White

[THE_GUN]

I would like to see White used as a tagger. He absolutely destroyed a few HBF's this year in Yarran and some others. Although Harvey destroyed him on the weekend. Have never rated him and always been at the fore of...delist matt white, however we have others to go first.

Farmer, McGuane, GOurdis, Taylor, Moore (retired), Nason, Hislop, Hicks, Whestoff, O'Rielly

I know some of the above are rookies but these are the guys that will give us nothing going forward and probably have to go before White. Not saying White doesn't deserve to go but there are others I would cut first.

I would like to know the reasons why you would like gourdis & O'rielly delisted.

Gourdis : Before injury has been in the coburg best more than any other player at coburg the last 2 years & has been harshly treated at richmond with not getting a string of games in 1 week out 5 even though he has shown more than thursfield,Mguanne and some others.
Extremely fast,Huge leap,Great athletism and 194cm 95 kgs definately a keeper for another year

O'rielly: irish always take 3-4 years and has shown great improvment last year with a few good games but has been injured this year and hasnt really been able to recover and lost fitness has guts and determination very much worth persisting with another year on the rookie list.

 

[_Wang_]

nope apparently jonesy is a dud.ignore the fact he can do specific roles consistently and well (not just for a block of games but seasons on end) . ignore the fact he makes good decisions, and ignore the fact, yes he has poor kicking skills, but he is smart enough ( sheesh footy smarts something jackson is totally devoid of) he in the main only uses them within his limitations.
can find plenty of the ball and when he does its usually to the teams advantage.
yep for so many tiger supporters hes a dud. but one has to say hes a far lesser dud than hacks like jackson. the double standards are well mindboggling.

Agreed with the bolded.. To compare him to White is pretty harsh on Jones..

 

[JAKLAUGHING]

I would like to see White used as a tagger. He absolutely destroyed a few HBF's this year in Yarran and some others. Although Harvey destroyed him on the weekend. Have never rated him and always been at the fore of...delist matt white, however we have others to go first.

Farmer, McGuane, GOurdis, Taylor, Moore (retired), Nason, Hislop, Hicks, Whestoff, O'Rielly

I know some of the above are rookies but these are the guys that will give us nothing going forward and probably have to go before White. Not saying White doesn't deserve to go but there are others I would cut first.

Thats probably why he wont be delisted...like you have posted...plenty others to go before whitey...

 

[Madison]

Has been in the system for 6(?) years now, clearly isn't going to get any better and he isn't good enough now.

Needs to go.

 

[JAKLAUGHING]

Maybe...but you can say that about a few others as well...

Gee some have it in for Whitey...i still think he has value...

 

[santa claws]

Thats probably why he wont be delisted...like you have posted...plenty others to go before whitey...

of course he wont be delisted hes a contracted player cant get rid of him even if we wanted.
craig cameron just how much more will he get wrong.

the way its going we will only turn two or three players over from the list proper what a joke. why because of fools like cameron signing every one up.

the only thing i can think of for the list being run the way it is is they think we have a top 4 list.

they better make the 8 next yr and not just scrape into it either.
one can see it coming a mile away half a job done again.

 

[rammbo]

There is a chance he will improve now he has to fight for his spot and his footy career the guy has pace and running ability just needs to find his role and work bloody hard.

 

[YellowandBlackBlood]

Always thought he and Simon Black would end up at the pies....

 

[Madison]

of course he wont be delisted hes a contracted player cant get rid of him even if we wanted.
craig cameron just how much more will he get wrong.

the way its going we will only turn two or three players over from the list proper what a joke. why because of fools like cameron signing every one up.

the only thing i can think of for the list being run the way it is is they think we have a top 4 list.

they better make the 8 next yr and not just scrape into it either.
one can see it coming a mile away half a job done again.

That's just ridiculous.

You really think the brains trust thought we had a top 4 list when they signed White's last contract? Or that because they did that a few years ago, it has now changed where the club thinks it is at?

If we only turn over 4 this year (off the main list I assume you mean), it won't be because we think we are finals bound, it will be because players we want out are contracted. And in a weak, and compromised, draft, maybe we aren't that fussed since we don't think its worth going super deep.

The true indicator of where the club thinks we are at will be the players they cut over the next two years, not just this one. There aren't many players contracted past 2012, and that is the 'super draft'. We will be culling the players we can this year, and you can bet we will cull more the year after, no matter where we finish.

 

[santa claws]

There is a chance he will improve now he has to fight for his spot and his footy career the guy has pace and running ability just needs to find his role and work bloody hard.

and what will improve his kicking or his decision making or his ability to get his hands on the ball these are just 3 things that need to improve dramatically after 6 yrs it wont happen.

yep he has supposed pace but nothing else to go with it.

what an ordinary lot our small forwards are.

nahas king and white. all lack polish. all are poor kicks, all are not big possesion winners. two white and king are basically defensive smalls as there is no other role for them talk about limited players and nahas has played most of his best footy away from the forward line.

throw in the fact we only have two genuine medium forwards morton and macdonald on the list neither of whom inspires any sort of confidence. in fact morton could well be gone as he is one of few players left who is uncontracted.
what competition does white have if he cant get a game in front of that lot he doesnt deserve a game.

i have to ask just where is the bar set for our supporters when it comes to our players. the way we want to hang onto every single player you would think we are playing collingwood today.

 

[santa claws]

That's just ridiculous.

You really think the brains trust thought we had a top 4 list when they signed White's last contract? Or that because they did that a few years ago, it has now changed where the club thinks it is at?

If we only turn over 4 this year (off the main list I assume you mean), it won't be because we think we are finals bound, it will be because players we want out are contracted. And in a weak, and compromised, draft, maybe we aren't that fussed since we don't think its worth going super deep.

The true indicator of where the club thinks we are at will be the players they cut over the next two years, not just this one. There aren't many players contracted past 2012, and that is the 'super draft'. We will be culling the players we can this year, and you can bet we will cull more the year after, no matter where we finish.

what is ridiculous is the fact they gave him a contract at all.
what is also ridiculous is it seems you think we cant cut deep just because its a compromised draft.go look at what fremantle are doing its up to 8 and rising.
what is ridiculous is players who should be in the gun are getting more than 1 yr contracts.
what is ridiculous is we should be turning over 8 to 10 players this yr with another 8 to 10 to follow, the way cameron is signing players up those that need to go wont until after 2013.

as far as i can gather there is just 14 players coming out of contract next yr and most of them would be required.

 

[rammbo]

and what will improve his kicking or his decision making or his ability to get his hands on the ball these are just 3 things that need to improve dramatically after 6 yrs it wont happen.

yep he has supposed pace but nothing else to go with it.

what an ordinary lot our small forwards are.

nahas king and white. all lack polish. all are poor kicks, all are not big possesion winners. two white and king are basically defensive smalls as there is no other role for them talk about limited players and nahas has played most of his best footy away from the forward line.

throw in the fact we only have two genuine medium forwards morton and macdonald on the list neither of whom inspires any sort of confidence. in fact morton could well be gone as he is one of few players left who is uncontracted.
what competition does white have if he cant get a game in front of that lot he doesnt deserve a game.

i have to ask just where is the bar set for our supporters when it comes to our players. the way we want to hang onto every single player you would think we are playing collingwood today.

Your dream of having 22 gun A graders is my preference but ffs santa it aint gonna happen and we just gotta just get the best out what we hav and upgrade where possible unfortunately white is still in our best 30 so i just hope he improves and becomes a valuable team member and yes i hav my doughts that he can but replacing him with someone that is likely to b a worst player doesnt cut it with me .

 

[Hipster Doofus]

He's the kind of guy that IF we delist, you want him to hang around and play at Coburg were he keen for it.

Yeah, gives his all, nothing against the bloke but he just won't cut it if we are going to improve. Hopes he stays and plays for Coburg

 

[santa claws]

Your dream of having 22 gun A graders is my preference but ffs santa it aint gonna happen and we just gotta just get the best out what we hav and upgrade where possible unfortunately white is still in our best 30 so i just hope he improves and becomes a valuable team member and yes i hav my doughts that he can but replacing him with someone that is likely to b a worst player doesnt cut it with me .

you see this is where you are patently wrong. im not asking for 22 a graders just 22 who are up to afl standard.

as i said white isnt going anywhere this yr hes unbelievably contracted.

and you know what ive said it often enough better the unknown dud than perservering with the known one.

one other little matter that is constantly over looked our top 30 is only good enough for a 12th placed finish on the ladder this yr or bottom half. it is not good enough to beat top 6 sides and is so poor at times that abysmal performing sides like gc and pa rolled us.
this is something that has not changed since 2002.
clearly our top 30 is part of the problem.

 

[tugga]

santa, a lack of any punctuation makes your posts incredibly difficult to read. Not trying to be a grammar Nazi, but they really are a mish mash sometimes.
PS: Not trying to belittle you or anything. I want to read what you say as I am interested, but sometimes I really struggle.

 

[Madison]

what is ridiculous is the fact they gave him a contract at all.
what is also ridiculous is it seems you think we cant cut deep just because its a compromised draft.go look at what fremantle are doing its up to 8 and rising.
what is ridiculous is players who should be in the gun are getting more than 1 yr contracts.
what is ridiculous is we should be turning over 8 to 10 players this yr with another 8 to 10 to follow, the way cameron is signing players up those that need to go wont until after 2013.

as far as i can gather there is just 14 players coming out of contract next yr and most of them would be required.

I don't think we should be going really deep this year. I would think 4-6. Ideally 6.

Without looking at contract status, I would like to move on Taylor, Farmer, McGuane, Jackson, White, Nason, Gourdis probably.

I think that would be enough for this year, and then next year do another decent clean out of probably 5-7, and after that keep it to 3-4 or so a year. 3-4 because if we stick to the above, most of the team will be kids so we won't have players who have been around long enough to cut.

10 this year is ridiculous. I am of the same opinion as you for the most part, but think you are taking it to the extreme.

 

[santa claws]

I don't think we should be going really deep this year. I would think 4-6. Ideally 6.

Without looking at contract status, I would like to move on Taylor, Farmer, McGuane, Jackson, White, Nason, Gourdis probably.

I think that would be enough for this year, and then next year do another decent clean out of probably 5-7, and after that keep it to 3-4 or so a year. 3-4 because if we stick to the above, most of the team will be kids so we won't have players who have been around long enough to cut.

10 this year is ridiculous. I am of the same opinion as you for the most part, but think you are taking it to the extreme.

hmm 10 is easy.

delist/trade - farmer, jackson, nason, taylor, webberley, and morton all out of contract. newman to the vet list and three new rookies. theres your 10.
when you look at the output of these players this yr and seasons past by getting rid of them you hardly lose a thing.
nothing ridiculous about it at all. not when you look whos still on the list for 2012.
my preference is to try someone new for two yrs and perhaps even fail, rather than continue with many we have. at the end of the day we cant do any worse.

 

[True Thylacine]

hmm 10 is easy.

delist/trade - farmer, jackson, nason, taylor, webberley, and morton all out of contract. newman to the vet list and three new rookies. theres your 10.
when you look at the output of these players this yr and seasons past by getting rid of them you hardly lose a thing.
nothing ridiculous about it at all. not when you look whos still on the list for 2012.
my preference is to try someone new for two yrs and perhaps even fail, rather than continue with many we have. at the end of the day we cant do any worse.

Have no idea why I am asking this as I can hear the answer already...but do you really think we can find 9 players better than those 9 in this draft? 6 or so OK but 9 who are actually better and improve the side? Why delist and gamble in a shallow draft when a few of those guys have some known ability, abeit with known limitations? Seems very high risk low reward to me.

 

[CoggaRules]

hmm 10 is easy.

delist/trade - farmer, jackson, nason, taylor, webberley, and morton all out of contract. newman to the vet list and three new rookies. theres your 10.
when you look at the output of these players this yr and seasons past by getting rid of them you hardly lose a thing.
nothing ridiculous about it at all. not when you look whos still on the list for 2012.
my preference is to try someone new for two yrs and perhaps even fail, rather than continue with many we have. at the end of the day we cant do any worse.

Understand your take on trying the untried, instead of trying the trying dude. But the brains trust has to play a cat and mouse game when it comes to keeping a balance in terms of "some" results, so the tiger is stirring stuff keeps the tigerheads somewhat hopeful, along with adding some newbies.
Pretty confident that the brains trust see and understand what you and alot of us see and understand. Next year will be year 3 of the rebuild and they know that in the midst of continuing the rebuild, they also need to maintain some kind of semi respectable position on the ladder to keep the fires burning.
Hence they opt to keep those that they know their capabilities and their inabilities. i.e somewhat competitive in games against similar standard teams. If they unearth another then the bar rises from there and so on and so on.

The bottom line is that the KPIs and all that shit need to keep pointing up, even if its minimal, the graph needs to stay on an upward trend. Slamming 9 newbies into the list aint an option in guaranteeing that trend stays pointing north.

 

[TimeFor11]

Diamonds in the rough every year from state leagues etc so whilst it is impossible almost to replace 9 with 9 better you may find 4 that will cut it and 5 duds that will only last the 2 years.

The question is will any of those 9 go on to bigger and better things? It would be an awesome job list management but a seriously difficult one at the same time.

 

[Madison]

hmm 10 is easy.

delist/trade - farmer, jackson, nason, taylor, webberley, and morton all out of contract. newman to the vet list and three new rookies. theres your 10.
when you look at the output of these players this yr and seasons past by getting rid of them you hardly lose a thing.
nothing ridiculous about it at all. not when you look whos still on the list for 2012.
my preference is to try someone new for two yrs and perhaps even fail, rather than continue with many we have. at the end of the day we cant do any worse.

I said the main list so the three rookies don't count.

The only ones I disagree on are Morton (who showed more than enough towards the end of 2010 to make me think he can play, and battle personal stuff this year, though I would only be giving him this year) and Webberley, who I would give one more year.

Aside from that I think you are on the money, which gives 5 picks with Newman going on the vet list. Which is a decent amount in a weak draft.

The next year I would without fail move on McGuane and White, with the blow torch on Webs, Morton, Thursfield going into the season. And the potential for Macdonald (if he has still shown nothing) and Tuck ( who I love but is getting on), as well as Graham (though I think we still need him for depth as we have no one else) to go at the end of the year as well.

That's a further 8 that could be gone (in what is meant to be a strong draft) and from there I believe the cleanout is done and you cut each year based on where you think players have been passed (maybe Grigg, Edwards, King etc.)

That's what I would be doing, and I have no doubt that the brains trust have a similar idea. Do you really think that they can't see the things that we can? They live and breathe footy all day every day, there is nothing we would observe that they don't.

 

[theyellowsash]

one thing to remember is that we cant just delist all our duds this year and replace them because of the contract lengths of drafted players. remember once drafted a player automatically has 2 years. that means if we get rid of say 10 main list players this year, the players we replace them with are tied to us for 2 years and we may struggle to make room for the following draft without delisting guys we might actually want to keep and give more time to. the list management aspect of it means that holding onto some guys like mcguane and white as injury backup will also allow us to draft more kids next year, and that may be a better and faster rebuilding method than just grabbing a handful of kids after pick 80 and hoping just one of them becomes a good player.

 

[santa claws]

Have no idea why I am asking this as I can hear the answer already...but do you really think we can find 9 players better than those 9 in this draft? 6 or so OK but 9 who are actually better and improve the side? Why delist and gamble in a shallow draft when a few of those guys have some known ability, abeit with known limitations? Seems very high risk low reward to me.

simply put the answer is no. if i had 9 picks every draft i would expect 5 or 6 players with a less successful rate the later the picks.


i mentioned 6 players to be delisted/traded, all out of contract. plus 3 rookies. moving newman to the vet list thus making room for 10 new players.

again those 6 farmer, nason, webberley, taylor, jackson and morton.
in all seriousness what sort of contribution did these blokes make this yr.
rookies hislop hicks and westhoff. newman to vets.
yep 9 gone and if you blinked you would miss them.

as far as i can see, you may correct me if im wrong but we have 5 rookies who have had two yrs we actually have to make a call on them. one of them likely orielly will get promotion.

we have picks 14 32 50 68 and psd pick 5 i think.
take an uncontracted player in the psd, use pick 68 on a mature player like our own nick carnell at coburg. he would be an automatic upgrade on those mentioned.
hopefully we could manage to trade both jackson and morton for picks somewhere between 35 and 49. or for a need, like as part of a deal for a ruckman like maric if they deem him good enough.

what are we losing? what is there to lose? at worst we replace a proven below standard player with an unknown quantity who may or may not be any good.

does replacing these blokes this yr hurt list management next yr? of course not there are many just like them if not worse.

 

[TimeFor11]

I admire Carnell for his courage and effort but seriously he has been under our nose for 4 years and isn't on our list. He has too many limitations that would see him struggle at AFL level.

Willie Wheeler already getting greater numbers than him after 1 year in the magoos.

 

[_RT_]

simply put the answer is no. if i had 9 picks every draft i would expect 5 or 6 players with a less successful rate the later the picks.


i mentioned 6 players to be delisted/traded, all out of contract. plus 3 rookies. moving newman to the vet list thus making room for 10 new players.

again those 6 farmer, nason, webberley, taylor, jackson and morton.
in all seriousness what sort of contribution did these blokes make this yr.
rookies hislop hicks and westhoff. newman to vets.
yep 9 gone and if you blinked you would miss them.

as far as i can see, you may correct me if im wrong but we have 5 rookies who have had two yrs we actually have to make a call on them. one of them likely orielly will get promotion.

we have picks 14 32 50 68 and psd pick 5 i think.
take an uncontracted player in the psd, use pick 68 on a mature player like our own nick carnell at coburg. he would be an automatic upgrade on those mentioned.
hopefully we could manage to trade both jackson and morton for picks somewhere between 35 and 49. or for a need, like as part of a deal for a ruckman like maric if they deem him good enough.

what are we losing? what is there to lose? at worst we replace a proven below standard player with an unknown quantity who may or may not be any good.

does replacing these blokes this yr hurt list management next yr? of course not there are many just like them if not worse.

Our picks are: 14, 36, 54, 72, 90 & 108. If we choose to upgrade a rookie we have to use our last live pick in the ND i.e. 90 and then pass 108. Odds are we will be taking Morris, who is a mature aged player, with a F/S pick as well so hopefully that will be 54 or 72. Also with the rookies we can still place them on the rookie list for a 3rd season if they qualify. I think they need to be under 23 to do so.