Past Daniel Menzel - delisted 2019

Remove this Banner Ad

DavyRed said:
Very disappointed indeed with his delisting. I was really looking forward to seeing what he could do after hopefully his first complete preseason in many years.
Click to expand...
They’ve failed by not giving him the preseason, they kept Fox, Knoll, Amartey, Wicks etc. He’s better than any of those players, regardless of where they play. If this is not about Bennell, list management has failed! Same goes for Maibaum, especially while Amartey & Knoll are re-contracted.

This is a BAD list!
 
Despite admiring his determination to come back from such horrific injuries and keep fighting at a second club, there was very little from what he produced this season that demanded another year on the list. I think a lot of people might've been sucked in by the occasional glimpse and the potential that he has always shown, but the reality is that he has never been able to capitalise on that potential due to his body giving out on him. It's tragic for him, but it's the right call. I really don't understand the doom and gloom about delisting him to be honest.
 
MC Bad Genius said:
Despite admiring his determination to come back from such horrific injuries and keep fighting at a second club, there was very little from what he produced this season that demanded another year on the list. I think a lot of people might've been sucked in by the occasional glimpse and the potential that he has always shown, but the reality is that he has never been able to capitalise on that potential due to his body giving out on him. It's tragic for him, but it's the right call. I really don't understand the doom and gloom about delisting him to be honest.
Click to expand...
Yet he has played the same number of seasons as Daniher, has the same goal average, is just 2.5 years older, managed to get on the park more in the last two years and could have been a solid cheap forward with a preseason behind him. I'm a bit puzzled on this. If we don't want Menzel then we can hardly justify going after Daniher.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Can’t recall him stringing together a couple of games where he looked like he guaranteed himself a new contract.

Extremely talented and a genuine footballer but injuries had slowed him and the club signed up Hayward for a few more years so assume Menzel was down the pecking order.
 
I would've given him a pre-season.
 
bungee said:
Yet he has played the same number of seasons as Daniher, has the same goal average, is just 2.5 years older, managed to get on the park more in the last two years and could have been a solid cheap forward with a preseason behind him. I'm a bit puzzled on this. If we don't want Menzel then we can hardly justify going after Daniher.
Click to expand...
I wasn't all the fussed on getting Joe Daniher, but he obviously provides a very different role to Menzel and I think you've cherrypicked some situational context to support your argument. You'd struggle to find anyone else that would agree that it's a worthwhile comparison. My point was that there just wasn't much upside in persisting with Dan Menzel.
 
cadsky said:
Could at least invite him back to train for a possible rookie spot
Click to expand...
The club would have discussed these things with him and told him their reasoning. They don't just say "you are the weakest link - goodbye!". Maybe he preferred to go home than be rookied. Either way, we gave him the chance he wanted. Pity it didn't work out.
 
Any chance he had in winning me over was lost in a particular NEAFL game where he completely misread the situation peeling off two players to try and get a “cheap” goal out the back (the ball went straight to those two players and it was an instant turnover under no pressure). It was embarrassing and at that point I wasn’t convinced we would persist with him. It wasn’t limited to that, but that particular moment really stuck out in my mind.

Lots of talent, seems a really good fella, but you can’t just be a seagull at AFL level.

I think moving him on was the right move as I don’t think he is best 22 and whilst handy depth we are better off putting time into our young crew.

All the best Menzel.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Stiff not to be given another pre-season. But will turn 29 next year and struggles with continuity and isn't established in the best 22. In a rebuilding team that set of circumstances leaves a player in no-mans land.

Worth a shot giving him a go, unfortunately, didn't work out.
 
Mick Oxlong said:
They’ve failed by not giving him the preseason, they kept Fox, Knoll, Amartey, Wicks etc. He’s better than any of those players, regardless of where they play.
Click to expand...

Agree Mick, it's a really strange decision when you consider who we've retained.
 
Mick Oxlong said:
They’ve failed by not giving him the preseason, they kept Fox, Knoll, Amartey, Wicks etc. He’s better than any of those players, regardless of where they play. If this is not about Bennell, list management has failed! Same goes for Maibaum, especially while Amartey & Knoll are re-contracted.

This is a BAD list!
Click to expand...

I certainly agree that Menzel should have been given another year. I'd have re-contracted him in the Wicks, Fox, Amartey group. I wouldn't have bothered with Knoll personally, when guys like Archie Smith or Ryan Abbott are around as delisted free agents, there was no need to re-sign him at that stage. I see Fox's seniors aspirations are about as strong as Menzel's would have been next year. Solid depth and could get more chances if injuries fell his way.

Just seems a waste to not see what Menzel could give now with a full pre-season and has played a handful of games in our system now and presumably knows his role.
 
S120 said:
I certainly agree that Menzel should have been given another year. I'd have re-contracted him in the Wicks, Fox, Amartey group. I wouldn't have bothered with Knoll personally, when guys like Archie Smith or Ryan Abbott are around as delisted free agents, there was no need to re-sign him at that stage. I see Fox's seniors aspirations are about as strong as Menzel's would have been next year. Solid depth and could get more chances if injuries fell his way.

Just seems a waste to not see what Menzel could give now with a full pre-season and has played a handful of games in our system now and presumably knows his role.
Click to expand...
I think the difference between Fox and Menzel is versatility. Menzel is only ever going to be a mid-sized forward, whereas Fox can be and has been used in a number of roles. That flexibility is paramount for a depth player, I think.
 
RW said:
Agree Mick, it's a really strange decision when you consider who we've retained.
Click to expand...

I heard this time last year, that no one was willing to contract him last season & we were the only ones to do that at least of all 18 clubs. He may have been rookie listed by someone but we actually gave him a contract.
He is once again available to the other 17 clubs so they now have the opportunity to show us what a huge mistake we've made by delisting him.

Geez are we going soft on here? We don't owe him anything & are being aggressive with our list. Sam Gray is definitely no better than Dan Menzel at his best but he is a huge improvement on the Dan Menzel who simply cannot cope with the two way running required in today's footy.
I don't understand how anyone on here would have superior knowledge of list management than those who are being paid to do it do. Opinion is all fine but geez some people get so hung up & all depressed over it.

Menzel offered us nothing last season other than failing to get himself off the ground which in turn kept Buddy of the ground cooling down which in turn was the end of his season with a hamstring injury. Yes that was frowned upon that a senior player didn't come off when he needed to.
 
S120 said:
I certainly agree that Menzel should have been given another year. I'd have re-contracted him in the Wicks, Fox, Amartey group. I wouldn't have bothered with Knoll personally, when guys like Archie Smith or Ryan Abbott are around as delisted free agents, there was no need to re-sign him at that stage. I see Fox's seniors aspirations are about as strong as Menzel's would have been next year. Solid depth and could get more chances if injuries fell his way.

Just seems a waste to not see what Menzel could give now with a full pre-season and has played a handful of games in our system now and presumably knows his role.
Click to expand...
In my opinion Knoll is a ruckman is cheap & has some aggression & all he needs to do is keep learning. Amartey is a young ruckman too who will keep learning & is backup in an emergency & should he show some improvement going forward & we want to move him on, we may at least get a pick for him.
Fox can play forward, back, tagger, ruck, wing & NEAFL when needed as a backup & do it all with no fuss. He's a good club man that all clubs need. He deserved another contract.
Menzel is not who we want running around in the NEAFL nor would he be happy with that & he should at least get taken as a rookie.
Cats didn't want him, we gave him a chance.
 
Tedeski said:
In my opinion Knoll is a ruckman is cheap & has some aggression & all he needs to do is keep learning. Amartey is a young ruckman too who will keep learning & is backup in an emergency & should he show some improvement going forward & we want to move him on, we may at least get a pick for him.
Fox can play forward, back, tagger, ruck, wing & NEAFL when needed as a backup & do it all with no fuss. He's a good club man that all clubs need. He deserved another contract.
Menzel is not who we want running around in the NEAFL nor would he be happy with that & he should at least get taken as a rookie.
Cats didn't want him, we gave him a chance.
Click to expand...

I'd definitely have kept Amartey around too. His physical characteristics and his best football, I think, is capable of playing seniors. I thought he should have got a game late in the year when McLean got rested in fact. He's got to bridge the gap between his best and worst obviously, but if he can get himself really, really fit this off-season, I think he can win himself another deal and be a seniors player. I'm not saying it's a sure thing, but he's a rookie and I'm happy to give him another year on the hope that he pulls it off - there's enough promise there for me to go with.

Fox definitely deserved another deal, no argument there. Right move to keep him around as depth.

Bell and Knoll are the two I'm very unconvinced about. I've given my thoughts on Bell elsewhere, but I'd be shifting him into defence in the hope that he can become a small defender - I don't see seniors ability anywhere else on the field. And Knoll I just don't rate to this point and we could have found a better option in the delisted free agents. I'd snap up Archie Smith in a heartbeat.
 
S120 said:
I'd definitely have kept Amartey around too. His physical characteristics and his best football, I think, is capable of playing seniors. I thought he should have got a game late in the year when McLean got rested in fact. He's got to bridge the gap between his best and worst obviously, but if he can get himself really, really fit this off-season, I think he can win himself another deal and be a seniors player. I'm not saying it's a sure thing, but he's a rookie and I'm happy to give him another year on the hope that he pulls it off - there's enough promise there for me to go with.

Fox definitely deserved another deal, no argument there. Right move to keep him around as depth.

Bell and Knoll are the two I'm very unconvinced about. I've given my thoughts on Bell elsewhere, but I'd be shifting him into defence in the hope that he can become a small defender - I don't see seniors ability anywhere else on the field. And Knoll I just don't rate to this point and we could have found a better option in the delisted free agents. I'd snap up Archie Smith in a heartbeat.
Click to expand...
In the preseason thread someone has said that Amartey and Bell have come back in not so great condition. That would not be a good sign if correct.
 
Kiama Chris said:
In the preseason thread someone has said that Amartey and Bell have come back in not so great condition. That would not be a good sign if correct.
Click to expand...
Is it too early to tell everyone "I told you so"? I'll be fuming if that is correct because we gave up players like Pink and Maibaum in the process of re-signing them. I would imagine that those players would be just as pissed of as me.
 
Opts said:
Is it too early to tell everyone "I told you so"? I'll be fuming if that is correct because we gave up players like Pink and Maibaum in the process of re-signing them. I would imagine that those players would be just as pissed of as me.
Click to expand...
No it would not be too early. And since this is the Menzel thread, I anticipate that he’d be just as pissed that he lost his spot for that overrated duo!
 
Seriously, how TF would any supporter know the condition of returning players? Someone says he saw a couple of blokes with "kegs".

Bull............s**t!

And now we're angry because those players were preferred to this player on the list.

Menzel was never a long term prospect for us. He was recruited as forward back up in the event we contested finals. Unfortunately half the list got injured and that possibility passed us by, together with Menzel's utility on our list.

Seems a decent enough bloke, and certainly a talented enigmatic player. You can afford his type in an environment where the remainder of the list are senior enough, fit enough, strong enough to do the heavy lifting. But in a developing list, there's no value in having a passenger up forward who offers little more than occasional magic.

I hope he gets another contract. And I hope he succeeds.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top