Opinion What unpopular AFL opinions do you have? - Part 2

[big_e]

i think thats a pretty popular opinion at the moment, most seem to think he'll be a solid 200+ game player/potential captain etc but never truly elite

If you said to a club that their number one draft pick would be a 200+ game player and potential captain, they would take that every day of the week.

 

[detox]

I think Tony Lockett and Dunstall wouldn't have made it in today's game. Physically their attributes just wouldn't have matched today's game where lead and mark forwards are practically dead. You either need to be a 2m tall pack marker ie Brown/Lynch or a small crumber basically. There's a few exceptions but I think they'd struggle. The amount of increased running and chasing they'd have to do they'd weigh 85kg each.

It's like Mike Tyson. He was a monster in his day, but put him up against someone from today like Tyson fury, who is 6'9 with a 210cm reach and superb defence and the 178cm Tyson couldn't get near him.

My opinion only.

 

[Hard Ball Get]

I think Tony Lockett and Dunstall wouldn't have made it in today's game. Physically their attributes just wouldn't have matched today's game where lead and mark forwards are practically dead. You either need to be a 2m tall pack marker ie Brown/Lynch or a small crumber basically. There's a few exceptions but I think they'd struggle. The amount of increased running and chasing they'd have to do they'd weigh 85kg each.

It's like Mike Tyson. He was a monster in his day, but put him up against someone from today like Tyson fury, who is 6'9 with a 210cm reach and superb defence and the 178cm Tyson couldn't get near him.

My opinion only.

You're assuming that they are teleported from back then to today and they dont have the benefit of modern training, coaching, professionalism etc.

Dunstall was one of the smartest forwards I've seen. Today, he'd be a superstar medium forward.

 

[big_e]

I think Tony Lockett and Dunstall wouldn't have made it in today's game. Physically their attributes just wouldn't have matched today's game where lead and mark forwards are practically dead. You either need to be a 2m tall pack marker ie Brown/Lynch or a small crumber basically. There's a few exceptions but I think they'd struggle. The amount of increased running and chasing they'd have to do they'd weigh 85kg each.

It's like Mike Tyson. He was a monster in his day, but put him up against someone from today like Tyson fury, who is 6'9 with a 210cm reach and superb defence and the 178cm Tyson couldn't get near him.

My opinion only.

Bit rough to say they are practically dead - 53's not that old...

 

[Minka Beaver]

I think Tony Lockett and Dunstall wouldn't have made it in today's game. Physically their attributes just wouldn't have matched today's game where lead and mark forwards are practically dead. You either need to be a 2m tall pack marker ie Brown/Lynch or a small crumber basically. There's a few exceptions but I think they'd struggle. The amount of increased running and chasing they'd have to do they'd weigh 85kg each.

It's like Mike Tyson. He was a monster in his day, but put him up against someone from today like Tyson fury, who is 6'9 with a 210cm reach and superb defence and the 178cm Tyson couldn't get near him.

My opinion only.

Dunstall was a brilliant footballer - his chasing and tackling was more in common with modern forwards than any of his peers.

A lot of it comes down to mentality. If Tony Lockett were a junior footballer nowadays, he’d be on a private school scholarship at 15 and groomed for professional footy. He won’t be living in Ballarat until he’s 23 and commuting to training twice a week.

 

[Spuddigger]

I think Tony Lockett and Dunstall wouldn't have made it in today's game. Physically their attributes just wouldn't have matched today's game where lead and mark forwards are practically dead. You either need to be a 2m tall pack marker ie Brown/Lynch or a small crumber basically. There's a few exceptions but I think they'd struggle. The amount of increased running and chasing they'd have to do they'd weigh 85kg each.

It's like Mike Tyson. He was a monster in his day, but put him up against someone from today like Tyson fury, who is 6'9 with a 210cm reach and superb defence and the 178cm Tyson couldn't get near him.

My opinion only.

What a load of bilge. This from a guy who barracks for loses.

 

[Duskfire]

I think Tony Lockett and Dunstall wouldn't have made it in today's game. Physically their attributes just wouldn't have matched today's game where lead and mark forwards are practically dead. You either need to be a 2m tall pack marker ie Brown/Lynch or a small crumber basically. There's a few exceptions but I think they'd struggle. The amount of increased running and chasing they'd have to do they'd weigh 85kg each.

It's like Mike Tyson. He was a monster in his day, but put him up against someone from today like Tyson fury, who is 6'9 with a 210cm reach and superb defence and the 178cm Tyson couldn't get near him.

My opinion only.

While you are true to a certain extent, both those players would have the fitness and training of today. Both Lockett and Dunstall had football smarts. With a great training regime and diet they would be up there.

I do think they wouldn’t kick as many goals, but that’s not really on them.

 

[Knox Harrington]

I think Tony Lockett and Dunstall wouldn't have made it in today's game. Physically their attributes just wouldn't have matched today's game where lead and mark forwards are practically dead. You either need to be a 2m tall pack marker ie Brown/Lynch or a small crumber basically. There's a few exceptions but I think they'd struggle. The amount of increased running and chasing they'd have to do they'd weigh 85kg each.

It's like Mike Tyson. He was a monster in his day, but put him up against someone from today like Tyson fury, who is 6'9 with a 210cm reach and superb defence and the 178cm Tyson couldn't get near him.

My opinion only.

I don't think you can say that.
Like others have said they were gun players who at their size would play different roles and they'd also be training under modern standards.
Dunstall would be slimmer and a de goey type
Plugger a goal kicker.
Brereton would be a stringer type.
Ablett Sr would play like Ablett jr.
Etc etc

 

[jesterwester]

I think Tony Lockett and Dunstall wouldn't have made it in today's game. Physically their attributes just wouldn't have matched today's game where lead and mark forwards are practically dead. You either need to be a 2m tall pack marker ie Brown/Lynch or a small crumber basically. There's a few exceptions but I think they'd struggle. The amount of increased running and chasing they'd have to do they'd weigh 85kg each.

It's like Mike Tyson. He was a monster in his day, but put him up against someone from today like Tyson fury, who is 6'9 with a 210cm reach and superb defence and the 178cm Tyson couldn't get near him.

My opinion only.

I’d often wondered how they would have gone- but I think you only have to look at a guy like Josh Kennedy, who’s made a career of 600+ goals leading at the ball carrier like Lockett would have done to realise he would have done pretty well in today’s game.

Elite football talent that both Dunstall & Lockett had would had carried them through had they been prepared to work as hard as the modern footballers do. So perhaps that would be where some of the old guard would fall.

Would Lockett have kicked 1300? Unlikely, because I think the game has gone away from the one goal kicker that kicks 10 per week. Loads are spread between multiple avenues. But I think he could have still averaged 3-4 a week which, if given the games could have seen him maybe get 1000.

One things for sure- can you imagine trying to be the extra in defence in today’s game knowing those two would be coming out to meet the ball?

 

[iluvparis]

I feel like Xavier Duursma needs more arrows in his goal celebrations. One arrow is not enough.

Needs to evolve it to a rapid fire crossbow over the offseason

 

[Cuzz09]

Darling should do 3 of those backflip push up things then do the worm and breakdance finishing with a chinhold pose after every goal.

On SM-G925I using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Cuzz09]

I reckon Flyin' should pull this out after a goal



On SM-G925I using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[detox]

While you are true to a certain extent, both those players would have the fitness and training of today. Both Lockett and Dunstall had football smarts. With a great training regime and diet they would be up there.

I do think they wouldn’t kick as many goals, but that’s not really on them.

With the fitness and training of today, dunstall and plugger are 188cm / 191cm and 85-90kg in weight.

How many guys that size will kick 600+ goals in today's footy? There is almost none of them. Degoey is one I can think of but he has blistering pace and the on the run finishing ability of a crumber.

Dunstall and plugger were essential lead and mark players as brilliantas they were.






On SM-G973F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Damon_3388]

That’s my biggest beef with the Rising Star award - it’s meant to be predictive, but is voted for on the basis of first year output. With that predictive nature in mind, I have no idea why there’s a fairest component attached to it either.

It's actually not meant to be predictive at all. It's meant to be for the best performed player who meets the criteria (under 21, less than 10 games) at the start of a season.

 

[Damon_3388]

I don’t mean to kick Essendon while they are down, as im not even watching the game, however Andrew Mcgrath doesn’t really scream pick 1 footballer to me just quite yet despite winning the rising star. Seems more like a round 1 pick 8-16 type who will play alot of decent games consistently.

i think thats a pretty popular opinion at the moment, most seem to think he'll be a solid 200+ game player/potential captain etc but never truly elite

I kind of wonder what Essendon thought they were getting with McGrath, and how they saw that fitting with their side. When you've got the #1 pick, and you're in desperate need of a big-bodied inside mid, why do you pick a 5'10" flanker/outside mid?

 

[Scotland]

I'm not sure Dunstall would be a star in today's footy. At 188cm and 100kg he was an ideal FF in the 80s and 90s. When he wasn't kicking goals he wasn't a high possession player and his career high for tackles was 23 in a season. Plugger was a bit bigger at 191cm, Ablett Sr only 185cm but spent most of his career not playing at FF so was more like a high marking, more athletic version of Robbie Gray. I think Plugger would still be a top key forward without kicking 100 each year and Ablett would be a Fyfe/Martin level star that gets people through the gates.

Back to Dunstall, the modern game doesn't allow the same lead-mark-goal-repeat channels that it used to. Franklin is 20 games ahead and 280 shots for goal behind and is daylight ahead of the nearest current player for goals and scoring shots. Kennedy and Riewoldt aren't far off Dunstall in games played and have had about half as many shots for goal. Different game. If Dunstall played today I'd expect that his coaches would want him to be more like 85-90kg and capable of covering a lot more ground so he wouldn't be as strong in contests. Would he have that aerobic capacity within him I don't know, but Tory Dickson is the only 80s style forward I can think of to kick 50 goals recently and his accuracy is absurd. If Dunstall was running 10-15km a game Richo-style and having shots from 45 on an angle could he still convert at 66%? We had Ben McKinley lead our goalkicking one year with 42 in 18 games and he had 80s/90s forward written all over him. Just wasn't big enough for 2010s footy and could never build the tank to compete with guys like LeCras, Nicoski, Embley who offered more in other areas.

So yeah, Dunstall is a 'tweener for me. Not saying he definitely couldn't be a star, but I think being a less talented but taller and more athletic player gives you the better chance.

 

[edgie]

'moving in to the middle' is overrated.

 

[Xtreme]

Sure, but why didn't people like him?

Nobody likes a cheater

Cheaters never prosper (see Lance Armstrong!)

 

[Billy ray]

I kind of wonder what Essendon thought they were getting with McGrath, and how they saw that fitting with their side. When you've got the #1 pick, and you're in desperate need of a big-bodied inside mid, why do you pick a 5'10" flanker/outside mid?

Welcome to gold coast recruiting!

 

[big_e]

I kind of wonder what Essendon thought they were getting with McGrath, and how they saw that fitting with their side. When you've got the #1 pick, and you're in desperate need of a big-bodied inside mid, why do you pick a 5'10" flanker/outside mid?

There are other ways of bringing players into your team, you know.

 

[Damon_3388]

There are other ways of bringing players into your team, you know.

That's great, but why make it more difficult than you have to? Why not just make the most of the #1 pick? Again, why pick a small outside type at #1, especially when you've already got plenty? You can't tell me that their prospects right now and outlook going forward wouldn't look infinitely better with Taranto or McCluggage in the middle, instead of McGrath seagulling cheapies in the backline.

 

[Damon_3388]

Welcome to gold coast recruiting!

Ben Ainsworth at #4

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

Really? I could have sworn when it was founded that it was meant to be predictive of career output. That explains plenty.

It’s still strange though that they have an age qualification.

I think the qualifications they have are pretty good. Under 21 at 1 Jan or <10 games at the start of the season, means it won't always just be the top five pick in the worst team whose position is never under threat and who can collect his 30 touches without anyone worrying about locking him down.

My issue with the Rising Star is the poor voting system (assuming it hasn't been changed): just a panel giving 5-4-3-2-1 at the end of the year, how lazy can you get? They should go round by round with 5-1 for the best five perfomances from the eligible players that round.

People will think that this is just Hawthorn/Clarko bashing, but his motivation tactics before the GWS game had sweet FA to do with the result. It was just a bit of fun/silly buggers stuff that the AFL saturated media has flogged like a dead horse, so they have something to write about.

"Clarko the master motivator..." he's a brilliant football mind, the best coach of the past 30 years, but stuff like that doesn't make a difference at the elite level. Under 16s, yeah maybe something like that would work. I haven't watched 360 or read any of his columns this week (or this year, really) but I bet Robbo absolutely loved it. That probably says enough.

 

[Minka Beaver]

I think the qualifications they have are pretty good. Under 21 at 1 Jan or <10 games at the start of the season, means it won't always just be the top five pick in the worst team whose position is never under threat and who can collect his 30 touches without anyone worrying about locking him down.

My issue with the Rising Star is the poor voting system (assuming it hasn't been changed): just a panel giving 5-4-3-2-1 at the end of the year, how lazy can you get? They should go round by round with 5-1 for the best five perfomances from the eligible players that round.

The under 21 and 10 game rules have been around forever, haven’t they? I think they worked very well in the late 1990s and 2000s, when recruitment was almost exclusively focused on 17 and 18 year olds in the National Draft. They probably need a review now that lists are slightly larger and recruiting options are wider.

The flip side to the good young player in the bad team making their name is the mature age recruit who is ineligible, despite cementing a spot in a very good side. Harry Taylor, Tim Kelly and Dane Rampe come immediately to mind.

The suggestion that votes be progressive throughout the season is a very good one.

 

[Luv_our_club]

Flick handballs should be illegal.

Players should be told that they will be losing the benefit of the doubt when it comes to umpire interpretation of correct handballs = If it doesn't look like a classic handball and you cannot be certain it was a handball then the umpire should pay a free kick for incorrect disposal.

This will create some injustices at first, but it will stamp out incorrect handball technique and eradicate the flick handball which has become an epidemic. (I mean the quick flick of the ball which is both hands moving with the ball in the same direction at the same speed (basically a throw) and not the ball being propelled by the fist).

Once the current trend changes the umpires can go back to being less strict.