Taylor up forward... Why?

[RedVest4]

Mods merge this if it's already being discussed somewhere else...

Am I the only one who thinks this is a stupid idea? In 2016 he was the number 1 defender in the AFL for average goals kicked on him...

We don't need two talls up there... Play small, kick it to Hawkins who will have more space and he can crum to Motlop/Menzel/McCarthy and resting mids...

Besides, if Scott is going to persist with playing Smith and Stanley in the same team (also a questionable decision) then one can rest up forward as the 2nd tall.

Yet another silly move by Chris Scott...

 

[HaroLad]

I think we should only do it in times when we need goals desperately, like the Richmond game. Harry seems like a composed figure, getting the job done without any complications.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Mods merge this if it's already being discussed somewhere else...

Am I the only one who thinks this is a stupid idea? In 2016 he was the number 1 defender in the AFL for average goals kicked on him...

We don't need two talls up there... Play small, kick it to Hawkins who will have more space and he can crum to Motlop/Menzel/McCarthy and resting mids...

Besides, if Scott is going to persist with playing Smith and Stanley in the same team (also a questionable decision) then one can rest up forward as the 2nd tall.

Yet another silly move by Chris Scott...

I'm sceptical of the move don't get me wrong, alas, we don't know it's a silly move until we see it in action.
Powder dry until at least after the JLT series matches.

 

[RedVest4]

I think we should only do it in times when we need goals desperately, like the Richmond game. Harry seems like a composed figure, getting the job done without any complications.

By the sounds it's going to be closer to a permanent thing... Didn't mind it against Richmond but don't think it won us the game - they just capitulated in true Richmond fashion.

 

[Turbocat]

Im not convinced about the Taylor move forward but ..
the positive to my mind is it gives us a chance to really freshen up the backline. Gardner, 2E , Thurlow , Stewart ... all may be new to the backline this year. Too many changes? Perhaps but after a period of settling in we could have a younger group and a setup that carries us thru the next few years. Obviously Lonergan and Mackie are not far from the end and we do need to keep blooding so the change over is not too drastic. And I doubt its purely a brainchild of CS. The test will be if Taylor can really handle the forward role on a regular basis.

 

[HaroLad]

By the sounds it's going to be closer to a permanent thing... Didn't mind it against Richmond but don't think it won us the game - they just capitulated in true Richmond fashion.

Honestly it's a stupid idea, Harry is the most underrated defender in the comp and I fear playing him elsewhere more and more goals will leak.

 

[00VicWard001]

Honestly it's a stupid idea, Harry is the most underrated defender in the comp and I fear playing him elsewhere more and more goals will leak.

It's 'an' idea. It's not necessarily stupid or good as we haven't seen the outcome of it.

 

[Daniel McL]

Happy enough with it. Prefer Taylor up there over Smith or Stanley.

Agree with what you say about only one of Smith/Stanley playing if Taylor plays forward though, can't have both we just need one of Smith/Stanley with Blicavs as No.2 ruck.

The only thing I would've preferred over it was Lonergan retiring end of last season (worried he's going to fall away quickly in 2017) meaning our back line would be Taylor, Henderson & Kolodjashnij which is also a good balance.

 

[HaroLad]

It's 'an' idea. It's not necessarily stupid or good as we haven't seen the outcome of it.

Maybe I was a bit harsh, but personally if anyone we should try Hendo up forward more often, as he actually used to be a forward.

 

[RedVest4]

Happy enough with it. Prefer Taylor up there over Smith or Stanley.

Agree with what you say about only one of Smith/Stanley playing if Taylor plays forward though, can't have both we just need one of Smith/Stanley with Blicavs as No.2 ruck.

The only thing I would've preferred over it was Lonergan retiring end of last season (worried he's going to fall away quickly in 2017) meaning our back line would be Taylor, Henderson & Kolodjashnij which is also a good balance.

Spot on re Smith/Stanley/Blicavs... I'm not even sure Smith is best 22 but he's rated internally for some reason... I'd prefer to see Stanley ruck and Blicavs 2nd ruck because I'm still not sold on him as a pure midfielder.

However back to the point, with all 3 inevitably playing in the same team, Taylor should not go forward.

Agreed re Lonergan too... Worried he may have a Ted Richards 2016 type year meaning Taylor will have to go back.

 

[Cezz The Catter]

Easy question to answer. We didn't recruit a genuine elite full forward after Hawkins more just plugged the whole with Pods.

Project Vardy Fail
Project Clark Fail
Project Kersten Fail

In my view Harry should be played down back. Lonergan will undoubtedly be gone next year and Scott seems to like the 3 talls down back meaning he'll be back there in 2018 anyway with Hendo and Kolo.

Honestly if we're going to persist with Blicavs, Smith and Stanley one of those guys has to become a KPF. Blicavs Midfield work i felt was exposed meaning his time there is redundant and either needs to become our 2nd ruck behind Smith or be dropped. Which i highly doubt Scott is considering as he loves a side of giants.

With Smith probably our most solid ruck, the gun points at Stanley to make CHF his own i reckon. It makes sense to me, agile, good jooks, great pace and big toe. Might as well have a crack.

 

[RedVest4]

Easy question to answer. We didn't recruit a genuine elite full forward after Hawkins more just plugged the whole with Pods.

Project Vardy Fail
Project Clark Fail
Project Kersten Fail

In my view Harry should be played down back. Lonergan will undoubtedly be gone next year and Scott seems to like the 3 talls down back meaning he'll be back there in 2018 anyway with Hendo and Kolo.

Honestly if we're going to persist with Blicavs, Smith and Stanley one of those guys has to become a KPF. Blicavs Midfield work i felt was exposed meaning his time there is redundant and either needs to become our 2nd ruck behind Smith or be dropped. Which i highly doubt Scott is considering as he loves a side of giants.

With Smith probably our most solid ruck, the gun points at Stanley to make CHF his own i reckon. It makes sense to me, agile, good jooks, great pace and big toe. Might as well have a crack.

Why do we need to recruit a second tall forward though... If you look at Sydney, Dogs, GWS... They have their full forwards in Buddy, Dickson, Cameron respectively and then ruck/resting forward in Tippett, Boyd, Patton respectively... Goals are then mostly kicked by small forwards and mids.

Also, you could argue we won the 2011 GF Because Pods went down - we became unpredictable and I think that's the way to go up forward in footy these days...

Agree with everything else you said, don't mind Stanley up forward but I still think we're too tall around the ground and lack pace... especially up forward.

 

[Vdubs]

Honestly it's a stupid idea, Harry is the most underrated defender in the comp and I fear playing him elsewhere more and more goals will leak.

As long as we kick more than we leak.
I have always liked it when Harry went forward, and now in his twilight, good move as a LT venture.
Worked for Alistair Lynch, and Ben Graham also won us many games there, and we have options in defence.

 

[Turbocat]

As long as we kick more than we leak.
I have always liked it when Harry went forward, and now in his twilight, good move as a LT venture.
Worked for Alistair Lynch, and Ben Graham also won us many games there, and we have options in defence.

All true. There are probably plenty of examples of players moving forward towards the rear of their career. One probably needs more athleticism and speed in the backline than the forwardline. for example Gehrig was a winger.

 

[Goggin Our Best]

I like it - because it forces them early on you would think to play Jake Kolo as a key back ( which i believe he will excel ) rather than just pinch hitting . I reckon Jake Kolo would provide a bit more dash and quick rebound - Taylor has been brilliant - but it is slow motion stuff

When Taylor went forward in the Richmond game - Jake Kolo went on to Reiwoldt - and i thought he did a pretty good job

No guantee with Taylor though - Glen Jackovich was an absolute champion CHB - but now and again they tried him at CHF - and he was very ordinary

 

[Turbocat]

I like it - because it forces them early on you would think to play Jake Kolo as a key back ( which i believe he will excel ) rather than just pinch hitting . I reckon Jake Kolo would provide a bit more dash and quick rebound - Taylor has been brilliant - but it is slow motion stuff

When Taylor went forward in the Richmond game - Jake Kolo went on to Reiwoldt - and i thought he did a pretty good job

No guantee with Taylor though - Glen Jackovich was an absolute champion CHB - but now and again they tried him at CHF - and he was very ordinary

True as well. My memory of him was that he very hard to play against but not great at being a player when others were trying to stop him. Was he mobile enough to play forward? Conversely I cant remember Stewy Loewe playing back. ... so some players certainly are role specific. Hawkins Scarlett Harley even the more versatile Mooney never really showed long term capability at the other end. So if Taylor can make it work , it probably elevates him to a new level.

 

[Mattlock]

I don't have a lot of faith in the idea, but I do really want to see a quicker and more suitable backline so I'm torn. I'll wait and see.

 

[winty]

Why do we need to recruit a second tall forward though... If you look at Sydney, Dogs, GWS... They have their full forwards in Buddy, Dickson, Cameron respectively and then ruck/resting forward in Tippett, Boyd, Patton respectively... Goals are then mostly kicked by small forwards and mids.

Also, you could argue we won the 2011 GF Because Pods went down - we became unpredictable and I think that's the way to go up forward in footy these days...

Agree with everything else you said, don't mind Stanley up forward but I still think we're too tall around the ground and lack pace... especially up forward.

Would've thought last year's prelim would've answered that question. What was it again? 72 inside 50s, mostly bombs to Hawkins with three blokes on him which resulted in 8 goals? If we had a genuine 2nd tall target down there, it would've spread the defenders a lot more as they would have had more than one player to keep an eye on.

As for playing Taylor forward, the guy has shown he's hard to beat one-on-one in defence. Henderson and Lonergan have shown they can hold down the fort down back, with Kolo steadily improving as well. Why not utilise Harry's one-on-one prowess in an attacking sense instead of a defensive one?

 

[Sttew]

Its a stupid idea if it becomes a case of "robbing Peter to pay Paul", i.e., if Lonergan, Kolo, Henderson and others falter. But if they hold up in defence and Harry provides a genuine second KPF focal point, then we will be saying, "Why did it take so long?"

 

[dazbroncos]

I think it's an option to have it's a good idea.

I don't think we should start like that.

Much like PFD up forward. Don't start there.

Have it as something that opposition teams need to be ale to counter but HT makes out back 6 so good.. it's gonna rob Peter to pay Paul.

Go Catters

 

[Seeds]

Mods merge this if it's already being discussed somewhere else...

Am I the only one who thinks this is a stupid idea? In 2016 he was the number 1 defender in the AFL for average goals kicked on him...

We don't need two talls up there... Play small, kick it to Hawkins who will have more space and he can crum to Motlop/Menzel/McCarthy and resting mids...

Besides, if Scott is going to persist with playing Smith and Stanley in the same team (also a questionable decision) then one can rest up forward as the 2nd tall.

Yet another silly move by Chris Scott...

We have too many talls in defence and not enough forward. This move should of been made four years ago and been made permanently. Taylor had a very average year last year in defence. The goal kicking argument is silly as he played at centre half back or even as a loose defender at times. Henderson and Lonergan always got the main goal kicking forward. We deseperately need an extra marking option on the forward line to prevent Hawkins from being double teamed all day. Did you not watch any football in the past three years where we constantly got beaten at centre half forward? Menzel helped a bit last year but still not enough and he is still injury prone. Only seems to be fit once every three weeks.

 

[Seeds]

I think it's an option to have it's a good idea.

I don't think we should start like that.

Much like PFD up forward. Don't start there.

Have it as something that opposition teams need to be ale to counter but HT makes out back 6 so good.. it's gonna rob Peter to pay Paul.

Go Catters

Taylor is done as a defender. May be done as a footballer. But let's give him a shot in the forward line first before we retire him.

 

[Seeds]

True as well. My memory of him was that he very hard to play against but not great at being a player when others were trying to stop him. Was he mobile enough to play forward? Conversely I cant remember Stewy Loewe playing back. ... so some players certainly are role specific. Hawkins Scarlett Harley even the more versatile Mooney never really showed long term capability at the other end. So if Taylor can make it work , it probably elevates him to a new level.

Yep it will elevate him to the level of Ben Graham.

 

[Seeds]

Easy question to answer. We didn't recruit a genuine elite full forward after Hawkins more just plugged the whole with Pods.

Project Vardy Fail
Project Clark Fail
Project Kersten Fail

In my view Harry should be played down back. Lonergan will undoubtedly be gone next year and Scott seems to like the 3 talls down back meaning he'll be back there in 2018 anyway with Hendo and Kolo.

Honestly if we're going to persist with Blicavs, Smith and Stanley one of those guys has to become a KPF. Blicavs Midfield work i felt was exposed meaning his time there is redundant and either needs to become our 2nd ruck behind Smith or be dropped. Which i highly doubt Scott is considering as he loves a side of giants.

With Smith probably our most solid ruck, the gun points at Stanley to make CHF his own i reckon. It makes sense to me, agile, good jooks, great pace and big toe. Might as well have a crack.

Drop Blicavs is the easy answer.

 

[catempire]

As a forward what is Taylor capable of that Stanley isn't?