Robert Wall's Top Fifty

[Bulldog1954]

Robert Walls Top Fifty

All of a sudden Mike Sheahan looks like a football genius

 

[Portmanteau]

It's pretty ordinary... but he didn't have a moronic selection of left-field such as Sheahan's (one N. Davis). Could do with a bit of re-working the order, but I'd say its passable.

 

[Blues4Life]

Passable, but I wouldn't even have Primus in my top 10, let alone number 1.

 

[daicos4ever]

Ahhh yes. A grand final team doesn't have a rep in the top 30. I suppose we made it by luck? Walls is a proven moron and this list is further evidence.

 

[The Mailman]

How the hell is Primus #1 and Darcy #2 ?
Neitz 7th is a bit rich considering he won the coleman medal (would be in my top 5)
Brad Johnson at # 8 is garbage, he wouldn't have made my top 20.
And Archer at #10 ahead of Riewoldt at 25 is downright laughable.

Gee whiz Wallsy.

 

[hourn]

started off allright, but that's normally a given. Its pretty easy to name the big names in a top 50 count.

A few of the more strange ones.

• Only 2 Collingwood Players in the whole thing, despite making the GF. Paul Licuria as low as 31 was another suprise.
• Maybe bias, but i thought Cuz woulda been top 10, if not, top 5
• Neitz at 7???? i know there haven't been many big goalkickers this year, and he was just about the only one. But i woulda thought around 20-25 mark woulda been about right for him.
• 18. Pavlich??? wouldn't have him quite that high.
• McLeod at 20??? had to be purely on his reputation
• Barry Hall at 35??? he really shouldn't even be near the list
• Darryl Wakelin should be higher than 34. He had a gun year, and was better than Leppitsch and Pavlich IMO
• Cameron Bruce??????? hmmmmmmmmmm
• Michael Stevens???????
• Did he put any effort into 40-50. Looks like he looked up all the Stevens in the competition.
• Kane Johnson should've been closer to the 30-35 range.

 

[Lockyer24]

Originally posted by Guey_34
It's pretty ordinary... but he didn't have a moronic selection of left-field such as Sheahan's (one N. Davis). Could do with a bit of re-working the order, but I'd say its passable.

In 2001 Nick Davis had remarkably similar stats to one J.Hird.

Hird was an All Australian I think? A Top 50 place was not out of left field IMHO.

F*%#@^ing Davis

 

[hourn]

Originally posted by The Mailman
Neitz 7th is a bit rich considering he won the coleman medal (would be in my top 5)

I had it completely the opposite way

 

[Blues4Life]

Originally posted by daicos4ever
Ahhh yes. A grand final team doesn't have a rep in the top 30. I suppose we made it by luck? Walls is a proven moron and this list is further evidence.

Yeah, espicially when Freo have 3 players in the top 25, yet couldn't make the 8.

 

[colin]

Those players run 20km in a game?

That's bloody incredible. How do Aussie Rules players attain fitness like that, it's astounding

 

[robbieando]

Gee what crap,

Even though I hate Collingwood, there is no way Buckley should be 33 on that list, he should be in the top 10.

 

[Blues4Life]

Buckley had a decent year, but Licuria was easily the Pies best player IMO. Other players in the comp deserved a top 10 spot more then Buckley.

 

[Lockyer24]

Primus #1? hah. I spose 'leading your team to a win when it counts' doesn't rate highly on Wallsys measurement of players.

Is this the Top 50 most overrated list?

Give up Wallsy!

 

[hourn]

Originally posted by robbieando
Gee what crap,

Even though I hate Collingwood, there is no way Buckley should be 33 on that list, he should be in the top 10.

noooo way. if any Pie player was gonna go close to top 10 it'd be Licuria, but even most Pie fans would admit its a bit rich for him to be in the top 10. Probably around 20 i'd say is right.

Buckley had a average year but would still get in most people top 50 on reputation alone.

 

[Dan26]

Is it just me, or is Matthew Primus not as good as he is made out to be? I don't see what the big deal is. He hasn't performed well in finals, and is a dodgy kick. I'd love him as a ruckman at my club, and I rate him highly as a player, but I wouldn't have him in my top-10 AFL players.

Does anyone else fail to see what is so good about him? To me, he is just a good player, but no superstar. I'd take Darcy any day of the week.

I just don't see what all the fuss is about.

 

[hourn]

yep agreed Dan


Darcy is a much better footballer.

Primus is better in the rucks situations, but not by far enough to cast him as the number one player in the game. Probably have him around number 10 in the competition. Maybe a little lower.

 

[Blues4Life]

Yeah I rate Primus as probably the second best ruckman in the competition, but not among my top 10 players overall.

 

[saiak]

Originally posted by Dan26
Is it just me, or is Matthew Primus not as good as he is made out to be? I don't see what the big deal is. He hasn't performed well in finals, and is a dodgy kick. I'd love him as a ruckman at my club, and I rate him highly as a player, but I wouldn't have him in my top-10 AFL players.

Does anyone else fail to see what is so good about him? To me, he is just a good player, but no superstar. I'd take Darcy any day of the week.

I just don't see what all the fuss is about.

I sorta agree, he isn't as good as some

 

[Bulldog1954]

Originally posted by The Mailman

Brad Johnson at # 8 is garbage, he wouldn't have made my top 20.

You must be joking, not in the top 20???

He averaged something like 22 touches a game, around the 6th or 7th most in the league and kicked 47 goals. When was the last time somebody kicked that many goals while being in the top ten in the league in disposals?????? Michael Voss had him his number one when asked

 

[Rohan_]

Burns should have been in the top 30.

 

[Dan26]

I wouldn't even have him at 10. Number 10 out of 640 players is extremely high.

I just don't know why commentators droll over him like he is some sort of God. He's just a player, whose bulk helps him in his ruck role, and he has obvious leadership qualities. It's not as if he's some incredible athelete with awesome disposal, and uncanny goal sense.

 

[Bulldog1954]

Originally posted by Dan26
Is it just me, or is Matthew Primus not as good as he is made out to be? I don't see what the big deal is. He hasn't performed well in finals, and is a dodgy kick. I'd love him as a ruckman at my club, and I rate him highly as a player, but I wouldn't have him in my top-10 AFL players.

Does anyone else fail to see what is so good about him? To me, he is just a good player, but no superstar. I'd take Darcy any day of the week.

I just don't see what all the fuss is about.

Some judges over estimate the importance of hitouts and "bullocking". He simply does not get anough of the ball or take anywhere near enough grabs. 11 touches and 4 grabs is pretty poor

 

[Sniper]

Originally posted by daicos4ever
I suppose we made it by luck?

Channel 9 getting the TV rights sure made things a lot easier. Just ask McChins.

You have a team of softies & hacks, excepy Buckley who had his worst season in many years.

 

[mic59]

Originally posted by daicos4ever
Ahhh yes. A grand final team doesn't have a rep in the top 30. I suppose we made it by luck?

You answered your own question, the TEAM made it to the GF.

 

[daicos4ever]

Originally posted by Sniper

You have a team of softies & hacks, excepy Buckley who had his worst season in many years.

Yet we make the Grand Final. All bides well for the future, doesn't it? Keep fishing sonny boy.