Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Adelaide' started by deaneus, Nov 25, 2016.
Brisbane ...Collingwood ?
(Log in to remove this ad.)
I know I had him in my dream team and he played two games early then was forgotten about for half the season. Held on to him as he was on the verge of playing his third game and generating cash, but it seemed like forever until he did. Came back into the side due to the injuries they copped and played some good games and actually attracted a tag after getting off the chain in a couple of games. Bulldogs would have certainly been happy with his output in his first year.
I expect Thommo to start the year. As long as he's sent for a rest as soon as he's only getting it 22 times and doing SFA outside the stoppage then I'll be happy. But if we persist and persist instead of giving, CEY, Wigg or whoever else a genuine crack in there, then I'll be pretty pissed.
How does offering up at least our first for Gibbs reconcile with being hell bent on going to the draft with it. There's also the small matter of having the coin for Gibbs, I'm sure we were hoping to find a use for it. You do also recall us addressing our need for outside run in the previous trade period. We're not exactly back in the N Craig days. Do you seriously consider that every club who failed to improve their 22 at the trade table hadn't bothered to try as well?
Gibbs came to us out of the blue. Wasn't targeted by us. Clubs serious about gearing up for a premiership crack certainly improve their list through FA, trade or both.
Why would we target him, he recently knocked us back and had 3 more years to run on his contract. What makes you so certain that we didn't try and get players but none were interested in coming to Adelaide.
Either way, it doesn't matter.
If we tried to get a bunch of players for a premiership assault and couldn't, then that's where we are.
Don't have the players for a current tilt, therefore play the draftees and build for the future.
Can't have a nothing year where we do neither.
The club thinks we do have the players for a current tilt
That's the worst scenario of all
Shows that they just wrote off our finals flop and Eagles game as bad days
Playing the kids before they are ready can be detrimental to the club and the players. It would be much harder to convince McGovern and Lever to sign on if we go backwards from 2016.
When clubs target a player, they don't just give them a call in trade week and say "how 'bout it?". They have generally been in discussions for 18months before hand. Which would mean they could have been talking to a player for most of the 2016 season about joining when their contract ends at the end of this year. It would certainly explain their reluctance to give up our 2017 first pick.
We need to put our best team on the park each week and see what the list is capable of. Throwing in the towel just because you think we had a charmed injury run last year and that won't happen this year would be defeatist.
If we are sitting outside of the 8 at the bye, then we start playing the kids, but until then we approach every game like we have the ability to go all the way this year.
Constant reassesment is required
at the begining of the year you would expect at least 8 clubs would consider themselves genuine chances to take the flag
But after 5 rounds you may see some reconsider this
We are definetly a chance but may need to re evaluate throughout the year, like freo did last year after losing Fyfe
Maybe losing crouch early is one of those things but I doubt it as he should be back
To be Honest if Crouch is missing for the first couple of Games, It opens the Door for Gallucci, And Pyke is not scared to Blood 1st-year players based on there training form, and Gallucci has that covered in Spades, The Very little Talk I am hearing from West lakes, Gallucci is up there with VB and Thommo with dedication to training.
It has been mentioned but I think this is what happened last year. There seemed to be an intention to blood players, McGovern and Milera eg with more to come later. Then we ''beat the draw'' and looked set for a good finish. That was when it seemed gold passes were handed out.
I hope this year is different , only because we have Hampton, Menzel and Knight looking to also break in. Otherwise they become surplus
Galluci will get a couple of runs this year but itr will probably be off the bench which is understandable
Crouch will be replaced in the mid at the start of the match by an experienced campaigner, CEY would be my pick although not a lot of games experience he is 23, or Thommo
CEY for Crouch would be the wrong mix, it could be Hampton or Wigg as they are more Defensive, but Gallucci has a better chance of starting in the first game with Crouch missing. As they will want pace to run with GWS, CEY while a moderately fast runner is not a quick player,
Most forget which I cannot understand why that Brad Crouch is a quick player with a good turn of speed.
I believe CEY is fighting for Lyons, Douglas or Thommo spot from last year. Along with Few others.
As you mention bring in the wrong Player and Sloane game changes, At a time we want help for Sloane.
With Crouch out of there we need an extractor, Sloane is a bit of an all rounder but do you want him in the thick of it trying to get it out consistently, he isnt capable of taking on a roll like Thommo that uses pure bulk and strength. I think most are forgeting if Thommo is out of that midfield mix from last year we need someone with some size and strenght, no way is hampton or wigg strong enough and galluci will develop but definetly not strong enough yet, CEY is the only one on the list. I think if anything when playing teams like Sydney we need a bigger midfield cant see how CEY isnt first choice if Thommo is playing in the magoos
Brad Crouch plays a similar role to Sloane he is not totally inside, As I said CEY is in the mix for Thommo inside role, along with others,
But Brad plays a inside and Outside, and it his pace and quickness they need replacing, not so much ball extraction.
How many pure inside player do they play, to me only 2 Matt and Thommo or Thommo replacement, the other need to inside/outside player with pace who can adapt and run or play defensive. So I would not have Matt, CEY and Thommo in the same midfield. Unless CEY has learnt to play a bit on outside.
Buy the way Hampton a Stronger player than CEY, and a Quicker player,
Thommo won't be there it will be Sloane, Matt and CEY without Brad
CEY is clearly needed as the big body we simply don't have one unless Thommo is back in there, Douglass has a mature body who could be there.
I always thought it was in reference to Cornes. you've always come across as a Port apologist
Lol, I have been critical of Kane Cornes, such that I have asked people to call him Kornes as he's giving me a bad name.
Have a look when I joined & before Kane was drafted.
Kane sugar Johnson was everything than Kornes wasn't - damaging with his disposal.
We targeted him because we believed he was persuadable and most of all he is exactly and precisely what we need
as long as they are prepared to be accountable either way
I expect that our club enquired of every midfielder that they had word were considering leaving their club. I'm sure every player manager got an email from Reid saying we were interested in beefing up our midfield brigade and had money available to spend.
I used to believe that once, but not anymore. That is the kind of thinking that delayed Walkers development.
All you have to do is look at GWS....flogged and flogged for years, yet had to compete against men. Baptism by fire and now they have developed. It has not been detrimental to them!!
It all comes down to team balance. Balance of maturity, ability, and potential. You play a kid if he is doing all the right things and there is legitimately a spot for him to fill. You don't hold him back. That was Craig's way and we all saw how that ended.