Remove this Banner Ad

Nigel Smart Decision

  • Thread starter Thread starter Stiffy_18
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

Should Nigel Smart play on in 2004?

  • YES

    Votes: 11 47.8%

  • NO

    Votes: 12 52.2%
  • Total voters
    23

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Stiffy_18

Stiffy_18

Hall of Famer
Veteran 30k Posts 10k Posts
Joined
Dec 14, 2002
Posts
38,214
Reaction score
13,242
Location
who cares
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Sacramento Kings
Should Nigel Smart play on in 2004?

After watching Hentschel and Bock today and having seen Parker throughout the season I would say NO. If he plays on he would be starving a yuongster of an opportunity.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Yes and No is about the right answer unfortunately IMO.

Nigel is one of the club stalwarts and deserves to play on if his form justifies it - and it does.

On the other hand it will slow the development of one of Parker, Hentschel and Bock.

The club is leaving it up to Nigel entirely, and have publicly stated that they hope he plays on.

No right answer I'm afraid.
 
Originally posted by DaveW
Yes. He's still one of our best players and by being on the veterans list he isn't harming the future quality of our squad.
Click to expand...
With Bicks retiring, Hart goes onto the vets. Am I right in saying Roo can go on to the vets list in 2005?

If Smart plays on, I think it means we will have 1 less rookie (as I think they limit the total of vets + rookies).
 
Originally posted by Kane McGoodwin

If Smart plays on, I think it means we will have 1 less rookie (as I think they limit the total of vets + rookies).
Click to expand...

Totally correct.

Every club is allowed to have a combined total of 6 veterans and rookies - with a maximum of 2 veterans.
 
Originally posted by Kane McGoodwin
With Bicks retiring, Hart goes onto the vets. Am I right in saying Roo can go on to the vets list in 2005?
Click to expand...
Correct.

If Smart plays on, I think it means we will have 1 less rookie (as I think they limit the total of vets + rookies).
Click to expand...
Yes, unless they've altered that as part of the changes.

One of the changes was that the veterans list is no longer capped at 2. But I don't know if they changed the vets+rookies cap of 6.

Given the success rate of rookies, one less on the list is no great loss.
 
Originally posted by macca23
Yes and No is about the right answer unfortunately IMO.

Nigel is one of the club stalwarts and deserves to play on if his form justifies it - and it does.

On the other hand it will slow the development of one of Parker, Hentschel and Bock.

The club is leaving it up to Nigel entirely, and have publicly stated that they hope he plays on.

No right answer I'm afraid.
Click to expand...
You must be getting splinters in the backside from sitting on the fence all the time:p
 
Originally posted by macca23
Yes and No is about the right answer unfortunately IMO.

Nigel is one of the club stalwarts and deserves to play on if his form justifies it - and it does.

On the other hand it will slow the development of one of Parker, Hentschel and Bock.

The club is leaving it up to Nigel entirely, and have publicly stated that they hope he plays on.

No right answer I'm afraid.
Click to expand...
Can we convince Smarty to play a lesser role to ease in the development of another key defender? ie. Play him more off the bench (like Bicks this year) in rotation with the names mentioned above. Wouldn't harm to have him semi-coaching these guys & imparting his wisdom.
 
Originally posted by Kane McGoodwin
Can we convince Smarty to play a lesser role to ease in the development of another key defender? ie. Play him more off the bench (like Bicks this year) in rotation with the names mentioned above. Wouldn't harm to have him semi-coaching these guys & imparting his wisdom.
Click to expand...

My immediate reaction to this was - good idea.

However, if Smarty was killing his opponent every week, keeping him kickless, only a half-arsed nutty coach would take him off.

So I guess Ayres would!!! :D
 
Originally posted by Kane McGoodwin
Can we convince Smarty to play a lesser role to ease in the development of another key defender? ie. Play him more off the bench (like Bicks this year) in rotation with the names mentioned above. Wouldn't harm to have him semi-coaching these guys & imparting his wisdom.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't think Nigel would settle for that.

According to Steven Trigg, we will know next week.
 
No.

I think he is holding a young bloke out.

On the subject of key defenders - if we pick up Gayfer could he be the answer to the full back position? Could we bring him through the ranks the way we brought in Stevo - play him in defence and then in attack?

I went down to the Rosemont Hotel to watch the TAC game and instead of the TAC match they showed Magpies v Power from last week! Who'd want to watch that crap twice?
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Originally posted by Jerome

On the subject of key defenders - if we pick up Gayfer could he be the answer to the full back position? Could we bring him through the ranks the way we brought in Stevo - play him in defence and then in attack?
Click to expand...

I have no doubt that Gayfer could play FB. As I've said elsewhere IMO he could play any of the key positions in defence or attack.

But obviously not straight away. It's a big jump from U/18 to AFL
 
Originally posted by Jerome
On the subject of key defenders - if we pick up Gayfer could he be the answer to the full back position? Could we bring him through the ranks the way we brought in Stevo - play him in defence and then in attack?
Click to expand...
We could but I would rather develop him into a CHF straight away. CHF is probably the toughest KP to learn and if you can play well there to start of with its better in the long run.

Since Gayfer is physically well developed for his age, I would play him at CHF to start of with. if he cannot cope with that then chuck him back in defence.
 
Originally posted by macca23
I have no doubt that Gayfer could play FB. As I've said elsewhere IMO he could play any of the key positions in defence or attack.

But obviously not straight away. It's a big jump from U/18 to AFL
Click to expand...
He will need a 2-3 years at SANFL before he cracks it for a permanent spot in the side. Having said that, he would be the sort of player you would persist with. If we get him I'll be stoked:)
 
Originally posted by macca23
Totally correct.

Every club is allowed to have a combined total of 6 veterans and rookies - with a maximum of 2 veterans.
Click to expand...
With new rules you can have 3 veterans.

If you have 3 then only a third of their salary will not be counted as part of the salary cap. If you have 1 or 2 then its half their salary;)
 
Originally posted by Jerome
I went down to the Rosemont Hotel to watch the TAC game and instead of the TAC match they showed Magpies v Power from last week! Who'd want to watch that crap twice?
Click to expand...
Didn't they have more than one TV? :confused:
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Originally posted by GoalsFrom50Out
Which SANFL club will Gayfer go to, out of curiosity?
Click to expand...
Who ever drafts him in a mini draft;)

Since North finished at the bottom, they would have 1st crack at him. I doubt they would take him since they have a few good KPP.
 
Originally posted by GoalsFrom50Out
Which SANFL club will Gayfer go to, out of curiosity?
Click to expand...
Huh? so we have drafted him already -or is this just wishful thinking, good guessing or something else??
 
Will be a hard decision for both Nigel & Ayresy to make but if Nige believes he still has something left in the tank for another full year & he still has the confidence of the coach well let him go for it,
he was no way our worst player in 03 & fully deserved his spot in the 22 & to be honest guys after watching sundays SANFL prelim i'm still not overly excited by what was on offer, besides Hentschel who had a reasonable game i was not rapt in the performance of the other Crows listed players,

Only saw the 2nd half of the TAC final & in my opinion Gayfer was easily the stand-out performer for the losing side,

Would he still be available when our first pick comes around though ??
 
He's still a very good defender and provides a lot of our drive out of defence. If he still has the passion then he should definitely play on.

It's true that there are a few youngsters waiting in the wings but if they're good enough they'll get their chance eventually.

Michael Tuck played 70 reserves games before making the Hawthorn firsts. Dipper couldn't break into the same team for about 4 or 5 years.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Similar threads

Macjoe
Tracy Smart or Graeme Goodings?
2
Replies
28
Views
2K
brucetiki
brucetiki

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom