Will Sullivan promotion

[paran]

At the start of the season Will Sullivan was promoted to our senior list. At the time it was thought to be cover for Cox, but that has proved unnecessary. I believe that his promotion was hastily done and poorly thought out. Currently we're in need of a player such as Hams on our senior list (dearth of mature small players), but can't due to the LTI rules. Is there any way to reverse the Sullivan promotion?

 

[smiths]

I guess you didn't know AFL clubs can elevate another rookie at round 11.

 

[paran]

After round 12? 2 games, and Sullivan probably won't contribute this season anyway.

 

[new breed]

Problem has been with West Coast's stubborn attitude not to play Brown in the backline and Lynch only forward , These examples meant West Coast would promote Sullivan and use Lynch only forward ... the plan hasn't worked too well at this stage !

 

[Denton52]

It was done because we were set on a final's push. Same problem as last season. Now makes 2 years (preseason) wasted and suddenly mid year it's "oh we weren't really expecting finals this year, we're actually developing the youth".

 

[Tyberious Funk]

At the start of the season Will Sullivan was promoted to our senior list. At the time it was thought to be cover for Cox, but that has proved unnecessary. I believe that his promotion was hastily done and poorly thought out.

I agree. I thought it was a strange decision at the time. We have two front line ruckmen in Cox and Naitanui. And a vaguely decent backup ruckman in Lynch. And if any one of those players were seriously injured, we could promote a rookie.

IMHO, we should have looked to promote a rookie that was likely to actually play. And of all the rookies on the list, I think Sullivan was one of the least likely.

Currently we're in need of a player such as Hams on our senior list (dearth of mature small players), but can't due to the LTI rules. Is there any way to reverse the Sullivan promotion?

Personally, I thought Stevenson should have got Sullivan's place. Hams has been handy, but I'd be surprised if he ends up playing more than about 20-30 games in his career. He reminds me of Cockie in that sense. Cockie added some energy and enthusiasm to the team, plus he had the benefit of being big-bodied and well developed compared to some of the draftees. But he's just not AFL-level. I think Hams is probably the same.

 

[paran]

Don't get me wrong, I think Hams best position is a back pocket, tough defender, but currently we really need a small who can crumb and provide defensive pressure in our forward line. Quite frankly, he's teh only guy on our list capable of the doing that job now. Masten failed at it and so did Dazzle. Scooter doesn't seem to have the skillset and neither does McGinnity. Cockie while tough, doesn't really fit the crumbing fwd mold.

I agree that Stevenson should be one of the rookies on the senior list, but of the other rookies Hams would provide the greatest contribution right now. Neates and Broome are not physically ready to play AFL, and Weedon is still half a season off (and not at all small).

 

[tesseract]

The upgrading of Sullivan may've been a strategic move to appease him, and in a way bribe him into staying at the club and not place himself into the market at season's end.
Sullivan can't be rerookied, so the Eagles acted early to ensure his future services.
Sullivan may've said this is what I expect or I walk.

I'm just speculating and am unsure if this is the case. But if it is, the Eagles must rate him enough to expect him to play a role for the club in the future.

 

[Masto]

It was purely done so that NicNat wouldn't be thrown to the wolves if Cox went down. Hams best position is at South Fremantle. And if you think this had anything to do with a finals push then you're a moron.

 

[NYJetsfor2029]

At the start of the season Will Sullivan was promoted to our senior list. At the time it was thought to be cover for Cox, but that has proved unnecessary. I believe that his promotion was hastily done and poorly thought out. Currently we're in need of a player such as Hams on our senior list (dearth of mature small players), but can't due to the LTI rules. Is there any way to reverse the Sullivan promotion?

You do know that Sullivan's promotion had no effect on any other rookie being promoted at the start of the season right?

We have no veterans so we were able to promote two rookies from the get go, but we just chose to only upgrade one. This is in no way Sullivan's fault.

I pretty sure they would have liked to upgrade Stevenson or Hams but chose not to to keep the pressure on all of the rookies to perform.

 

[paran]

You do know that means we can't have Stevenson AND Hams, right?

 

[BlueandGoldforever]

Will Sullivan was promoted before the season started for the following reasons:

1) The Eagles were unsure if Dean Cox was going to make it through the season considering he broke down pre-season after missing the last third of the 2009 season
2) The Eagles wanted to play Quinten Lynch permanently at full-forward so if the situation arose that Cox or Nic Nat broke down, Sullivan could fill the void without disrupting the balance of the team
3) The Eagles assumed that at some stage Nic Nat was going to need a rest for a couple of games, which directs you back to the above point.

You can't blame the logic behind the Eagles coaching staff decision.

 

[greennick]

While I agree that the promotion has ostensibly resulted in naught so far (maybe there are some hidden benefits like him not chasing a deal elsewhere or something), I can't fault their reasoning. At the start of the year, none of the rookies could be picked over another, therefore how could you promote one over the other. Better to keep them all on a level playing field chasing promotion from the WAFL until R11 or a LTI.

 

[bodazoka]

I completely agree with the logic before the start of the season, also wasent it something that we had to do before the season or we wouldnt of been able to upgrade a rookie?

ie We couldnt save the upgrade for a few weeks?

 

[joeyavalanche]

i know its been thrown up and then bagged in here,
but i think our most ready-to-go rookie is Callum Wilson.

when he debuted last year onwards he was kicking regular goals and providing a proper lead up target.

this time last year our forward line was a shambles and this year it seems to be our strength.
i think Wilson deserves a chance to play as he was with Kennedy and LeCras firing down there, he may just fit the mix.
we need a strong marking, lead up full forward and he is just that.

the eagles maybe gave him a handful of games,
but compared to the time wasting they are doing between lynch and hansen yet again isnt really productive.

he was part of majority of those games we played great in late last year.

should be one of the rookies upgrading for me.

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

I completely agree with the logic before the start of the season, also wasent it something that we had to do before the season or we wouldnt of been able to upgrade a rookie?

ie We couldnt save the upgrade for a few weeks?

No, it had to be done by 2pm on the Tuesday after the NAB Cup grand final.

We could have promoted a second player at the same time. There was some suggestion at the time that we didn't due to salary cap reasons.

 

[bodazoka]

Cheers Five.

 

[eagles_4_life]

No, it had to be done by 2pm on the Tuesday after the NAB Cup grand final.

We could have promoted a second player at the same time. There was some suggestion at the time that we didn't due to salary cap reasons.

how do we have salary cap issues seriously anyone? my understanding of kerr's big contract was perfomance based and since he has barely played shouldnt be much. the only others would be cox, glass and may be embley. how do we have salary cap issues?

 

[Sw3Et]

Because we only upgraded 1 of a possible 2 rookies at the start of the year, does that mean we get an extra upgrade after the split round? So we could elevate Wilson and Hams?

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

No, we had to do it straight after the NAB Cup or not at all.

We only get the one mid-season upgrade after this round, same as every other club.

 

[ziad]

Problem has been with West Coast's stubborn attitude not to play Brown in the backline and Lynch only forward , These examples meant West Coast would promote Sullivan and use Lynch only forward ... the plan hasn't worked too well at this stage !

Lynch has played in defence - for short periods because he was completely so hopeless. He has also played in the mid field and ruck where he is also hopeless, slow, unable to tackle and makes poor & slow decisions. Stubborn is a good thing sometimes.

Brown is potentially a great foward and is being developed, not a bad thing. I like him in defence.

A well balanced list should have three ruckmen. With Cox recovering from injury and Nic so young it is even more reasonable to have the backup of a third ruckman. He have lost Seaby who was the back up.

 

[rant]

Promoting Sullivan as a back up ruckman with Cox/Naitanui/Lynch on the team makes no sense at all. Cause if one of them are injured he can just be elevated for those few games then back to the rookie list. There is no way he is going to get a game with cox and naitanui fit (even if they were out of form).

Either

1. Eagles screwed up and thought that they had all the players they needed from the senior team and long term were going to keep Sullivan anyway. Now have Lynch/Hansen/Sullivan/Weedon/Notte/Spangher/Neates (7 players that are unlikely to play a game for the rest of the year)

2. Eagles promised Sullivan an upgrade in a deal to keep him.

 

[Eastern Rangers]

Problem has been with West Coast's stubborn attitude not to play Brown in the backline and Lynch only forward , These examples meant West Coast would promote Sullivan and use Lynch only forward ... the plan hasn't worked too well at this stage !

Really bad call in hindsight.

If he's not our best FF then he's not a best 22 player. The only problem was that he was never the best option to play FF.