Opinion Changes vs Port

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Sando doesnt seem to think like this though, because thommo and porps are killing it.

Thompson is looking increasingly like Daniel Kerr in his last couple of dire seasons. Last year it was because he was carrying an injury and now it is because he had an interrupted preseason. Eventually we will have to admit that his body won't allow him to play at a high level anymore.

Porps teased in the preseason with some tasty glimpses. Very disappointing but Round 1 was Porps 2013 all over again. With players of Porps' vintage it isn't about what they might do down the track. If they can't do it now then they can't do it at all. Same with Mackay. He isn't going to produce anything better than he is currently showing. We keeping waiting in vain for their best footy to re-emerge.

 

[Kickin_Goals]

Welcome back Kickin_Goals sorry but Jenkins wouldnt hold a candle to westhoff.

Cheers
Though what's Westhoff going to do other then have more endurance. In what contest actual contest does Westhoff beat Jenkins?
If Jenkins leans on him and knocks him on his ass constantly the twig man he is, that will fade fast and Jenkins won't get shorter, his reach won't lessen and it's not just for Westhoff, who is going to get first hands on the tap down anywhere near him?
Westhoff does what exactly other then be a bit taller then other mids?
Jenkins is about the quickest guy over 40meters going about, explosiveness, pack breaking size and strength.
Why not make use of him without Douglas in there as a mover, Thommo barely moves there is only Danger to tag if we are being real Sloane is a goer but he's not as imposing as either and the more bodies trying to bring Jenkins down the less I see being on Danger.
When Natanui was in there and cox was rucking this worked pretty well for West Coast who had a midfield that couldn't do jack without them both in there.
Don't see what's being lost between him being in there or pick any given player, since the mid field seems to constantly be missing Dangerfield anyway.

 

[BACCS]

The good news is that it's the one role on the ground that counts most and also all our other players suck balls at it

I didn't realise Danger and Sloaney were shit clearance players, my bad. Matty Wright goes ok in there too, as does Crouch.

 

[FR0GGY]

Cheers
Though what's Westhoff going to do other then have more endurance. In what contest actual contest does Westhoff beat Jenkins?
If Jenkins leans on him and knocks him on his ass constantly the twig man he is, that will fade fast and Jenkins won't get shorter, his reach won't lessen and it's not just for Westhoff, who is going to get first hands on the tap down anywhere near him?
Westhoff does what exactly other then be a bit taller then other mids?
Jenkins is about the quickest guy over 40meters going about, explosiveness, pack breaking size and strength.
Why not make use of him without Douglas in there as a mover, Thommo barely moves there is only Danger to tag if we are being real Sloane is a goer but he's not as imposing as either and the more bodies trying to bring Jenkins down the less I see being on Danger.
When Natanui was in there and cox was rucking this worked pretty well for West Coast who had a midfield that couldn't do jack without them both in there.
Don't see what's being lost between him being in there or pick any given player, since the mid field seems to constantly be missing Dangerfield anyway.

Westhoff is a smart player, jenkins just wouldnt have the footy smarts or skills yet to go with him. Sure athletically he should be able to compete, but my fear is he just wouldn't. Jenkins is a monster, he should be able to dominate with his attributes up forward, but he doesn't - yet.

 

[BACCS]

Thompson is looking increasingly like Daniel Kerr in his last couple of dire seasons. Last year it was because he was carrying an injury and now it is because he had an interrupted preseason. Eventually we will have to admit that his body won't allow him to play at a high level anymore.

Porps teased in the preseason with some tasty glimpses. Very disappointing but Round 1 was Porps 2013 all over again. With players of Porps' vintage it isn't about what they might do down the track. If they can't do it now then they can't do it at all. Same with Mackay. He isn't going to produce anything better than he is currently showing. We keeping waiting in vain for their best footy to re-emerge.

Mackay wasn't too bad last night, his ball use was good.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

I didn't realise Danger and Sloaney were shit clearance players, my bad. Matty Wright goes ok in there too, as does Crouch.

Yep, of course Danger and Sloane are excellent and Crouch is on his way. Wright.... hmmm. Even if we pay that it's only four. And Sloane's better on the outside anyway.

The leading teams in the competition bat deeper than that.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Mackay wasn't too bad last night, his ball use was good.

He's a 15/16 touch handy player.

And that's all.

We keep thinking that this season he's going to break through and be something more than that.

 

[Footypie32]

I actually like having Grigg, Smith, Kerridge, Mackay and Jaensch in the side. Although they have their deficiencies, It's nice knowing we have some half decent kicks in the side. Provided we keep Jaensch the hell away from the defensive 50.

 

[BACCS]

Yep, of course Danger and Sloane are excellent and Crouch is on his way. Wright.... hmmm. Even if we pay that it's only four. And Sloane's better on the outside anyway.

The leading teams in the competition bat deeper than that.

The leading teams really don't. Having 4-6 very good to decent clearance players is about the norm. Hawks have Mitchell (who plays HBF a lot these days anyway), Hodge (again, doesn't play as much midfield these days), Sewell (coming to the end), Shiels (no different to Wright), Burgoyne when he floats through there... Sydney's two best are Jack and Kennedy.

 

[BACCS]

He's a 15/16 touch handy player.

And that's all.

We keep thinking that this season he's going to break through and be something more than that.

Until we get Hendo back, we need him in the side. His foot skills and pace are important, even if he'll never be a big ball winner.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

The leading teams really don't. Having 4-6 very good to decent clearance players is about the norm. Hawks have Mitchell (who plays HBF a lot these days anyway), Hodge (again, doesn't play as much midfield these days), Sewell (coming to the end), Shiels (no different to Wright), Burgoyne when he floats through there... Sydney's two best are Jack and Kennedy.

I reckon we've actually got two good clearance players - Dangerfield and Crouch. Sloane is better on the outside, Wright is a handy depth mid.

And Dangerfield is not a 'constructive' clearance player in the same way that the likes of Mitchell/Selwood are. He's a physical, crash n bash type. Which is great, but we miss a player of Lyons type IMO. Even Douglas is a bang-it-on-the-boot merchant.

We get raw clearance numbers, we don't get constructive possession chains with our current mix.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Until we get Hendo back, we need him in the side. His foot skills and pace are important, even if he'll never be a big ball winner.

Need him in the side in order to do what?

Finish 10th?

This is what I'm saying. Mackay is an ok player. We thought he'd be an excellent player. He isn't and is now at a time in his career where what we see is what we get.

If we have a bunch of what we see is what we get types and we are not making the finals with these players... hopefully that is clear.

 

[Elite Crow]

He's a 15/16 touch handy player.

And that's all.

We keep thinking that this season he's going to break through and be something more than that.

But Wayne's world claimed the haters were wrong after a good trial game.

DMack should be averaging over 20 possessions this stage of his career.

I know I am a broken record on this but we allow average players to have long average careers and then we wonder why we haven't played in a GF since the 90s.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

But Wayne's world claimed the haters were wrong after a good trial game.

DMack should be averaging over 20 possessions this stage of his career.

I know I am a broken record on this but we allow average players to have long average careers and then we wonder why we haven't played in a GF since the 90s.

Mackay will have a great season when he's 31 like Reilly

 

[Elite Crow]

Mackay will have a great season when he's 31 like Reilly

And earn himself another 2 years

 

[BigLefty]

I reckon we've actually got two good clearance players - Dangerfield and Crouch. Sloane is better on the outside, Wright is a handy depth mid.

And Dangerfield is not a 'constructive' clearance player in the same way that the likes of Mitchell/Selwood are. He's a physical, crash n bash type. Which is great, but we miss a player of Lyons type IMO. Even Douglas is a bang-it-on-the-boot merchant.

We get raw clearance numbers, we don't get constructive possession chains with our current mix.

So we want MORE handballs again now?

I know what you mean though. Lyons seems to have the time to collect, look......look again.....then make the right give to the player in space. Crouch has this, so does Grigg (maybe more in general traffic than a stoppage though). Danger just hits the pack a million miles an hour and either stands up with the footy and runs away, or just moves it on.

I think the coaching staff don't want more clearance mids than whatever the mix was at the start of the game. We were always going to sub Crouch for Lyons if possible to keep the numbers the same.

I don't know what the right mix is, but Lyons seems to perform with the limited chances he's given.

 

[The Karma Bus]

Need him in the side in order to do what?

Finish 10th?

This is what I'm saying. Mackay is an ok player. We thought he'd be an excellent player. He isn't and is now at a time in his career where what we see is what we get.

If we have a bunch of what we see is what we get types and we are not making the finals with these players... hopefully that is clear.

This is what I've meant with our list.. People see these players, get used to them and have high hopes for them and it leads to overrating.. Some of them are just not as good as people think they are or are going to be.. On a consistent basis, they are not going to deliver what you need to be a serious challenger..

Some think Martin coming in when we have a couple of injuries means we have depth, I mean come on.. The bit part players at many other clubs are a lot better than ours..

 

[BACCS]

Need him in the side in order to do what?

Finish 10th?

This is what I'm saying. Mackay is an ok player. We thought he'd be an excellent player. He isn't and is now at a time in his career where what we see is what we get.

If we have a bunch of what we see is what we get types and we are not making the finals with these players... hopefully that is clear.

We have made finals with Mackay in the side, he's fine for the time being. Not all players have to be 'excellent', he plays his role and does it to a good enough standard for our structure.

 

[Elite Crow]

We have made finals with Mackay in the side, he's fine for the time being. Not all players have to be 'excellent', he plays his role and does it to a good enough standard for our structure.

More excellent players means more chance of premiership, and we've missed the finals more than we've made them recently.

 

[BACCS]

This is what I've meant with our list.. People see these players, get used to them and have high hopes for them and it leads to overrating.. Some of them are just not as good as people think they are or are going to be.. On a consistent basis, they are not going to deliver what you need to be a serious challenger..

Some think Martin coming in when we have a couple of injuries means we have depth, I mean come on.. The bit part players at many other clubs are a lot better than ours..

I think some on here, including you, really underrate our depth because you watch them more than other sides, but extremely overrate the standard of depth around the competition.

No one said Martin was a good depth option, he's just lucky with the number of injuries in our side atm that a decent pre-season earned him a round 1 spot. It happens all over the comp.

 

[BACCS]

More excellent players means more chance of premiership, and we've missed the finals more than we've made them recently.

Well, clearly, but we have a good number of excellent players, with a few others looking like they have the potential to be. I went into this debate recently with Carl, so I aint bothering again.

 

[Elite Crow]

Well, clearly, but we have a good number of excellent players, with a few others looking like they have the potential to be. I went into this debate recently with Carl, so I aint bothering again.

Good, then I get the last word. There are sides with more excellent players than us and expansion sides with a lot more potential excellent players.

 

[The Karma Bus]

I think some on here, including you, really underrate our depth because you watch them more than other sides, but extremely overrate the standard of depth around the competition.

No one said Martin was a good depth option, he's just lucky with the number of injuries in our side atm that a decent pre-season earned him a round 1 spot. It happens all over the comp.

But many say our depth is great.. Martin is part of that depth.. Even guys who get regular games are not quite as good as the equivalent at many other clubs.. We don't bat deep enough.. And no, I don't just watch the Crows.. I could almost name you every player on other team lists.. The point is that yes there are some clubs that don't have great depth, but do we want to be them or do we want to climb the mountain finally again after what will be 20 years soon?

 

[Tex200]

Good, then I get the last word. There are sides with more excellent players than us and expansion sides with a lot more potential excellent players.

Yep - wonder who else would give Porps a game?

 

[FR0GGY]

Yep - wonder who else would give Porps a game?

Essendon - Neil is there isn't he?