Josh Krueger

[Cap]

Heard some interesting/disappointing news on Kruegs the other day.
Apparently he has 4 weeks to pull his head in or he will be pretty much delisted at the end of this 4 week period.
Obviously he cannot be technically delisted but he will no longer be training with the crows and will spend his entire time at Glenelg.
Some stuff has been happening off the field, nothing to serious but NC is not happy and has put Kruegs on notice.

well its good to get put on notice sometimes - what kind of offfield "issue"

I have heard from various sources that he is a bit on the slow side and is pretty bad with getting to training on time !

 

[outback jack]

various sources?? Are you kidding?

i can tell you that by his pic, i was prepared to give him the benefit of a lot of doubt the first yr, but two yrs in a row is no coincidence

 

[Cap]

various sources?? Are you kidding?

i can tell you that by his pic, i was prepared to give him the benefit of a lot of doubt the first yr, but two yrs in a row is no coincidence

lets just leave it that he sees them on a constant basis and they work for the AFC

 

[Fergus]

I was trying to eavesdrop on a conversation between 2 AFC officials recently at training about Krueger. I couldn't make out many of the words but the overall tone was one of disappointment and frustration.

 

[just maybe]

Naturally. He doesn't have any natural beauty to keep him at the club as a media thug, so he actually has to play football well to keep his spot.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

I wonder how Brent Hall is going at Collingwood?

We badly need at least 1 of our young talls to come through soon.

Disappointing to hear about Krueger's attitude.

 

[Crowman32]

I hope Krueger can work things out with the crows coz it would be a shame if he gets delisted at the end of the year. The kid has talent and just needs to play enough footy to actually show that talent.

 

[outback jack]

If he was drafted at 21 he cant have too much talent. There would be a reason why all the other clubs overlooked him

 

[just maybe]

If he was drafted at 21 he cant have too much talent. There would be a reason why all the other clubs overlooked him

Usually I agree with you but that's a stupid comment.

Plenty of amazing players have been drafted low. I'd love Matt Maguire from Saints, he was drafted at 21 as well.

Actually, Sam Fisher who plays for the Saints was a Westies boy drafted at 55 in 2003. He looks pretty good.

 

[DaveW]

Maguire was 17 when he was drafted.

And you'd think age would have caught up to Fisher at 55.

 

[DaveW]

And now that I've looked up Krueger, he would have been barely 20 when he was drafted.

But I agree with outback jack's point though - we shouldn't have wasted a 2nd rounder on an obscure mature age player.

 

[outback jack]

Usually I agree with you but that's a stupid comment.

Plenty of amazing players have been drafted low. I'd love Matt Maguire from Saints, he was drafted at 21 as well.

Actually, Sam Fisher who plays for the Saints was a Westies boy drafted at 55 in 2003. He looks pretty good.

yep i think this is a misunderstanding, i'm sure your talking about draft number and i'm talking about age. Basically he had been overlooked by all the clubs at least twice before, maybe three times. So we shouldnt think that hes got the talent that some of been mentioning. Probably a solid player at best. I think we recruited for what we needed that yr, not really what was the best on offer.

Fisher is a gap filler at best, CHB type, we dont really need that type, we've got kenny.

 

[outback jack]

And now that I've looked up Krueger, he would have been barely 20 when he was drafted.

But I agree with outback jack's point though - we shouldn't have wasted a 2nd rounder on an obscure mature age player.

prob was that we only had three picks i think, or i think we had four but decided not to fill it, for some strange reason. If we wanted to take him, 2nd probably had to be it cause hudson was always going to be last. Its a shame when you look at some of the players that went 2nd, 3rd and even 4th round that yr have turned out to be very good. Port esp did well that yr.

 

[DaveW]

I contend that Krueger would have been around for a rookie listing.

Though others disagree.

 

[outback jack]

we'll never know, but you'd reckon that would be the case considering he wasnt taken other yrs. Even if he wasnt, would it have been a great loss?? Probably easier to say that now with hindsight though

 

[tribey]

I contend that Krueger would have been around for a rookie listing.

Though others disagree.

He was certainly out of the box. The AFL draft tracker had him listed as "Joshua Ku" initially. Speculation obviously, but at the very least a third rounder probably would have snagged him.

 

[drakeyv2]

If he doesn't pan out it wont be the biggest waste of a draft pick we've ever had.

I just hope we have gotten out of the "trying to pull a swifty/ being smart" type of drafting we have done in the past by drafting older players or players with an injury cloud over them. We did it again with Knights last draft with his knee tendonitis. From reports here he seems to be ok but that would be the exception not the rule.

 

[johnnypanther]

I would say it's time to give up on him when he is 21 turning 22 this year, has played virtualy no senior football at any level & has a chronic back injury.

Time to cut our losses.

i disagree - he has talent and we are lacking in big man marking talent - remember Thurstans for Port - he took years to develop and finally struck it last year at the age of 24. Now i'm not saying we persevere that long with Krueger but i think there are plenty of others to delist before him. However, if his back injury is hopeless or his attitude/work ethic is poor then my opinion would change - he may well end up getting delisted and then relisted as a rookie

 

[johnnypanther]

i noticed that Krueger was not listed to play again this week in the Glenelg league or Reserves teams

 

[johnnypanther]

If he doesn't pan out it wont be the biggest waste of a draft pick we've ever had.

I just hope we have gotten out of the "trying to pull a swifty/ being smart" type of drafting we have done in the past by drafting older players or players with an injury cloud over them. We did it again with Knights last draft with his knee tendonitis. From reports here he seems to be ok but that would be the exception not the rule.

we've had plenty of worse wasted draft picks - Krueger was draft pick no 33
- remember Tom Gilligan pick no 13 & Picioane at 17 ( and others)

i do agree with your "swifty" comment, however, in the sense that sometimes we have picked somebody up with IMO a higher pick than necessary as IMO we could have picked that same player up later in the draft (eg Krueger,Hudson,just of the top of my head)

 

[CaptainDangerfield]

i disagree - he has talent and we are lacking in big man marking talent - remember Thurstans for Port - he took years to develop and finally struck it last year at the age of 24. Now i'm not saying we persevere that long with Krueger but i think there are plenty of others to delist before him. However, if his back injury is hopeless or his attitude/work ethic is poor then my opinion would change - he may well end up getting delisted and then relisted as a rookie

I agree. Freddie should come in between numbers 10-12 on the "to be delisted at end of 2005" list. At least we don't no what we are getting with freddie whereas we know exactly what we are getting with the other "iffy" players on our list.

 

[Blue Red and Gold]

we'll never know, but you'd reckon that would be the case considering he wasnt taken other yrs. Even if he wasnt, would it have been a great loss?? Probably easier to say that now with hindsight though

I think you will find Kruegs took up the game latter than others, he has not been playing the game his entire life so he was a late bloomer this is why he has not attracted attention before.

 

[outback jack]

I think you will find Kruegs took up the game latter than others, he has not been playing the game his entire life so he was a late bloomer this is why he has not attracted attention before.

ah ok i see what you mean, but still no reason not to take him later. Have to wait and see what happens

 

[just maybe]

yep i think this is a misunderstanding, i'm sure your talking about draft number and i'm talking about age.

Oh ok, no worries, yeh was a misunderstanding.

What I don't understand is why we thought he had such amazing talent...from everything I heard just after he was drafted, he hadn't shown anything with Glenelg.