The long wait to see Blease in action at the top level was really worthwhile. He made a Clayton's start against the Bulldogs in round 15 when he came on late as the substitute but then went back to Casey.

Blease persevered and eventually won a Rising Star nomination with his pace and brilliant footskills late in the season to stamp himself as player of the future.

Games MFC 2011 5  MFC Total 5 Goals MFC 2011  0 MFC Total 0

Games CSFC 2011 13 Goals CSFC 2011 7 

Really good footy brain, quick, good skills.

Is he too small?

Not if you give him a role where his height (or lack of it) is meaningless.

Destined for the midfield as I don't like wasting talent off the HBF but he may stay there for the time being.

  On 27/10/2011 at 22:19, rpfc said:

Destined for the midfield as I don't like wasting talent off the HBF but he may stay there for the time being.

Why is talent wasted on the HBF? He played there this year and I think his 'dash' was not lost due to playing on the HBF, if anything it added to its effectiveness.

  On 27/10/2011 at 23:22, Nasher said:

Why is talent wasted on the HBF? He played there this year and I think his 'dash' was not lost due to playing on the HBF, if anything it added to its effectiveness.

Poor choice of words perhaps.

Any numptie can play HBF, it is where you put the Chris Johnson's of this world to show some semblance of form, it is where you put good players who are out of form to regain that form, it is the easilest position to play on the footy ground.

That is all I am saying.

Blease can do well there and have a great effect, but I think he is better value up the ground.

We've only just begun to see this kids attributes at AFL level. Look forward to a more seasoned, stronger, fitter Blease in 2012 and beyond. Having overcome a horrendous and worrysome injury at the start of his AFL career. Provides some much needed pace to the side that will benefit our teams strategic play.

  On 27/10/2011 at 23:28, rpfc said:

Poor choice of words perhaps.

Any numptie can play HBF, it is where you put the Chris Johnson's of this world to show some semblance of form, it is where you put good players who are out of form to regain that form, it is the easilest position to play on the footy ground.

That is all I am saying.

Blease can do well there and have a great effect, but I think he is better value up the ground.

The HBF is a bit of a conundrum. As you rightly infer its often used for convalescence or "now where do I put that bloke" . But its an oft maligned position which is a bit silly for if you put someone there with good pace and ability to read the ball it can make it a very effective spearhead for a good team.

its quite often suggested that a team is as good as its lower 6 players. Id rehash that a bit and suggest good teams have good players even in these "lower 6 " type positions...i.e Its the calibre and strength of the player in these spots that might deffine a team.

  On 27/10/2011 at 22:19, rpfc said:

Really good footy brain, quick, good skills.

Is he too small?

Not if you give him a role where his height (or lack of it) is meaningless.

Destined for the midfield as I don't like wasting talent off the HBF but he may stay there for the time being.

I was quite surprised by his agression and attack at the ball and his speed. Having only seen Sam on TV in VFL games I really thought he was going to be an ordinary player at best.

Is he too small? Well I'm not sure if 184cm is that small (gee if only I was as tall - er small)!!!!

We need line breakers and I reckon Sam may well be the man.

I'm a fan. He can bring us some pace and class that we sorely lack. I'd like to eventually see him further up the ground, but a HBF is fine for now.

  On 28/10/2011 at 02:47, Dee Dee said:

I was quite surprised by his agression and attack at the ball and his speed. Having only seen Sam on TV in VFL games I really thought he was going to be an ordinary player at best.

Is he too small? Well I'm not sure if 184cm is that small (gee if only I was as tall - er small)!!!!

We need line breakers and I reckon Sam may well be the man.

Skinny small. I don't think he will build up like other 184cm mids.

But that is just an opinion.

Be interesting to see what a preseason under "new management" results in. ( goes for a lot of blokes actually )

  On 28/10/2011 at 05:22, belzebub59 said:

Be interesting to see what a preseason under "new management" results in. ( goes for a lot of blokes actually )

This is a key for most of our list, our players have to learn to work both ways. Sam included we have a great attacking team on our terms, but when it is not going our way we don't work hard enough. Sam can be a regular starting 18 player in 2012 but he needs to get a bigger tank and continue to learn to work hard. I always laugh at players that have the ability to run away from players when they have the footy but can't run players down when the don't. It doesn't make sense, I hope Sam doesn't become one of these players.

He looks like a hulking behemoth compared with what he looked like when he first got to the club. He's getting there.

I don't think he'll ever be the incredible hulk, but he won't always be a skinny kid.

I've become a huge fan in a very short time. I was critical of his first game against the Dogs, where he made some very poor decisions that reflected pretty poorly on him, but he mroe than made up for it in his later games. His electrifying pace brought me to my feet on multiple occasions, especially seeing him running through CHB with two opponents looking certain to flatten him, and he just accelerated between them and left them for dead. He's gone from a possible attitude problem to a 200+ game star of the club in my mind. I really hope he's put his injuries behind him and is going to have a long an prosperous career with the Dees.

Edit: I'm happy for him to have NO. 17 right now thanks MFC management.

I'm expecting further continued improvement from Blease away from Tom Scully.

Yes, they were mates but I sense Sam had an unhealthy reliance on the other bloke and now he can be his own man.

I expect Blease to fill out to have a physique similar to Heat Shaw.

Fine with me.

And I like the HBF for Blease.

Yes, it's the easiest position to play, but I think it allows for him to have maximum influence on a game.

Room for his dash, then long kicking.

Any further up field and he'll need to be kicking the goals himself.

Not necessarily a bad thing, but I'd like him to be spotting up our forwards.

It's funny how people always say that the HBF is the easiest position to play. Put a spud there. See how that goes..

  On 30/10/2011 at 02:00, SloonieMcFloonieloone said:

It's funny how people always say that the HBF is the easiest position to play. Put a spud there. See how that goes..

Happens all the time, but because it so easy to play there the spud now does not look like a spud.

It's a paradox.

And it is the easiest position to play.

That's not to say that you're not a fine player to be able to play there - it just means that every other position on the ground is harder to play in.

I just feel that the HBF never gets the respect it deserves. Someone who butchers the ball and doesn't have a good footy brain will be shown up very quickly!

  On 30/10/2011 at 03:26, SloonieMcFloonieloone said:

I just feel that the HBF never gets the respect it deserves. Someone who butchers the ball and doesn't have a good footy brain will be shown up very quickly!

That may be, but they will be shown up first in every other position.

Not necessarily. Ask Clinton Jones. Different role need different skills.

The attacking HBF needs someone who can run and damage the opposition. The often get fed the ball, but they will only be fed the ball if they can damage the opposition.

You could say that being a ruckman is easy because all you have to do is compete in ruck contests. Full backs only have to stop the opposition full forward. A forward pocket only has to apply defensive pressure. A wingman only has to get by himself. A full forward only has to compete in the air.

Different roles suit different skills sets. Doesn't necessarily mean that it's easy. Being entrusted to kick the ball through an opposition press is far from easy.

I just pictured Newton playing an attacking HBF role. I shuddered.

  On 30/10/2011 at 03:59, Axis of Bob said:

Not necessarily. Ask Clinton Jones. Different role need different skills.

The attacking HBF needs someone who can run and damage the opposition. The often get fed the ball, but they will only be fed the ball if they can damage the opposition.

You could say that being a ruckman is easy because all you have to do is compete in ruck contests. Full backs only have to stop the opposition full forward. A forward pocket only has to apply defensive pressure. A wingman only has to get by himself. A full forward only has to compete in the air.

Different roles suit different skills sets. Doesn't necessarily mean that it's easy. Being entrusted to kick the ball through an opposition press is far from easy.

Maybe I should move away from the term "HBF" as today the roles are very fluid.

There is a role in the backline where a player is tasked to 'mind' the 5th or 6th best forward and provide an avenue out of the backline, and some run and carry through the middle.

They don't win the footy but are given it, they don't have a great desire or need to man anyone (indeed teams now play a defensive forward on some of the best of these types of flankers), and they are usually instructed to find space and frontrun.

I just feel that any solid kick with half a brain can play the role.

Anyone with half a brain can win the ball there, but the key is being able to damage the opposition with the ball.

If you're just a solid kick and that's it, then you aren't really any benefit to your side. The player needs to be offensively talented enough to damage the opposition. Davis, Yarran, Deledio, Mackie, Murphy/Gilbee, Hodge, Hurn etc. These are very offensively talented players and they are given the ball because they can take the ball through the press better than their team mates. They either have explosive pace or are damaging, heavy kicks.

You could play Nathan Jones at half back and he'd get it 30 times a game. But you wouldn't. Blease is offensively talented, and that's why you'd play him at half back. It's plays to his strengths.

Thinking the role is 'easy' depends on how you define success. I could play there and get the ball 10 times a game at AFL level. But it would be embarrassingly awful and the side would be pounded. But if Grimes plays there, gets it 20 times and makes a few clangers then everyone calls it a failure. Leon Davis does that in the Grand Final and he has 'vanished'. But Lonergan gets it 6 times in the GF and he's brilliant.

How 'easy' the role is depends on how you measure success in each role.

I think it is seen as being easier because of the relative ease of which players in that position rack up numbers of disposals.

Often, if you've had 28 touches, you're seen to have had a good game, regardless of whether it comes straight back, or not.

I'd have to say that forward pocket is easier. All you need to do is float around, pick up other people's spills and take potshots at the goal. You don't have to create play and other people usually do all the physical work for you.