Is there a ready made Hale type out there..in other comps?

[Red Sox 2]

GNF and TOR - you do yourselves no credit with your descriptions of Newton or any MFC player for that matter. I would be keen to read your description of Mark Jamar at the end of 2008.

You should be preparing to be disappointed. I reckon we should and will retain Michael Newton as a rookie - it's a low cost, he has attributes we need and he's been making progress. If we had secured David Hale it might have been a different story.

I admire you for not potting players but cannot agree with your assessment that Michael Newton has been making progress. The attributes you speak of, I am not exactly sure what these are?

To respond to the OP question, if you saw a Pods or Newton at VFL level who would you take?

I am happy that both MFC and Newton have extended enough time to each other and need to call it a day. I think it was High Tower that mentioned Sinclair from Port. I would much prefer to give a spot to someone such as him that has shown his attributes at VFL level, consistently.

[daisycutter 28,713]

I am happy that both MFC and Newton have extended enough time to each other and need to call it a day. I think it was High Tower that mentioned Sinclair from Port. I would much prefer to give a spot to someone such as him that has shown his attributes at VFL level, consistently.

I'm hopeful we can find a place on our list for Sinclair. Might be some other clubs sniffing around too

[beelzebub 22,697]

Is it possible that we are in a position that more than a few clubs envy, that of having quite some depth/ or probable talent in the midfield that we can possibly afford to home in on a bloke like Sinclair? I.e a little earlier in the drafting circus thanother clubs could afford being that they're after mids mids and more mids!

[Guest hangon007]

I've got an idea!

Why don't we fast-track the entire list!!

We could even win the premiership next year!

This is the thinking outside the square that we have been waiting for...

Because you can only play 22 players in the team at one time. (Now its 21 plus a sub) Best way to fast track somebody is play them ... tough concept for some to understand I know. But at times its just got to be done.

[jayceebee31 692]

What about this bloke ?

Picking my suggestions now HT- CAN'T YOU FIND ANY YOURSELF..

[old55 21,818]

I admire you for not potting players but cannot agree with your assessment that Michael Newton has been making progress. The attributes you speak of, I am not exactly sure what these are?

To respond to the OP question, if you saw a Pods or Newton at VFL level who would you take?

I am happy that both MFC and Newton have extended enough time to each other and need to call it a day. I think it was High Tower that mentioned Sinclair from Port. I would much prefer to give a spot to someone such as him that has shown his attributes at VFL level, consistently.

The problems with Michael Newton are mostly in his psychology. He can mark, he is actually a good kick and he has shown he can compete in the ruck at VFL level. I didn't see much of Casey this year but the good judges I trust saw him make progress in 2010. I definitely saw him make good progress in 2009 in his attack on the ball and defensive efforts. He can perform the required skills - he needs to be able to do it under AFL pressure. Jamar was quite similar.

Retaining Newton on the rookie list and drafting Sinclair (or similar) onto the main list are not mutually exclusive and if he's any good I'm all for it. I reckon we're gonna have 4 ND picks - we should delist PJ and Tommy Mac - and 5 rookie picks even if we retain Newton. That means we can put 9 new players on our list. If we reckon that PJ and TMac are the best available option at any of those 9 positions then we can pick them up. Retaining Newton deprives us of a 6th rookie pick - 10th player overall, retaining PJ and TMac deprives us of ND picks 49 and 52 - 3rd and 4th player overall, there's a big difference.

[rpfc 27,666]

Because you can only play 22 players in the team at one time. (Now its 21 plus a sub) Best way to fast track somebody is play them ... tough concept for some to understand I know. But at times its just got to be done.

Just because you are playing them does not equate to 'fast-tracking' their development.

Of course, their development would be aided by AFL footy, but can we afford to carry a kid who isn't ready?

I don't think we can, and I don't think we would be doing him (or Gawn) any favours by playing them when they are not ready.

Increasing, unnecessarily and cruelly, the expectations on them

Edited October 13, 2010 by rpfc

[beelzebub 22,697]

Let's put Sinclair in the box for now. Any others ?

Keep in mind Jurrah came from the other side of the stump (albeitly via the filth) so we can look further afield than the VFL

[Guest hangon007]

Let's put Sinclair in the box for now. Any others ?

Keep in mind Jurrah came from the other side of the stump (albeitly via the filth) so we can look further afield than the VFL

You can look where ever you want. However, the big question is are they any better than we already have on our senior list?

Obviously the Footy department thought Hale was ... so it was their choice to chase him. However, just because we didn't get Hale doesn't mean we have to chase an average or previously failed similar type else where ... to try a fit on our senior list.

One proviso might be unless we can get them on our Rookie List ... but you would think Why has he lasted that long ... How good could he genuinely be. (But then again Dean Cox did come from a Rookie list)

Are we recruiting somebody to play on our list or Caseys list?

[beelzebub 22,697]

You can look where ever you want. However, the big question is are they any better than we already have on our senior list?

Obviously the Footy department thought Hale was ... so it was their choice to chase him. However, just because we didn't get Hale doesn't mean we have to chase an average or previously failed similar type else where ... to try a fit on our senior list.

One proviso might be unless we can get them on our Rookie List ... but you would think Why has he lasted that long ... How good could he genuinely be. (But then again Dean Cox did come from a Rookie list)

Are we recruiting somebody to play on our list or Caseys list?

He may not be average at all.. just obscure..or a late developer having gone under the radar. Not a failure...not simply presented at the higher level yet.

[Guest hangon007]

He may not be average at all.. just obscure..or a late developer having gone under the radar. Not a failure...not simply presented at the higher level yet.

Exactly he cannot be "average" he has to get in front of what we already have got on our senior list. Otherwise he is merely clogging our list or restricting the development of what we already have.

If we recruit "him" we have to play him. Many of the names mentioned have already failed at the higher level.

You can fit "late developers having gone under the radar" on a Rookie list but it would be one hell of a risk on your senior list. However, this is not to say I'm averse to risk, just pre-warning of the "hit & miss" nature of big blokes.

If our FD take the risk its fine by me.

[The Chazz 4,077]

He may not be average at all.. just obscure..or a late developer having gone under the radar. Not a failure...not simply presented at the higher level yet.

Obviously the FD are looking for a more mature body than a kid aged 18-22 for the next couple of seasons at least. By this time, we are hoping that Gawn/Fitzpatrick may be that big body that can play this role. So, as we missed out on Hale (and didn't get Jesse White), it is natural to think that we should look further afield to fill this need.

The concern I have is just how much will the J-pod experiment pay off for a team that is far better than us? Sure, he kicked some bags, but on the MCG he was mostly useless, and come finals time, he was rarely sighted. Prior to this year, the VFL has produced minimal in the way of ready made players who came in and made an impact. Barlow and J-Pod did this year (don't forget what I wrote about J-Pod though), so do we really think that gap filler is running around in these leagues now? To be honest, I'm doubtful. Trying to pick up a 24-27 year old, proven FF that can pinch hit in the ruck, but most importantly, expecting them to have an impact at AFL level is bordering on dreaming!

So, what's my suggestion/input to this thread?

Well, I have just finished watching the replay of the Melbourne/Sydney game from Round 17 - the game where we couldn't do a thing wrong! Paul Johnson played all over the ground that day, and I have to admit, when he was deep in the forward line, he was dangerous. Now, before you PJ-haters start eating your computer screen, what is this role we need filled? It's not to expect our Full Forward to come in and kick 100+ goals for the year, my expectation would be to get 30 goals out of him (I would love to know what the FD's expectation would be). Where this player will be most valuable is ensuring we get the ball to ground as much as we can (when he doesn't mark it), to ensure over crumber's are having more of an impact. They obviously need to ruck maybe 5-7 minutes per quarter, and ensure that sides don't get on top of us during Jamar's rest period.

My question is "Why CAN'T PJ play this role"? His kicking for goal is quite accurate. His decision making may let him down at times, but if he is contesting anywhere up to 60m out from goal, and if he manages to have the ball in his hands, it will generally be from mark or free kick. His decision would have been made for him so he doesn't have to think - if he is in range, have a shot! His ruck work is competitive, in 2009 he was our main ruckman from memory.

The other thing to think about is that all clubs are in the same boat. Sides like Sydeny, Geelong, etc wont have the luxury of playing 2 rucks, plus a tall forward line, otherwise they risk not having that extra runner in the team. So, use Geelong for example, Ottens is an automatic selection, do they play him forward and Blake as the number 1 ruck, or start Ottens in the ruck and have either Blake, Hawkins or West play as either a tall forward/ruck, or actually start them on the bench (taking up one of only 3 interchange spots), so that they can keep their forward line of Mooney and J-Pod? Either way you look at it, I'm confident in PJ's ability to play that 2nd ruck against other Club's potential 2nd rucks. You need to really think about a side like Geelong's structure in 2011 (not what we have already seen), to work out that PJ may just be that saviour.

I believe Green will play more forward again in 2011, and he should expect 40+ goals out of himself again. Jurrah, well, if he can play 22 games, he has to be a realistic chance of kicking 40+ himself. Add the odd cameo from Petterd, Sylvia and Watts, and all of a sudden, the need for PJ to win games off his own boot for us is reduced significantly. If we can have Green, Jurrah and someone else all kick over 30 goals this season, as well as 3 or 4 guys kicking more than 20 goals, we WILL win more games than we lose.

Sorry for the long-winded post, my opinion of PJ is neutral, 2011 will see him sink or swim. I just think he is a far better option than trying to find that player from the VFL.

[beelzebub 22,697]

Billy....PJ cant mark above his head (esp pack marking ) !! kinda a requirement for a forward Id say

[The Chazz 4,077]

Billy....PJ cant mark above his head (esp pack marking ) !! kinda a requirement for a forward Id say

He would not be expected to mark everything kicked at him. If we moved the ball quick enough inside to him in a one-on-one, I personally believe he would mark more than he drops.

When you think about it, not many Full Forwards that aren't the number 1 forward for that team, not many of them would mark as much as they would like.

I have explained how I see that role having a massive impact on our team, being a key marking option doesn't even rate in the top 5 KPI's for me.

B59, you have pretty much proved my point. Yeah sure, he may not be strong at marking above his head. But can he make a contest? Will that mean the ball hits the ground?? Isn't that what we are hoping any of the players we put in that role can achieve? I'm also predicting the delivery from our midfielders to be of a higher standard that what we have experienced in the past 6 or 7 years, so I would think PJ would take most of his marks on a lead.

[The Chazz 4,077]

Billy....PJ cant mark above his head (esp pack marking ) !! kinda a requirement for a forward Id say

Think it was quite immature using that rolling eyes picture too. There are more requirements for this role we have than just taking above-head marks, perhaps you should understnd the role we are needing to fill, then you may see that, regardless of your opinion of PJ, that he may tick a number of the boxes that Hale or even White would have filled.

[rpfc 27,666]

Obviously the FD are looking for a more mature body than a kid aged 18-22 for the next couple of seasons at least. By this time, we are hoping that Gawn/Fitzpatrick may be that big body that can play this role. So, as we missed out on Hale (and didn't get Jesse White), it is natural to think that we should look further afield to fill this need.

The concern I have is just how much will the J-pod experiment pay off for a team that is far better than us? Sure, he kicked some bags, but on the MCG he was mostly useless, and come finals time, he was rarely sighted. Prior to this year, the VFL has produced minimal in the way of ready made players who came in and made an impact. Barlow and J-Pod did this year (don't forget what I wrote about J-Pod though), so do we really think that gap filler is running around in these leagues now? To be honest, I'm doubtful. Trying to pick up a 24-27 year old, proven FF that can pinch hit in the ruck, but most importantly, expecting them to have an impact at AFL level is bordering on dreaming!

So, what's my suggestion/input to this thread?

Well, I have just finished watching the replay of the Melbourne/Sydney game from Round 17 - the game where we couldn't do a thing wrong! Paul Johnson played all over the ground that day, and I have to admit, when he was deep in the forward line, he was dangerous. Now, before you PJ-haters start eating your computer screen, what is this role we need filled? It's not to expect our Full Forward to come in and kick 100+ goals for the year, my expectation would be to get 30 goals out of him (I would love to know what the FD's expectation would be). Where this player will be most valuable is ensuring we get the ball to ground as much as we can (when he doesn't mark it), to ensure over crumber's are having more of an impact. They obviously need to ruck maybe 5-7 minutes per quarter, and ensure that sides don't get on top of us during Jamar's rest period.

My question is "Why CAN'T PJ play this role"? His kicking for goal is quite accurate. His decision making may let him down at times, but if he is contesting anywhere up to 60m out from goal, and if he manages to have the ball in his hands, it will generally be from mark or free kick. His decision would have been made for him so he doesn't have to think - if he is in range, have a shot! His ruck work is competitive, in 2009 he was our main ruckman from memory.

The other thing to think about is that all clubs are in the same boat. Sides like Sydeny, Geelong, etc wont have the luxury of playing 2 rucks, plus a tall forward line, otherwise they risk not having that extra runner in the team. So, use Geelong for example, Ottens is an automatic selection, do they play him forward and Blake as the number 1 ruck, or start Ottens in the ruck and have either Blake, Hawkins or West play as either a tall forward/ruck, or actually start them on the bench (taking up one of only 3 interchange spots), so that they can keep their forward line of Mooney and J-Pod? Either way you look at it, I'm confident in PJ's ability to play that 2nd ruck against other Club's potential 2nd rucks. You need to really think about a side like Geelong's structure in 2011 (not what we have already seen), to work out that PJ may just be that saviour.

I believe Green will play more forward again in 2011, and he should expect 40+ goals out of himself again. Jurrah, well, if he can play 22 games, he has to be a realistic chance of kicking 40+ himself. Add the odd cameo from Petterd, Sylvia and Watts, and all of a sudden, the need for PJ to win games off his own boot for us is reduced significantly. If we can have Green, Jurrah and someone else all kick over 30 goals this season, as well as 3 or 4 guys kicking more than 20 goals, we WILL win more games than we lose.

Sorry for the long-winded post, my opinion of PJ is neutral, 2011 will see him sink or swim. I just think he is a far better option than trying to find that player from the VFL.

The role he needs to play is someone who is a long target and a threat in a pack mark. He would prefer to avoid contact and plays like it.

He is no long target.

When he has done well in the forward line (a below par definition of 'well') it is as a lead up forward.

And another one of those is what we don't need.

[daisycutter 28,713]

He would not be expected to mark everything kicked at him. If we moved the ball quick enough inside to him in a one-on-one, I personally believe he would mark more than he drops.

When you think about it, not many Full Forwards that aren't the number 1 forward for that team, not many of them would mark as much as they would like.

I have explained how I see that role having a massive impact on our team, being a key marking option doesn't even rate in the top 5 KPI's for me.

B59, you have pretty much proved my point. Yeah sure, he may not be strong at marking above his head. But can he make a contest? Will that mean the ball hits the ground?? Isn't that what we are hoping any of the players we put in that role can achieve? I'm also predicting the delivery from our midfielders to be of a higher standard that what we have experienced in the past 6 or 7 years, so I would think PJ would take most of his marks on a lead.

You're not related are you Billy?

[The Chazz 4,077]

The role he needs to play is someone who is a long target and a threat in a pack mark. He would prefer to avoid contact and plays like it.

He is no long target.

When he has done well in the forward line (a below par definition of 'well') it is as a lead up forward.

And another one of those is what we don't need.

Fair points, I seriously disagree, but your opinion is fine.

Reality is, we have minimal chance of picking someone in the draft that can have an immediate impact in that position, we may fluke someone in the PSD, but again, it's doubtful, I think we are clutching at straws hoping to find our saviour in one of the secondary leagues, therefore, the only realistic option is to look at our options;

Spencer = NAFFA (Not a full forwards a$$hole)

Gawn = will be lucky to play senior footy at all this year

Fitzy = unknown, may provide it, doubtful for early 2011, may sneak in for a handful of games in the 2nd half

Newton = NAFA (similar to Spencer, but is Not A Footballer's A$$hole)

Sylvia/Dunn = Are not swing rucks

Martin = My man, but not from round 1. Missed a lot of footy in 2010. I have been calling for him to play this position for over 12 months, but needs to show form first.

Johnson = Our only legitimate option from round 1. Sook all you like about his ability, but unless you would rather see Jamar at full forward and Spencer in the ruck, you're gunna dry your eyes because we got nothing else.

[The Chazz 4,077]

You're not related are you Billy?

Nah mate, just a realist! See my above post for my reasons - it was a process of elimiantion, and a process of accepting reality in regarsd to us picking up such player through the VFL/SANFL/AFLQ/etc

[daisycutter 28,713]

Nah mate, just a realist! See my above post for my reasons - it was a process of elimiantion, and a process of accepting reality in regarsd to us picking up such player through the VFL/SANFL/AFLQ/etc

Well I don't like bagging our players, and PJ is a trier, but mate he's never going to cut the mustard. Time to give someone else a go

[The Chazz 4,077]

Well I don't like bagging our players, and PJ is a trier, but mate he's never going to cut the mustard. Time to give someone else a go

I know, I know. BUT WHO???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

I'm talking 2011, trade period is over, are we going to get this person from either drafts? I do like the look of that Sinclair (from the AFL wensite highlights), but we're no certainty of snaring him.

Spencer in my opinion will never cut the mustard. Options are getting skinnier and skinnier (no offence Fitzy, you will fill out one day!).

Edited October 13, 2010 by billy2803

[beelzebub 22,697]

oops I used an Icon !! bad bub....bad !!

Billy rpfc pretty well summed it. and i proved nothing for you. If you think so...its a perillous argument you profer.

The role of a KPF is to be the focus of a forward line. Ideally he takes the #1 defender. He must be able to offer not just a contest but the reasonable expectatoin that on as many occasions as not he can ideed mark it. Think Neitz!!..or for that matter as the topic ..a HAle..or similar. Or...even more appropriately I suppose.. Jamar.. he can, but hes wasted if at FF all day.

PJ is big and plays small. Hes quite good in space but a goal square is the antithesis of space.

PJ has been trilaed at FF and found particularly wanting. I would offer up as expert witness for this argument the MFC. If it thought of PJ as you do none of us would be here discussing that role or the need to get a Hale type; would we ?

[beelzebub 22,697]

Spencer is a ruck protege not a KPF in the making !!

[daisycutter 28,713]

I know, I know. BUT WHO???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

I'm talking 2011, trade period is over, are we going to get this person from either drafts? I do like the look of that Sinclair (from the AFL wensite highlights), but we're no certainty of snaring him.

Spencer in my opinion will never cut the mustard. Options are getting skinnier and skinnier (no offence Fitzy, you will fill out one day!).

Well sinclair is one I like the look of.

And according to JCB you could have a look at Orren Stephenson, Nth Ballarat

And yeah, I don't think any of the current players fit the immed requirements for Fwd/2ndRuck

[The Chazz 4,077]

oops I used an Icon !! bad bub....bad !!

Billy rpfc pretty well summed it. and i proved nothing for you. If you think so...its a perillous argument you profer.

The role of a KPF is to be the focus of a forward line. Ideally he takes the #1 defender. He must be able to offer not just a contest but the reasonable expectatoin that on as many occasions as not he can ideed mark it. Think Neitz!!..or for that matter as the topic ..a HAle..or similar. Or...even more appropriately I suppose.. Jamar.. he can, but hes wasted if at FF all day.

PJ is big and plays small. Hes quite good in space but a goal square is the antithesis of space.

PJ has been trilaed at FF and found particularly wanting. I would offer up as expert witness for this argument the MFC. If it thought of PJ as you do none of us would be here discussing that role or the need to get a Hale type; would we ?

Bad Boy Bubby.

We sniffed around for a suitable player, we didn't get our man, we have minimal option of being able to pull one out of our rear. Hence me stating that PJ is, like it orr lump it, most likely going to be that man for a major part of the first part of the season. Regardless of your, and others opinion of his ability, we have nothing else! I'm happy for you to throw up an alternative for me, but you just can't.

Hasn't Bailey come out and pretty much described the role as a "last resort" option when going forward? And the big area we need to lift is in the amount of goals we score from stoppages and crumbing packs? That to me lowers the expectations of such Full Forward to take big strong, Neitz-like marks. Neitz was a fine player, a great player, but sadly, their aren't any 23 year old Neitz's on offer, not to play season 2011 anyway.