Roast The Cull needs to start

[Ray Button]

We've all been hanging on the annoucement of the delistings for a while now, since obviously if we are to use the 4 to 6 early picks in the draft we had to make room on the list. This year more so than any other of recent times, I felt that everyone on the 2010 list had some justification for remaining and the potential to eventually make it at senior level, and whoever missed out would be very unlucky.

There was always going to be 3 or 4 more going off the senior list, plus a couple of rookies to make room for manoeuvering. I had earmarked Yoshi as a likely unlucky candidate, and figured that one of McCulloch/McCauley/Charman would go, with Charman least likely since he is still under contract. I thought the most likely scenarion was for McCulloch to go and McCauley & Beams to be elevated rookies. Almost got it right - looks like the club is hedging its bets with McCauley to see what else is available in the draft. They need one more ruckman than just Leuenberger, Clark and Charman to service two teams, even with the new interchange rules which limit the use of old-style knock ruckman.

Like many others thoughts, Proud's demise was unexpected, but not surprising since he has had a fair opportunity to make his mark, perhaps more so than Austin, Sheldon and a couple of the other younger guys who get another opportunity.

As it stands, there are now five spaces available in the senior list, and several in the rookie list (remember that apart from the two delistings there plus Beams' upgrade, we didn't completely fill all our rookie allowance last year). I suspect that there won't be a spare spot left to elevate McCauley to the senior list and at best he will be re-rookied. Also looks like the club will bank at least one of the compensation picks.

 

[PTizzle]

In terms of player by player:

Johnstone - A bit unlucky, but I'm not surprised. I think another year would have been good considering we lost three mature bodies and he is somewhat versatile, but I can understand the reasoning. Enjoyed having him at the club.

Proud - Something HAS to have happened in terms of an agreement he didn't fulfill properly, wanting a chance elsewhere, personal reasons or an agreement with the club as he was kicking goals and getting some semblance of form towards the end of the season. Was excited to see him play this year and am pretty disappointed he's going. Would be surprised if he wasn't picked up by another club.

McCulloch - Haven't seen a lot of him, looked alright but not too disappointed about him leaving, except...

McCauley - ...both of our future ruck prospects leaving is very worrying to me. McCauley looked like he had the goods and I'm pretty peeved about this. Hopefully he gets re-rookied when all is said and done.

Yoshiura - Great bloke, so well spoken, hard working and intelligent but I think deep down we all knew that it'd be incredibly tough for him to make it. I have no doubt he'll use this year as a launching pad for a successful Sports Science career and I wish him all the best. Hopefully Don Barry can fill his cult figure shoes.

Beams - The best news by far. To elevate him without him yet playing a senior game is a great vote of confidence and when you consider players like Ashton Hams of the Weagles weren't elevated after some impressive senior games shows the coaching staff reckon he can go the whole nine yards with his career. Can't wait.


A few numpty questions, who can be re-rookied if we don't pick up all the players we want? Is it possible we might keep Johnstone around on a reduced salary as a bit of a mentor for the reserves? Can Yoshi continue to play in the reserves if he chooses?

 

[Cousin Jed]

If they thought Johnstone was capable of mentoring younger players, I don't think they would have delisted him. Just the impression I get.

 

[PTizzle]

I don't think he'd be fit for it in the seniors, but I figured with his experience he could at least have helped out our reserves. But you're right, if they saw the leadership qualities in him I think they would have worked something out.

 

[Last of the Roys]

Wow, I was shocked when I heard last night that Proud had been delisted. Obviously we don't know the full story, but I am pretty disappointed with the call. Maybe they think with the new rules he will never have the tank necessary to play at a high enough intensity for most of a game. I realise his history, but I just can't help but think we have thrown away a relatively decent young player to another club.

Johnstone wasn't a surprise. But with the loss of Riska, Brennan, Sherman, and the delisting of Selwood, you could make a very good case to keep him in the team as a midfield back-up. I just don't understand throwing out a quality player, even one that is admittedly inconsistent. We had lost enough talent and experience already.

God the thin blue 'midfield' line that we have at the moment is amazing. Any injuries to Black, Rich, Redden, Rockliff, or Power - we basically don't have any back-ups anymore. Who else is going to play midfield??? That is why I am not sure why we got rid of either Proud or Johnstone.
- Patfull - despite the love from the Club and a couple of good games, it wasn't good for him or the team when he was in the midfield;
- Adcock - plays his best off half back
- Polkinghorne - has shown glimpses, but desperately needs to get fit and develop endurance
- Banfield - hasn't got the endurance yet and is needed as our only real small forward
- Buchannan - tries hard, but is not up to AFL quality
- Stiller and Sheldon - only seem to be depth players at best
- Harwood, O'brien, and other young mids - may improve, but should we throw all our eggs in that basket straight away???

On the two delisted Mc's - I haven't seen either play, but I would have kept one of them as a back-up ruckmen, even given the new rules.

I haven't totally written off the likes of Austin, Sheldon, or Collier - but it is incredibly hard to see exactly what the Club has seen in them. There is a small chance they will make it - you can make that claim for each of them; but at the end of the day those three guys were clearly at the bottom of our list and had not developed this year.

 

[Tassie4ever]

- Patfull - despite the love from the Club and a couple of good games, it wasn't good for him or the team when he was in the midfield;

Observed in a major Brisbane hospital yesterday [Thursday]with his forearm in a splint- hand problem?

 

[Rick2]

I just don't understand throwing out a quality player, even one that is admittedly inconsistent. ]

That's it for me too - we just don't have that much talent. I know he can be frustrating but he seems to be marked alot harder because of who he is. Some brilliance, I think, is better than none.

 

[western royboy]

The Brian Cook Model

Individual
Meets | Fails
|
1 | 2
_______ |_______ Team
|
3 | 4
|


You get a position plotted based on the two questions.

Q.1 Do you meet or fail the expectations based upon your contributution to the team / clubs objectives? ie. are you living their values? Yes or No

Q. 2 Do you meet or fail your objectives as an individual? ie. are you being the best you can be / are you up to the level required? Yes or No

Yes / Yes puts you in Quadrant 1 - it's an easy decision to keep the player / employee - Easy Call.

Similarly No / No puts you in Quadrant 4 0- again an easy call - you're out

Quads 2 & 3 are the hard ones Yes / No, No /Yes - these are the hard calls. Brian Cook believes that where possible people who are living the club culture but might just be a bit short on the performance side should get another chance.

Alby may have unfortunately drifted into the hard call category bu he'd already had a chance or two.

 

[LionMen]

TJ would've benefited most from being in an elite midfield. Back at Melbourne was pretty much the only good player their so got the tag every week and didnt have enough ability to shake the tag off. At the lions he hasn't gotten tagged as much but due to our young midfield hasn't had as many opportunities. That being said if he were in Geelong he could've been a James Kelly/Joel Corey type contributor

 

[acuguy]

Hypothetically a player, same time last year was only retained on the list on a one year make or break contract and given twelve months to prove himself he belongs at the club.

Hypothetically, a player with a lengthy tenure on the list and with an equally lengthy misdemeanours and non-performance issues is given yet again a certain amount of time to prove that he has the will, determination, the capacity and ability to get himself in shape, to improve his tank, skin folds and other areas to hold his place on the list. Hypothetically this is his tenth final warning. Hypothetically this player makes certain (under instruction from his management) he is seen to hit the treadmill the gym, the running track with prominent members of the club. Hypothetically this player still fails to meet the standards set for him. Hypothetically he reaches the last chance saloon.
.

Hypothetically a club should keep the best and most talented players on the list ahead of duds. Hypothetically of course

 

[Gabbatoir]

Hypothetically a club should keep the best and most talented players on the list ahead of duds. Hypothetically of course

I'd argue that Proud hadn't shown enough to be considered in the 'best and most talented players' bracket and would be much closer to the 'dud' bracket.

I understand the appeal he had in the Byron Pickett 'bash and crash' mould, but fail to see what he provided to the team that has earned the uproar from some posters it has.

I'm not trying to bait anyone, I just genuinely don't see what the fuss is about.

 

[POBT]

I'd argue that Proud hadn't shown enough to be considered in the 'best and most talented players' bracket and would be much closer to the 'dud' bracket.

I understand the appeal he had in the Byron Pickett 'bash and crash' mould, but fail to see what he provided to the team that has earned the uproar from some posters it has.

I'm not trying to bait anyone, I just genuinely don't see what the fuss is about.

I've seen what the fuss is about, but I haven't seen it often enough.

I would have kept him but I can see why people like yourself and irel don't have an issue with that call.
I think the fact that he's never demonstrated the ability to run out games really counted against him. What I hope is that we haven't overreacted to the rule changes, the impact of which is yet to be seen. If we have gone "short and endurance" with our list model, it is a bit of a gamble to take without really seeing how the rule change will play out.

 

[Nuggo]

I've seen what the fuss is about, but I haven't seen it often enough.

I would have kept him but I can see why people like yourself and irel don't have an issue with that call.
I think the fact that he's never demonstrated the ability to run out games really counted against him. What I hope is that we haven't overreacted to the rule changes, the impact of which is yet to be seen. If we have gone "short and endurance" with our list model, it is a bit of a gamble to take without really seeing how the rule change will play out.

In this game you can't wait to see how it plays out. You get left behind every time. Hopefully we have done a full analysis on this and have a clear indication of which direction we are taking.

 

[Grimreepah]

The Brian Cook Model

Individual
Meets | Fails
|
1 | 2
_______ |_______ Team
|
3 | 4
|


You get a position plotted based on the two questions.

Q.1 Do you meet or fail the expectations based upon your contributution to the team / clubs objectives? ie. are you living their values? Yes or No

Q. 2 Do you meet or fail your objectives as an individual? ie. are you being the best you can be / are you up to the level required? Yes or No

Yes / Yes puts you in Quadrant 1 - it's an easy decision to keep the player / employee - Easy Call.

Similarly No / No puts you in Quadrant 4 0- again an easy call - you're out

Quads 2 & 3 are the hard ones Yes / No, No /Yes - these are the hard calls. Brian Cook believes that where possible people who are living the club culture but might just be a bit short on the performance side should get another chance.

Alby may have unfortunately drifted into the hard call category bu he'd already had a chance or two.

It's a bit of an attitude vs talent debate.

Proud seemed to have more talent, whereas Sheldon and Austin come across as fairly mature young men.

And perhaps the club did not consider someone who is taking steps to overcome a drinking problem (as commendable as that is) to be put in higher regard than people who never had drinking problems in the first place.

 

[Crusha]

Can Yoshi continue to play in the reserves if he chooses?

He could join Western Magpies. As he is U21, he could then turn out for the Reserves.

Not so for McCauley (too old). Given he has been invited to train-on, then they may be hedging their bets to place him back on the rookie list, in case they miss a preferred Ruck option in the ND. If that is the case, and with Tom Hickey already taken by GC, one wonders who that might be. If not one the noted fancies, Goringe/Lycett (and I hope not, as they would require one of our early picks), then perhaps Challwell (???).
Of course, it could just be that they are doing the right thing by him and allowing him to maintain fitness, if his intention is to nominate for the ND.

 

[blynd_freddie]

Hypothetically a player, same time last year was only retained on the list on a one year make or break contract and given twelve months to prove himself he belongs at the club.

Hypothetically, a player with a lengthy tenure on the list and with an equally lengthy misdemeanours and non-performance issues is given yet again a certain amount of time to prove that he has the will, determination, the capacity and ability to get himself in shape, to improve his tank, skin folds and other areas to hold his place on the list. Hypothetically this is his tenth final warning. Hypothetically this player makes certain (under instruction from his management) he is seen to hit the treadmill the gym, the running track with prominent members of the club. Hypothetically this player still fails to meet the standards set for him. Hypothetically he reaches the last chance saloon.

Hypothetically offcourse.

The Brian Cook Model

Individual
Meets | Fails
|
1 | 2
_______ |_______ Team
|
3 | 4
|


You get a position plotted based on the two questions.

Q.1 Do you meet or fail the expectations based upon your contributution to the team / clubs objectives? ie. are you living their values? Yes or No

Q. 2 Do you meet or fail your objectives as an individual? ie. are you being the best you can be / are you up to the level required? Yes or No

Yes / Yes puts you in Quadrant 1 - it's an easy decision to keep the player / employee - Easy Call.

Similarly No / No puts you in Quadrant 4 0- again an easy call - you're out

Quads 2 & 3 are the hard ones Yes / No, No /Yes - these are the hard calls. Brian Cook believes that where possible people who are living the club culture but might just be a bit short on the performance side should get another chance.

Alby may have unfortunately drifted into the hard call category bu he'd already had a chance or two.

A two gate, four-quadrant possibility of results sounds like a wonderfully simple base to start any personality/psychological testing. The next phase is to then randomly throw in half a dozen or so similarly themed but specifically key worded questions to assist ranking the strength of the answers… basically to split each quadrant again into a minimum of three sectors -- more for, middling and more against, I’d guess most of us in a company based work force would be quite familiar with the annual appraisal format of comparing the views of the assessor vs the assessed and the resulting identification of same page or different book discussions regarding the more easily identified “trends”.

I’ve not seen any footy based testing or do I have any knowledge that an end of year ‘appraisal’ actually exists but footy being a business I would be most surprised if this is not part of an end of year review.

And even less surprised after hearing that Dr Robb had also factored in China and the Shanghai game when delisting decisions were made.

Then add potential vs results vs time line vs a draft full of unknown potentials and I'm so glad I'm not the person having to make the decisions... I'm happy with the thought of giving Albie a continuing opportunity but as a rookie if he is not drafted elsewhere.

 

[Scubaveg]

And even less surprised after hearing that Dr Robb had also factored in China and the Shanghai game when delisting decisions were made.

Thought it was very strange Albie didnt travel to China but stayed home training the house down when we were struggling to make a full squad.

 

[blynd_freddie]

Thought it was very strange Albie didnt travel to China but stayed home training the house down when we were struggling to make a full squad.

I think the earlier suggestion from TBD and possible visa restrictions may have also been a factor here.

 

[melbournemartin]

No offence mate, but this is an irritating post.

I like Trav too, but Melbourne couldn't get the best out of him either and dumped him, so to say you are "pissed off" at Brisbane and that he is "welcome back at Melbourne" is really quite annoying. One could make the case that Melbourne failed to develop him into the player he could/should have been. If Melbourne supporters try to say that Brisbane ruined the Travis Johnstone legacy, then that will be laughable in the extreme.

Just save the faux-anger.

I'm personally not in favour of dumping him, but Voss inherited him from the previous regime. He had an obligation to see out the contract, which he did. He owes him nothing beyond that.

We didn't get the best out of him but us sane supporters had long realised that he was never going to be the star midfielder that we wanted. Call that a failure if you will, I'm hardly going to vouch for Daniher as being a fantastic coach. Voss gave him very little chance though. It's not a case of "ruining a legacy" but he was and is still talented enough to warrant a spot in your 22. I loved watching him at the Demons and still enjoyed it at the Lions but he was completely mismanaged and I often was rather annoyed...irritated even. And we didn't exactly dump him, we traded him at the perfect time when he still had significant value.

As for him being welcome back, well I can't speak for all the supporters and the club in general, and it's extremely unlikely to happen, but I wouldn't be upset seeing him run around for us next year.

 

[Dylan12]

I wouldn't be upset seeing him run around for us next year.

Will never happen and I would've thought was blatantly obvious considering your club forced your skipper James McDonald to retire when he wanted to go around again.

 

[Hollow Knight]

Irritated me to see James McDonald mismanaged like that. Would be welcome
at Brisbane anytime.

 

[melbournemartin]

Irritated me to see James McDonald mismanaged like that. Would be welcome
at Brisbane anytime.

I agree, I'd have kept him on for another year but not as captain.

 

[Warwick]

Overall, from the outside looking in, some strange list decisions.

On the face of it, the most worrying aspect is the fact we have delisted both our developing ruckmen. By most reports they were both coming along nicely and really should have been given more of an opportunity considering how injury-prone our top ruckmen are, and the fact we will more than likely replace them anyway with younger prospects.

The Proud decision may well come back to hurt us but the fact is he never delivered. He was starting to play some decent footy in the forward line towards the end of the year and he probably deserved another chance going by that. Especially with some of the players left behind.

I could have lived either way with Johnstone. I enjoyed him at the Lions and believe he was treated poorly by the match committee but that's life. He certainly made a solid contribution in his 3 years.

What worries me the most are the players still around. I've said before we will have our weakest list since the merger in 2011. Extremely poor trading and list management recently will mean we will enter 2011 with Charman, Stiller, Raines, Buchanan, and Sheldon on our list. IMO not one of them are AFL standard and IMO not one of them have anything to offer our side. It staggers to think the contracts they were offered. While young, Collier, Austin, O'Brien, Bartlett, our 2010 draftees will also make up a large portion of our list. Black and Power are fading and we have blasted a massive hole in our 24-28 group with the loss of Brennan, Rischitelli, and Sherman.

Our midfield, quite frankly, will be pitiful next season. The potential is there but I challenge you to find a worse or shallower midfield group in the league for 2011. Are we seriously pinning our hopes on Black and Power to carry that group again next season? I know people don't agree but Power has already gone half a season too many in my opinion, especially as a first-team midfielder. He might be capable of playing up forward but we don't have that option now considering how thin our engine room group is. Rich, Rockliff, Banfield, Harwood, Redden etc have all shown promise, but they should be back-up, not the leaders. With Proud and Johnstone now gone as well, we will struggle to have 6-8 players with claims to be classed as "legitimate midfielders". Most teams have 14-20 in their squads.

It will take us more than a couple of years to sort out the gross inbalance in our squad especially if WS poach a couple of our emerging guns. We have 3-4 top-aged, but fading stars, nothing in the middle, and a bunch of youngsters (not to mention a lot of fringe rubbish). We also have 3-4 deep forward options, a plethora of half-backs and little in the way of midfield or ruck depth. God I hope Hadley continues his exceptional strike-rate.

 

[Snuka]

Ouch Warwick!

Harsh but pretty fair. Agree with just all of that, including the feelings on the delistings. What the hell was the point of delisting those rucks when we are just going to need to pick up another couple.

I'm going to suggest that there is a chance, albeit unlikely that we could improve our midfield as a group with a fresh gameplan, fitness/conditioning regime, skills improvement, draftees, etc. We saw some very young but impressive midfields this year so we can only hope that Woewooden and the new setup can assist us in that regard. We've been relying on the same few guys for years and if we restructure it, put together a well-drilled group of 10 or so blokes doing the right skills and strength work, with a solid game plan it isn't out of the realms of possibility that we could build up a group that can at least break even and maybe even impress as the Dees group have done.

That group as I see could contain at different times the following: Black, Rich, Redden, Rockliff, Polkinghorne, Clark, Leuey, Polkinghorne, Banfield, Harwood, X, Buchanon, Beams (and I would have included Johnstone & Proud in there). Looks weak I admit but Malthouse had a pretty similarly average looking group a year or two ago too.

Also two of the guys you've mentioned as not being AFL standard are premiership players but I do see your point about maybe no longer being able to make an impact at this level.

 

[Dylan12]

Ouch Warwick!

Harsh but pretty fair. Agree with just all of that, including the feelings on the delistings. What the hell was the point of delisting those rucks when we are just going to need to pick up another couple.

Couldn't have said it better Warwick, I think we will be battling for sure.

Re: the ruckmen; I can't help but think we must have our eye on one of the delisted ruckmen such as a Simon Taylor as back-up, who the club must rate higher than McCulloch, McCauley because I am lost otherwise as to why we would delist both Maccas.