All:

I am of the belief like many that we have the makings of a premiership defence. It is a back half with height and speed that can match up well on almost any forward set up thrown at it. It will only improve further as it matures.

Below is our back six as named this time 2 years ago.

Backs:J.Rivers, N.Carroll, M.Whelan

Half backs:D.Ward, P.Wheatley, D.Bell

Alot can change in a short period and alot of the time you dont see it coming. It might be a late blooming rookie that takes time to mature, a 198cm athlete picked as a punt in the PSD or a shy Tasmanian forward with good speed off the mark.

I thought of this over the weekend watching Watts chase kicks in the Casey 2's, Jurrah showing glimpes of majik in the Casey 1's and Newton start to gain confidence yesterday. Maybe our forwardline is not as far away as we think.

Ward, Carroll and Bell. Ouch.

Wheatley at CHB? Now we can choose from Warnock, Martin, Rivers, Garland and Frawley.

Dean Bailey is a genius, Daniher was a plodder.

And for much of that season, Rivers wasn't even on the park.

I remember the talk on this forum before the 2008 season. No one had any faith in Garland, Frawley, Martin or Warnock. I remember thinking it would be extraordinary unlucky if all four turned out to be duds, but then I couldn't see where the improvement was going to come from... What a great surprise it was though. The silver lining of the 2008 season.

And for much of that season, Rivers wasn't even on the park.

I remember the talk on this forum before the 2008 season. No one had any faith in Garland, Frawley, Martin or Warnock. I remember thinking it would be extraordinary unlucky if all four turned out to be duds, but then I couldn't see where the improvement was going to come from... What a great surprise it was though. The silver lining of the 2008 season.

So true Wisedog. I'II put my hand up and thought Garland was a dud. Could we be wrong about Newton who has only played 17 games?

Dean Bailey is a genius, Daniher was a plodder.

maybe the most insightful thing youve ever uttered

Is Daniel Bell's career effectively over?

So true Wisedog. I'II put my hand up and thought Garland was a dud. Could we be wrong about Newton who has only played 17 games?

I'll second that. I too thought very little of Garland (along with Warnock) when they first came to the club and thought they'd both be delisted in 2 years. Now when fully fit we'll be looking at a defence line of

FB: Rivers, Warnock, Whelan*

HB: Frawley, Martin, Garlnad

*I'll note Whelan probably only has this year and maybe next left so I'll assume his position will be filled by Bartram or Chenney.

Is Daniel Bell's career effectively over?

I'll assume they possibly offer him for trade at the end of the year and hope either Adelaide or Port will be interested. If there's no one interested however I still think they'll hold onto him. Could be useful if injuries hit.

Now we can choose from Warnock, Martin, Rivers, Garland and Frawley.

Dean Bailey is a genius, Daniher was a plodder.

Four of those players were recruited in the Daniher years, but don't let facts get in the way of your argument.

I'll second that. I too thought very little of Garland (along with Warnock) when they first came to the club and thought they'd both be delisted in 2 years. Now when fully fit we'll be looking at a defence line of

FB: Rivers, Warnock, Whelan*

HB: Frawley, Martin, Garlnad

*I'll note Whelan probably only has this year and maybe next left so I'll assume his position will be filled by Bartram or Chenney.

I think it may be Bennell to replace Whelan for a while until he goes into the midfield.

Yes Maurie the only Bailey appointee is Martin.

Four of those players were recruited in the Daniher years, but don't let facts get in the way of your argument.

Ok, so perhaps our recruiting over the last decade hasn't been that bad...

How then, do you explain the team's performance during that time? Those are the only facts you can truly rely on.

Ok, so perhaps our recruiting over the last decade hasn't been that bad...

How then,do you explain the team's performance during that time? Those are the only facts you can truly rely on.

we finished in the finals 7 times in Daniher's 10 years with no money, home games sold interstate and crap facilities - they ARE the facts.. :angry:

How then, do you explain the team's performance during that time? Those are the only facts you can truly rely on.

I'm not defending all of the Daniher years. However, it is still true that all our current tall defensive options, with the exception of Martin, were recruited while Daniher was still coach. To add them to Bailey's 'tick-box' as a genius is just plain wrong.

we finished in the finals 7 times in Daniher's 10 years with no money, home games sold interstate and crap facilities - they ARE the facts.. :angry:

Are they now? I count 6 - 98, 00, 02, 04, 05 & 06.

In 2000 we had a good year, except for a near record loss in the GF... The rest of our finals efforts were terrible. How many finals did we win after 2000? Our team was soft and crumbled as soon as the tempo stepped up which it does in finals footy.

Half the competition participates in finals each year, that means some very average teams get in. Good teams are judged by their finals performances so go back and look at our efforts in 2004, 05 & 06 and come back here and construct an argument that we were a good side back then.

I'm not defending all of the Daniher years. However, it is still true that all our current tall defensive options, with the exception of Martin, were recruited while Daniher was still coach. To add them to Bailey's 'tick-box' as a genius is just plain wrong.

I agree with the comment about Bailey, he has a long way to go before being considered successful.

However you have to admit that he is showing signs that he appears to be better at developing a team than Daniher. Admittedly this hasn't been demonstrated by a good win/loss ratio, however he took over a team that had alot of holes in it.

Something went horribly wrong during the Daniher/Cameron era, I always put it down to poor recruiting among other things but it's a discussion that has no clear answer

A lot of this improvement surely has something to do with the recruitment of Wellman as the back coach, was a fantastic backman, and a lot of the players show similarities to the way he played.

I think a good thing about Martin is he hasn't played for too long, so hasn't developed bad habits from a long time in the game, as he is so raw someone like Wellman can teach him the right things to do pretty much from scratch.

A lot of this improvement surely has something to do with the recruitment of Wellman as the back coach, was a fantastic backman, and a lot of the players show similarities to the way he played.

I think a good thing about Martin is he hasn't played for too long, so hasn't developed bad habits from a long time in the game, as he is so raw someone like Wellman can teach him the right things to do pretty much from scratch.

with the development of stef martin, what becomes of paul wheatley when he's ready to resume?

i think there's still room for him but who drops out to make way for him? will there be room for him when col garland is ready to come back?

A lot of this improvement surely has something to do with the recruitment of Wellman as the back coach, was a fantastic backman, and a lot of the players show similarities to the way he played.

I think a good thing about Martin is he hasn't played for too long, so hasn't developed bad habits from a long time in the game, as he is so raw someone like Wellman can teach him the right things to do pretty much from scratch.

The Russian has is it one, Wellman, brought in by Bailey.........

has taken a guy that was hanging on to the list by fingertips and turned him into our gorilla strangler (he played whole game on Sunday which was magniiicent effort), a tall gangly forward from Tassie into one of the most exciting backmen, an athletic basketballer who can read the ball in flight and judge perfectly what he is going to do when it drops......

.also you will notice these days if he gets a chance to spike the ball out also goes through the opposition player as well....Wellman all over.......and we have Frawley, who I though was raw as anything who has improved every game he plays......looked great on Sunday and has realised he can actually run with the ball.......

Rivers being Rivers and the likes of Whelan, Cheney, Bennell, Grmies, Strauss to come in and out is just the icing on the cake

Backs:J.Rivers, N.Carroll, M.Whelan

Half backs:D.Ward, P.Wheatley, D.Bell

That lineup makes me feel sick in the stomach.

I'll assume they possibly offer him for trade at the end of the year and hope either Adelaide or Port will be interested. If there's no one interested however I still think they'll hold onto him. Could be useful if injuries hit.

Pretty sure we tried doing that this year.

But hopefully we do get something from him this year. I dont think his a dud but no room in our defence. Nor is he going to be a gun mid.

Yeah I mean Bell is obviously not in the starting 22 anymore but I think right now he's a good squad player who could have a role if injuries hit. He's been ok for us, got 60 games up in a very difficult period for us, that's not to be forgotten, although as a first-round pick you'd have to say he hasn't come on as we'd have hoped. Hopefully he does get picked up as he's good enough to be on many clubs' lists.

Ward, Carroll and Bell. Ouch.

Wheatley at CHB? Now we can choose from Warnock, Martin, Rivers, Garland and Frawley.

Dean Bailey is a genius, Daniher was a plodder.

daniher got them all to the club

with the development of stef martin, what becomes of paul wheatley when he's ready to resume?

i think there's still room for him but who drops out to make way for him? will there be room for him when col garland is ready to come back?

Wheatley's not a backman and shouldn't be considered as such - certainly not as a key defender such as Martin.

Wheatley's role is more akin to a defensive winger and he's been played further up the ground under Bailey.