Unpopular opinions

Remove this Banner Ad

Virgin Dog said:
This has become especially true for 3 players in particular I've noticed - Cordy, Dale and Williams. Can't say anything negative about them without being told you're objectively wrong.

Here's one on that theme:
Cal Porter will be delisted without playing a game
Laitham Vandermeer will potentially play a couple of games but won't make it - feels like Austin was going for a Dalrymple-like pick here, but reached way too early
Click to expand...

You may be correct but what is the positive effect of writing young blokes off so early? Where is the net gain in these type of statements other than to say I told you so??

Please don’t read this aggressively, I am just wondering what the point is.
 
maddog37 said:
You may be correct but what is the positive effect of writing young blokes off so early? Where is the net gain in these type of statements other than to say I told you so??

Please don’t read this aggressively, I am just wondering what the point is.
Click to expand...
Saying "this kid is a Spud and will never make it" is just pointless if you're being plain critical or bringing it up when it's not even relevant. Only reason I brought it up is because it's an unpopular opinion thread. If you say "player X isn't up to the rigours of AFL and doesn't seem to be improving" then I see no problem with that (when relevant, i.e. in a predictions thread or ones like this for unpopular opinions).

The problem arises when we are in the main threads and we might be discussing a best 22, for example, and people jump down your throat for including Bailey Dale when they think he's s**t, or not including Bailey Williams because you don't think he's ready, yet they think he shits solid gold. It's totally fine to have an opinion and discuss it rationally, but it does become pointless when conversation gets derailed by irrelevant player criticism. Like I said, it's different here as that's the actual intention of the thread (to post unpopular opinion) but not really ok in my eyes to post s**t like that on the main board because, as you implied, there is nothing to be gained
 
Virgin Dog said:
yet they think he shits solid gold.
Click to expand...
Nice trait to have as a player, I think we have been spoilt of late having a few players excel in their first
few years after drafting and that puts a level of expectation on all the draftees which is not very fair.
Some blokes take years and some never make it and this is the norm not the other way.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Yojimbo said:
Nice trait to have as a player, I think we have been spoilt of late having a few players excel in their first
few years after drafting and that puts a level of expectation on all the draftees which is not very fair.
Some blokes take years and some never make it and this is the norm not the other way.
Click to expand...
That's it. With a few random exceptions, most years you're lucky to have half your draft pool last long term. 2017 seemed to be one of the few notable exceptions, where Richards, Naughton and Gowers all became best 22 in their first year (3 out of our 4 draftees), but other years we're lucky to retain half.

I randomly picked 2011 to use as an example. We drafted Clay Smith (great pick, but medical retirement), Michael Talia (gone), Daniel Pearce (gone) and Tory Dickson (great pick but struggles with injury). That's 2 out of 4 that were good picks. The year before was worse, where we got Libba and Wallis, but the other 3 draftees amounted to nothing. 2012 wasn't too bad (Stringer, Hunter, Macrae all legitimate guns, but also grabbed Hrovat and Prudden).

We can't expect every young player to be a certified gun. In 2018 we drafted 7 players (Bailey Smith, Rhylee West, Laitham Vandermeer, Ben Cavarra, Lachie Young and Jordon Sweet). Odds tell us that we might be able to expect 4 solid players from that pool. That means that, despite all the hype, we could get nothing out of Ben Cavarra, Jordon Sweet and maybe even Bailey Smith.

Which brings us to another point we need to remember in that not every top 10 draft pick becomes a 200 gamer. There have been plenty of duds throughout the years, and we can't take for granted that Bailey Smith is going to be the next Dangerfield. Could always have ourselves a Richard Tambling on our hands (although to be fair, the hit rate for top 10 picks lasting is pretty damn close to 100% these days, but still)
 
The main reason we won the 2016 Premiership is because Zaine Cordy sent Callan Ward to outer space.
 
Virgin Dog said:
That's it. With a few random exceptions, most years you're lucky to have half your draft pool last long term. 2017 seemed to be one of the few notable exceptions, where Richards, Naughton and Gowers all became best 22 in their first year (3 out of our 4 draftees), but other years we're lucky to retain half.

I randomly picked 2011 to use as an example. We drafted Clay Smith (great pick, but medical retirement), Michael Talia (gone), Daniel Pearce (gone) and Tory Dickson (great pick but struggles with injury). That's 2 out of 4 that were good picks. The year before was worse, where we got Libba and Wallis, but the other 3 draftees amounted to nothing. 2012 wasn't too bad (Stringer, Hunter, Macrae all legitimate guns, but also grabbed Hrovat and Prudden).

We can't expect every young player to be a certified gun. In 2018 we drafted 7 players (Bailey Smith, Rhylee West, Laitham Vandermeer, Ben Cavarra, Lachie Young and Jordon Sweet). Odds tell us that we might be able to expect 4 solid players from that pool. That means that, despite all the hype, we could get nothing out of Ben Cavarra, Jordon Sweet and maybe even Bailey Smith.

Which brings us to another point we need to remember in that not every top 10 draft pick becomes a 200 gamer. There have been plenty of duds throughout the years, and we can't take for granted that Bailey Smith is going to be the next Dangerfield. Could always have ourselves a Richard Tambling on our hands (although to be fair, the hit rate for top 10 picks lasting is pretty damn close to 100% these days, but still)
Click to expand...
I did a study last year of the last 12 Drafts from pick 1 to pick 60 and tried to pick the best player taken at each number,
while some numbers were fairly obvious some were tough to pick a semi decent player.
 
- Bailey Dale won't make it

- We won't really be a threat until we reduce the amount of sub-par kickers in the team, we can carry a few but not too many.

- The way we enter the forward 50 is atrocious, it's more an issue of method than personnel.
 
Kony Abbott said:
- Bailey Dale won't make it

- We won't really be a threat until we reduce the amount of sub-par kickers in the team, we can carry a few but not too many.

- The way we enter the forward 50 is atrocious, it's more an issue of method than personnel.
Click to expand...
Not an unpopular post with me.
Naturally we both hope Dale will make it but it's looking at best about a 50/50 chance as I see it.
 
BRWB said:
Two BF trusims that may not be popular.

1 - Whether a footy opinion is unpopular or not is largely time sensitive.

2- A negative assessment of a young Dogs player is usually unpopular while a positive assessment of a young player is extremely popular.

I recall being smashed for not rating or expressing concern about largely ordinary players like Hrovat, Talia and Jong. Conversely have rarely been criticised for rating someone who hasn't kicked on like Webb.
Click to expand...
Here's another -
3 - Rationality is suspended (or at best impaired) in match day threads from the first bounce until the final siren, when a semblance of sanity and balance returns. BF tolerance levels drop to a low ebb over this period unless we happen to be winning comfortably. I call this MDP or Match Day Psychosis ... and it's perfectly OK. In fact it's a key part of the emotional reason we follow footy.
Moral - don't waste your time getting into a shitfight over something posted in a match day thread.
 
And another two:
4 - If you've come to BF expecting a 50/50 balance between positivity and negativity you've come to the wrong place. It's a supporters forum and we feed on hope which is also why there's a strong bias towards praising draftees in their first season or two. So the balance is always going to be skewed towards positivity. (But see #5)

5 - Whether a poster is generally positive or negative has way more to do with their personality than the objective truth of the subject at hand.
 
The whole linking arms as a stance against racism is the single most cringworthy thing I have seen in a long time. It literally has zero impact.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

freddy mercury said:
The whole linking arms as a stance against racism is the single most cringworthy thing I have seen in a long time. It literally has zero impact.
Click to expand...

Never heard Port Adelaide fans sing 'Never Tear Us Apart' prior to a game?
 
Here’s my unpopular opinion for the week...

Adam Goodes pointing the “ape” comment girl in 2013 was more about him making a name for himself than about racism.

The subsequent 2-3 year of booing and vitriol towards him may have been excessive, but was brought on by his self-importance rather than his race.
 
Has Bevo taken the Barrett stuff to far. I think so. He is a gutter journo and I am sure likes to have ago at Bevo and the club. However I do not think he should have said anything as part of Tom's retirement. Bevo should just totally ignore him going forward as if he does not exist.
 
Optimistic Dog said:
Has Bevo taken the Barrett stuff to far. I think so. He is a gutter journo and I am sure likes to have ago at Bevo and the club. However I do not think he should have said anything as part of Tom's retirement. Bevo should just totally ignore him going forward as if he does not exist.
Click to expand...
I think he said afterward he should not have brought him into it
 
josh the gent said:
Here’s my unpopular opinion for the week...

Adam Goodes pointing the “ape” comment girl in 2013 was more about him making a name for himself than about racism.

The subsequent 2-3 year of booing and vitriol towards him may have been excessive, but was brought on by his self-importance rather than his race.
Click to expand...

Wow
 
doggiesmrx said:
After one game lol? It’s not bigfooty building him up- it’s inside the 4 walls of the club who are excited by what they’re seeing.
Click to expand...
Clearly not one game as I posted this midway through last season. It’s an unpopular opinion thread and he’s going to be decent but I don’t believe he’s ever going to the Dean Cox/Brodie Grundy level player many are assuming he will be.
 
We need more late picks/rookies/kids who have had to scrap and scrape into the AFL system.

They are the types that have real mongrel, and our levels of bastard are lacking. We're too nice.
 
Mofra said:
We need more late picks/rookies/kids who have had to scrap and scrape into the AFL system.

They are the types that have real mongrel, and our levels of bastard are lacking. We're too nice.
Click to expand...
Cal Porter, Lachie Young, Jordon Sweet - these are the types we should have in our side by next year. Late picks, Young and Sweet both drafted as overage rookies, and all have a bit of prick in them. We have a midfield full of softcocks (except Bailey Smith) and we can't carry that going forward. On that note, how's this for an unpopular opinion:
  • Jackson Macrae being traded would be a net win for the club.
I've stated to notice this in a number of games, but Macrae accumulates without ever causing any real damage to the opposition. He constantly goes for bullet passes that just dribble along the ground half the time (the other half he pulls them off with perfection, but can't have a 50/50 player getting the ball that much when we already have Hunter). With Dunkley's rise and addition to the leadership group, we now have 3 big bodied mids who lack genuine mongrel, and Macrae is definitely, without doubt, the softest of the 3. Losing him would net an enormous trade return, big cap space, and most importantly would free up space in the midfield to add a guy like Rhylee West or Cal Porter eventually.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top