Jack Grimes

[deeflog 679]

In that case you're getting way ahead of yourself cos they're not ready.

Development doesn't mean simply putting kids in positions when they aren't ready and then watching them magically turn into capable players over the course of 10 games.

i would argue strongly that Cheney showed enough last year to warrant putting more time and games into him, but fair enough with Strauss and i did say eventually for Blease

[Deeoldfart 8,033]

If we both stick to what we do best, I'll only ever work in fashion and you'll only ever make an arse of yourself... and what would be the fun in that.

.......................

Ha!ha! Perfect response!

[Demon_JB 1,385]

We have a lot of midfielders to throw around and mix up. Not to mention a lot of games and time to set everyone's position in the future. From what I saw with Gybserts in his first match, that guy is a ball magnet and seems to be very suave in his ability to dispose of it cleanly. Honestly, someone with that sort of ability would be deadly in the back line. So if we had to make a change, swapping those two if they are in our starting 22 would be something to look at in my opinion.

[rpfc 28,429]

Somebody's a misogynist...

A boon for DLand this bloke is.

[Swampfox 190]

I think Grimes will eventually move to the centre of the ground i just dont believe he is quite ready for that role yet

In todays football a half back flanker is technically a defensive midfileder

[rednblue 0]

If this year is still a "development year" then start playing the players that need developing and in the positions they need to develop into.

Grimes will be a midfielder maybe next year or the year after, play him there. Strauss will move into Grimes' position when he moves to the midfield, play him there and let him develop.

If it forces out a Bruce, MacDonald or even Rivers so be it, they will not be part of the premiership team in 3 years time

I agree with this statement. Grimes is an amazing rebounding defender, but I do see him eventually moving into more of a midfielders role while Strauss will take that "quarterback" role that Grimes currently occupies.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

If we both stick to what we do best, I'll only ever work in fashion and you'll only ever make an arse of yourself... and what would be the fun in that?

Game Set Match.... B)

[Akum 2,660]

Grimes got picked in the centre and I was surprised, given that Sculgrove (plus McKenzie) were out, that he didn't play there. IMO, after Sculgrove, he's the one mid we have who can consistently hurt the opposition the most.

About Grimes in defence, IMO we need to get more sophisticated about selection rather than just pick more or less the same back 6 every game. The best teams play their "quarterback" on the matching forward (tall or small) who's least accountable, who they can "zone off" the easiest. But Geelong doesn't have a forward who's not accountable, so it was always going to be very difficult for Grimes to zone off & do the "quarterback" stuff. Which is why I was surprised they didn't play Grimes in midfield, where he might have done some damage, and a defensive small (e.g. Cheney) on Stokes.

On the other hand, I think that Grimes was one of a number of our younger players (others being Bennell, Jetta, Watts & Wonna) who looked very very tired against the Cats.

But my point is that we need to put Grimes where he's likely to do most damage, and if the other side have no small forwards that he can easily zone off, we're going to lose a lot of drive from him as "quarterback" and he might be better in midfield. Especially against top teams like Geelong.

[Red Sox 2]

Jack Grimes - will be/is a star no matter where he plays!!!!

Not strong enough, accountable enough, slow to move the ball from defence???????? This may well be one of the silliest things I have seen written....seriously!

The guy bounces up from marking contests, keeps his feet and he will win the ground ball 7/10 times if not more, he uses the ball fine, dont count kicking out against him....there are 40 blokes who would look bad at times when kicking out from FB.....zones etc make this one of the most difficult parts of the game IMO...the entire team need to get better in this area but saying that they have actually worked some coast to coast play quite well comparing to last year.

I would suggest the fact that a suggestion comes to move Jack to the middle would only happen if he was a damn fine player, which he is, but to argue that he should be moved because of deficiencies in his game....your almost arguing against the point you are trying to make!

AUTHORS NOTE - Jack is a superstar and I would never agree with negative comment anyway You're a star Jacky!!

Edited May 31, 2010 by Demon Jack 16

[hoopla 418]

lol. OMG. Not accountable, undisciplined. My God.

Jack Grimes? The Melbourne guy? Number 16? Far out, you blokes watch a different game to me!

... and a very different game to me..

Is this thread a script for Monty Python?

Edited May 31, 2010 by hoopla

[deeflog 679]

Its time to release Jack Grimes to the midfield. He is not a natural backman. He is not accountable enough, strong enough in one on ones, is always too slow to move the ball from defence, whether it be from kick ins or in general play, and like Davey is far more damaging forward of the centre.

Last year when he was released he dominated games and racked up high possessions to the point where he had to be "rested" so we didn't ruin our draft prospects.

I think he would be the cream on the midfield

funny how things change around here in a month B)

[Gorgoroth 12,950]

To be honest we can afford to keep Grimes there, what we can't do is keep both grimes and Bruce there, both play the loose attacking HBF role.

One need's to play elsewhere.

[Grandson of a gun 276]

Grimes is learning from Bruce. That is the bigger picture.

Grimes is fantastic across half back and with the plethora of mids we have he needs to stay there as soon you will find that he will be just like enright or gilbert or hodge, that really damaging half back that sets up a lot of play.

Bruce won't play on and so i believe they are getting him to teach the young backline as much as possible in the last few games.

[old dee 23,791]

He is a beauty, wish we had three more like him.

Never puts in a poor game and has lots very good ones.

In case we have forgotten he is at the Demons because we traded Travis J.

[Disco Demons 92]

He is a beauty, wish we had three more like him.

Never puts in a poor game and has lots very good ones.

In case we have forgotten he is at the Demons because we traded Travis J.

i'm pretty sure we got dunn for travis...

grimes is a fantastic player...people need to remember he's played every game this year...compared to previous years...

it's the forward line that needs to take the pressure off the backline...

Could play grimes in the forwardline?

[BennytheJet 15]

i'm pretty sure we got dunn for travis...

grimes is a fantastic player...people need to remember he's played every game this year...compared to previous years...

it's the forward line that needs to take the pressure off the backline...

Could play grimes in the forwardline?

Nope - it was grimes for travis

[MadAsHell 4,212]

i'm pretty sure we got dunn for travis...

grimes is a fantastic player...people need to remember he's played every game this year...compared to previous years...

it's the forward line that needs to take the pressure off the backline...

Could play grimes in the forwardline?

We got Dunn for Jolly.

Got Grimes for TJ.

[drdrake 3,163]

We need Strauss and Cheney to get into the team and cement their spot, Grimes belongs in our Midfield. The third quarter his clearance work was great and I remember against Essendon preseason he dominated the clearances.

[Nasher 33,616]

i'm pretty sure we got dunn for travis...

Heh, your timelines are a bit skewed there. We got Dunn out of the Darren Jolly trade. That feels like a lifetime ago now.

[Disco Demons 92]

We got Dunn for Jolly.

Got Grimes for TJ.

cheers for that.

[Dinosaur Rover 197]

Its time to release Jack Grimes to the midfield. He is not a natural backman. He is not accountable enough, strong enough in one on ones, is always too slow to move the ball from defence, whether it be from kick ins or in general play, and like Davey is far more damaging forward of the centre.

Last year when he was released he dominated games and racked up high possessions to the point where he had to be "rested" so we didn't ruin our draft prospects.

I think he would be the cream on the midfield

“I think Jack Grimes [was good]. We put him onball and we made a few changes, because we had to. He competes hard all day, anyway, Jack,” Dean Bailey at MFC web site post Adelaide game.

[tess 19]

Heh, your timelines are a bit skewed there. We got Dunn out of the Darren Jolly trade. That feels like a lifetime ago now.

You were that keen to correct him, that you didnt even give yourself enough time to have a look and see two other people in this thread have already done so.

[Gorgoroth 12,950]

Grimes is learning from Bruce. That is the bigger picture.

Ahhh that's why Grimes has started to turn the ball over at a rapid rate. Bruce is teaching him.

[e25 5]

You were that keen to correct him, that you didnt even give yourself enough time to have a look and see two other people in this thread have already done so.

Considering the timing of the posts, it could easily have been a case of overlap between reading & replying to the thread and when the other corrections were made.

Happens to me a lot, that I take a bit of time to read a thread while I am busy on something else and by the time I post a reply 3 other ppl have had the same thought.

Just saying is all.

Edited June 28, 2010 by Enforcer25

[e25 5]

I think it's a given that Grimes can be very good in the midfield.

The real issue is that he is much more valuable to the team on a HBF.

We don't have anyone else who can perform there like he does.

Scully, Trengove, Gysberts, McKenzie et al cannot play that role.

Putting him in the midfield was only done as a necessity and I think it will continue to be that way in the future.

Not merely because of his kicking and composure, but his courage and his penchant for fearlessly running back with the flight of the ball and actually taking the mark more times than not.

It's robbing Peter to pay Paul, when you don't in fact owe Paul any money.

(And I swear I read earlier that someone thinks he is soft and not a good defender?? Madness.)

Edited June 28, 2010 by Enforcer25