Get some muscles Mackstar!

[jess_555]

I was watching the Mackstar play on Saturday in that GREAT gandfinal and I noticed that whenever Mackie tries to tackle he just is no where near strong enough. YES, i know his a young gun but when is he gonna get some muscles? I think he needs some tips on tackling from Jimmy Bartel!
C'MON lil boy get some grip!


PS: I'm not just writing this coz he would look SO much hotter if he had muscles. Hahahaha

 

[worthogs]

I was watching the Mackstar play on Saturday in that GREAT gandfinal and I noticed that whenever Mackie tries to tackle he just is no where near strong enough. YES, i know his a young gun but when is he gonna get some muscles? I think he needs some tips on tackling from Jimmy Bartel!
C'MON lil boy get some grip!


PS: I'm not just writing this coz he would look SO much hotter if he had muscles. Hahahaha

Problem is that he looks to have bulked up ...to a flyweight

 

[RoosterLad]

what do you expect? his old mans an ump!

 

[chapmanmagic35]

Still a skinny lad!

However, he still should be in our starting 22.

 

[Rosella]

Thought he was supposed to be in the gym all summer.

 

[Ricketts]

He's just a boy, as i'll say everytime he goes near the ball.

Saw his 5-year-old cousins or some other relatives on the train to the game once last year, they were nearly bigger than him.

 

[Partridge]

He's just a boy, as i'll say everytime he goes near the ball.

Saw his 5-year-old cousins or some other relatives on the train to the game once last year, they were nearly bigger than him.

I could handle that excuse for his first year, but this is what - his 3rd season now? I don't doubt his skills, but he has to start putting on some muscle soon or else he just won't last.

 

[scottydeewah]

Even if he doesnt put on muscle he has to at least put his body in. Skinny Lappin, Caracella 2 blokes all skin and bones yet they go alright.

 

[Stoney]

Ease up fellas ... im sure he's aware he needs to put it on although i'd challenge anyone with his body - type to put on bulk quicker than he is doing it.

u cant change a persons body type no matter how much u spend in the gym - im expecting 5 more years b4 mackie starts to show himself as a key player for our team as a reliable 3rd tall who kicks 2-3 each week and can take a pack mark or outbody his opponent consistently.

 

[GeeCat]

I could handle that excuse for his first year, but this is what - his 3rd season now? I don't doubt his skills, but he has to start putting on some muscle soon or else he just won't last.

Abit hard on the boy, he's only had the 3 pre-seasons. Some bodies don't react as fast as many others do to weights, or even proteins for that matter. I don't think we'll ever see Mackie with a genuine ripped-up frame for quite some time yet (though in fairness, he has put on abit of size since his first arrival).

Even if he doesnt put on muscle he has to at least put his body in. Skinny Lappin, Caracella 2 blokes all skin and bones yet they go alright.

Been used a few times already, but ever since that hospital ball by Graham a few seasons back, Mackie's never been as ferocious on his attack on the ball as before. That being said, I think he's more than accustomed to throwing the body at the ball/man. Not exactly the 'I hear footsteps' guy a few make him out to be.

 

[Scarlett30]

Thought he was supposed to be in the gym all summer.

I think he lost his key to the gym

 

[ezbian]

u cant change a persons body type no matter how much u spend in the gym - im expecting 5 more years b4 mackie starts to show himself as a key player for our team as a reliable 3rd tall who kicks 2-3 each week and can take a pack mark or outbody his opponent consistently.

5 Years !!! You are patient ! You are willing to give him 8 years before he starts to make a difference.

Way too long. The clock is ticking for Daddy Mack. The writing is on the wall for mine. Its a shame because S.Wells doesn't often make too many bad picks.

 

[RoosterLad]

get him on the juice

 

[nananana catman]

get him on the juice

It'd be worth the 1 year ban if he got some rippling muscles

 

[chapmanmagic35]

5 Years !!! You are patient ! You are willing to give him 8 years before he starts to make a difference.

Way too long. The clock is ticking for Daddy Mack. The writing is on the wall for mine. Its a shame because S.Wells doesn't often make too many bad picks.

Clock isn't ticking as he has shown promise over his three years. Some people expect too much from youngsters because they see what guys like Riewoldt and Judd have done early on in their careers.

Judd and Riewoldt are exceptions.

 

[catempire]

Some players don't need muscles. Mackie is one of them. Heaps of class and will go well this year.

 

[ezbian]

Clock isn't ticking as he has shown promise over his three years. Some people expect too much from youngsters because they see what guys like Riewoldt and Judd have done early on in their careers.

Judd and Riewoldt are exceptions.

I don't expect too much from youngsters, far from it.

I just question Mackie's commitment, as I really don't think it is that hard to put on bulk. Yes, there has been glimpses of talent but many players show talent and don't deliver anything further.

Unless Mackie can put on size, and contest in a key position, I can't see where he will fit. He is in the same mould as SJ and I know who I would rather have, and doesn't offer what Lil Gaz and Chappy put on the table.

He is not quick enough to play on the wing, and from what I have seen doesn't have the mental capacity to go back. I have all seen him play some real stinkers at VFL level. I just think with the future of our side, and the age of our forward line, I don't know when he will get an opportunity. In this current crop of players I am not sure what he is going to add. In saying that he may escape the axe for another few years, as I would think Gardiner, Lonergran and McCarthy will fall before him. Might be trade bait one day?

He seems to be very streaky. When he is ON, I agree he has that delectable talent we all love, but it is too long between drinks for mine.

At the end of the day it was a week draft http://afl.com.au/default.asp?pg=draft&spg=display&articleid=176962

and I don't think we missed out on too much after Mackie.

 

[Stoney]

5 Years !!! You are patient ! You are willing to give him 8 years before he starts to make a difference.

Way too long. The clock is ticking for Daddy Mack. The writing is on the wall for mine. Its a shame because S.Wells doesn't often make too many bad picks.

Mate its fact that players generally peak around 26-27

Mackie is what? 20? (correct me if im wrong)

He will not be a dominant player until he is at least 25 - when he hits that age with experience and about 7-8 more kg - im expecting him to be a elite forward who u will consider picking each season in dream team!

dont b so critical of the kid!!!

 

[ezbian]

Ok players do peak at 25 - 27.

But Unfortunately Mackie is growing up in a group, that is currently along way ahead of him and will be peaking at the same age.

Mackie is also going to have to grow up with the emerging talents of Nath and Tommy Hawkins.

To me Kingley's spot is what Mackie has to be eyeing off.

Yes he has showed talent, but footy clubs can be ruthless. Lets say he starts becoming more consistent, but is still in and out of the Geelong side over the next three years, as the current crop continue to improve. A lowly ranked team bottom's out and are looking for a player who has been starved of opportunities but has shown some promise. We get offered a first and second round pick, or have the opportunity to trade for something we also need, that is the point where GFC will show much they believe in the boy.

Jason Saddington and Carlton come to mind. Here is a player that has showed alot of promise. Very similar player to Mackie, slightly built, oozes talent when he is on. Sydney invested 8 years in Saddington, only to trade him for pick 50! Saddington was also a first round pick drafted at pick 11.

 

[GeeCat]

I just question Mackie's commitment, as I really don't think it is that hard to put on bulk. Yes, there has been glimpses of talent but many players show talent and don't deliver anything further.

Unless Mackie can put on size, and contest in a key position, I can't see where he will fit. He is in the same mould as SJ and I know who I would rather have, and doesn't offer what Lil Gaz and Chappy put on the table.

He is not quick enough to play on the wing, and from what I have seen doesn't have the mental capacity to go back. I have all seen him play some real stinkers at VFL level. I just think with the future of our side, and the age of our forward line, I don't know when he will get an opportunity. In this current crop of players I am not sure what he is going to add. In saying that he may escape the axe for another few years, as I would think Gardiner, Lonergran and McCarthy will fall before him. Might be trade bait one day?

He seems to be very streaky. When he is ON, I agree he has that delectable talent we all love, but it is too long between drinks for mine.

Bulking up is easier said than done, and as I referred to before, different body types respond varyingly to weight programs/diets. Not everyone can come back with defined arms and weigh in at 90 kilos - it just isn't possible for some bodies, regardless of whether you work out 4 days a week in the gym or not.

Mackie isn't going to be a key position player for us, nor does he need to be. The talent he has, the assets he brings, we don't necessarily need them in the body of a key position player (though, it would obviously be nice). Positions needn't be so carefully defined. In today's game, there is no necessity to strictly abide by the traditional 2 keys, 2 mediums, and 2 smalls system. Having Dog seemingly take hold of one of the 'flank positions' shouldn't be the determining factor in whether or not Mackie belongs; his value for us lies as a part of our ongoing rotation system. I think that's one of the more important aspects in what he brings to the table - he doesn't make us overly top heavy, such is his versatility, in one sense.

His consistency in production is still lacking, I don't dispute that. But surely the same can be said for a good part of the rest of the boys, Nathan included. You've mentioned Mackie's 'glimpses' of talent (otherwise suggesting you're not entirely convinced I take it), and go on to remind us of the ever-failing ability of many before him to fully recognise that talent. Yet, in the following post, you directly take on the assumption that both Nathan and Hawkins will turn out for us. As precious a subject he is, hasn't Nathan too only shown glimpses of talent? It might hurt to suggest it, but what's not to say he won't turn out? What's not to say young Tom won't turn out? And yes, you may turn on me and pull out the argument that both Nathan and Tom are true key positions, that they may very well straighten us up. But think about the times Mackie's straightened us up with some well-timed goals himself (see '05 R1 Richmond game).

He may not have made any position his own yet, nor may he be in our best 22 (much like Nathan, as far as I'm concerned), but surely that's not enough to justify questioning his immediate future.

 

[Rosella]

Mackie is what? 20? (correct me if im wrong)

He's 21. Don't you remember his celebrations last year?

 

[ezbian]

Mackie isn't going to be a key position player for us, nor does he need to be. The talent he has, the assets he brings, we don't necessarily need them in the body of a key position player (though, it would obviously be nice). Positions needn't be so carefully defined. In today's game, there is no necessity to strictly abide by the traditional 2 keys, 2 mediums, and 2 smalls system. Having Dog seemingly take hold of one of the 'flank positions' shouldn't be the determining factor in whether or not Mackie belongs; his value for us lies as a part of our ongoing rotation system. I think that's one of the more important aspects in what he brings to the table - he doesn't make us overly top heavy, such is his versatility, in one sense.

See this is what I don't understand with Mackie. What are the assets that he brings to the table? What is he offering that we don't already have? There are only 22 places in the side each week, who is he going to replace to offer some of these assets. Yes, you can play 2 players like Mackie in a rotational system in a forward line but currently, and unless there is vast improvment I don't see how he can fit into a rotation that includes: Ottens, Playfair, Kingsley, Johnson, Lil Gaz, Chapman, Riccardi, Kelly, Milburn, Mooney, et al.

You've mentioned Mackie's 'glimpses' of talent (otherwise suggesting you're not entirely convinced I take it)

Don't worry I agree he has talent, although I don't think it is amazingly special, and going to help him differentiate himself from others. Again this is what I think the problem I have with him. I don't see what else he can bring to the table. What is going to make him a regularly selected AFL footballer.

As precious a subject he is, hasn't Nathan too only shown glimpses of talent? .

Yeah I guess this will just be a matter of opinion. But I have been really impressed with what Nath brings, and yes he can be very important to a structure.

But think about the times Mackie's straightened us up with some well-timed goals himself (see '05 R1 Richmond game).

I would hardly call round one last year straightning us up! Yes he showed his talents in only the first quarter, but he hardly straightned us up. From memory he kicked a skillful opportunistic around the corner/over the shoulder goal, and had two lead mark goals where he led into the pocket on the southern stand side. Here he used his pace and got it delivered lace out, it was hardly a contested pack mark. Don't imagine that Mackie straightned us up that day. Ottens, Playfair and Kingsley were all playing that day, Mackie benefited because they were there and Dog wasn't. Which gets back to my earlier point when Dog plays there is no space for him. GeeCat do you have him in your 22 for Round 1? Or I would be interested to see what the 22 is that allows Mackie to play?

He may not have made any position his own yet, nor may he be in our best 22 (much like Nathan, as far as I'm concerned), but surely that's not enough to justify questioning his immediate future.

I don't think this year is make or break for Mackie. But IMO I would like to see him start to dominate some VFL level games. A couple bags of 4 or 5. A couple 25 plus possession games on the HFF, allowing him to hurt sides with his talent. In the VFL games I have seen so far he has struggled to impose himself on the play, either as a marking option or dangerous ground level player like Dog. I plan on watching alot more of the VFL this year, and hope to see him start showing that he doesn't belong at that level and needs to be playing AFL to allow his game to continue to develop. Currently he looks like alot of the other boys running around in the early game.

 

[GeeCat]

Not to sound condemning, but your view is far too narrow minded. By focusing solely on Mackie's current status is ignoring the rest of the path down the track.

What's not to say those forementioned players drop out of that 'rotation' you've named? Our 22 may all look very cleanly cut to you at the moment, but that's not to say it won't change down the track.

Let me ask you this: what would you say is the status of guys like Prismall? Varcoe? Do they fit into our current 22? They each have their 'assets', but where do they currently fit? The answer? They probably don't right now. But they keep others on their toes, and we remind ourselves that they'll slot right into the rotation somewhere down the track.

And I know they're a couple of years behind Mackie in their development. But time has always been an issue with him. When does that time run out? I don't know, but at the moment I'd like to think he's done enough to keep that date guessing still. He's hardly blown anyone out of the water with his performances to date, I make no secret of that. He's still a bit player, and players can't live by that forever. But he's shown it's worth persisting with him, that it's worth keeping a spot open for him.

How many players on our list have his type of talent? Not many. Of course, talent without the eventual output is useless, sometimes even a failure. Will that be Mackie? I don't know. But I could substitute his name with at least half a dozen on our list - guys who are getting by on potential and the glimpses they've shown, the few performances they've staged. Footy brain's are needed to go side by side with raw talent - he's got that. Handy pace, a non-textbook size that allows him to get by some match-ups (both a blessing and curse some may say), a nous for the goals, the ability to crack a game open in the space of a few minutes, the right mindset to tackle, chase, and maintain the forward pressure when he wants to - all there. Within our list, perhaps one of his glowing attributes is his ability to actually kick the ball.

What's going to make him a regularly selected footballer? Well, it's all a matter of opinion, no? I like to think I've seen enough to suggest he's got a spot if he wants it. Is he in my best 22? As of today, no he isn't. For Round 1? Yes he is.

I would hardly call round one last year straightning us up! Yes he showed his talents in only the first quarter, but he hardly straightned us up. From memory he kicked a skillful opportunistic around the corner/over the shoulder goal, and had two lead mark goals where he led into the pocket on the southern stand side. Here he used his pace and got it delivered lace out, it was hardly a contested pack mark. Don't imagine that Mackie straightned us up that day. Ottens, Playfair and Kingsley were all playing that day, Mackie benefited because they were there and Dog wasn't.

Could you downgrade his performance anymore?

Don't let the fact that we eventually smacked Richmond get in the way of your memory; he kicked 3 legitimate goals to keep us in the game that quarter. Considering we only had the 8 shots on goal, contributing to half our score is more than just feeding on breadcrumbs. Straightening us up doesn't have to be structure-wise. Does Kingsley regularly take a contested pack mark? Rhetorical. Yet does he straighten us up? I would argue considerably. Mackie may have benefited selection-wise from Dog's absence, but don't try to peg his performances as thieving or leeching. He may very well go on to be a contributor who feeds on the lack of attention, much like some argue Kingsley would if he had the proper sidekicks, but Mackie's performances were far from illegitimate that day.

 

[ezbian]

Not to sound condemning, but your view is far too narrow minded. By focusing solely on Mackie's current status is ignoring the rest of the path down the track..

My view is not narrow minded it is just my opinion. Track back to the start of this post I said the clock was ticking. This year isn't make or break for Mackie, and perhaps next year won't be either, but heading into his fourth year at the club, i want to start to see some seperation from him and the other guys in the VFL. I want to see him press for selection rather than be put in the side because of injuries, and because he fits a role. As I said I would like to see some 4-5 goal games in the VFL, and or some 25+ possession games this year. If it doesn't happen this year then the spolight and the blow torch becomes a bit hotter next year. Yes he was a project player, but at what stage do you stop developing? 5? 6? 7? years. I am interested to get your thoughts on this. I personally think you need to start to see some real consistency in years 5 & 6 for a project player.

What's not to say those forementioned players drop out of that 'rotation' you've named? Our 22 may all look very cleanly cut to you at the moment, but that's not to say it won't change down the track...

Yes and hypotehticals are fantastic, thats what makes this forum interesting. To me our structure wont change that much because Thompson is developing his forward line for strong successful period in our history. Every player mentioned still has at least 3 - 4 years of top level football left in them. The younger guys like Chappy, Johnno and Lil Gaz still have room for vast improvement. At this stage they are also poles ahead of Mackie. I just don't want us to be sitting around in four years still waiting for Mackie to make the most of his talents. As I said, I would like to see some strong improvement this year.

Let me ask you this: what would you say is the status of guys like Prismall? Varcoe? Do they fit into our current 22? They each have their 'assets', but where do they currently fit? The answer? They probably don't right now. But they keep others on their toes, and we remind ourselves that they'll slot right into the rotation somewhere down the track....

You have answered your own flawed question. Prismall is in his second year of football and is a completely different package to Mackie. Varcoe is sight unseen. They are hardly keeping others on their toes. One has just started and shown a fair bit. The other hasn't even touched a footy yet, and the only form guide is the opinion of the experts (albeit a very rosy outlook). If comparing Mackie, compare him with other project players that play the same position/s. Gardiner, Lonergran, McCarthy, Playfair. Don't compare him with two midfielders who are just working out the fastest way to make it to training.

And I know they're a couple of years behind Mackie in their development. But time has always been an issue with him. When does that time run out? I don't know, but at the moment I'd like to think he's done enough to keep that date guessing still. He's hardly blown anyone out of the water with his performances to date, I make no secret of that. He's still a bit player, and players can't live by that forever. But he's shown it's worth persisting with him, that it's worth keeping a spot open for him.....

Agreed see earlier point and I look forward to your comments. As I say, I would like to see some strong improvement this year. If that doesn't happen and his form line starts to plateau, then we can scrutinise again more closely next year.

Could you downgrade his performance anymore?.....

Could you upsell it anymore? I think his actual performance was somewhere in between our two views

Does Kingsley regularly take a contested pack mark? Rhetorical. .....

I know it was rhetorical but I do need to add that he does take many body on body, man on man marks, or positions himself in a way that allows him to collect the ball at ground level. A skill that Mackie will hopefully gain. Currently he is more of the Western Bulldogs type forward. Needs it out in front on a quick lead.

Yet does he straighten us up? I would argue considerably. Mackie may have benefited selection-wise from Dog's absence, but don't try to peg his performances as thieving or leeching. He may very well go on to be a contributor who feeds on the lack of attention, much like some argue Kingsley would if he had the proper sidekicks, but Mackie's performances were far from illegitimate that day.

His performances weren't thieving or leeching, but nor were they set up because of his structural importance and straightning us up as you mentioned earlier. I fully agree that the sign of a good side is when quality players continue to get under the guards of the opposition because they focus heavily on the stars. Essentially this is what our team is built upon, Dasher Milburn and Mooney can attest to that.

It is obvious that mackie is one of your up and coming favorites and I have no problem with this. We all have them. I think extremely highly of Nath and could argue until I was blue and white in the face about his value, talents, skill and need for extra time. But like Mackie I am expecting improved output from Nath this year also. Just like I expect it from Big H. Just like I expect it from Lil Gaz and Turbo Tenace. I look forward to seeing if Mackie can develop and improve, and I will be watching with interest this Saturday either early or late to see that. (I hope it is early because if all fit I think he and Nath are playing for the same spot)

I am a traditionalist, and like BIG structural forward lines. I want us to follow the winning formula like North, Bris and Essendon have over the last decade. For now it will be Big H and Otto with lots of other options such as Johnno, Lil Gaz, Chappy, KK, Nath or even Mackie. In the future I hope it becomes even more traditional with T.Hawkins and Nath, and hopefully Mackie takes on greater importance and can play KK's role even better.

Here's to improvement for all our players. I am hoping some step up into the upper superstar echelon, although I don't think it is critical to our success to have that superstar. Then at the end of the season we can revisit this post, hopefully discussing how much Mackie and Nath have progressed, and looking forward to how much they will continue to progress over the next two years.

 

[WestCat]

Is Mackie a vegetarian? I still can't figure out why he can't put any weight on. I'm skinny myself, but started going to the gym and put on about 6kg in a few months while retaining the same diet and not taking anything dodgy. With Mackie being an AFL footballer, he should easily be able to put on 10kg in a year having access more often to a gym as well as having a high protein diet funded and provided for him (I'm guessing).

Anyway, back onto the topic of Mackie's spot in our team, I think he'll be a replacement for SJ over the next couple of years when Johnno's out injured. In the long term though, I can see him as a Dasher type player, skilled, tall and plays in that utility role.