Travis Varcoe

[Vdubs]

I'd say that sums it up pretty succinctly.

"If" we decide to go with another tall [ extremely unlikely IMO ] then surely Lonergan would have the credentials ahead of Podsiadly.

I realise it's a nice little fairytale, but at 28 years of age, never been considered good enough to play senior footy, been delisted by two other clubs and hardly set the world alight in the pre season competition there's really nothing there to suggest he should get a game with the reigning premiers.

Having just the two talls up forward has worked pretty well to date, as two flags would attest, so why change it now?



Ahhhh, the old "X" factor sounds good but what exactly does it mean, especially in regards to a player who would be in our bottom half dozen [ three or four? ] in terms of selection.

If you mean Varcoe, he is in our BEST 22. Anywhere from selection 10 -22, if it is done like that. You'll notice how much we need him. Leg speed, fear factor for opposition defenders, creativity, goal assists, and goals, but mainly the speed. Things happen around him. X factor means what you think it does, excitement, unpredictability, all of the above. We are a far better team with Travis Varcoe in the lineup.

 

[vinum coupe]

What is X factor?

Here's an example

a 20 year old Leon Davis, or
a 21 year old Steve Johnson



Sure, they may do bugger all for 34% of a game, and maybe you wouldn't have an issue with not sending your best man to them.

It'll work out fine of course. For a while........ and then they'll do things for 10 minutes that you would never believe. 5 goals, game over.


The next time you meet your new assistant coach asks "why do we have our best player on him, he doesn't do a whole lot"

The answer
"He has X factor"

 

[Cattery]

If you mean Varcoe, he is in our BEST 22. Anywhere from selection 10 -22, if it is done like that. You'll notice how much we need him. Leg speed, fear factor for opposition defenders, creativity, goal assists, and goals, but mainly the speed. Things happen around him. X factor means what you think it does, excitement, unpredictability, all of the above. We are a far better team with Travis Varcoe in the lineup.

Yep, agree he's in our best twenty two, but selection "ten" to twenty two? Like to hear who the twelve regular players are who you think he'd be ahead of.

Sure he has leg speed, but so do Byrnes and Wojcinski and they're also in our bottom tier of players. Creativity, yeah in patches, fear factor for opposition defenders, hardly gonna give many of them sleepless nights I wouldn't think, goal assists, yep his best asset.

X factor denotes to me something like what vinum coupe says, the type of player who can go missing for periods but then in one quarter, or even fifteen minutes, will turn a game on it's head, and I'm afraid I don't regard Trav as that kind of player.

Are we a "far" better team with him in it? Not in my opinion, we're lucky to have him as our 20-22 selection as he gives us really good depth but that's about it "at the moment." Good thing is he has age on his side and he does have talent, so maybe he will turn out to be a "really" good player, especially if he works on his deficiencies.

 

[Partridge]

I realise it's a nice little fairytale, but at 28 years of age, never been considered good enough to play senior footy, been delisted by two other clubs and hardly set the world alight in the pre season competition there's really nothing there to suggest he should get a game with the reigning premiers.

Having just the two talls up forward has worked pretty well to date, as two flags would attest, so why change it now?

Can't argue with any of that. We don't need to screw with our forward line structure for the sake of stupid sentimentality.

Ahhhh, the old "X" factor sounds good but what exactly does it mean, especially in regards to a player who would be in our bottom half dozen [ three or four? ] in terms of selection.

"X" factor means the following things:

1. The player has some skill, but never seen at the base of a pack. In modern parlance, they are called "outside" players. I call them either soft or receivers.

2. Average around 9 possessions a game, and after each one are described as possessing "wizardry" or "magical skills".

3. Are treated like superstars when in reality they are at best modest performers. Examples include Dale Thomas (who would surely be captain of such a team), Eddie Betts and Daniel Motlop.

4. Are never seen in big matches or when the pressure's on.


I would have put Varcoe in that category in his first or second year, but after some definite improvement last season, I'd say he's ridding himself of those tendencies and becoming a genuine quality footballer.

As far as selection goes, Varcoe would be selected somewhere between 16-22. Not a chance in Hades would be top 10 or top 12. He's not even ahead of Byrnes right now. I realise he's sponsored by BF and therefore opinions are coloured accordingly, but let's just wait until he becomes a superstar before he's assumed to be one.

 

[Belisarius]

I am in between some of the posts here.

Travis, on his actual record in games played thus far, is a mediocre to fair player fro us. However when people see what he can do in patches - they see potential for a lot more. Sometimes, as you are renewing the team, you just have to pick some up and comers and trust that some will make it.

Travis is one of the key prospects at GFC - that is not there yet but they see as making it. I am inclined to agree - but only time will tell.

With more fringe type players like Wojo - you know what you are getting as a mature aged and experienced player - and it is unlikely he will play significantly better.

On this basis I personally would prefer to see Varcoe be included in the side over players like Wojo. He might just click one day - and become a more consistently damaging player - he however has yet to fully repay the club for their faith at this point in time.

 

[Cattery]

"X" factor means the following things:

1. The player has some skill, but never seen at the base of a pack. In modern parlance, they are called "outside" players. I call them either soft or receivers.

2. Average around 9 possessions a game, and after each one are described as possessing "wizardry" or "magical skills".

3. Are treated like superstars when in reality they are at best modest performers. Examples include Dale Thomas (who would surely be captain of such a team), Eddie Betts and Daniel Motlop.

4. Are never seen in big matches or when the pressure's on.


I would have put Varcoe in that category in his first or second year, but after some definite improvement last season, I'd say he's ridding himself of those tendencies and becoming a genuine quality footballer.

As far as selection goes, Varcoe would be selected somewhere between 16-22. Not a chance in Hades would be top 10 or top 12. He's not even ahead of Byrnes right now. I realise he's sponsored by BF and therefore opinions are coloured accordingly, but let's just wait until he becomes a superstar before he's assumed to be one.

Geez mate, we seem to be on the same wavelength.

Agree that he showed improvement last year, at least up until his injury, but still don't believe he's overcome the traits you describe in points one and four, still reluctant to put his body on the line to win the contested footy, and seldom produces in "big" games.

You've hit the nail on the head with your "wizardry" and "magical skills" comment, he has a lot of flair about him that catches the attention and stays in peoples minds [ but doesn't produce it nearly enough IMO ] and this combined with his sponsorship on BF has him perceived as better then he really is; don't get me wrong, he's a very handy bottom tier player and young enough to develop into something a lot better, but he ain't there yet.

I am in between some of the posts here.

Travis, on his actual record in games played thus far, is a mediocre to fair player fro us. However when people see what he can do in patches - they see potential for a lot more.

Agree 100%, he does look outstanding "at times" and if he could produce it at a more consistent level would indeed be a top liner.

 

[darren forssman]

Agree that he showed improvement last year, at least up until his injury, but still don't believe he's overcome the traits you describe in points one and four, still reluctant to put his body on the line to win the contested footy, and seldom produces in "big" games.

i think you will forever be disappointed as i cant ever see him being that type of player.

as patridge said, he is more of a receiver and deliverer.

i could well be wrong but i imagine that varcoe could end up being similar to michael long.

 

[Partridge]

Agree that he showed improvement last year, at least up until his injury, but still don't believe he's overcome the traits you describe in points one and four, still reluctant to put his body on the line to win the contested footy, and seldom produces in "big" games.

You've hit the nail on the head with your "wizardry" and "magical skills" comment, he has a lot of flair about him that catches the attention and stays in peoples minds [ but doesn't produce it nearly enough IMO ] and this combined with his sponsorship on BF has him perceived as better then he really is; don't get me wrong, he's a very handy bottom tier player and young enough to develop into something a lot better, but he ain't there yet.

To be fair, I should point out that those 4 traits weren't necessarily aimed at just Varcoe. There are a lot worse than him in my opinion.

 

[crunchola]

i think you will forever be disappointed as i cant ever see him being that type of player.

as patridge said, he is more of a receiver and deliverer.

i could well be wrong but i imagine that varcoe could end up being similar to michael long.

Great- a Norm Smith medalist in a Premiership team

 

[Vdubs]

Seems like the X factor is a bit like love- we all know what it is but have different ways of describing it. Anyway, Travis has it and I LOVE him as a player.

 

[catempire]

Ah, the old "every midfielder must be a hard, in and under, accumulator" criticism.

Glad the GFC hierarchy sees it differently.

 

[Cattery]

Ah, the old "every midfielder must be a hard, in and under, accumulator" criticism.

Glad the GFC hierarchy sees it differently.

Ah, the old "don't criticise Trav under any circumstances cause he's above that sort of thing" defence.

Don't think anyone's saying "every" midfielder must be a hard in and under type [ I'm certainly not ] you actually need variety, from the bloke who will win the ball from the bottom of a pack, like Selwood, to the "outside" player like Varcoe.

Calling a player a receiver is not of itself a criticism, the point I was making is that there are times in a match where circumstances dictate that even players of that ilk simply have to put themselves on the line even if it means risking injury, and to date I haven't seen any evidence that Trav is willing to do that, far to willing to let himself be bustled out of a contested situation.

 

[catempire]

to date I haven't seen any evidence that Trav is willing to do that, far to willing to let himself be bustled out of a contested situation.

Perhaps watch more closely. Or not. Doesn't matter.

I'm just glad that the opinion of those that count - the selectors - is vastly different to yours.

 

[Cattery]

Perhaps watch more closely. Or not. Doesn't matter.

So you're saying that doesn't happen?
Mate maybe you should take your own advice and watch more closely. I realise saying anything remotely critical of Trav is like waving a red flag at a bull to a lot of posters on here, but news flash, he ain't without flaws.

I'm just glad that the opinion of those that count - the selectors - is vastly different to yours.

Dont't know why you keep referring to the selectors to back your argument, one they aren't infallable and two I've already stated that Varcoe's in our best twenty two [ just ] so I guess our opinions aren't that vastly different after all.

 

[catempire]

I am not critical of the fact you are criticising. I'm am critical of its content.

I don't need to watch more closely; I'm comfortable with what I see.

 

[Cattery]

I am not critical of the fact you are criticising. I'm am critical of its content.

I don't need to watch more closely; I'm comfortable with what I see.

Fair enough, but don't be so vague, what exactly are you critical of regarding what I said?

 

[catempire]

Fair enough, but don't be so vague, what exactly are you critical of regarding what I said?

There is obviously a spectrum when it comes to players being hard at the ball - you have the likes of Selwood on one end and the likes of Varcoe near to the other. As you have correctly pointed out, that's the way it should be and isn't a problem in and of itself.

Where we differ is what you say you haven't seen and I know I have. There's not much to argue about there, other than for each of us to say the other is wrong. I don't think that's being vague.

 

[Cattery]

There is obviously a spectrum when it comes to players being hard at the ball - you have the likes of Selwood on one end and the likes of Varcoe near to the other. As you have correctly pointed out, that's the way it should be and isn't a problem in and of itself.

Where we differ is what you say you haven't seen and I know I have. There's not much to argue about there, other than for each of us to say the other is wrong. I don't think that's being vague.

Fair enough, just remember I'm not talking in absolutes, no player pulls out of a contest 100% of the time so you're probably right in saying you've seen him go for the hard ball, trouble is IMO that on most ocassions he seems quite content to be eased out of a contested situation or simply skirt it altogether.

I'm not the only one who thinks so either, several others have commented on it as well, which in no way means it's a fact of course, just opinions.

As you say, at the end of the day one of us is wrong, just as long as you realise it's you there's no problem.

 

[catempire]

Fair enough, just remember I'm not talking in absolutes, no player pulls out of a contest 100% of the time so you're probably right in saying you've seen him go for the hard ball, trouble is IMO that on most ocassions he seems quite content to be eased out of a contested situation or simply skirt it altogether.

I'm not the only one who thinks so either, several others have commented on it as well, which in no way means it's a fact of course, just opinions.

As you say, at the end of the day one of us is wrong, just as long as you realise it's you there's no problem.

Right, I took "and to date I haven't seen any evidence" as pretty absolute.

 

[Cattery]

Right, I took "and to date I haven't seen any evidence" as pretty absolute.

Geez a bloke has to be word perfect around you.

Okay how about, to date I've seen "precious little" evidence, that better?

Gotta go, I'll leave you with a question, are you completely happy with his commtment at the contested footy in general?

 

[catempire]

Geez a bloke has to be word perfect around you.

Okay how about, to date I've seen "precious little" evidence, that better?

Gotta go, I'll leave you with a question, are you completely happy with his commtment at the contested footy in general?

I have seen instances where I haven't been happy with his contested efforts, but not enough that I am concerned when looking at the bigger picture, which I always try to do. And certainly not to the extent that I would use the words "precious little".

 

[meto]

I have seen instances where I haven't been happy with his contested efforts, but not enough that I am concerned when looking at the bigger picture, which I always try to do. And certainly not to the extent that I would use the words "precious little".

The ideal is that the players' attack on the ball should be 100% all the time.
If I classified our players 1-22, Varcoe would eaily win the 22 position.

Do believe he'll find it hard to get back into the team post injury.

 

[Vdubs]

The ideal is that the players' attack on the ball should be 100% all the time.
If I classified our players 1-22, Varcoe would eaily win the 22 position.

Do believe he'll find it hard to get back into the team post injury.

wrong? he missed a fair chunk of footy end 09 and was straight back in for the finals, ahead of Stokes

 

[catempire]

The ideal is that the players' attack on the ball should be 100% all the time.
If I classified our players 1-22, Varcoe would eaily win the 22 position.

Do believe he'll find it hard to get back into the team post injury.

"Should be" indeed.

Just as all players should be able to kick both sides of their body.

And should have wafer-thin skin-folds.

And never make arses of themselves in public.

Perhaps robots are the answer?

 

[Cattery]

I have seen instances where I haven't been happy with his contested efforts, but not enough that I am concerned when looking at the bigger picture, which I always try to do. And certainly not to the extent that I would use the words "precious little".

Just as a matter of interest, would you be as forgiving of other players who fail to commit on a regular basis or is it just because his name is Travis Varcoe?
For instance, do you cut Hunt the same slack for his failures to put himself on the line when the balls in the air?

"Should be" indeed.



Just as all players should be able to kick both sides of their body.



And should have wafer-thin skin-folds.



And never make arses of themselves in public.



Perhaps robots are the answer?

Clever answer, but really just another way of dismissing legimate criticsm of Trav.