We are the quickest team on paper

[Tony Delaney]

And by bringing it up again and having a go at those who do have a negative opinion of Mark Bolton, you're no better.



Again, by even saying that you are attempting to belittle the opinion of anyone who hasn't played AFL football. The great thing about footy and these boards is we can all have an opinion regardless of our walk of life. We actually are allowed to disagree with the selectors, with the recruiters, with the coaches.

At the end of the day, one person selects the team and few would doubt that Kevin Sheedy has a point to prove in picking Mark Bolton. He was the one that selected him at the draft when there were more viable options and its his reptuation that is diminished when our number four draft pick has been something of a failure when compared to the bloke who went the pick after him.

Yep, Mark Bolton is a great athlete, he works hard and he has my respect for that. But there are better footballer who got less opportunities and for that reason he is lucky. Don't attempt to belittle my opinion by bringing up some half-baked statistic about 150 years experience, I'm entitled to my opinion and I'll continue to state it.

Mark Bolton is an ordinary footballer, shouldn't be on our list and had the AFL rejected the Rama proposal there is probably every chance he wouldn't be.



The last time we won a Premiership, Mark Bolton was on the list and played one game for the season. Mark Bolton would not get a game for any of the top four sides last season, infact I'm not sure he'd get a game in any of the top 12 sides. The bloke has played 117 games of AFL football and only three times he's had 20 or more disposals and in just under half those games he's touched the ball less than 10 times. Sorry, that's not very good.

I hope you aren't being critical of Paul Hills there, we can't have that. But no, I didn't say the same thing about Paul Hills, Paul Hills was a much better footballer than Mark Bolton. Paul Hills averaged nearly 18 disposals in a Premiership year, Mark Bolton averages less than 11 for his career.

Hi Mr Statistic. Do you have the statistics of how many quarters he averages a game or minutes per game because averaging 11 may not be too bad in 2, 2/12 quarters a game. He is used as a spare parts man and I guess (don't know) but would say he plays around 60 to 70 minutes a game. Stats are not everything.

I have not once said your not allowed to say he is crap, only the sarastic, moronic way it's done over and over is boring and annoying. So yes I can say Paul Hills was not the best footballer. The bench was not used nearly half as much back then as it is now so he would have greater statistics. Bolton was on the list in 2000 as he was still establishing himself and earn't his spot in the team in a similar way to Gary O'Donnell years earlier. The 150 years thing once again relates to me stating that they all pick the team and Bolton gets selected so your opinion or not those charged with running the football department are happy enough with him so by mocking his football ability in a childish way you are mocking the football knowledge of these people. He wouldn't get a game at East Keilor the way you lot talk.

So Mr. research you are entitled to your opionion never said you wern't.

Also if the AFL rejected the Rama situation Rama would have been left off all together and re drafted later on with other clubs doing the right thing and not selecting him. They would never have taken a spot on our small list with a player that is virtually no chance of playing in 2007.

 

[Longy413]

I'd hate to say it but the reason we are the quickest team on paper is all the aboriginals

We had 20 blokes run below 3 seconds yesterday and the draftees were at the AFL induction. Meaning blokes like Jetta, Davey, D_ick etc didn't run. That left Cole, Dempsey, Lovett, Lovett-Murray as the only aboriginal players to run.

Nash, Dyson, Stanton, Lloyd, Monfries, MJ, McPhee, Winderlich, Neagle, among others, all would have ran below 3 seconds for the 20m.

I don't think the aboriginal players on our list had anything to do with it.

 

[Longy413]

Hi Mr Statistic. Do you have the statistics of how many quarters he averages a game or minutes per game because averaging 11 may not be too bad in 2, 2/12 quarters a game. He is used as a spare parts man and I guess (don't know) but would say he plays around 60 to 70 minutes a game. Stats are not everything.

Good footballers earn their position on the ground, 9 years on and Mark Bolton still hasn't done that.

9 seasons he's played and he couldn't crack the top 10 in the best and fairest in our worst season in 70 years. 9 seasons and not one single finish in the top 10 of the best and fairest.

He's used as a spare parts man because he doesn't have a position at AFL level, he isn't good enough to demand one.

So yes I can say Paul Hills was not the best footballer. The bench was not used nearly half as much back then as it is now so he would have greater statistics.

No, the bench wasn't used as much. That meant if you were on the bench you spent more time there. Rotations didn't exist, if you started on the bench you spent more time there, being benched was more of a punishment than it is today. Paul Hills was good enough to avoid spending time there.

Bolton was on the list in 2000 as he was still establishing himself and earn't his spot in the team in a similar way to Gary O'Donnell years earlier.

Yet other players that were establishing themselves got a game. Mark Johnson, Dean Solomon, Adam Ramanauskas, Jason Johnson were all drafted after Mark Bolton. Mark Bolton didn't get a game because he wasn't good enough to demand a game in a team that is strong, nothing has changed in 2007.

The 150 years thing once again relates to me stating that they all pick the team and Bolton gets selected so your opinion or not those charged with running the football department are happy enough with him so by mocking his football ability in a childish way you are mocking the football knowledge of these people. He wouldn't get a game at East Keilor the way you lot talk.

I don't think I've ever done that, but feel free to keep up the accusations.

The 150 years thing is redundant, it doesn't matter. You can have an informed opinion on AFL without playing the game. Our football manager, our fitness coach, our recruiting/list manager have not played a single game of AFL football between them. One of them hasn't ever played the game at any level, all of them are on the match committee.

Port Adelaide's new recruiting manager has never played AFL footy, Wayne Brittain never played AFL footy, we had an assistant coach in a Premiership year (1993) that never played AFL footy.

It's a childish retort.

So Mr. research you are entitled to your opionion never said you wern't.

What were you saying about being sarcastic and moronic?

Also if the AFL rejected the Rama situation Rama would have been left off all together and re drafted later on with other clubs doing the right thing and not selecting him. They would never have taken a spot on our small list with a player that is virtually no chance of playing in 2007.

You don't know that...

 

[ant555]

Great news about Neagle.

"We are rapt with the whole of our testing results, but in particular Mark Bolton has run very well in the 3.2km and he is up there with the best we have had in nine years," Quinn explained this afternoon

Suprise suprise too bad he has to kick the ball too hehe

lol they have been doing a heap of work with his kicking so far this pre season, dont know if it will do any good though.

 

[ant555]

Longy = mr research lol

Come on Longy no need to provide a ballanced argument , just say Bolton is crap and leave it at that You know how Bigfooty works

 

[Crave]

Hi Mr Statistic. Do you have the statistics of how many quarters he averages a game or minutes per game because averaging 11 may not be too bad in 2, 2/12 quarters a game. He is used as a spare parts man and I guess (don't know) but would say he plays around 60 to 70 minutes a game. Stats are not everything.

I have not once said your not allowed to say he is crap, only the sarastic, moronic way it's done over and over is boring and annoying. So yes I can say Paul Hills was not the best footballer. The bench was not used nearly half as much back then as it is now so he would have greater statistics. Bolton was on the list in 2000 as he was still establishing himself and earn't his spot in the team in a similar way to Gary O'Donnell years earlier. The 150 years thing once again relates to me stating that they all pick the team and Bolton gets selected so your opinion or not those charged with running the football department are happy enough with him so by mocking his football ability in a childish way you are mocking the football knowledge of these people. He wouldn't get a game at East Keilor the way you lot talk.

So Mr. research you are entitled to your opionion never said you wern't.

Also if the AFL rejected the Rama situation Rama would have been left off all together and re drafted later on with other clubs doing the right thing and not selecting him. They would never have taken a spot on our small list with a player that is virtually no chance of playing in 2007.

Speaking of moronic ways.....you seem to be oblivious to the fact that players actually manage to play several games WITHOUT distinction.

Sure, most of us would never be close to playing a professional sport of any type. It doesnt mean that if a player gets selected to represent their club at the highest level, they've made it to the pinnacle. Only need to look as far as the Australian Cricket team to see players who have made debuts, then be dropped...sometimes never to return again through lack of grasping that opportunity or lack of opporunity through someone taking their spot.

Bolton has been lucky to be selected throughout his career, and Im tipping its just about to run out.

 

[WeneedyoungJarmans]

Not only do the Bombers have the best spine in the league, they are also the quickest team. This is phenomenal. Surely they'll be top 4 next yr if thats the case!

 

[Shane Hird]

Hi Mr Statistic. Do you have the statistics of how many quarters he averages a game or minutes per game because averaging 11 may not be too bad in 2, 2/12 quarters a game. He is used as a spare parts man and I guess (don't know) but would say he plays around 60 to 70 minutes a game. Stats are not everything.

I have not once said your not allowed to say he is crap, only the sarastic, moronic way it's done over and over is boring and annoying. So yes I can say Paul Hills was not the best footballer. The bench was not used nearly half as much back then as it is now so he would have greater statistics. Bolton was on the list in 2000 as he was still establishing himself and earn't his spot in the team in a similar way to Gary O'Donnell years earlier. The 150 years thing once again relates to me stating that they all pick the team and Bolton gets selected so your opinion or not those charged with running the football department are happy enough with him so by mocking his football ability in a childish way you are mocking the football knowledge of these people. He wouldn't get a game at East Keilor the way you lot talk.

So Mr. research you are entitled to your opionion never said you wern't.

Also if the AFL rejected the Rama situation Rama would have been left off all together and re drafted later on with other clubs doing the right thing and not selecting him. They would never have taken a spot on our small list with a player that is virtually no chance of playing in 2007.

Tony D,you spend way to much time and effort defending Bolton. You're one of those supporters who stick up for every player on the EFC list,weather their sh-t or not...but knowone is saying you can't do that.

I just feel you are wasting you're time defending Bolton,whats the point?
Every team has one or two or three players that are never going to be at an elite level.Or as Jack Dyer used to say just a "good ordinary player".

But the sad thing is,Bolton isn't even that. He's below a good ordinary player.He's skills are well below par (while under pressure) compared to most others on the team. He's just a very fit athlete who can punch a ball from someone's hands (sometimes) and provide running link up play and give it off to someone with better skills.

He's at the stage where he's basically a classic off the bench player. He takes the place of another player when he's tired and has to come off or when we get an injury half way thru a match. Give up the Bolton defending lines...is he worth that much to u? Worth that much to this team? NO.

We can't let this thread turn into another Bolton Lovers Vs Bolton Dis-likers because there's no way I getting involved in that again.

Back to the testing.....Jay Neagle. He must have the speedy legs like his old man

Stanton..I am rapt this kid can run as fast as he can and the endurance he has built up is fantastic.

We are going to run everyone off their feet this year....but I'd like to compare other sides testing with the same drills. Are we just level with other sides or are we ahead? Players breaking club records is great,but how good are those times compared to other sides? I wonder.

 

[Shane Hird]

Not only do the Bombers have the best spine in the league, they are also the quickest team. This is phenomenal. Surely they'll be top 4 next yr if thats the case!

This maybe my fault having f-ck wits like this posting crap. I've been giving it to the Hawthorn mob for a week on bay 13 and now some of them will float in like flies at a BBQ and will try to be as annoying as they can.

I suggest everyone ignore the Hawthorn menace that plagues us all

 

[Longy413]

Not only do the Bombers have the best spine in the league, they are also the quickest team. This is phenomenal. Surely they'll be top 4 next yr if thats the case!

If you read the first post you would see it's a p!sstake.

Take a deep breath, read the opening post (not just the thread title), remove your foot from your mouth, retract your post and then go and play on the freeway.

 

[Audemars Piguet]

Not only do the Bombers have the best spine in the league, they are also the quickest team. This is phenomenal. Surely they'll be top 4 next yr if thats the case!

You ought to be shot.

P.S. Longys right, I cant wait to see the back of Bolton, terrible player.

 

[WeneedyoungJarmans]

If you read the first post you would see it's a p!sstake.

Take a deep breath, read the opening post (not just the thread title), remove your foot from your mouth, retract your post and then go and play on the freeway.

Blah blah blah! Sticks and stones! Fact is Essendon won 3 games in 2006. Essendon are crap and will finish bottom 4 again in 07.

 

[Longy413]

Blah blah blah! Sticks and stones!

See, you could have just posted a realisation that the thread title was a joke and not meant to be taken seriously, instead you post more crap and further embarrass yourself.

Fact is Essendon won 3 games in 2006.

You don't say...

Essendon are crap and will finish bottom 4 again in 07.

Such insight, such method, such research, such a qualified and well documented opinion. You really are the modern marvel of football knowledge.

 

[Tony Delaney]

Good footballers earn their position on the ground, 9 years on and Mark Bolton still hasn't done that.

9 seasons he's played and he couldn't crack the top 10 in the best and fairest in our worst season in 70 years. 9 seasons and not one single finish in the top 10 of the best and fairest.

He's used as a spare parts man because he doesn't have a position at AFL level, he isn't good enough to demand one.



No, the bench wasn't used as much. That meant if you were on the bench you spent more time there. Rotations didn't exist, if you started on the bench you spent more time there, being benched was more of a punishment than it is today. Paul Hills was good enough to avoid spending time there.



Yet other players that were establishing themselves got a game. Mark Johnson, Dean Solomon, Adam Ramanauskas, Jason Johnson were all drafted after Mark Bolton. Mark Bolton didn't get a game because he wasn't good enough to demand a game in a team that is strong, nothing has changed in 2007.



I don't think I've ever done that, but feel free to keep up the accusations.

The 150 years thing is redundant, it doesn't matter. You can have an informed opinion on AFL without playing the game. Our football manager, our fitness coach, our recruiting/list manager have not played a single game of AFL football between them. One of them hasn't ever played the game at any level, all of them are on the match committee.

Port Adelaide's new recruiting manager has never played AFL footy, Wayne Brittain never played AFL footy, we had an assistant coach in a Premiership year (1993) that never played AFL footy.

It's a childish retort.



What were you saying about being sarcastic and moronic?



You don't know that...

Are you thick Mr Long. I don't have a problem with you having an opinion on anyone whether crap or not. Once again I have posted regarding the continuous crap that posters continue to post about Bolton to me is getting boring. I can't recall saying it was you. You replied to me about Bolton not visa versa.

Secondly I can't recall saying if you havn't played AFL you can't comment. My point was those that know most about AFL select him. So my comments are not childish and redundant. As informed as you are, don't try and tell me you are more informed than Sheedy and co. So read that line and get it through your head. Anyone can have an opinion. So quoting as many people as you like that havn't played AFL and are involved in AFL is redundant because you can not figure out what I am meaning.

Thirdly Bolton is not as good a footballer as most others in the team and yes others from the same period are more established, so what. Never said he was. I just say that the way some posters continuously get into him you would think he couldn't put one foot in front of the other.

As for votes they don't mean everything. The way the Bombers voting is designed is for players who have more game time are going to get more votes. If you are used as a spare parts player because you are not a gun then you are not going to get many votes. Also as for the bench back in 1993 era yes if you were on it you were likely to stay but the other way too if you were on you were likely to stay on. I am guessing, but you could probably tell me Bolton has probably started on the field in half the games in his career so if he were in the 1993 era fair cahnce he may have had more game time and accumulated more of things called stats.

How many games did Paul Hills play. I know about 10 Essendon supporters if you asked who was the worst Essendon player to play in a premiership they all say Paul Hills. A good battler thats about it.

 

[danzan22]

Blah blah blah! Sticks and stones! Fact is Essendon won 3 games in 2006. Essendon are crap and will finish bottom 4 again in 07.

Im sure everyone here would like to here some constructive critisim but what your saying is hardley that, go back to the hawks board where you beelong.

 

[Longy413]

Are you thick Mr Long. I don't have a problem with you having an opinion on anyone whether crap or not. Once again I have posted regarding the continuous crap that posters continue to post about Bolton to me is getting boring. I can't recall saying it was you. You replied to me about Bolton not visa versa.

In a reply to me you labelled Bolton bashers as morons. If you don't have a problem with it, why post about it?

Just let it go and staying away from personal jibes might be a good idea too.

Secondly I can't recall saying if you havn't played AFL you can't comment. My point was those that know most about AFL select him. So my comments are not childish and redundant. As informed as you are, don't try and tell me you are more informed than Sheedy and co. So read that line and get it through your head. Anyone can have an opinion. So quoting as many people as you like that havn't played AFL and are involved in AFL is redundant because you can not figure out what I am meaning.

That's because what you are saying doesn't have a meaning. By stating that Sheedy's opinion means more you are taking away the worth of the opinion of those that post here. The "doesn't matter what you say about Mark Bolton, Sheedy picks him, Sheedy is right, you are wrong" theory belittles people and that is exactly what you are doing.

Using you never played AFL as a retort you are most definately taking away from peoples opinion and you are basically saying if we disagree with Sheeds we must be wrong. That's crap.

Thirdly Bolton is not as good a footballer as most others in the team and yes others from the same period are more established, so what. Never said he was. I just say that the way some posters continuously get into him you would think he couldn't put one foot in front of the other.

Agree, but there wasn't a trace of that in this thread.

As for votes they don't mean everything. The way the Bombers voting is designed is for players who have more game time are going to get more votes. If you are used as a spare parts player because you are not a gun then you are not going to get many votes.

Again, you seem to be struggling with the concept as to why Mark Bolton is a "spare parts" player. He is a spare parts player because he doesn't have a position at AFL level, he isn't a very good KPP, he isn't a very good midfielder. If he was, he'd have a position, he wouldn't be a spare parts player, he wouldn't spend extended time on the bench.

Mark Bolton is not in our best 22, when everyone was up and running last season, Bolts did not get a game. He was not in the side in Round 1, we had injuries, he got games he would not otherwise have got. Right place, right time. He's lucky to have played as many games as he did.

If you have a position, you stay on the ground, you stay on the ground and you get votes.

How many games did Paul Hills play. I know about 10 Essendon supporters if you asked who was the worst Essendon player to play in a premiership they all say Paul Hills. A good battler thats about it.

Paul Hills played 63 games.

Fact is, someone had to be our worst Premiership player. Nine times in 1993, Paul Hills had more than 20 disposals, Mark Bolton has done that just three times in his career. Paul Hills might have been our worst Premiership player, but Mark Bolton wouldn't have got a game. There is no comparison.

 

[WeneedyoungJarmans]

See, you could have just posted a realisation that the thread title was a joke and not meant to be taken seriously, instead you post more crap and further embarrass yourself.



You don't say...



Such insight, such method, such research, such a qualified and well documented opinion. You really are the modern marvel of football knowledge.

Why thank you! No research was required. Any observer can see that the Bombers are hopeless.

 

[Jex]

Paul Hills played 63 games.

Fact is, someone had to be our worst Premiership player. Nine times in 1993, Paul Hills had more than 20 disposals, Mark Bolton has done that just three times in his career. Paul Hills might have been our worst Premiership player, but Mark Bolton wouldn't have got a game. There is no comparison.

Agree. Hills was a bit rough around the edges, but he could find the footy and never shirked a contest. Definitely earned his spot in 1993.

I'm also sick of the Bolts bashing, even though I lay into him a bit myself. I'd rather bag him after a crap performance during the year, than have a go at him during the preseason. He did well in a time trial and people will say that's all he's good for. If he ran poorly in the time trial, people would say he's not even good at that anymore. He's lucky to still be on the list, but he's here for another year, so we may as well support him and hope he does well.

 

[Crave]

Why thank you! No research was required. Any observer can see that the Bombers are hopeless.

Except our own supporters...imagine that. I spend a bit of time posting on the Bulldogs board also due to having lived in the area all my life, so you tend to find out a bit about their personnel.

What Im getting at is you wouldnt believe which opposition supporters are on there, posting the same tripe you seem quite experienced at...surprise, surprise...Hawthorn. Must be something in the water down at Glenferrie Oval.
They must be already testing the use of drinking treated sewerage water.

 

[WeneedyoungJarmans]

Im sure everyone here would like to here some constructive critisim but what your saying is hardley that, go back to the hawks board where you beelong.

you want some real constructive criticism, here goes:

the Bombers list is in a true rebuild state. So much so that if you compare it to the rebuild position of Hawthorn or even Carlton, it is at least 1 to 2 yrs behind those 2 clubs.

In terms of player selection, whilst there is a lot of hype about this yrs prospects, Essendon could be criticised for its failure to address a variety of needs in this draft. Not only do they require pacy midfielders but a pressing concern is to develop at least 2 key position defenders. There is no realistic key defensive prospect coming through to replace the likes of Fletcher. And please don't say Kepler Bradley. He is not capable.

If you were recruiting this yr for Essendon would you have drafted Davey and Reemers considering you already drafted Jetta and have guys like Lovett for pinch hitting goals. Using the priority pick on Jetta was understandable, but then to pick a 22 yr old forward pocket and another small forward are both wasted selections IMO. Especially since Neagle was drafted as a 3rd tall forward last yr. Too much focus on drafting pace and forwards was given and not enough to defensive KPPs. Enough said!

As for their recruiting model, its easy to see that under Sheedy's reign, he likes to remain competitive from yr to yr. He has a tendency to try and recruit troubled footballers ala Cole, Zantuck or ageing stars like Campo and Mal Michael in an attempt to top up and remain competitive from year to year. But is this a proven approach!

History will suggest this is not the way to go for the Bombers. The teams that have followed a top up mentality in recent times, who already have an inadequate list, in an attempt to remain competitive, have only worsened their situation in the long run.

The 2 that come to mind are: Hawthorn - under Peter Schwab and North - under Dean Laidley. Both clubs have suffered the consequence in the long term of topping up in an attempt to improve the following season.

Rebuilding takes time. 2/3 drafts of sitting at the bottom and reping the benefits of early picks. This is the ideal scenario. But its obvious from Sheedy's motives that with the likes of Mal Michael in the side, he intends to try and move up the ladder next yr. And the worst thing that could happen to the Bombers is that they win 8-10 games next yr - max is all they are capable of.

Fact is they are better off remaining at the bottom and reaping the benefits of more early picks. But I dont believe Sheedy is the right man to rebuild the club, from the bottom up, with a recruitment model that will build a list capable of winning a premiership against the interstate powerhouses of today.

The best thing that can happen to Ess is for someone like O'Donnel to take over the coaching position and concede that they need to sit at the bottom, piss off all the dead wood and give every kid and rookie an opportunity over some 30 yr old looking for a few bucks.

Believe me, I've seen it with my club, you are destined for more years of mediocrity if the focus does not change.

Gone are the days of motivating disgruntled footballers, resurrecting careers etc. Its all about complete list management - across the board - all positions. And unless you have depth in all areas, you are not in the hunt!

 

[Crave]

Are you thick Mr Long. I don't have a problem with you having an opinion on anyone whether crap or not. Once again I have posted regarding the continuous crap that posters continue to post about Bolton to me is getting boring. I can't recall saying it was you. You replied to me about Bolton not visa versa.

Secondly I can't recall saying if you havn't played AFL you can't comment. My point was those that know most about AFL select him. So my comments are not childish and redundant. As informed as you are, don't try and tell me you are more informed than Sheedy and co. So read that line and get it through your head. Anyone can have an opinion. So quoting as many people as you like that havn't played AFL and are involved in AFL is redundant because you can not figure out what I am meaning.

Thirdly Bolton is not as good a footballer as most others in the team and yes others from the same period are more established, so what. Never said he was. I just say that the way some posters continuously get into him you would think he couldn't put one foot in front of the other.

As for votes they don't mean everything. The way the Bombers voting is designed is for players who have more game time are going to get more votes. If you are used as a spare parts player because you are not a gun then you are not going to get many votes. Also as for the bench back in 1993 era yes if you were on it you were likely to stay but the other way too if you were on you were likely to stay on. I am guessing, but you could probably tell me Bolton has probably started on the field in half the games in his career so if he were in the 1993 era fair cahnce he may have had more game time and accumulated more of things called stats.

How many games did Paul Hills play. I know about 10 Essendon supporters if you asked who was the worst Essendon player to play in a premiership they all say Paul Hills. A good battler thats about it.

I dont think the man needs to answer that. We're all entitled to our privacy regarding our appendage.

 

[Shane Hird]

Following on from the success of the best spine on "paper" thread.



Bombers impress in testing
Monday, 8 January 2007

The Bombers have returned from their Christmas break today ready to embark on the remainder of the pre-season in terrific shape. In testing conducted this morning, the players registered some of the best results John Quinn has seen in his time at the club.

"We are rapt with the whole of our testing results, but in particular Mark Bolton has run very well in the 3.2km and he is up there with the best we have had in nine years," Quinn explained this afternoon.

"We have done speed testing today and Courtenay Dempsey has run the fastest we have ever had over 20 metres and Jay Neagle is the quickest player we have ever had over 5 metres.

"Over 20 players broken the magical three seconds mark for 20 metres so we are rapt to have that sort of speed at the club," he said

And another speed machine around the club Andrew Lovett is a producing some of his best results in the testing, proving he is well and truly over his hip injury.

"Lovett has run an all time personal best today for his twenty metres, a personal best for his counter movement jump; his skin folds are approaching the best they have been so he is looking promising right across the board."

The results all points to the hard work the players have continued do over their break, proving they are ready to fightback in 2007.

"Some players who have come back from the Christmas break in significantly better shape than they left which has shown they have worked really hard and they mean business," Quinn said.

Training now changes slightly for the players in the lead up to Round 1, with the emphasis shifting towards skills, while there will be a greater focus on individual needs.

Speed will kill in 2007 hopefully with Lovett looking like he is near top fitness and Stanton burning up the track...Watson even fitter than last season.

Looks good so far Wish Houli was tested so we could compare his running to other older players

 

[Shane Hird]

you want some real constructive criticism, here goes:

the Bombers list is in a true rebuild state. So much so that if you compare it to the rebuild position of Hawthorn or even Carlton, it is at least 1 to 2 yrs behind those 2 clubs.

In terms of player selection, whilst there is a lot of hype about this yrs prospects, Essendon could be criticised for its failure to address a variety of needs in this draft. Not only do they require pacy midfielders but a pressing concern is to develop at least 2 key position defenders. There is no realistic key defensive prospect coming through to replace the likes of Fletcher. And please don't say Kepler Bradley. He is not capable.

If you were recruiting this yr for Essendon would you have drafted Davey and Reemers considering you already drafted Jetta and have guys like Lovett for pinch hitting goals. Using the priority pick on Jetta was understandable, but then to pick a 22 yr old forward pocket and another small forward are both wasted selections IMO. Especially since Neagle was drafted as a 3rd tall forward last yr. Too much focus on drafting pace and forwards was given and not enough to defensive KPPs. Enough said!

As for their recruiting model, its easy to see that under Sheedy's reign, he likes to remain competitive from yr to yr. He has a tendency to try and recruit troubled footballers ala Cole, Zantuck or ageing stars like Campo and Mal Michael in an attempt to top up and remain competitive from year to year. But is this a proven approach!

History will suggest this is not the way to go for the Bombers. The teams that have followed a top up mentality in recent times, who already have an inadequate list, in an attempt to remain competitive, have only worsened their situation in the long run.

The 2 that come to mind are: Hawthorn - under Peter Schwab and North - under Dean Laidley. Both clubs have suffered the consequence in the long term of topping up in an attempt to improve the following season.

Rebuilding takes time. 2/3 drafts of sitting at the bottom and reping the benefits of early picks. This is the ideal scenario. But its obvious from Sheedy's motives that with the likes of Mal Michael in the side, he intends to try and move up the ladder next yr. And the worst thing that could happen to the Bombers is that they win 8-10 games next yr - max is all they are capable of.

Fact is they are better off remaining at the bottom and reaping the benefits of more early picks. But I dont believe Sheedy is the right man to rebuild the club, from the bottom up, with a recruitment model that will build a list capable of winning a premiership against the interstate powerhouses of today.

The best thing that can happen to Ess is for someone like O'Donnel to take over the coaching position and concede that they need to sit at the bottom, piss off all the dead wood and give every kid and rookie an opportunity over some 30 yr old looking for a few bucks.

Believe me, I've seen it with my club, you are destined for more years of mediocrity if the focus does not change.

Gone are the days of motivating disgruntled footballers, resurrecting careers etc. Its all about complete list management - across the board - all positions. And unless you have depth in all areas, you are not in the hunt!

F-ck off u idiot!

 

[Crave]

you want some real constructive criticism, here goes:

the Bombers list is in a true rebuild state. So much so that if you compare it to the rebuild position of Hawthorn or even Carlton, it is at least 1 to 2 yrs behind those 2 clubs.

In terms of player selection, whilst there is a lot of hype about this yrs prospects, Essendon could be criticised for its failure to address a variety of needs in this draft. Not only do they require pacy midfielders but a pressing concern is to develop at least 2 key position defenders. There is no realistic key defensive prospect coming through to replace the likes of Fletcher. And please don't say Kepler Bradley. He is not capable.

If you were recruiting this yr for Essendon would you have drafted Davey and Reemers considering you already drafted Jetta and have guys like Lovett for pinch hitting goals. Using the priority pick on Jetta was understandable, but then to pick a 22 yr old forward pocket and another small forward are both wasted selections IMO. Especially since Neagle was drafted as a 3rd tall forward last yr. Too much focus on drafting pace and forwards was given and not enough to defensive KPPs. Enough said!

As for their recruiting model, its easy to see that under Sheedy's reign, he likes to remain competitive from yr to yr. He has a tendency to try and recruit troubled footballers ala Cole, Zantuck or ageing stars like Campo and Mal Michael in an attempt to top up and remain competitive from year to year. But is this a proven approach!

History will suggest this is not the way to go for the Bombers. The teams that have followed a top up mentality in recent times, who already have an inadequate list, in an attempt to remain competitive, have only worsened their situation in the long run.

The 2 that come to mind are: Hawthorn - under Peter Schwab and North - under Dean Laidley. Both clubs have suffered the consequence in the long term of topping up in an attempt to improve the following season.

Rebuilding takes time. 2/3 drafts of sitting at the bottom and reping the benefits of early picks. This is the ideal scenario. But its obvious from Sheedy's motives that with the likes of Mal Michael in the side, he intends to try and move up the ladder next yr. And the worst thing that could happen to the Bombers is that they win 8-10 games next yr - max is all they are capable of.

Fact is they are better off remaining at the bottom and reaping the benefits of more early picks. But I dont believe Sheedy is the right man to rebuild the club, from the bottom up, with a recruitment model that will build a list capable of winning a premiership against the interstate powerhouses of today.

The best thing that can happen to Ess is for someone like O'Donnel to take over the coaching position and concede that they need to sit at the bottom, piss off all the dead wood and give every kid and rookie an opportunity over some 30 yr old looking for a few bucks.

Believe me, I've seen it with my club, you are destined for more years of mediocrity if the focus does not change.

Gone are the days of motivating disgruntled footballers, resurrecting careers etc. Its all about complete list management - across the board - all positions. And unless you have depth in all areas, you are not in the hunt!

If we're making comparisons to the Hawks now, they dont seem to have a recognised spine. M

Most of your shning lights have played less than 2 seasons of senior football.

Barely any finals experience amongst the current playing group.

Dismissing Sheedy? Thats laughable considering the Hawks coaching history isnt all that flash of late.

4-5 years ago, you would have had a point regarding our rebuilding. however...you have completely ignored the influx of talented kids we suddenly find in our ranks. Did you ignore Monfries courage, Watson's breakout year, Stanton's continued emergence as a future star, Johns returning to play senior football from a debilitating injury, Lovett's Anzac Day medal, Lovett-Murray's run off the half back flank?

From where Im standing, you havent even taken the time to acquire this knowledge before making a reckless statement in regards to our recruitment.

 

[Longy413]

I don't know why I'm responding, it's funny to make you look silly and I like talking about Essendon I guess....

the Bombers list is in a true rebuild state. So much so that if you compare it to the rebuild position of Hawthorn or even Carlton, it is at least 1 to 2 yrs behind those 2 clubs.

We have more draftees on our list from the last 5 drafts than Carlton. More first rounders as well.

In terms of player selection, whilst there is a lot of hype about this yrs prospects, Essendon could be criticised for its failure to address a variety of needs in this draft. Not only do they require pacy midfielders but a pressing concern is to develop at least 2 key position defenders. There is no realistic key defensive prospect coming through to replace the likes of Fletcher. And please don't say Kepler Bradley. He is not capable.

In the last three drafts we have drafted Andrew Lee, Jay Neagle, Danny Chartres and Dean D_ick. All talls that will be developed to play in key defensive posts.

As for pacy midfielders, since 2002 we have drafted Jason Winderlich, Andrew Lovett, Ricky Dyson, Jay Nash, Leroy Jetta, Courtenay Dempsey, Kyle Reimers, Alwyn Davey and Brent Stanton.

If you were recruiting this yr for Essendon would you have drafted Davey and Reemers considering you already drafted Jetta and have guys like Lovett for pinch hitting goals. Using the priority pick on Jetta was understandable, but then to pick a 22 yr old forward pocket and another small forward are both wasted selections IMO. Especially since Neagle was drafted as a 3rd tall forward last yr. Too much focus on drafting pace and forwards was given and not enough to defensive KPPs. Enough said!

You're showing yourself up again, this really is fun.
Jay Neagle is being developed as a key defender.
Kyle Reimers played most of his footy across half back and half forward, he's not a small forward.

Alwyn Davey didn't play purely as a small forward and like Lovett will rotate through the midfielder, infact he spent a lot of time in the SANFL starting in the centre square. We drafted Davey because he was the best available at that pick, he would have gone a couple of picks later to Port Adelaide had we not drafted him.

As for their recruiting model, its easy to see that under Sheedy's reign, he likes to remain competitive from yr to yr. He has a tendency to try and recruit troubled footballers ala Cole, Zantuck or ageing stars like Campo and Mal Michael in an attempt to top up and remain competitive from year to year. But is this a proven approach!

We've got 10 players on our list that are recruited as first year players in the past two national drafts. That's a quarter of our list. Nearly two thirds of our list is made up of players drafted from 2001 onwards.

Rebuilding takes time. 2/3 drafts of sitting at the bottom and reping the benefits of early picks. This is the ideal scenario. But its obvious from Sheedy's motives that with the likes of Mal Michael in the side, he intends to try and move up the ladder next yr. And the worst thing that could happen to the Bombers is that they win 8-10 games next yr - max is all they are capable of.

We've already been down the bottom for two drafts, we had two first round picks in 2005, and three picks in the top 20 in the best draft of time.

We drafted SIX kids before we drafted Mal Michael. SIX kids, and Mal was the best player availabe in the PSD after we had drafted those SIX kids. We then drafted another two kids in the rookie draft, that gave us EIGHT kids over all and one of the best defenders of recent times.

Winning is a habit, but so is losing. The more games we win the better.

Fact is they are better off remaining at the bottom and reaping the benefits of more early picks.

Yep, because that is a proven theory. Adelaide, West Coast, Sydney, Port Adelaide, Brisbane, Essendon of 2000 and the like all did that.

Gone are the days of motivating disgruntled footballers, resurrecting careers etc. Its all about complete list management - across the board - all positions. And unless you have depth in all areas, you are not in the hunt!

Exactly, it is about list management and part of that includes player development. We lost a lot of experience over the past few years, we actually need someone to teach these youngsters how to play the game. We lost Solomon, Rioli, Rama and the like. We drafted EIGHT kids after drafting TEN in 2005 and we had the opportunity to recruit a bloke who can not only protect our youngsters as they ease into senior footy, allow them to develop at their own pace, but also teach them how it's done.

What a terrible idea that was.