Remove this Banner Ad

Taylor Walker Dropped...

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Walker may have had a poor game previously, but has done far more than an underdone Porplyzia, Knights & at least has kicked better than Burton. Should be playing ahead of all of these 3 & also deep in the forward line where he does his best work.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Mattner asked to be traded, quite different.

that's a little economical there. Mattner himself said he didn't want to go to Sydney when they first approached him. midway through the season.

but as he kept discovering he was on the outer, more and more sydney's wooing of him started to look attractive.

in the end he asked for a trade, but he didn't start from that position.
 
It isn't though. You and others often spout this when discussing young players and say that a finals push is no time to bring in youngsters. Have a glance through Collingwood's last few years and whether they have been reluctant to bring in young players just because they are in the top eight or top four race. They debuted 10 players one season and still made the finals! And, surprise surprise, they are around the mark again this season and we've fallen off the radar.

Our reluctance to play Walker has left him a season behind where he could be and, what's more, the 'advantage' of not stuffing up our team with a raw, inconsistent kid the last few seasons has netted us a benefit of exactly ZERO.

exactly. we remain one of the leagues oldest teams, despite all these amazing young players (?!).

Malthouse makes the point he generally likes to introduce first gamers to Anzac day to see what they're made of. (don't know if he did this week).

we'd never do that.
 
Has kicked 2 goals for Norwood up to half time.

Who cares...how many backwards handballs has he executed from half-back?

Let's get our KPI's right.

Even Sat morning on AA Clarke was answering the Taylor questions with the emphasis that goals this week weren't going to count for much but rather doing all the little things that he needs to work on.

How about our coaching staff work on selecting goal kicking forwards and playing them as forwards somewhere in the half of the ground near our own goals:mad:
 
exactly. we remain one of the leagues oldest teams, despite all these amazing young players (?!).

Malthouse makes the point he generally likes to introduce first gamers to Anzac day to see what they're made of. (don't know if he did this week).

we'd never do that.
Our team list as a whole is actually the 6th oldest in the competition at the moment, we're right in the middle of the pack. Our list averages 23.41 years of age. We're a whole 0.04 years older, per player, than Port Adelaide who are 7th on the list.
http://afl.allthestats.com/teams/teamlistavgs.php

The team we fielded last week had an average age of 25.4 years, making it also the 6th oldest team to hit the paddock - behind Geelong (avg 26.7), St Kilda, Footscray, Sydney and Collingwood.
http://afl.allthestats.com/statistics/avgage.php

Both averages are heavily skewed by the presence of the veterans.

We're not one of the oldest teams in the league - and we'll probably be getting very close to Richmond territory next year (avg age of team list just 22.50 years) if we lose all 5 of our veterans simultaneously.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Poor performance so far from Walker...only has the 3 to 3/4 time.

Will need another 5 goals, 10 tackles, 15 handballs this quarter to push for selection this week...i mean standards would need to be high to break into the Adelaide side at present.
 
Our team list as a whole is actually the 6th oldest in the competition at the moment, we're right in the middle of the pack.

6th out of 16th isn't middle of the pack.

if we consider finishing 6th on the table to be a successful campaign... :p

we are supposed to be a young side, and that just shows ARE one of the oldest teams.

Both averages are heavily skewed by the presence of the veterans.

No. the averages correctly reflect our reliance on those veterans.


We're not one of the oldest teams in the league - and we'll probably be getting very close to Richmond territory next year (avg age of team list just 22.50 years) if we lose all 5 of our veterans simultaneously.

Classic Non Sequitur

All of the data you presented shows clearly, and unmistakeably we are one of the oldest teams.

Performance wise we are currently in prime Richmond territory.
 
Poor performance so far from Walker...only has the 3 to 3/4 time.

Will need another 5 goals, 10 tackles, 15 handballs this quarter to push for selection this week...i mean standards would need to be high to break into the Adelaide side at present.
If he kicks one goal in the last quarter does that mean he would get one per quarter for the game? NC would LOVE that sort of consistency, and would rate that sort of game much higher than if he'd kicked 6 or 7 in the first half and then not been sighted after half time.
 
If he kicks one goal in the last quarter does that mean he would get one per quarter for the game? NC would LOVE that sort of consistency, and would rate that sort of game much higher than if he'd kicked 6 or 7 in the first half and then not been sighted after half time.

As long as he doesn't kick 2 or more in the last qtr, that would be inconsistent.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

"One of the oldest" says to me that we're in the top 2 or 3. We're not, as I clearly showed. Neither our list as a whole (including the veterans), nor the team we've selected each week this season, is "one of the oldest". We're right in the middle of the pack.

We're 6th out of 16, 12-13 days older than 7th and 0.14 years (51 days) older than 8th.

Footscray are the oldest team in the league. They average 24.13 years to our 23.41, a difference of approximately 263 days. St Kilda are also a full half-year older than our team on average.

I'm certainly not saying that we're one of the youngest sides going around in 2010, but for you to suggest that we're "one of the oldest" is a bald faced lie which flies in the face of the statistics.
 
"One of the oldest" says to me that we're in the top 2 or 3. We're not, as I clearly showed.

top 2 or 3 is all you. congrats.

you clearly showed we are one of the oldest. end of.

but for you to suggest that we're "one of the oldest" is a bald faced lie which flies in the face of the statistics.

I am not suggesting, you proved we are one of the oldest.

unless you have stats that show we are not 6th, then save your breath.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Taylor Walker Dropped...

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top