Analysis Fielding a team of 100+ gamers

[Winter]

Come finals time we could conceivably have 18 blokes on the field, all with 100+ games experience. Would be interested to know if this has ever happened before? While very unlikely due to the likes of Tarrant, McDonald and Brown being key players, an interesting exercise all the same:

Firrito, Thompson, Wright
Atley, Hansen, Macmillan*
Gibson*, Wells, Dal Santo
Ziebell, Waite, Higgins
Harvey, Petrie, Thomas
Goldstein, Swallow, Cunnington

100+ game rookies: Nahas & Ray

* Gibson has played 90, Macmillan 86

 

[ozzyoslo]

So called experts have said that you need the majority of a team to get that 100-120 games under their belts before the player really hit their straps.......our time is now folks.

 

[numchuks]

If we did not at least have a few 'rookies' in our best 22 come finals time, it would be extremely disappointing.

 

[ozzyoslo]

If we did not at least have a few 'rookies' in our best 22 come finals time, it would be extremely disappointing.

They dont necessary have to be playing in the best 22 come finals time but they need to have had some form of playing exposure during the season to give them the experience and to rest / freshen up some players who need to be given a spell from the rigors of footy.

 

[Roo182]

Obviously our average games is quite high due to Boomer, Petrie, Firrito, Dal Santo etc but anyone know what our number is without Booms?

 

[Roo182]

Managed to work it out:

I took all the guys yet to play a game as didn't think it made sense to count them. If they're in there it's about 93, however Id'd say the most consistent number is the 118.

If you take Harvey out, it's about 108. Right in the sweet spot.

 

[Yianni]

In 2 weeks we'll have 3 300 gamers in the team.

How common is that? Seems like it'd be quite rare.

 

[Winter]

If we did not at least have a few 'rookies' in our best 22 come finals time, it would be extremely disappointing.

I don't subscribe to this.

I'm interested in winning a premiership in 2016, if this means we play our most experienced side so be it.

 

[numchuks]

I don't subscribe to this.

I'm interested in winning a premiership in 2016, if this means we play our most experienced side so be it.

Ok, lets put out our most experienced side with Rarren Fay in it and see how close we get to a premiership.

 

[Firestarter]

Ok, lets put out our most experienced side with Rarren Fay in it and see how close we get to a premiership.

That is a bit of a lame comeback.

We brought Anderson in and it's s**t luck he got injured. We played Wood and Turner. Hansen isn't playing. Black isn't playing.

 

[naturally north]

I don't subscribe to this.

I'm interested in winning a premiership in 2016, if this means we play our most experienced side so be it.

Correct call four premierships since 1925 tells me I don't care if the fifth is won by pensioners.

 

[numchuks]

That is a bit of a lame comeback.

Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.

 

[Winter]

Ok, lets put out our most experienced side with Rarren Fay in it and see how close we get to a premiership.

If our older players continue to play better football than our rookies in 2016, why would you exchange them in the team?

 

[Whereitallbegan]

Come Grand Final day, i'll take my chances with the inexperienced Tarrant and Brown!

 

[Horace]

Come Grand Final day, I'll take anything so long as we win it.

 

[Mjs94]

I don't subscribe to this.

I'm interested in winning a premiership in 2016, if this means we play our most experienced side so be it.

This.

If a kid is tearing the VFL apart then by all means bring them in, but no giving games to anyone because what their birth certificate says. Let them earn their spot and actually appreciate it more when they get it.

 

[Passmore]

If our older players continue to play better football than our rookies in 2016, why would you exchange them in the team?

Cos it'll get Hutchy on board. And we can all go on the main board and tell everyone how good well be one day