Graham Cornes on Taylor Walker

[johnnypanther]

Even Bradman got dropped from the Aussie team.

As for Cornes...... he has got to the stage where i just switch off whenever he says anything now.....

 

[Scallop Industry Thug]

Why was he drafted at #75?

 

[WALL-e]

because he was a schoolarship player and we could use our last pick in the ND.

 

[Scallop Industry Thug]

Fair enough. I was puzzled why a talent would fall that low

 

[arrowman]

FWIW I'm on the side of: Legitimate question to ask, and supporters are entitled to hear reasoning from the club (and I think we have, by and large) but on balance I think the club is doing the right thing.

He is 19 and probably not up for a full season. Our club has a track record of managing young players into the AFL side.

There are boxes he will have to tick before he gets a game on the back of more than pure talent.

I think it'd be good for his development to get a few more games this year, and to play in finals. But only if he'e earned his spot. I don't think playing, say, Burton ahead of Walker (and I agree there's room for both of them in the team) means Craigy has some sort of short sighted "we can win the flag this year" mentality. It does mean we play our best team every week, and don't give away spots.

Edited to add: As for Cornes' article: Legitimate subject of discussion, but overstated case for the sake of causing controversy. No balance, no consideration of the factors that the informed people on this thread have contributed. But that's The Advertiser for you.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

I think it'd be good for his development to get a few more games this year, and to play in finals. But only if he'e earned his spot. I don't think playing, say, Burton ahead of Walker (and I agree there's room for both of them in the team) means Craigy has some sort of short sighted "we can win the flag this year" mentality. It does mean we play our best team every week, and don't give away spots.

At the start of the year though we played Myke Cook ahead of Shirley.

Surely Craig couldn't have thought that Cook was a better player than Shirley at that stage of his career.

Safe selections = Safe performances

 

[arrowman]

At the start of the year though we played Myke Cook ahead of Shirley...

Oh, I think that behind the "you have to earn your spot" rhetoric there's also the unstated "new young player will get a game as soon as he shows enough, and we'll rest an older player to have a look at the kid".

If every young player had to 100% earn his selection ahead of more experienced players who are performing OK, you'd never develop the list. It's a line that coaches walk, but they don't (IMHO) talk about it too frankly.

 

[Mong]

I don't have a problem with Walker playing a few games in the SANFL. Now is the time to try to iron out some of Walker's faults, and he has a few, which are mainly mindset related.

I also don't agree with the criticism that Neil Craig doesn't regard players with flair. Cornes, in the same article, made that claim and then went on to point out how keen they were to get Burton in the team. Brett Burton is one of the most enigmatic players around and no one plays with more flair than him, yet Craig puts more faith in him than most supporters do.

I believe Neil Craig fully appreciates the talent Taylor Walker has and his importance to the club over the next decade. That is why he is careful to teach him the right way to play at this level.

I also believe the selection committee is made up of more than just Neil Craig although reading this forum you'd not know that.

 

[CROW36]

This year, like last year is still a development year, just because he has undeniable talent, doesn't mean that he receives a gold pass into the side and nor is it the end of the world if he isn't playing at senior AFL level as some want to suggest. I don't see what the rush is with Taylor, he's had a fairly decent taste of senior footy, he's shown what he can do, now he needs to learn how to fight for his spot, as well as work on his consistency. A few weeks in the SANFL last year didn't hurt the development of Tippett or Mackay, he'll be back, either later this year or next year and in 1-2 years time when he's averaging 4 goals a game no one will remember that he spent a couple of weeks in the SANFL.

At the beginning of the year, there was a thread about what we expected from Taylor and IIRC the general consensus was 15-20 games, averaging about 1-2 goals a game with the odd haul of 4-5 goals, which is exactly what he's on track to do. You don't get games on talent, you get games because you've earnt it, no player is bigger than the team and this IMO is why teams such as Port and Freo struggle at times with consistency, because players when they're young are played because they are young, not because they necessarily deserve it. Yes, playing them early may fast track development, but it won't necessarily develop them to the best of their ability.

We've drafted Walker for what he can do when he's 21+ years old, not for what he can do as a teenager, anything else just happens to be a bonus IMO.

Very well said have to agree with everything you said...you are making a lot of sense I wonder how many times Chad got dropped in his first year of AFL it's was quite awhile ago but if my mind serves me right his form was so bad that he even was dropped to the reserves can someone refresh my memory.
If Taylor Walker has deficiency's in his game better to get them rid of them now otherwise we could have another Fev on our hands.....

 

[beartoo]

sometimes, I just don't know where to start./QUOTE]

I won't drive into the hole you created there, except to say that you could be one of the best straight men in history.
The point I was making--somewhat badly--is that working out who is talented and who will make the big time is an uncertain science. If everyone can work out who is or is not an 'amazing talent' and will certainly be a super-star, why do we need recruiting departments? Adam Saliba ring any bells? How many top ten draft picks don't have ongoing careers? How many late picks become stars? Johncock, Hird to name a couple. There are factors other than sheer talent that go into making a top sportsman.
The point is that giving blokes game time is not necessarily the way to turn them into good footballers.
We may be at cross-purposes here as I can't imagine you disagreeing with this.

 

[Crow-mo]

Oh, I think that behind the "you have to earn your spot" rhetoric there's also the unstated "new young player will get a game as soon as he shows enough, and we'll rest an older player to have a look at the kid".

If every young player had to 100% earn his selection ahead of more experienced players who are performing OK, you'd never develop the list. It's a line that coaches walk, but they don't (IMHO) talk about it too frankly.

I think there was a clear shift in direction after 2007 where the club decided it's approach wasn't really working, and they decided to start to try and get some games into the young guys a lot earlier than they would have previously.

where that impetus for a change in philosophy came from, is debatable.

 

[Crow-mo]

sometimes, I just don't know where to start./QUOTE]

I won't drive into the hole you created there, except to say that you could be one of the best straight men in history.
The point I was making--somewhat badly--is that working out who is talented and who will make the big time is an uncertain science. If everyone can work out who is or is not an 'amazing talent' and will certainly be a super-star, why do we need recruiting departments? Adam Saliba ring any bells? How many top ten draft picks don't have ongoing careers? How many late picks become stars? Johncock, Hird to name a couple. There are factors other than sheer talent that go into making a top sportsman.
The point is that giving blokes game time is not necessarily the way to turn them into good footballers.
We may be at cross-purposes here as I can't imagine you disagreeing with this.

you lost me when you couldn't tell the difference talent wise, between Smith & Meesen.

the above rambling makes no sense. feel free to restate more clearly.

 

[twentydollarnote]

you lost me when you couldn't tell the difference talent wise, between Smith & Meesen.

the above rambling makes no sense. feel free to restate more clearly.

Hes pointing out (correctly) that you've somehow got the notion into your head that talent is a exact measurement which can be determined at age 17 and somehow where a player is drafted is roughly equal to their amount of talent, which is wrong and supported by clubs draft orders and entire draft lists varying greatly.