Drum at fullback?

[Roundhouse]

Why do we continually experiment with players positions.

Our track record is shocking, Schammers/Murphy/Mundy and Johnson's development stalled. Farmer's career stalled when he was pushed into the midfield.

The guy is a flanker, whether that be forward or back.

Leave him there IMHO

Carp!

Those players mentioned have had form slumps regardless of where they played.

You're also conveniently ignoring players like Pav (who has excelled when switched from defense to the midfield to the forward line), Solomon (who was switched forward and excelled after nearly his whole career in defense), and Gilmore (who is excelling since being moved into the ruck rotation).

 

[theGav56]

Carp!

Those players mentioned have had form slumps regardless of where they played.

You're also conveniently ignoring players like Pav (who has excelled when switched from defense to the midfield to the forward line), Solomon (who was switched forward and excelled after nearly his whole career in defense), and Gilmore (who is excelling since being moved into the ruck rotation).

You could put Headland in there too playing forward this season. And the reality is that if Snake could not convert to a forward then one of Sandilands, Longmuir or himself would have been a WAFL player.

The idea that a player like Drum "is" a flanker is premature, and building his versatility is a major improvement to our list and team structure. Many players, particularly tall ones, play different roles once they become AFL players and their bodies develop.

Schammer was sent into the backline out of desperation, and that it did not suit him is bad luck for him. The team needed a small running backman due to injuries. Step up young man and learn something. And if a players preferd position doesn't fit the teams needs, and they can't adapt to what the team does need, trade them.

Polak is the perfect example. We didn't need another third man up in defence (Mundy, Johnson are better), we needed a Key Forward or Key Defender.

 

[sabre_ac]

Carp!

Those players mentioned have had form slumps regardless of where they played.

You're also conveniently ignoring players like Pav (who has excelled when switched from defense to the midfield to the forward line), Solomon (who was switched forward and excelled after nearly his whole career in defense), and Gilmore (who is excelling since being moved into the ruck rotation).

Pavlich is a star, I did not "Conveniently" ignore him as players like him would dominate anywhere they played.

Solomon as a defensive forward = Backmen.

Gilmore I will give you.

Schammer, Farmer, Murphy, Mundy debacle > Gilmore experiment.

 

[Bluto]

Bradley is not exclusively a full forward, he's not exclusively any position. Why's that you ask? Because he isn't good at any of them. If he was good at them, he would've stayed in that position. Essendon people say that he was carp in the backline and if he was even half decent he would've gotten a game in their midfield. Instead, he played in the VFL as a key forward. And just because he's tall doesn't mean he can ruck. As he showed this season, Gilmore is a very capable third string ruckman. If either 211 or Warnock was to go down with injury, I'd be comfortable with Happy stepping in to fill the void.
...
Murphy and Kiwi aren't just list fillers. They are capable back ups. It's when you have three back ups that you have a problem. We don't need three. Especially when one of them is a crab. Bradley couldn't even get a game for Essendon this year. Why would we want a guy who has no position and couldn't get a game in a mediocre team?

You reckon that Murphy and Campbell would get a game ahead of Lucas and Lloyd? Clearly Bradley is capable as a key forward, at least at VFL level. Murphy is a capable key forward at WAFL level. So what is the difference?

I am not saying that we should recruit Murphy, but your logic sucks.

 

[Ysaye]

You reckon that Murphy and Campbell would get a game ahead of Lucas and Lloyd? Clearly Bradley is capable as a key forward, at least at VFL level. Murphy is a capable key forward at WAFL level. So what is the difference?

I am not saying that we should recruit Murphy, but your logic sucks.

Recruit him? Did we delist him? ..

 

[Bluto]

Recruit him? Did we delist him? ..

I stand by my comment...although admittedly it would make more sense if I had written 'Bradley' like I had meant to!

I was going to edit it but I would rather have a post look stupid due to a typo than the obvious alternative.

 

[bigkev bleeds purple]

You reckon that Murphy and Campbell would get a game ahead of Lucas and Lloyd? Clearly Bradley is capable as a key forward, at least at VFL level. Murphy is a capable key forward at WAFL level. So what is the difference?

I am not saying that we should recruit Murphy, but your logic sucks.

No.

Do you reckon Bradley would get a game ahead of Pavlich and Tarrant?

More importantly, do you think Bradley would get a game ahead of Campbell and Murphy? My answer is no.

The difference is we have two key forwards who have shown potential at AFL level and who have torn apart WAFL teams on their best days. Why would we want another key forward who isn't even as good as the four we already have?

 

[Moo]

No.

Do you reckon Bradley would get a game ahead of Pavlich and Tarrant?

More importantly, do you think Bradley would get a game ahead of Campbell and Murphy? My answer is no.

The difference is we have two key forwards who have shown potential at AFL level and who have torn apart WAFL teams on their best days. Why would we want another key forward who isn't even as good as the four we already have?

No one is arguing that Bradley is better than Tarrant and Pav - I'm not sure why you keep stating it? Has anyone disagreed?

Whether he is better than Murphy or Campbell - I don't think it is as clear cut as you are saying.

He won the F&B and leading goal kicker for a team in a comp that is superior to the WAFL. What do you base your view he is inferior? - I asked before how many times have you seen him play - he was a very decent young WAFL player and to win a leading goal kicker and F&B from 15 games in a high quiality comp- not worth a shot?

As per the our guys tear apart team on certain days ...we need consistent performers and added pressure for spots helps that.

I'm not sure we will take Kepler - however I think it would be a good move if the price is right.

 

[Underdog]

Gilmore (who is excelling since being moved into the ruck rotation).

Gilmore I will give you.

I don't think you need to. Gilmore is playing well in the ruck but he is a pinch hitter at best. He is never going to be a full time ruckman let alone a dominant one.

He has been a relative success but I'm not sure you can call it a great success when he wouldn't be in your best 22 with all players fit.

 

[theGav56]

Pavlich is a star, I did not "Conveniently" ignore him as players like him would dominate anywhere they played.

Solomon as a defensive forward = Backmen.

Gilmore I will give you.

Schammer, Farmer, Murphy, Mundy debacle > Gilmore experiment.

Gilmore and Schammer were moved to different roles because we needed someone to play there due to injury/suspension etc.

Murphy has been tried in different positions because he has not performed consistantly as a forward. While giving him time in the backline has not helped him as a forward, he needs some sort of development as he has clearly lost his way.

Not sure what the Mundy debacle is? Any move that helps him develop his hardness at the contest is worthwhile.

Farmer? When we had Medhurst playing we had one too many small forwards and not enough midfielders. Geelong has succesfully built flexibility into their team by developing players in the early stages of their carreers as small forwards before swinging them midfield. In fact it is a carreer path for many midfielders, and hardly an experiment. The real question should be one the players answer by adding that string to their bow. For Souths, Farmer goes into the midfield rotation and has immediate and significant impact. Just ask Murphy who kicked a swag of goals that Farmer set up from midfield. In an area of the ground where we lack speed, where is the "debacle" in asking Farmer to play a role in fixing that?

Other experiments that have developed our flexibility;

Sandilands in the forward line has worked, without actually turning him into a forward. It has upset opposition defences and helped develop one of Sandilands weaknesses.

MacPharlin to the forward line has given us a potential shock tactic.

 

[Roundhouse]

Pavlich is a star, I did not "Conveniently" ignore him as players like him would dominate anywhere they played.

So you don't want to include good players who have been moved around to good effect only average players. Way to try an load the argument, but I don't think you are fooling anyone.

Solomon as a defensive forward = Backmen.

LMAO! Now you don't wanna include players who have been shifted to opposite ends of the ground because you are claiming that it's the same position? Talk about going from the sublime to the ridiculous.

Gilmore I will give you.

Schammer, Farmer, Murphy, Mundy debacle > Gilmore experiment.

Farmer has never played more than 1/4 of a game in the middle for Freo. I'd hardly say he has "swapped positions" and I'd hardly say his career stalled.

Murphy has had terrible games as a forward (I'm talking zero possessions here) as well as back. I don't see how you can blame any of that on the coaching staff's moves.

Mundy? He goes OK wherever he plays. Has had great some great games in defence but his best game was probably a few year ago at the G where played out of the midfield and half-forward. Again, I'd hardly say his career has stalled.

Schammer had a bad form slump when moved to half back, but he has also had form slumps in the midfield and half-forward. His best position is in the midfield, but he has been unable to cement a spot there.

Your complaining about Freo stalling player's careers by trying them in different positions is bunk. Trying to invalidate the sucesses and exagerate failures does nothing to strenghten your argument.

 

[bigkev bleeds purple]

No one is arguing that Bradley is better than Tarrant and Pav - I'm not sure why you keep stating it? Has anyone disagreed?

Whether he is better than Murphy or Campbell - I don't think it is as clear cut as you are saying.

He won the F&B and leading goal kicker for a team in a comp that is superior to the WAFL. What do you base your view he is inferior? - I asked before how many times have you seen him play - he was a very decent young WAFL player and to win a leading goal kicker and F&B from 15 games in a high quiality comp- not worth a shot?

As per the our guys tear apart team on certain days ...we need consistent performers and added pressure for spots helps that.

I'm not sure we will take Kepler - however I think it would be a good move if the price is right.

I only made the Bradley < Pav and Mapper argument because Bluto made the Murphy and Kiwi < Harry Highpants and Lucas argument.

If Bradley's VFL form was worth anything Essendon wouldn't have dropped him cold by de-listing him, would they? Don't forget that Matthew Knights, the man who would've made the decision on de-listing him, coached the Bendigo Bombers this season. I'm sure he's got a better idea of where Bradley's at than you or I. The exact reason why Knights gave Bradley the flick is exactly the reason why we shouldn't pick him up. We already have more capable key forwards. Which is exactly the argument I've made all along, while trying to debunk the versatility myth.

I've seen him play AFL (hence why I think he's a crab) but not VFL. Have you? Matthew Knights has and he decided he wasn't good enough to be on an AFL list. If he was a good WAFL youngster that doesn't count for squat. He had his chance to be an AFL player and all he did was prove he wasn't good enough. Who are we to argue?

 

[Moo]

I only made the Bradley < Pav and Mapper argument because Bluto made the Murphy and Kiwi < Harry Highpants and Lucas argument.

If Bradley's VFL form was worth anything Essendon wouldn't have dropped him cold by de-listing him, would they? Don't forget that Matthew Knights, the man who would've made the decision on de-listing him, coached the Bendigo Bombers this season. I'm sure he's got a better idea of where Bradley's at than you or I. The exact reason why Knights gave Bradley the flick is exactly the reason why we shouldn't pick him up. We already have more capable key forwards. Which is exactly the argument I've made all along, while trying to debunk the versatility myth.

I've seen him play AFL (hence why I think he's a crab) but not VFL. Have you? Matthew Knights has and he decided he wasn't good enough to be on an AFL list. If he was a good WAFL youngster that doesn't count for squat. He had his chance to be an AFL player and all he did was prove he wasn't good enough. Who are we to argue?

No mate not VFL ...I saw a lot of him the year before he was drafted.

I am hoping Harvey knows him enough to make the right call.

Knights strikes me as a muppett so he may have made an error ...guess we will know soon.

 

[theGav56]

I am hoping Harvey knows him enough to make the right call.

Knights strikes me as a muppett so he may have made an error ...guess we will know soon.

Muppet or not, he has seen a lot more of Bradley on the field than Harvey has.

 

[sabre_ac]

Gilmore and Schammer were moved to different roles because we needed someone to play there due to injury/suspension etc.

Murphy has been tried in different positions because he has not performed consistantly as a forward. While giving him time in the backline has not helped him as a forward, he needs some sort of development as he has clearly lost his way.

Not sure what the Mundy debacle is? Any move that helps him develop his hardness at the contest is worthwhile.

Farmer? When we had Medhurst playing we had one too many small forwards and not enough midfielders. Geelong has succesfully built flexibility into their team by developing players in the early stages of their carreers as small forwards before swinging them midfield. In fact it is a carreer path for many midfielders, and hardly an experiment. The real question should be one the players answer by adding that string to their bow. For Souths, Farmer goes into the midfield rotation and has immediate and significant impact. Just ask Murphy who kicked a swag of goals that Farmer set up from midfield. In an area of the ground where we lack speed, where is the "debacle" in asking Farmer to play a role in fixing that?

Other experiments that have developed our flexibility;

Sandilands in the forward line has worked, without actually turning him into a forward. It has upset opposition defences and helped develop one of Sandilands weaknesses.

MacPharlin to the forward line has given us a potential shock tactic.

Mundy I don't think will ever develop any toughness, he is always going to be very much a seagull finisher type.

Farmer is the purest small forward in the competition, when he plays their he dominates. His season in the midfield was disapointing.

I don't agree with you regarding Sandilands, I don't think the guy is a forward yet. Still can't mark in a pack or above his head.

McPharlin I liked the move, but in highnsight wasn't a good one. Before he was moved there he was one of the elite backmen in the competition ( I believe he will makei there again, just a year behind in his development)

 

[theGav56]

Mundy I don't think will ever develop any toughness, he is always going to be very much a seagull finisher type.

Farmer is the purest small forward in the competition, when he plays their he dominates. His season in the midfield was disapointing.

I don't agree with you regarding Sandilands, I don't think the guy is a forward yet. Still can't mark in a pack or above his head.

McPharlin I liked the move, but in highnsight wasn't a good one. Before he was moved there he was one of the elite backmen in the competition ( I believe he will makei there again, just a year behind in his development)

Your responses are all very one dimensional, and don't reflect the way football is actually played.

Developing "toughness" in Mundy doesn't mean turning him into one of the hardmen of the competition.

Farmer never speant a season in the midfield, but he did spend some occassional time in there, and I hope he does every season. He is very dynamic and it can help create mismatches.

No-one is trying to turn Sandilands into a forward, but it is still very disruptive when he goes forward because of his extreme height. It's the other forwards who should benefit when it happens, and it can certainly help develop his marking. It is also pretty important that rucks these days have another position they can go to, and this is the best alternative for Sandilands.

MacPharlin's move as much as anything was a response to Polak's failure up forward and our desperate need for another marking tall forward. It has created a match-winning alternative for us as we witnessed this season.

ALL very good moves and worthwhile experiments given the teams needs. Forward and midfield have been our weaknesses, and the moves have been designed to address them, primarily from areas of strength.

 

[sabre_ac]

Your responses are all very one dimensional, and don't reflect the way football is actually played.

Well that is your opinion

Developing "toughness" in Mundy doesn't mean turning him into one of the hardmen of the competition.

I would be happy to see him not shirk contest's and for his tackles to actually stick (The second being the most important IMHO)

No-one is trying to turn Sandilands into a forward, but it is still very disruptive when he goes forward because of his extreme height. It's the other forwards who should benefit when it happens, and it can certainly help develop his marking. It is also pretty important that rucks these days have another position they can go to, and this is the best alternative for Sandilands.

Ideally this is the aim, his height causes problems for the defence.
But when the guy can't mark over his head, it negate's his value down there. From what I have seen, he hasn't been disruptive at all. The first two defenders still go to Tarrant/Pavlich and the next biggest will go to Sandilands. Rarely does a ruckmen follow him in to the forward line.

ALL very good moves and worthwhile experiments given the teams needs. Forward and midfield have been our weaknesses, and the moves have been designed to address them, primarily from areas of strength.

Well I disagree, Farmer IMHO has no impact in the middle.

Murphy just seem's to wander when put in the backline
Mundy needs to play a loose man role
McPharlin pinch hitting in the forward line is good but when he was left there for almost a season, I believe this was a mistake.
I haven't given up hope that Sandilands one day will be a dangerous pinch hit forward, but as it stand's right now he is not.

Forward line has never been our weakness (Not in the Conolly era anyway), our weakness has always been goal kicking / consistent midfield.

Chasing big name players at the expense of draft pick's hasn't helped either.

By all mean's experiment, but cut your losses. I see now value in going down with a sinking ship. The moment Schammer proven not to be a backmen he should have been moved back to the midfield.

Farmer IMHO should never have played in the midfield.

 

[Underdog]

No-one is trying to turn Sandilands into a forward, but it is still very disruptive when he goes forward because of his extreme height. It's the other forwards who should benefit when it happens, and it can certainly help develop his marking. It is also pretty important that rucks these days have another position they can go to, and this is the best alternative for Sandilands.

To be honest, as a WC supporter, I am always more then happy when I see Sandilands go forward against us. We just play a third tall on him who has enough height to compete causing Sandi to drop the mark, then he can just run off him easily and create from defence.

 

[theGav56]

To be honest, as a WC supporter, I am always more then happy when I see Sandilands go forward against us. We just play a third tall on him who has enough height to compete causing Sandi to drop the mark, then he can just run off him easily and create from defence.

Which of course would be different if Farmer was playing, and the ball hitting the deck is to our advantage, or against a team such as Bulldogs, Brisbane or St Kilda, where limited tall defenders make a mismatch an advantage to us. Him going to the forward line worked well in the first few weeks of the rule change where taking out the arms was illegal. The point is about him having the versatility to do that if required, not for it to become his position.

 

[Underdog]

Which of course would be different if Farmer was playing, and the ball hitting the deck is to our advantage

Even I have the ability to spill marks at AFL level

 

[theGav56]

Even I have the ability to spill marks at AFL level

So does

lynch. How did he improve on that again?

 

[ALM_30]

Why not?

Matthew Scarlett started his career at 190cm and weighed just 75kg, it took him a couple of pre- seasons to build up to a decent playing weight for his current position, now he's 192cm and 95kg.

There was a alot of talk mulling around when Drum got drafted that he reminded alot of people of Scarlo, with his dash and natural defensive skill and nous. Very strong in the air as well.

I remember saying to watch out for this kid when the Dockers took him, hopefully under a new coach he'll get a go, because I can't wait to see him develop.

 

[Underdog]

So does

lynch. How did he improve on that again?

his was a mechanical flaw - Sandilands is just uncoordinated.

There is also a big difference between hitting the ball at full pace and standing there grabbing a mark when you are 4 feet taller then everyone else...

Actually, even when he was dropping a few on the lead, he was still reliable when it was placed on his head like Sandi gets...

 

[Underdog]

I don't mean to be too harsh on Sandi...but just feel some people overstate his ability in the forward line. If he is mainly there for crumbs, he might as well be called the Anvil...doesn't that nickname have a great pedigree..

He really needs to get his overhead marking to about the Seaby strength and then he will be truly dangerous in his stints forward. But you can't always count on a players' skills improving with time...look at Rowen Jones as a perfect example

 

[Scham]

Sandi up forward hasn't worked.

He lacks mobility in getting to the contest ie fall of the ball, lacks mobility in creating defensive pressure ie his oponent runs off him far too easily, and he doesn't hold his marks under physical side on body contact (nothing to do with arm chopping).