Need a CHF

[docko911]

The problem we have is David Astbury is a genuine CHF but for some dumbass reason we decided we needed him to play down back. Now he has no idea how to play the position he would best suit.
Ben Griffiths is about the same except probably more a full forward but now has a full back complex. As for Elton he would also be a great option except once again is playing down back. Seriously do our development staff have any ****ing idea if you want a FF or CHF you find a player with potential, you stick him in your forward line for about 10 games his first season, 15 his second and a full season his 3rd. Then by his forth he is a genuine gun. If he doesn't work you'll know by about halfway through the second year so you start the process again leaving the original player in the VFL just incase they develop or at least become a backup. This whole drafting and developing process is so much easier then these really intelligent experienced people show.

 

[docko911]

If anyone wants to see how to develop tall forwards go take a look at the early career of the top 20 forwards in the AFL this season. Almost all of them averaged more than 10 games a year over their first 3 years. SO if any of you smart people think tall forwards take time that is why they should play at Coburg think again!

 

[THE_GUN]

If we had Royce , Carey,N.Riewoldt , ......... We would be turning them into VFL Backman

 

[Dragonss]

If anyone wants to see how to develop tall forwards go take a look at the early career of the top 20 forwards in the AFL this season. Almost all of them averaged more than 10 games a year over their first 3 years. SO if any of you smart people think tall forwards take time that is why they should play at Coburg think again!

buddy... i'd do that if we WEREN'T in the race towards the finals. gifting games are a nono at this point in our reign.

__________________________________________________________________________

elton is a gun. as a junior he was a swingman CHF/CHB. the reason why we play our forwards down back in coburg is because we get smashed in the middle and it's always in our defense, which means our forwards arent doing anything. so for them to get involved they have to go down back to help out our defense. i dont think the coburg coach has a choice, even if he was dumb.

next year we should be recruiting the best vfl midfielders so our forwards get good use and that will in turn give our forwards confidence and help them develop. i am still not willing to give up on griffiths even though he's done jackshit, i know that if he's put into a harsher training regime and a better development squad he'll blossom and smash us.

_______________________________________________________________

does not help when kingy is demanding the ball in the goal square one on one against a taller opponent who can mark the ball over his head. happened many times yesterday. a vickery should've be there.

 

[TJTIGER]

Guess it depends on which club was interested and what they were willing to offer. A second round pick for Griffiths from Dogs or Saints would give us a crack at another top 25 kid

Apart from CHF & Ruck, do you see us with any other deficiency that we need to fill ?

 

[TJTIGER]

Has 93.75 carry over points.

If so deanbf, he's probably going to get a week. But he did look like he was trying to slow down and turn. On the other hand tucking in of the arm doesn't look good. Who knows with the MRP they move in mysterious ways

 

[Stylo]

Unless we play a traditional CHF role( instead of keeping talls deep inside fwd 50) all this is moot.

Agree, and IMO that's what we need to do. Jack in the square as a traditional FF and an athletic tall with a huge tank to man the arc all day and deliver inside 50. As someone else pointed out, so often we lack that link between our fowardline and our midfield.

Nick Riewoldt is obviously the prototype. Elton is probably the closest thing we have.

I spose there's no chance of us luring Nick over in his twilight years for a crack at a flag with his cousin...

 

[oi watch out]

The answer is Vickery and he's getting closer. He's a good ruck and but will be a really good CHF too.

What I've seen of McBean is promising when he fills out more, just hope it doesn't effect how good he is below his knees.

A left field option is Dusty. Has the work rate, skills, strength, aggression but just lacks the height.

Rule a line through both Astbury and Griffiths, they're both gutless.

 

["The Roar Is Back"]

The answer is Vickery and he's getting closer. He's a good ruck and but will be a really good CHF too.

What I've seen of McBean is promising when he fills out more, just hope it doesn't effect how good he is below his knees.

A left field option is Dusty. Has the work rate, skills, strength, aggression but just lacks the height.

Rule a line through both Astbury and Griffiths, they're both gutless.

The only difference between Vickery , Astbury ad Griffiths is the opportunities Vickery has been given .

 

[oi watch out]

The only difference between Vickery , Astbury ad Griffiths is the opportunities Vickery has been given .

I disagree, Vickery has shown aggression in patches leading up to and including this year even if it's towards the opposition or flying the flag for his team mates.

I remember when we drew with St Kilda a couple of years ago in Conca's first year, Goddard cleaned up Conca right on half time, Astbury was the closest person to it but was the last one in when a scuffle broke out. He's not the enforcer we want to fill that spot.

 

[JR82]

we need a T.Walker type that can kick the ball 55+ as a CHF. i reckon in his latter years that Dusty could play that role, he is after all the same weight/height as some bloke named R.Hart was

 

[Stylo]

Good question. The only problem is that trialling in the 1s is over, so call it rotting at Coburg if you like but that's the new reality. They have to demand a game with form or they will have to continue to develop down there.

Why? It's obvious our forwardline isn't complete, therefore we should be trying new things until we strike a good balance.

I call it rotting at Coburg because despite appearances, I think it would be very, very hard for a young KPP to play for that side, let alone develop into an AFL level footballer. Playing for Coburg is not a walk in the park; I think it kills confidence.

We should be trialling these guys in the seniors. Give each of Astbury, Griffiths, McBean and Elton a 2-3 week run of games at CHF (or Griff at FF with Jack on the arc) and see what they can produce at that level. It's a far better indicator of their ability than what they put up at Coburg.

Just weeks ago people were saying Arnot would never get a game with us. Poor disposal, poor decision making, too rough etc. Look how he's gone when surrounded by proper structures.

 

[Stylo]

And I still think Rance would be a good left field option

 

[CotchIsKing]

The challenge is who do you push out to give these guys a game?

A Edwards has played his role well in the matches he has played. Smart, correct leading, creating space. Good defensive efforts. He may not be the long term option but would we accept a potential drop in overall output to give these guys a game? I would maybe be a yes should they have shown the necessary achievement of deliverables and Coburg. Then we get back into the argument of the players (ex McBean) not playing those roles at Coburg and is McBean ready?

Good sides do find the ability to rotate players but also I think they have players at the lower level demanding a game. Whatever your view on him, Arnot did this and Vlas had shown enough in the preseason and at Coburg to be given a shot when the spot opened up and he grasped it.

I don't have the answer. I would love to hear from the coaches where they see the likes of Elton, Astbury and Griff (the view on McBean seems a little clearer with his ascension to emergency on the weekend), fwd/back, progressing well or otherwise. The snippets from the weekly review of the Coburg team is not sufficient to clearly articulate where they are positioned.

RFC_Official is it possible to get a developing players update from Choco or even better Dimma answering some of the questions floating around?

 

[Stylo]

The challenge is who do you push out to give these guys a game?

A Edwards has played his role well in the matches he has played. Smart, correct leading, creating space. Good defensive efforts. He may not be the long term option but would we accept a potential drop in overall output to give these guys a game? I would maybe be a yes should they have shown the necessary achievement of deliverables and Coburg. Then we get back into the argument of the players (ex McBean) not playing those roles at Coburg and is McBean ready?

Good sides do find the ability to rotate players but also I think they have players at the lower level demanding a game. Whatever your view on him, Arnot did this and Vlas had shown enough in the preseason and at Coburg to be given a shot when the spot opened up and he grasped it.

I don't have the answer. I would love to hear from the coaches where they see the likes of Elton, Astbury and Griff (the view on McBean seems a little clearer with his ascension to emergency on the weekend), fwd/back, progressing well or otherwise. The snippets from the weekly review of the Coburg team is not sufficient to clearly articulate where they are positioned.

RFC_Official is it possible to get a developing players update from Choco or even better Dimma answering some of the questions floating around?

Good post, it would be great to hear from Chocco or Dimma about their plans for these guys. All seem so up in the air with their development, with the exception of McBean. I'm dreading the day I read a Coburg report detailing McBean doing a solid job at FB, without being outstanding...

As far as making space, I think next year when Vickery starts rucking more in the no 1 spot we'll be able to fit another tall in alongside Jack and Azza, with Vickery around the ground more.

 

[tigs2010]

If so deanbf, he's probably going to get a week. But he did look like he was trying to slow down and turn. On the other hand tucking in of the arm doesn't look good. Who knows with the MRP they move in mysterious ways

After he'd got him flush in the head he was then like "oops, accident"

 

[tigs2010]

Good post, it would be great to hear from Chocco or Dimma about their plans for these guys. All seem so up in the air with their development, with the exception of McBean. I'm dreading the day I read a Coburg report detailing McBean doing a solid job at FB, without being outstanding...

As far as making space, I think next year when Vickery starts rucking more in the no 1 spot we'll be able to fit another tall in alongside Jack and Azza, with Vickery around the ground more.

I'd like to think someone will develop past Azza. Please god let it happen.

 

[theflea]

we really really really should play a traditional chf. its give jack heaps of space to work in. and we need some way of linking the forward line with the midfield. a chf gives us both of those. so why dont we have one? that damn forwards coach

Agree but I think it comes down to the belief that playing a CHF opens you up to shallow f50 entry turnovers. Not sure of the merits to it but think this is the case.

 

[theflea]

I'm not sure our game plan revolves around having a genuine CHF . I do think Griffiths could play high forward role with more time upon the wings . He would be very dangerous marking upon the wings with his ability to kick over zones .

Or wing.

 

[cairo tiger]

Vickery is not the answer unleash elton or mcbean

 

[juss]

And I still think Rance would be a good left field option

Can't be serious?

 

[Stylo]

Can't be serious?

Dead

 

[juss]

Dead

Why so?
We don't exactly have an abundance of proven key backs (let alone ones that can stay on the park). He was drafted as a defender, played his entire career as a defender, and played some good footy as a defender.

His overhead marking (has improved) but is still suspect and nowhere near good enough to be a genuine CHF. He also isn't the best reader of the ball in flight and has trouble keeping his feet.

I haven't seen him take a set shot at goal, but his kicking can occasionally be suspect, so might not be the most reliable set shot.

 

[tiggywigs]

Why so?
We don't exactly have an abundance of proven key backs (let alone ones that can stay on the park). He was drafted as a defender, played his entire career as a defender, and played some good footy as a defender.

His overhead marking (has improved) but is still suspect and nowhere near good enough to be a genuine CHF. He also isn't the best reader of the ball in flight and has trouble keeping his feet.

I haven't seen him take a set shot at goal, but his kicking can occasionally be suspect, so might not be the most reliable set shot.

All of which is true, but he's big, fast and fearless and would probably scare the hell out of opposition half-backs with his kamikaze attacks.

It would probably be worth considering on a "swing man" basis if Grimes was up and about.

 

[TigermanM2]

IMO it's time for us to start trialling some of these guys in the seniors. We've got nothing to lose and everything to gain from doing so. No use leaving them to rot at Coburg, waiting for them to develop new attributes. As evidenced by players like Arnot and Vlastuin, sometimes playing in the seniors is the very best thing for a kid's development.

We are 10 and 5.
6th on the ladder.
Have a reasonably stable side
The next 7 games will either make us or break us.
Haven't made finals in 12 years

.....and you want to trial some fringe players to see how they go?? This is what teams do when they have nothing left to play for!

Look, I don't so much mind your idea but the timing is terrible. Lets just back the guys who have got us to 10 and 5. As for Arnot and Vlas, its easier to bring in young, upcoming midfielders when you have 9-12 of them rotating during a game. Elton, Asbury and Griffiths are far harder to hide. They can be badly exposed.