Garland nominated for Rising Star

[mo64 5,278]

Looking at that its tough to discern a serious trend. ie we have Brisbane and Collingwood up there (of the teams that are doing well at present) but then we also have ourselves, Richmond and Port, who are all struggling (obviously the optimal number of rising star nominations is 6!). I'm going to have to go with rising star nominations meaning sod all at this stage. I can think of numerous players who have earned a nomination for one or two weeks good form, only to vanish from the face of the earth subsequently.

Likewise, looking back at the history of rising star WINNERS, at least half have been no more than journeyman players.

I think you're right Diablo, ther's no correlation between Rising Star nominees and success.

Younger players get more of an opportunity, and can make more of an impression in struggling sides.

[CARN THE DEES! 14]

Is there another Jared Rivers other than the one deanox mentioned in his post? I've only ever seen the one.

Well that will teach me 2 post before reading throughly.... i feel quite stupid

[JACKATTACK 17]

I think you're right Diablo, ther's no correlation between Rising Star nominees and success.

Younger players get more of an opportunity, and can make more of an impression in struggling sides.

Agreed, however if I were to go back a further 2 years it would paint a different story:

Hawthorn had 5 nods between 2002 and 2003.

Geelong also had 3 or 4 in that time.

So coming into the last 2 years both Hawthorn and Geelong were near the top of my ladder, I chose not to include 02-03 in the ladder because that would have knocked us off top spot, and no-one here wants to see that happen.

[deanox 8,908]

there is no correlation between success and those figures. but thatsw simply because those figures indicate the number of nominations in the past 4 years. that means, that it could only be 5 years since even the first nominated player could have made their debut putting them at around the 23 mark (assuming they debuted at 18). in another 4 years, we will have 11 players aged between 22 and 27 who have been nominated for the award. that will be when they are hitting their straps, if they continue to play well.

it will be interesting to see how that list compares to the ladder in 4 years. it would be also interesting if we could see a list from 2000-2004. before to long indicates geelong and hawthorn were up there. i wonder if the doggies had a few aswell?

if someone knew where to get that information and was willing to do it thatd be great.

[Neita3000 37]

Colin will be a star. Is probably the most raw player on our list and still yet is playing great footy. Only more improvement can come. Cameron picked up a beauty

Edited July 8, 2008 by Nasher

[Pates 9,551]

Well done to Garland, can't say i've been sold on him since day one but he has shown some great potential this year and really looks like a footballer. Now let's try and get Morts, Valenti, and co. nominated!

Edited July 8, 2008 by Nasher
Removed deleted quote

[maximum bob 462]

It's a pity Ricky Petterd got injured. Would've had a real shot.

[tess 19]

Garland on SEN in 5 mins.

[Neita3000 37]

Garland on SEN in 5 mins.

What did the next Matty Scarlett say?

[joeboy 2,918]

What did the next Matty Scarlett say?

The only enlightening thing he said was that assistant coach Sean Wellman awarded free meals to any defenders who kicked goals , which gave him added incentive to work his way forward .

[Dappa Dan 2,188]

So coming into the last 2 years both Hawthorn and Geelong were near the top of my ladder, I chose not to include 02-03 in the ladder because that would have knocked us off top spot, and no-one here wants to see that happen.

:D

I can't believe the Saints have only one. That sucks for them. Though I guess Riewoldt and Kosi Count for quite a lot...