Jason Johnson

[blumfieldisback]

Why on earth would your club be intersted in him, you have many similar players who may have beter skills, surely your after midfielders who can run the lines not the extractor type.

 

[sainter]

He would fill the void left by Powell and possibly Thompson.

As West Coast have shown you can't have enough quality midfielders.

We do need more pace in the midfield but they also need to be complimented by players that go in and win the hard ball.

JJ was outstanding against us late in the season but whether that means we will go after him is another question.

 

[blumfieldisback]

hmmm but didnt your player group as reported in the herald sun today say get him

 

[Kildonan]

Solomon and Johnson consider trade offers
06 October 2006 Herald-Sun
Mark Robinson

ESSENDON premiership pair Jason Johnson and Dean Solomon are destined for new clubs in 2007.

That was then ... Dean Solomon (left) and Jason Johnson (right) were once up with James Hird as the Bombers' keys.

Their standoff with the Bombers reached critical levels yesterday when negotiations floundered again, just three days before the start of trade week.

Their manager Michael Quinlan said yesterday the players had no alternative but to talk with opposition clubs.

His bid for two-year contracts for both players was yesterday rejected by the Bombers.

The club remains steadfast on one-year deals only.

St Kilda and Melbourne have zeroed in on All-Australian Johnson, while Fremantle is trying to entice Solomon to Perth.

Some senior Saints players were made aware of the club's interest in Johnson at Tuesday's best-and-fairest count and gave it the thumbs-up.

The Dockers have made repeated inquiries about Solomon, who this time two years ago was on the verge of signing a reported four-year deal with Richmond.

Pleas by teammates and coach Kevin Sheedy convinced him to stay.

Solomon is again overseas - this time in Spain.

Both Solomon and Johnson are not categorically out of Windy Hill, but they will seek a trade on Monday unless the club improves its offer at the weekend.

``We are trying to come to an agreement, and, if not, they will look at other opportunities,'' Quinlan said last night.

``If a player wants to change clubs, the only opportunity to do it is next week.

``I'm hopeful everything can be resolved, but at the same time you've got to consider opportunities elsewhere if a deal cannot be done.

``Neither player has said they want to leave, so all I can really say is negotiations are continuing.''

Johnson is a two-time best-and-fairest winner and a go-at-it midfielder who, when fit, plays a major role in the middle.

He finished seventh in this year's Bomber best-and-fairest from 20 games.

Against him is his age - he will play as a 29-year-old next year - and an ability to sometimes butcher the ball.

He missed most of the pre-season because of a foot injury and, after a sluggish start, returned to good form in the run home.

If Johnson is struggling for a multi-year deal, then Solomon's position is even worse.

He is 27 in January, also can turn over the ball and is not quick. However, he is popular, has size and is ferocious at the contest - attributes the undersized Dockers need to help them take the next step.

This year the 189cm defender was often asked to play on the monster forwards, often at a substantial height and weight disadvantage.

The Bombers, meanwhile, maintain that negotiations are continuing.

 

[bob down]

Solomon and Johnson consider trade offers
06 October 2006 Herald-Sun
Mark Robinson

ESSENDON premiership pair Jason Johnson and Dean Solomon are destined for new clubs in 2007.

That was then ... Dean Solomon (left) and Jason Johnson (right) were once up with James Hird as the Bombers' keys.

Their standoff with the Bombers reached critical levels yesterday when negotiations floundered again, just three days before the start of trade week.

Their manager Michael Quinlan said yesterday the players had no alternative but to talk with opposition clubs.

His bid for two-year contracts for both players was yesterday rejected by the Bombers.

The club remains steadfast on one-year deals only.

St Kilda and Melbourne have zeroed in on All-Australian Johnson, while Fremantle is trying to entice Solomon to Perth.

Some senior Saints players were made aware of the club's interest in Johnson at Tuesday's best-and-fairest count and gave it the thumbs-up.

The Dockers have made repeated inquiries about Solomon, who this time two years ago was on the verge of signing a reported four-year deal with Richmond.

Pleas by teammates and coach Kevin Sheedy convinced him to stay.

Solomon is again overseas - this time in Spain.

Both Solomon and Johnson are not categorically out of Windy Hill, but they will seek a trade on Monday unless the club improves its offer at the weekend.

``We are trying to come to an agreement, and, if not, they will look at other opportunities,'' Quinlan said last night.

``If a player wants to change clubs, the only opportunity to do it is next week.

``I'm hopeful everything can be resolved, but at the same time you've got to consider opportunities elsewhere if a deal cannot be done.

``Neither player has said they want to leave, so all I can really say is negotiations are continuing.''

Johnson is a two-time best-and-fairest winner and a go-at-it midfielder who, when fit, plays a major role in the middle.

He finished seventh in this year's Bomber best-and-fairest from 20 games.

Against him is his age - he will play as a 29-year-old next year - and an ability to sometimes butcher the ball.

He missed most of the pre-season because of a foot injury and, after a sluggish start, returned to good form in the run home.

If Johnson is struggling for a multi-year deal, then Solomon's position is even worse.

He is 27 in January, also can turn over the ball and is not quick. However, he is popular, has size and is ferocious at the contest - attributes the undersized Dockers need to help them take the next step.

This year the 189cm defender was often asked to play on the monster forwards, often at a substantial height and weight disadvantage.

The Bombers, meanwhile, maintain that negotiations are continuing.

HE IS A HACK! Back to the dark days of Frost and co if they trade for him.

 

[St DAC]

HE IS A HACK! Back to the dark days of Frost and co if they trade for him.

Actually, he's not a hack at all. He had a slow start this year due to injury and therefore not a full pre-season, but his second half of the season was very good, and against us he was BOG. Very good at the clearances, an area we were poor in this year, and a genuine hard nut. Kicks a goal to two as well.

 

[Kildonan]

Actually, he's not a hack at all. He had a slow start this year due to injury and therefore not a full pre-season, but his second half of the season was very good, and against us he was BOG. Very good at the clearances, an area we were poor in this year, and a genuine hard nut. Kicks a goal to two as well.

While I agree with you exactly, Johnson does not fit with our (?now discarded) recruiting profile - a guideline that I was very happy with, that he is unlikely to be able to play 100 matches for the club.

Given that Powell (same age as Johnson) retired this year, Johnson has to be a risk, and it begs the question: Who do we delist in order to find room on the list for Johnson?

 

[blumfieldisback]

While I agree with you exactly, Johnson does not fit with our (?now discarded) recruiting profile - a guideline that I was very happy with, that he is unlikely to be able to play 100 matches for the club.

Given that Powell (same age as Johnson) retired this year, Johnson has to be a risk, and it begs the question: Who do we delist in order to find room on the list for Johnson?

powell had chronic leg injuries through out his career whilst johnsons only real injury concern was his foot this season his only 28 and would have 5 years of decent footy in him (bar injuries), if you include finals thats easy 100 games.

 

[pol06]

some more grunt in the midfeild would not be a bad thing. i wouldnt want to be giving up much to get the veteran though. worth it if the price it right (very low)

 

[Kildonan]

Powell had chronic leg injuries through out his career whilst Johnson's only real injury concern was his foot this season. He's only 28 and would have 5 years of decent footy in him (bar injuries), if you include finals that's easily 100 games.

You may well be right.
But seriously - how many players are still playing when they're 33/34 yo ?

It is usually only the really exceptional players or late bloomers (i.e. ruckmen) and small midfielder types.

My earlier question is still valid:

Who will be delisted to make room for Johnson?

Could that person have played more games for the club??

 

[blumfieldisback]

You may well be right.
But seriously - how many players are still playing when they're 33/34 yo ?

It is usually only the really exceptional players or late bloomers (i.e. ruckmen) and small midfielder types.

My earlier question is still valid:

Who will be delisted to make room for Johnson?

Could that person have played more games for the club??

huh isnt he the small midfielder type, and he has won 2 best and fairests i think 1 was in 2001, grand final year we lost to brissy and he has won all australian selection. you have lost powell and thompson havnt u.

 

[St DAC]

StKildonan, it all depends on the team expectations for the next couple of years. If we are within sight of a flag then just recruiting kids who are unlikely to be ready for senior footy yet doesn't help the (current) cause, and we are then relying on our established senior group to get the job done. If that's where we are we need to top up on senior guys, because we just lost 2, maybe 3 of them in one hit. JJ fits that bill, he's a better Powell model of player. By "better" I mean he runs the lines better, and is a better kick (than Powell). Lacks nothing in the grunt department either.

If we are "rebuilding" (& I don't think we are) then draft kids only with a view to a flag within 2-3 years.

This "100 games or not interested" policy was GT's. Who knows what the new guy will want? But if we can get an established senior player good for 2-3 years I wouldn't be adverse to getting him. JJ is 28, so should have a minimum 2 years of decent footy, assuming his body is OK.

As to who I'd trade, you've got to give to get. Maybe Ferg, TS40? It depends on what Essendon are looking for, and what the new coach is willing to part with.

 

[Kildonan]

I'm not so "black and white" about the building versus top up scenario.

I know that we are close - i.e. a finals contender. This would suggest that a top up philosophy is a reasonable approach, but I believe our best approach is to continually recruit kids. That way we always have youngsters coming through challenging the established players and forcing their way into the team. The kids approach means that there will be a better spread of players of different ages for our future. This ensures a more continuous flow of talent into the squad and a greater likelihood of sustained success.

We already have a concentration of players from around the 2001 draft era.
This is the skeleton that our team is built around. These guys are likely to still be performing at the highest level after 2011.

Admittedly we do lack numbers in the more mature players, but my belief is that only on rare occasions can a mature aged recruit contribute the way they are expected - and more often than not they carry baggage or fitness issues that weren't apparent before the trade.

We still have a number of players on our list that are developing, but I think this is the area we need to work on the most. Our first year with a new coach is statistically unlikely to yield a premiership. I think we would be unwise to trade as if it is.

Keep topping up on top class kids and rookie potential key backs and rucks and hang on to them as if they are a five year project. If we look after the future, it will soon be the present.

I don't want an era of insufficiency brought about by neglecting the drafting of kids like Carlton is having.
(And Sheldon did to us when he was coach !!)

 

[Kildonan]

This "100 games or not interested" policy was GT's. Who knows what the new guy will want?

The new coach wont have much say in who he wants - he will be a committee member of the recruiting committee and that's all. The club is specialising departments with their own department heads.

But if we can get an established senior player good for 2-3 years I wouldn't be adverse to getting him. JJ is 28, so should have a minimum 2 years of decent footy, assuming his body is OK.

2 years with possibly a third based on performance is the most that we can expect from JJ. That's a fair assessment.

What would we have to give up to get him?

I am sure that Essendon will be asking for our 2nd round draft pick, so it comes down to what Melbourne are willing to part with.

Our 2nd round draft pick would yield a great recruit (possible 200 match / 10 + year player and may be likened to a late first round draft pick in any other draft).

The problem is that it may take 1 or 2 seasons to develop into AFL fitness and strength levels. So patience is required.

We have players like McQualter and McGough ready to step up now and youngsters like Justin Sweeney, Cathal Corr and Philip Raymond will progress over the next year to begin the push into the firsts.

Why sacrifice the next generation for a perceived quick fix now?

 

[St DAC]

The problem is that it may take 1 or 2 seasons to develop into AFL fitness and strength levels. So patience is required.

We have players like McQualter and McGough ready to step up now and youngsters like Justin Sweeney, Cathal Corr and Philip Raymond will progress over the next year to begin the push into the firsts.

Why sacrifice the next generation for a perceived quick fix now?

Why? because if we want a premiership in 2007 we don't have enough quality in the midfield. We were found wanting this year, we've just lost 400 games experience and in Powell's case toughness in_and_under, Lenny is coming back and can't be expected to hit the ground at full pace and Harves is 100 years old on his last year. We need 10 midfielders in the 22; that's what the game demands now.

So not only do we need to recruit for the future (I agree with you on that) but we also have recruit with an eye to the next couple of years as the young guys come through. That's what JJ brings to the side; ready-made grunt, work ethic, ball_getting ability, clearances, a couple of goals.

I'm not advocating a Carlton-like top up; but a select choice that appears to be available to cater for a specific need. What would I give up? Dunno, that's why I'm not a coach! It depends on the asking price.

And if you say that Powell & Frankie were not in our best 22, consider they both played in the QF against Melbourne, so they certailnly were that day.

 

[Kildonan]

Why? because if we want a premiership in 2007 we don't have enough quality in the midfield. We were found wanting this year, we've just lost 400 games experience and in Powell's case toughness in_and_under, Lenny is coming back and can't be expected to hit the ground at full pace and Harves is 100 years old on his last year. We need 10 midfielders in the 22; that's what the game demands now.

The club has given up on winning a premiership in 2007, otherwise Thomas would still be coach. A first year coach has next to no chance of winning a premiership. All 4 persons being considered for the coaching position will be a first year coach. We are forced into at least a year of "development". Topping up now is a waste of potential future champions. Next year, it may be the correct approach.

And if you say that Powell & Frankie were not in our best 22, consider they both played in the QF against Melbourne, so they certailnly were that day.

Powell and Frankie were in our best 22. This not an indictment on our back up players as they had the experience and composure to play their roles better than a youngster. Now that they have departed, it allows the depth players to step up.

 

[St DAC]

The club has given up on winning a premiership in 2007, otherwise Thomas would still be coach. A first year coach has next to no chance of winning a premiership

A first year coach usually doesn't get to play with a list of our quality. I'm aware that statistically it's unlikely, but it's not like it's a natural law or something. Someone has to be the first ... I think we are in the race to win next year.

Tell Harves he's playing for nothing next year ...

 

[sainter]

The club has given up on winning a premiership in 2007, otherwise Thomas would still be coach. A first year coach has next to no chance of winning a premiership. All 4 persons being considered for the coaching position will be a first year coach. We are forced into at least a year of "development". Topping up now is a waste of potential future champions. Next year, it may be the correct approach.

I can't agree with you on that.

The club made the decision because they felt he wasn't the right man to take us to a premiership.

You and I may not have agreed with the decision to sack Thommo but I'm at least confident in the thought that it was made to maximise our chance of winning the flag next year. In fact I think they made their choice out of panic or desperation because the perception outside the club was that our chances of winning a premiership with the current list were slipping away.

 

[Bourky23]

malcolm blight won a flag first year he coached adelaide... infact he took them back 2 back in his first 2 years at the helm

 

[sainter]

Very few first year coaches would inherit a list as good as ours as well.

 

[Kildonan]

I can't agree with you on that.

The club made the decision because they felt he wasn't the right man to take us to a premiership.

You and I may not have agreed with the decision to sack Thommo but I'm at least confident in the thought that it was made to maximise our chance of winning the flag next year. In fact I think they made their choice out of panic or desperation because the perception outside the club was that our chances of winning a premiership with the current list were slipping away.

It may seem a little radical, but I stick by that, the club has set us back by two years by sacking Thomas. This doesn't mean that it wasn't the right thing to do. The facts are compelling, though, that a first year coach will find it tough, ... very tough, to win a premiership. It is an unrealistic expectation.
I'm not saying that it can't happen, but the odds are astronomical.

Maybe we needed to take those steps backwards, though, to capitalise on the era ahead when the "school of 2001" reach the age at which they play their best footy.

The window of opportunity meh, it hasn't passed us by, we haven't even reached it yet.

We were probably the best team in 2005, we might have snagged an early one before our time, but we let it slip through our fingers on the selection table.

 

[Kildonan]

malcolm blight won a flag first year he coached adelaide... infact he took them back 2 back in his first 2 years at the helm

Malcolm Blight wasn't a first year coach (by any stretch of the imagination)

 

[sainter]

It may seem a little radical, but I stick by that, the club has set us back by two years by sacking Thomas. This doesn't mean that it wasn't the right thing to do. The facts are compelling, though, that a first year coach will find it tough, ... very tough, to win a premiership. It is an unrealistic expectation.
I'm not saying that it can't happen, but the odds are astronomical.

Maybe we needed to take those steps backwards, though, to capitalise on the era ahead when the "school of 2001" reach the age at which they play their best footy.

The window of opportunity meh, it hasn't passed us by, we haven't even reached it yet.

We were probably the best team in 2005, we might have snagged an early one before our time, but we let it slip through our fingers on the selection table.

I really think those compelling stats for new coaches that you speak of aren't relevant here because the majority of new coaches do not inherit a playing group as talented as ours. Not many clubs would be stupid enough to sack a coach that gets his team to the finals three years in a row.

I didn't agree with the sacking of Thomas and should we have a good run of injuries and go on to win a premiership I've got no doubt it is something that we could have achieved with GT at the helm. Still, the decision has been made and I'm certainly not going into 2007 thinking that we aren't without a chance.

 

[Kildonan]

I'm not so sure that our squad is that fantastic.

Opposition supporters would have us believe that all St Kilda did was squat in the cellar soaking up draft picks until our squad was so good that even Grant Thomas could coach us.

We all know better.

We did spend three years in / near the cellar, but many other clubs have spent longer. Fremantle spent six years, Collingwood five years, Carlton - well they haven't finished yet and so on.

We were the first club to fully intellectualise what we were doing in the drafting process given what opportunities were open to us and more importantly, what would happen if we failed. We set about with a plan to build a squad. We traded and we drafted. We built the foundation of a great team over three years. 2000, 2001, and 2002. After that we started to improve on-field and the draft drip feed stopped. We topped up 2003, 2004 and a bit in 2005. We still have the foundation of a great team in place, but now the recruits that we traded for back in 2000/1 are aging.

Our club has got a great squad of players, they just can't keep them on the park. Despite this we have been able to play finals football in each of the last three years. I think a lot of our success has been due to the passion that Grant Thomas had instilled into the players.

Now there have been several other clubs with their snouts well and truly entrenched in the proverbial draft trough topping up using the St Kilda model and they are catching up to us. People are beginning to panic.

There is no need to panic. The foundation is still there. They haven't peaked yet. They will in a couple more years. We need to have the young second string players peaking when they are peaking. We need the youth from this draft to start making their contribution soon (1 - 2 years).

JJ will be at the end of his usefulness and will have taken on-field time off our developing midfielders by the time we really peak.

I say stick to the youth policy.

 

[blumfieldisback]

well some coaches have gone close i think to getting to the granny in their first year, neale daniher in 98 and paul roos in 2003? From the outside u needed to sack Thomas, he may have changed the culture around which was great but his coaching philosophies i think cost you a premiership especially in 2004. de-listing capuano mid season, letting nobel go, losing penny and jones then heath black for fiora and then really questioning whether harvey should go on?????

then this year playing brooks in a game which he played well enough to warrant selection for that final against melbourne but was unduely dropped. Gehrig isn't getting younger and your backline is fragile and your midfield is devloping cancerous growths in it.

Hopefully a new coach can actually bring in players to even out your list and play kosi and the clarkes in there correct positions. (Forward and wings)