after chance after chance to short people like Mitchell, Neade and Gray (at least that one briefly worked out but he seems to be reverting back to type now) and average mature-age depth players like O'Shea and Stewart coupled with his complete lack of willingness to provide the same extended opportunities to young talls. Butcher, Howard, Clurey, whoever. Even Mason Shaw back in 2014 when he was in form.

No team has 22 superstars. Every team is gonna have a few lesser lights to fill out those last few spots. Why the **** do we consistently fill those last spots with out of form short people with little to no upside instead of using one or two of them to develop some young key position players, and offer sone desperately needed structural support to Lobbe/Dixon/Hombsch to boot?

Firstly, risk/reward. We play Kane Mitchell, there's a 90% chance he'll continue to be shit (risk) and a 10% chance he'll play at his peak level which is a short quick outside player with average skills (reward). We play John Butcher, there's a 90% chance he'll continue to be shit (risk) and a 10% chance he'll play at his peak level which is a contested marking beast key forward with superb athleticism for his height and excellent defensive pressure (reward). The risk is the same either way, but one reward is far more valuable than the other.

Secondly, you need to sink time into developing these guys. It's an unfortunate reality. Most KPP's take around 50-100 games before they reach their peak. It's probably already too late. Even if Ken wakes up tomorrow and decides "right, I've had it all wrong, from now on I'm gonna start playing young KPP's", by the time Dougal/Clurey/Austin etc are hitting their peak Boak/Gray/Hartlett/Dixon/Ryder etc will be past their best and nearing retirement.
Click to expand...
Ken had the benefit of Primus having done exactly that, Primus got crucified for it. Result of giving the young guys games was we improved significantly in subsequent years.
 
PJ Power said:
Another good post. It's not like we don't have options to cover Schulz with structurally. Howard had a shaky debut in the Showdown but to omit him after that performance when others have gone on to keep their spots for the next 3 weeks only to produce more of the same, is ordinary from the selectors.
Click to expand...
Agree!
 
It's time to crack the glass.. Please John don't have a mare today
 
Schulzenfest said:
I'm still a Ken Hinkley fan, but the one thing about him that shits me above all else is his willingness to give chance after chance after chance to short people like Mitchell, Neade and Gray (at least that one briefly worked out but he seems to be reverting back to type now) and average mature-age depth players like O'Shea and Stewart coupled with his complete lack of willingness to provide the same extended opportunities to young talls. Butcher, Howard, Clurey, whoever. Even Mason Shaw back in 2014 when he was in form.

No team has 22 superstars. Every team is gonna have a few lesser lights to fill out those last few spots. Why the **** do we consistently fill those last spots with out of form short people with little to no upside instead of using one or two of them to develop some young key position players, and offer sone desperately needed structural support to Lobbe/Dixon/Hombsch to boot?

Firstly, risk/reward. We play Kane Mitchell, there's a 90% chance he'll continue to be shit (risk) and a 10% chance he'll play at his peak level which is a short quick outside player with average skills (reward). We play John Butcher, there's a 90% chance he'll continue to be shit (risk) and a 10% chance he'll play at his peak level which is a contested marking beast key forward with superb athleticism for his height and excellent defensive pressure (reward). The risk is the same either way, but one reward is far more valuable than the other.

Secondly, you need to sink time into developing these guys. It's an unfortunate reality. Most KPP's take around 50-100 games before they reach their peak. It's probably already too late. Even if Ken wakes up tomorrow and decides "right, I've had it all wrong, from now on I'm gonna start playing young KPP's", by the time Dougal/Clurey/Austin etc are hitting their peak Boak/Gray/Hartlett/Dixon/Ryder etc will be past their best and nearing retirement.
Click to expand...

Wish I could like this 100 times.

Hammer. Nail. Head.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom