Remove this Banner Ad

Wrong Place, Wrong Time

  • Thread starter Thread starter Chaisa
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Influenced a bit by the discussion in the "Adelaide decline", with a few people theorising that Fogarty would be a much better player if he was based 20 years ago but a possible bust in today's climate.

So, who do we think are players that were flops in their time but would be much better players in a different circumstance? Not talking about guys that had horrid injury runs but players who's skillset was poorly suited to the era they played in or had a thing that held them back that would've been less relevant in another time.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Someone like Jack Darling would be interesting to watch in the late 80’s/90’s. Similar to Fogarty. He’d be the right height for a key forward (instead of now as a 2nd/3rd tall) and is so mobile for his size and good 1v1. He wouldn’t kick say 1000, but I’d say he would have been a 650-800 goal kicker in that period. As it stands he probably gets to 550 if he plays another 4 years at 40 goals a year.

But as the OP asked for flops specifically.

From WC, then North, Ben McKinley springs to mind; natural goal kicker who wouldn’t have had the same pressure to chase and apply as much defensive pressure. Would have done well a generation or two back.
 
Peter Hudson, if only they had proper knee reconstructions back then...
 
To take a different tack, NicNat and Hugh Greenwood. I'd love to see how their opponents in the '80s and '90s would have combatted their athleticism, attack on the footy and tackling pressure, elements that would have been virtually unprecedented for players of their size at the time. Would bust a lot of myths about the "hardness" of footy back then IMO.
 
From the swans I always felt Jarred Moore, while not a spud, was the epitome of a player who would have been a star in another era. He had amazing footy IQ, could find the ball easily and always used it with skill, was also tough and a real competitor. He just simply didn't have the height or the tank to excel in the modern game. Could have easily seen him dominating games in the 80s or 90s.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

What happened to him?

Is he injured or what?

Sent from my SM-G981B using Tapatalk

I was critical of Watts being soft. Then in a game last year he took on two opponents and almost burst through. Unfortunately he dragged an opponent with him and the weight of the opponent landed on the back of his foot, doing a nasty injury and break by his ankle.



I'm starting to think we won't see him back, as he is no longer even mentioned in the injury list but can't seem to get onto an extended list. Perhaps McKenzie and Mayes are ahead of him in the pecking order.
 
I was critical of Watts being soft. Then in a game last year he took on two opponents and almost burst through. Unfortunately he dragged an opponent with him and the weight of the opponent landed on the back of his foot, doing a nasty injury and break by his ankle.



I'm starting to think we won't see him back, as he is no longer even mentioned in the injury list but can't seem to get onto an extended list. Perhaps McKenzie and Mayes are ahead of him in the pecking order.

Yeah I wondered if it was still because of that incident
 
Tom Hawkins.

Don't get me wrong - he's a very good tall forward already - but he doesn't fit the modern forward prototype. He can't run like the wind and his leap hasn't been there since he started having back issues in 2013 (he was actually a pretty good leap back in 2012).

Hawkin's one-wood is out-wrestling opponents for a one-on-one mark, where he's just unbeatable because of (a) his size, and (b) his ability to pick where the ball will drop. That doesn't suit the modern game so much, because 1 v 1 contests are hard to manufacture in zone defences.

If Hawkins had played in the 80s with a clear forward line, he could have been Lockettesque - with, possibly, a reasonable dose of intimidation factor simply due to his size.
 
To take a different tack, NicNat and Hugh Greenwood. I'd love to see how their opponents in the '80s and '90s would have combatted their athleticism, attack on the footy and tackling pressure, elements that would have been virtually unprecedented for players of their size at the time. Would bust a lot of myths about the "hardness" of footy back then IMO.

I'll tell you how Polly would tackle NicNats leap, he would jump early, into the body, hang in the air & either get the tap or grab the ball & handball it. A technique he perfected in WA against taller opponents most notably 4 time AA Jack Clarke who complained Farmer cheated by doing it.
 
I'll tell you how Polly would tackle NicNats leap, he would jump early, into the body, hang in the air & either get the tap or grab the ball & handball it. A technique he perfected in WA against taller opponents most notably 4 time AA Jack Clarke who complained Farmer cheated by doing it.

Farmer was 10cm shorter and 15kg lighter than NicNat, and probably less athletic with a shorter reach too. I'm sure NicNat could adapt and out-ruck him.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Tom Hawkins.

If Hawkins had played in the 80s with a clear forward line, he could have been Lockettesque - with, possibly, a reasonable dose of intimidation factor simply due to his size.

Agree. Easily a century goal kicker with 1980s style game plans and scoring levels.

Would have looked great with a mullet too.
 
Agree. Easily a century goal kicker with 1980s style game plans and scoring levels.

Would have looked great with a mullet too.
Kinda like... this?

I have no idea how this bloke contributed half the DNA to a KPF with tree trunk arms, but there you go


bec07534dfdd4f83fa56fbbfb4a00d3b3d421895.jpg
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom