Prediction Michael Barlow

[adelaidecrows]

Make no mistake we were after Barlow.

We failed to secure our man. Again. Is it a big deal? Its not great that's for sure.

We offered him the potential for success but he went to GC for playing time and no doubt more dollars. I don't think it's an issue at all. It's more like a sign of the fact we aren't going to sell our souls for a pr friendly 'missing piece'. All we can do is trust we wont see more of the same at selection and we advance further into September. Sometimes doing a hail-mary at the trade table really backfires.

 

[Bovo]

Okay so the bad; we did not land any experienced talent. No player that could hit the ground running. No player to help us take the next step in our bid for a premiership.

The good; we will now be forced to grow our kids. Milera, Wigg, CEY to name a few will have no choice but to actually be given a chance. There is a lot to like about actually investing in the kids you drafted.

The issue; I just want to win a premiership while I am still young enough to be arrested for partying. Is that so wrong?

 

[The Sloane Ranger]

There is one upside to all of this. The failure to land either Gibbs or Barlow should mean that we have plenty of room in next year's salary cap. We could use that room to pay out the final year of Mackay's contract. Maybe...

The upside for me is if we are forced to play young talent ahead of Plodders

Menzel, Hampton, Milera, and Knight had no impact in 2016 for various reasons however all 4 players have talent and a skill set to be very good AFL players, all 4 must rerun to ore-season in good shape and back it up with a strong pre-season

Players like Rat, Cameron, M. Crouch, B. Crouc, Seedsman and Shooter have all had a solid taste of AFL and still have much improvement in their games and I expect to see further improvement in 2017

What I also like even our good players like Talia, Laird, Smith, Sloane, Tex and Lynch are still in that age profile where you expect their best footy is in the next 3 years

Finally back in Barlow and what will be interesting to follow in 2017, if CEY gets his opportunities how will his 2017 numbers compare with MB, I'm not convinced that we lose out here

If the coaches can come up with a new play book with some players in nee roles and at the same time moving out certain players from he best 22 I still believe that we can improve on 2016

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Is there another delisted midfield option we might take in the PSD?

 

[craig crowing]

Those that happy that we did not get Barlow and think trade period not a failure I hope enjoy watching Thommo stinking it up again watching his player runs free down the field in the majority of games.
And guess what we still have no structure to replace Noble and looks like our top 2 assistant coaches will be back again.

 

[footy4ever]

I was pretty meh about Barlow. Ok if we got him, ok if we didn't.

Nobody knows how far the Crows were into Barlow, if at all. But if Crows were into him, they knew where to draw the line after weighing the cost in both contract length and money.

As with Gibbs, the right decision was made, yet according to the only posters who know anything, it's another Crows 'fail'. OK, I'm done with your idiocy.

 

[Wood_Duck]

Is there another delisted midfield option we might take in the PSD?

No, even Dal santo retired rather than come to us.

 

[Elite Crow]

I was pretty meh about Barlow. Ok if we got him, ok if we didn't.

Nobody knows how far the Crows were into Barlow, if at all. But if Crows were into him, they knew where to draw the line after weighing the cost in both contract length and money.

As with Gibbs, the right decision was made, yet according to the only posters who know anything, it's another Crows 'fail'. OK, I'm done with your idiocy.

A bit melodramatic? How many posters are claiming not getting Barlow at any cost is a fail?

What is a fail is the whole trade period where we failed to bring in a quality mid to address a need and traded a decent mid cheapily. Your issue should be with the club not posters who point out the obvious.

 

[Vader]

I was pretty meh about Barlow. Ok if we got him, ok if we didn't.

Nobody knows how far the Crows were into Barlow, if at all. But if Crows were into him, they knew where to draw the line after weighing the cost in both contract length and money.

As with Gibbs, the right decision was made, yet according to the only posters who know anything, it's another Crows 'fail'. OK, I'm done with your idiocy.

To be fair, I don't think that people are actually critical about the Gibbs or Barlow non-deals individually. Taken in isolation, both of those decisions were probably the right ones to make. It's the collective failure of Adelaide to improve our midfield, either through trading or FA, which has upset people.

Adelaide's time is now, and there is/was an obvious need to improve our midfield if we are to have a hope of winning the flag while Sloane/Walker/JJ/Betts are still at their playing peak. Organic growth was never going to cut it - we need major improvement (not gradual & incremental improvement), and we need it now. Adelaide seems to have put all of their efforts into 1x deal during trade week, and 1x DFA. They don't appear to have had a Plan B for either of these deals falling through, let alone both of them going down in flames.

We were told that the club would be going into the trading period with the intention of boosting our midfield stocks. We're also told that it was Gibbs who approached the club, not the other way around. This begs the question - what were the club's plans for improving the midfield before Gibbs made his approach? Adelaide are a closed shop, and we really don't know what they had in mind, but from an outsider's perspective it appears that there was no plan whatsoever going into trade week.

The anger is understandable, as people see this as Adelaide's best opportunity since 2005/2006 and next year will be the 19th season since our last premiership. They recognise that opportunities like this don't come along very often, and the club appears to be pissing this one away through inept planning & management. I tend to agree with them - I think Adelaide appear very likely to piss away the best team we've assembled in two decades, because the head shed don't have a plan for obtaining the "final pieces" of the puzzle.

 

[Elite Crow]

To be fair, I don't think that people are actually critical about the Gibbs or Barlow non-deals individually. Taken in isolation, both of those decisions were probably the right ones to make. It's the collective failure of Adelaide to improve our midfield, either through trading or FA, which has upset people.

Adelaide's time is now, and there is/was an obvious need to improve our midfield if we are to have a hope of winning the flag while Sloane/Walker/JJ/Betts are still at their playing peak. Organic growth was never going to cut it - we need major improvement (not gradual & incremental improvement), and we need it now. Adelaide seems to have put all of their efforts into 1x deal during trade week, and 1x DFA. They don't appear to have had a Plan B for either of these deals falling through, let alone both of them going down in flames.

We were told that the club would be going into the trading period with the intention of boosting our midfield stocks. We're also told that it was Gibbs who approached the club, not the other way around. This begs the question - what were the club's plans for improving the midfield before Gibbs made his approach? Adelaide are a closed shop, and we really don't know what they had in mind, but from an outsider's perspective it appears that there was no plan whatsoever going into trade week.

The anger is understandable, as people see this as Adelaide's best opportunity since 2005/2006 and next year will be the 19th season since our last premiership. They recognise that opportunities like this don't come along very often, and the club appears to be pissing this one away through inept planning & management. I tend to agree with them - I think Adelaide appear very likely to piss away the best team we've assembled in two decades, because the head shed don't have a plan for obtaining the "final pieces" of the puzzle.

This could quite possibly be your best ever post, nah bugger it I am going to call it, it is.

 

[Heafy83]

Oh no the world is ending we weren't able to land a player who was DELISTED by another club. Let that sink in...... DELISTED!

Have no idea why people are so against backing our own players in. 2016 was supposed to be a tough year, with a tough draw, and us losing possibly the best player in the comp. Not many expected us to make the 8. However we improved on 2015 and our kids continued to progress. Why can't 2017 be the same? Why can't those young players take the next step? Its how the Hawks have won their flags. Backed their own list in and brought in role players to fill specific roles. Dogs just backed their own youth in and won a flag. But no on this board its all doom and gloom and the club has nfi. Yet since Sando sacking (which I see as the start of the turnaround for AFC) the club has done nothing but prove the doubters on here wrong.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Oh no the world is ending we weren't able to land a player who was DELISTED by another club. Let that sink in...... DELISTED!

Have no idea why people are so against backing our own players in. 2016 was supposed to be a tough year, with a tough draw, and us losing possibly the best player in the comp. Not many expected us to make the 8. However we improved on 2015 and our kids continued to progress. Why can't 2017 be the same? Why can't those young players take the next step? Its how the Hawks have won their flags. Backed their own list in and brought in role players to fill specific roles. Dogs just backed their own youth in and won a flag. But no on this board its all doom and gloom and the club has nfi. Yet since Sando sacking (which I see as the start of the turnaround for AFC) the club has done nothing but prove the doubters on here wrong.

Will we do that?

We've backed in Lever, Atkins, Cameron and McGovern over the last couple of years and they've shown really promising signs.

Will we have the balls to filter in a new batch? Will we see Doedee and Milera (or Mr Pick 13 even) given similar opportunities afforded to McGovern last year? If so I can see 2017 being a very exciting year and cannot wait for it.

I worry though that the incumbents will be given umpteen opportunities to play and our exciting kids will have to bide their time in the SANFL. Hope I'm wrong.

 

[craig crowing]

Oh no the world is ending we weren't able to land a player who was DELISTED by another club. Let that sink in...... DELISTED!

Have no idea why people are so against backing our own players in. 2016 was supposed to be a tough year, with a tough draw, and us losing possibly the best player in the comp. Not many expected us to make the 8. However we improved on 2015 and our kids continued to progress. Why can't 2017 be the same? Why can't those young players take the next step? Its how the Hawks have won their flags. Backed their own list in and brought in role players to fill specific roles. Dogs just backed their own youth in and won a flag. But no on this board its all doom and gloom and the club has nfi. Yet since Sando sacking (which I see as the start of the turnaround for AFC) the club has done nothing but prove the doubters on here wrong.

Thats fine I agree with avoiding negativity but watching closely you and few others when Thommo, Mackay and Douglas get games each week even though crapping it up. Or criticism of Clarke and Campo.

 

[dylan123]

Oh no the world is ending we weren't able to land a player who was DELISTED by another club. Let that sink in...... DELISTED!

You're getting caught on the finer details and not looking at the bigger picture of us not making a single move this off-season to improve our list for 2017. We went into the off-season with an obvious weakness and we've done nothing to address that.

Its how the Hawks have won their flags. Backed their own list in and brought in role players to fill specific roles. Dogs just backed their own youth in and won a flag.

We haven't had access to the top end talent that clubs like Hawthorn/Bulldogs did that helped them get to where they are, that's a big worry for mine in hoping our team can also reach the heights of other clubs from relying on internal improvement alone.

Whilst Dogs did an amazing thing this year by winning the flag, I'd hardly be using them as a model team to try a mimic either. Just further pushes the 'make finals and anything could happen' motto rather than striving to make your team as strong as you possible. Not saying Dogs are crap but it took a long time for a team outside the 4 to win one and it'll probably take a while before the next one, perhaps they managed to win one before they expected (due to standing up when it mattered most).

 

[Heafy83]

Thats fine I agree with avoiding negativity but watching closely you and few others when Thommo, Mackay and Douglas get games each week even though crapping it up. Or criticism of Clarke and Campo.

I'll watch closely you and others when the club, as it did this year, back some younger players in and give them a consistent shot and under performers are not given a game where possible.

 

[Heafy83]

You're getting caught on the finer details and not looking at the bigger picture of us not making a single move this off-season to improve our list for 2017. We went into the off-season with an obvious weakness and we've done nothing to address that.

Who says that has to come from outside? Why can't it come from internal improvement? It did in 2016 why can't it again?

Everyone is ignoring that fact. Everyone is so hung up on the 'big fish' theory that they ignore what is happening in front of their eyes.

We haven't had access to the top end talent that clubs like Hawthorn/Bulldogs did that helped them get to where they are, that's a big worry for mine in hoping our team can also reach the heights of other clubs from relying on internal improvement alone.

Whilst Dogs did an amazing thing this year by winning the flag, I'd hardly be using them as a model team to try a mimic either. Just further pushes the 'make finals and anything could happen' motto rather than striving to make your team as strong as you possible. Not saying Dogs are crap but it took a long time for a team outside the 4 to win one and it'll probably take a while before the next one, perhaps they managed to win one before they expected (due to standing up when it mattered most).

Really? So the Hawks won their flags on the back of talent picked up early in the draft? Outside of Hodge, Buddy & Roughie it gets real thin. Mitchell, Lewis, Breust, Hill, Smith, Birchall, Shiel, Stratton...... and the list goes on..... are stalwarts of their flag sides yet were not high picks or players we didn't have access to equally.

My point with the dogs was improvement came internally. They didn't go grab that big fish or seek anything more than role players. I agree their flag was a bit of an anomaly but the development of their youth is something to be applauded.

 

[Swooping Crow]

Oh no the world is ending we weren't able to land a player who was DELISTED by another club. Let that sink in...... DELISTED!

Have no idea why people are so against backing our own players in. 2016 was supposed to be a tough year, with a tough draw, and us losing possibly the best player in the comp. Not many expected us to make the 8. However we improved on 2015 and our kids continued to progress. Why can't 2017 be the same? Why can't those young players take the next step? Its how the Hawks have won their flags. Backed their own list in and brought in role players to fill specific roles. Dogs just backed their own youth in and won a flag. But no on this board its all doom and gloom and the club has nfi. Yet since Sando sacking (which I see as the start of the turnaround for AFC) the club has done nothing but prove the doubters on here wrong.

Please read Vader's post above.

 

[Heafy83]

Please read Vader's post above.

Already did.

All it points out to me is how far fans are removed from reality. They like the big shiny things (ie household big names) rather than taking a look at whats happening in our own backyard.

Yes we need an improvement in the midfield, but its not a huge one. Yes Gibbs would have been nice but there is nothing saying one of the younger players on our list can't produce that Gibbs role. Midfielders develop the quickest of any position on the field. Most that are genuine players are at an elite level by 22/23.

 

[Danger in Texas]

Really? So the Hawks won their flags on the back of talent picked up early in the draft? Outside of Hodge, Buddy & Roughie it gets real thin. Mitchell, Lewis, Breust, Hill, Smith, Birchall, Shiel, Stratton...... and the list goes on..... are stalwarts of their flag sides yet were not high picks or players we didn't have access to equally.

My point with the dogs was improvement came internally. They didn't go grab that big fish or seek anything more than role players. I agree their flag was a bit of an anomaly but the development of their youth is something to be applauded.

Lewis, Birchall and Smith were all first rounders?

 

[Heafy83]

Lewis, Birchall and Smith were all first rounders?

Sorry have to take Lewis off that list forgot he got taken at pick 7. Birchall was at 14 and smith at 19. Picks we have been exposed to (barring 12/13) as well.

 

[Vader]

Who says that has to come from outside? Why can't it come from internal improvement? It did in 2016 why can't it again?

Everyone is ignoring that fact. Everyone is so hung up on the 'big fish' theory that they ignore what is happening in front of their eyes.

The problem is that we need significant improvement from our midfield in 2017 if we are to win the premiership. We've lost 2 of our regular inside midfielders (Thommo & Lyons), with no apparent replacement.

The nature of Organic Growth is that it is relatively slow and incremental. We don't have time for our midfield to improve incrementally, if we are to win a flag while our current forwards are at their peak. By the time our midfield peaks (relying solely on organic growth), our forward line will already be in decline.

The only way to get our midfield & forward lines to peak at the same time is via trading & free agency. The club has so far failed to achieve that.

 

[Danger in Texas]

I'll be honest, a 2017 flag seems pretty much out of the question. I reckon we'll be somewhat able to challenge in 2018 when some of our younger players have developed further. Hopefully Eddie doesn't drop off massively in output over the next two years.

 

[Heafy83]

The problem is that we need significant improvement from our midfield in 2017 if we are to win the premiership. We've lost 2 of our regular inside midfielders (Thommo & Lyons), with no apparent replacement.

The nature of Organic Growth is that it is relatively slow and incremental. We don't have time for our midfield to improve incrementally, if we are to win a flag while our current forwards are at their peak. By the time our midfield peaks (relying solely on organic growth), our forward line will already be in decline.

The only way to get our midfield & forward lines to peak at the same time is via trading & free agency. The club has so far failed to achieve that.

I would argue everything you have said there is wrong. The gap is not that large and by everyone's reckoning on here Thommo gave us bumpkin this year anyway. Midfielders develop very quickly and most of the mids on our list have been in the system for 2-4 years already. Its the exact reason you were happy to move Lyons on. He hit his peak already.

We have the top end talent to win a flag. Its the bottom end that needs the work. These players do not need to be of the elite standard but just do their role well and be reliable. Its the players 16th-30th on your list that will win you the flag as these are the players that get exposed the most when the pressure is on.

 

[Alwaysacrow]

To be fair, I don't think that people are actually critical about the Gibbs or Barlow non-deals individually. Taken in isolation, both of those decisions were probably the right ones to make. It's the collective failure of Adelaide to improve our midfield, either through trading or FA, which has upset people.

Adelaide's time is now, and there is/was an obvious need to improve our midfield if we are to have a hope of winning the flag while Sloane/Walker/JJ/Betts are still at their playing peak. Organic growth was never going to cut it - we need major improvement (not gradual & incremental improvement), and we need it now. Adelaide seems to have put all of their efforts into 1x deal during trade week, and 1x DFA. They don't appear to have had a Plan B for either of these deals falling through, let alone both of them going down in flames.

We were told that the club would be going into the trading period with the intention of boosting our midfield stocks. We're also told that it was Gibbs who approached the club, not the other way around. This begs the question - what were the club's plans for improving the midfield before Gibbs made his approach? Adelaide are a closed shop, and we really don't know what they had in mind, but from an outsider's perspective it appears that there was no plan whatsoever going into trade week.

The anger is understandable, as people see this as Adelaide's best opportunity since 2005/2006 and next year will be the 19th season since our last premiership. They recognise that opportunities like this don't come along very often, and the club appears to be pissing this one away through inept planning & management. I tend to agree with them - I think Adelaide appear very likely to piss away the best team we've assembled in two decades, because the head shed don't have a plan for obtaining the "final pieces" of the puzzle.

It's been a dreadful off season so far hasn't it. I posted something similar to this earlier in this thread. I'm not upset individually about them either, your right though there was no plan B involved at all it seems and that makes me very angry.
Like most of us I guess I was excited after the appointments of Fagan, Roo, Walsh and Pyke. There was major improvement in all areas of our club plus on field performances and finals.
There was a genuine sense of optimism from the club, the media and even on BF but now I feel totally flat. As I wrote in my previous post, they had better work bloody hard in the next 12 months and plan ahead a lot better for next time or there will be some unhappy campers on this board including me. I haven't written next year off just yet but I'm not optimistic.

 

[Ozzie]

Firstly, on Wright, his role changed, and thus he regressed in the minds of the coaches - which is fair enough, we had better players playing his role after then (Danger, Thommo, Sloane, Brouch, and later on Mrouch). Because of what Wright produced in that role whilst we had that midfield depth, I'm fine that we let him go, and the club obviously was, too. The main reason that I'm not happy we let Lyons go *without getting someone else in* is that we don't have that proven midfield depth, now that Danger's gone and Thommo's cooked it.

Levi Greenwood's season may have been a little bit better than Lyons, but not 18 picks better. Fair enough on the value of the pick in regards to the draft though, although I'll just desperately be hoping that 43 turns into a good player (which, knowing Ogilvie, I reckon it will, but there's a lower chance without doubt).

Let me say this - I would be pretty confident in saying that, if Lyons' role did not change in 2017, he would produce similar numbers. As you said, Wright's role changed after 2012, so of course he regressed - he wasn't able to play his best position because there were others that were better at it.

And look, I'm not doubting that the midfield mix needs to change. I think a midfield of Brouch, Mrouch, Sloane, Greenwood and, say, our pick 13 (whoever that will be) will be very much capable. I'm confident Greenwood will develop in the next few years, same with our pick 13. Unfortunately, however, the killer there is that our forward line will have regressed. Betts is integral to our forward structure and can just make things happen. In 2019, when our midfield is up and running, Betts likely won't be having nearly the same impact as he has in the past two years. If we didn't have Betts in the past two years, I'd argue that we wouldn't be finishing as high as we have - our system is based a lot around scoring heavily. Not only this, but JJ will be 30 and will have lost some of his natural athleticism which sets him apart, Tex will be in the last years of his prime, as will Lynch. Will our forward line be good enough to still make an impact by then? I'm worried.

People keep bringing up the likes of Menzel, Knight, Hampton etc. as replacements for Lyons' role next year. Well, the thing is, these players can't yet do what Lyons can do - win clearances with ease. They aren't big bodied like Greenwood, or explosive like, say, a Venables or SPP could be, either. Yes, they have points of difference that may work in the guts, but those players are best used on the outside. Particularly Menzel and Hampton - we want these players in space kicking accurately to a target OR kicking a goal themselves, rather than being at the coalface 50% of the time. Knight is capable on the inside and getting his hands dirty, yes, but he isn't a major clearance player yet, and anyway, IMO he's best used as a tough, gritty outside mid.

Yeah I'll admit, I didn't expect Rat to make the impact he did (although I'm still holding judgement on him until he wins more contested ball and actually tackles), and I was probably a little bit surprised by Lyons, too (I don't think I should have been in hindsight, though). Fair enough on you thinking Knight will be able to make a similar impact to JL next year, but at this stage, I doubt it, considering he missed more than half a season through injury. I reckon 2018 is Knight's year. I'll be very happy to be proven wrong, same with any other player. Bottom line is, though, that only 3 true inside midfielders in our 22 won't get us into contention - Dogs had five playing in the Granny, Swans had four.

Anyway, I won't de-rail this thread any more with my ramblings

Well, we still have Dear developing nicely. I would take Marshall with pick 13 this year and rely on the young mids we have along with another mid and Jarman in the draft. If none of the young mids look like doing the job take a mid next year. To me, we would have a year's development into Marshall already rather than waiting on a tall next year. They will be the replacements for JJ and Tex. BJ could end up being Eddie's replacement. Menzel and co can also slot into a forward role.