Well said Woody.Making your way in the world today takes everything you got.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Well said Woody.Making your way in the world today takes everything you got.
Well he is American.
Cox still.does some odd things in games
He could be the best ruckman in the whole league yes better than Grundy but Grundy can’t play Forward.
Only trouble with your theory is Jolly went for 0.5 goals per season over his career and never had a season where he averaged a goal a game. He was generally a 5-15 goals per season ruckman. He was a fairly good ruckman when it came to goal kicking which illustrates in the modern game how far ruckmen has slipped as goal kickers.Grundy will end up being a good enough forward. Can mark and kick. No reason he cant average a goal a game like Darren Jolly did.
But hes still always going to be a better number one ruckman than Cox because of his mobility and ability to link up in general play. Even if Cox is arguably better at the hitouts.
Edited.
I was talking about Jollys time at Collingwood. It was far closer to a goal per game (especially in 2010) than it was to 0.5. And that was in the twilight of his career compared to Grundy being at the peak of his powers. Maybe a goal a game for Grundy is a stretch but hes good capable to bob up most weeks and slot one. And thats all you need for a first ruck.
Cox's main role has to be as a forward though. And he needs to aim for 40+. Whatever he does in the ruck (assuming Grundy is in the 22 and playing to his ability) should be icing on the cake.
If we get 20 goals from Grundy and 40 from Cox that will take us a long way
2010 was Jolly's best season in his career and in the strongest team he ever played in.
I wouldn't put a statistical target for Grundy goal wise, Id set him the target of winning his position and pressing forward when he can.
Still not a good example. His goals were generally drifting forward whilst playing ruck, rather than as a forward with a defender marking him. It's a very different scenario.Edited.
I was talking about Jollys time at Collingwood. It was far closer to a goal per game (especially in 2010) than it was to 0.5. And that was in the twilight of his career compared to Grundy being at the peak of his powers. Maybe a goal a game for Grundy is a stretch but hes good capable to bob up most weeks and slot one. And thats all you need for a first ruck.
Cox's main role has to be as a forward though. And he needs to aim for 40+. Whatever he does in the ruck (assuming Grundy is in the 22 and playing to his ability) should be icing on the cake.
If we get 20 goals from Grundy and 40 from Cox that will take us a long way
Still not a good example. His goals were generally drifting forward whilst playing ruck, rather than as a forward with a defender marking him. It's a very different scenario.
At Collingwood it was 0.7 goals per game for Jolly and that was in a very dominant team where he had more opportunity to score.Edited.
I was talking about Jollys time at Collingwood. It was far closer to a goal per game (especially in 2010) than it was to 0.5. And that was in the twilight of his career compared to Grundy being at the peak of his powers. Maybe a goal a game for Grundy is a stretch but hes good capable to bob up most weeks and slot one. And thats all you need for a first ruck.
Cox's main role has to be as a forward though. And he needs to aim for 40+. Whatever he does in the ruck (assuming Grundy is in the 22 and playing to his ability) should be icing on the cake.
If we get 20 goals from Grundy and 40 from Cox that will take us a long way
Great post GC, and I hope you are right about the bolded bit. There’s a first time for everything.
I have high hopes for big Cox. If he can't mark the ball, then he needs to ensure the opposition know he is competitive. Use every single kilo he has to pressure/hurt the other team. Play hard and fair. Think his improvement will turn some heads this year.
Still not a good example. His goals were generally drifting forward whilst playing ruck, rather than as a forward with a defender marking him. It's a very different scenario.
Spot on. Jolly used experience to drift forward at the right time and generally take a mark without a direct opponent. Note this was in a powerful team with fairly predictable ball movement and, generally, slightly less defensive pressure than we see these days. We can hope Grundy can emulate this but reality he lacks the experience Jolly had back then, the team structure/game plan and it may not fit the role Bucks has marked out for him. If he does play as a forward, rather than first ruck, then it would be reasonable to expect some more goals out of him, something he is capable of. I suspect that won't be the case that often, more Grundy will rest whilst Cox plays first ruck.At Collingwood it was 0.7 goals per game for Jolly and that was in a very dominant team where he had more opportunity to score.
...
A really pleasing outcome from the Doggies game was actually a few players hitting packs hard and hurting the Doggies players willing to back into packs. It's not something we've seen a lot over the last few years.
Just as a comparison to a couple of rucks from yesteryear.At Collingwood it was 0.7 goals per game for Jolly and that was in a very dominant team where he had more opportunity to score.
My point is not to question Jolly or Grundy. Jolly was a good goal kicker for a ruckman but he would need to be exceptional to get up to a goal a game. Likewise Grundy, who goes at 0.3 goals a game can up his number but 20 is a massive ask. Ruckmen just rarely manage that amount in the modern game.
Cox could be the exception to this based on his current trajectory is my real point. It's he not Grundy that gives the possibility of the combination working because he is the only one who can become a real forward threat. If you think of the successful recent forward rucks think of Hale of Ryder(pre going full time ruck) They could go for 15-20+ hit outs per game and combine it with 20+ goals in a season. Now we want Cox to give the same ruck output but also to massively ramp up the scoring. If he kicks 40 goals in 2018 he will be a weapon no other side has anything close to. There is the potential for him to reach that mark and if he did we are suddenly a completely different team
Heres hoping
Grundy will continue to be a great young ruck who may score a few extra goals but Cox is the potential point of difference
Loving his work. Only wish instead of trying to exaggerate contact just go for the ball. If anything the umpires will give him more when they see him really going for it and getting impeded
Just as a comparison to a couple of rucks from yesteryear.
Paul Salmon averaged 1.7 goals per game overall noting he was mainly a ruck at Hawthorn and 9nly averaged about 0.4 goals per game i believe.
But kicked heaps for Essendon.
Point being a ruck who was super tall and kicked goals.
Then we move to Simon Madden.
1.5 goals per game and he was a ruck.
Very accurate kicker too.
Mason If gets those numbers we’d be frothing... in delight.
No reason with his height he can’t snag 22 plus goals a season.
A lot of truth there.As a kid growing up in the 90's I recall Fish as being Essendon's crap full forward who wanted to play in the ruck so badly he left Essendon went to Hawthorn and made their team of the century....