Jack Watts

[Chook 14,471]

Perhaps the most insightful comment that I have ever read regarding Watts.

I've said before that we should ask Jack where he'd be most comfortable playing. Perhaps he doesn't know himself, but if Neeld is smart, he'll be able to find out. Only then can we get the best out of everyone's favourite underperforming number one draft pick.

[MadAsHell 4,088]

Went out to Casey last night, and while Watts didn't play the classic CHF game he was still clearly the most influential player out there. Kicked 2 2nd half goals when it really mattered, gave off numerous goal assists, a couple from some clean gathers near the boundry, beating more then one opponent and finding a team mate when the ball looked certain to go out. Oh and he kicked probably the greatest point you'll ever see from a snap over his shoulder in the last quarter which if it had of gone through would have put Casey in front at that point in time.

He took on some responsability tonight to make things happen, and was good to see him back himself on occassion instead of looking to give it off everytime. Was a very good standard match and I'm very glad I went along to Casey instead of watching the Sydney-v-GWS match.

[Good Times Grimes 2,396]

Sounds like Watts showed some hunger and wants to play Round 1. I'm excited to see what he does against the Lions.

[timD 994]

He's not being played as a CHF. There are only a handful in AFL footy and in truth I think it is better to consider KPF versus 'flanker'. Players rotate through FF and CHF and really the function of the role is more important than the position. KPF is the clunk-marking, pack-hitting target for your mids. Watts appears to only be able to paly that role toa very limited degree ATM. Tom Mcdonald is being played, and tries to play, like a key foward.

With Watts, it is disappointing that he does not play like a key forward. He can learn it. Mitch clark clearly can and he's not been played there for long peroids and has had to do his thing while aso getting out of JB's way.

Watts is clean and clever. He does not 'know his size' yet. He'll learn.

[Hannibal 5,814]

These comments about Jack have a sense of deja-vu about them, Ben-Hur.

I'm wondering if your opinion is just a little too subjective.

As the coach has said, why people are concerned about a 20 yr old who has played 40 games, he's not quite sure...

I'm concerned because I know how important the 2008 draft was to our future premiership chances. We had 3 picks in the top 20 and we had to get them right. We needed a key forward and we didn't get one. And for varying reasons Bleeze and Strauss have hardly got on the park. We tanked for picks the following year, so it's pretty obvious the club shared my sentiments regarding the value of draft picks.

I've been following footy for a long time and I see what everyone likes about Watts. That's the easy part. I also see what he does poorly. And I see that we have a number one draft pick entering his 4th year that is a mile off being a key forward. I find that disappointing. Others get excited by him playing a nice outside role with a few clever goal assists in a seconds match. Each to their own. I know Watts' capabilities and I won't let him off the hook. If Hurley had Watts' attributes he'd be an all-time great. Watts will play 200 + games, that's not in question.

Neeld will get the best out of Watts if he plays him as a roaming wing/high half forward. But Neeld has already stated that he'll play him as a key forward and he's certainly been playing him deep. He won't dominate games in that role. It will be interesting to see if Neeld changes his tune and plays Watts where he's likely to have the most impact. Watts has the capacity to dominate as a key forward, but he's not ready. He doesn't know how yet. Do you persist with him as a forward, or do you get the most out of him playing him somewhere else as his body develops ? I don't know the answer, although other footy experts believe he should be played down back, where he'll really learn what's required of a key forward. He'll learn how they go about it, as in, where they run; how hard they work; the timing of their leads; their appetite to hit packs and cause spills; how they lead, double back and lead again; how they create space for themselves, etc.

I note that no-one challenges my positive comments re Tynan, Tapscott and Couch. Those comments are accepted because they're found to be pleasing. Watts' natural talent doesn't impress me. It's what he does with it that I'm interested in. Right now he doesn't know how to use that talent, other than playing an attractive outside role. That will impress some, but not me. If he was pick 50 I'd cut him slack and think we'd picked up a real talent, as a pick one I'm left underwhelmed. Some will say that the number his name was read out doesn't matter. they'll say that once you're on an AFL list it doesn't matter how you get there. I disagree. It matters a lot. A club makes a massive investment in a pick one and those type of picks help define your club and its destiny.

[The Chazz 4,077]

I'm concerned because I know how important the 2008 draft was to our future premiership chances. We had 3 picks in the top 20 and we had to get them right. We needed a key forward and we didn't get one. And for varying reasons Bleeze and Strauss have hardly got on the park. We tanked for picks the following year, so it's pretty obvious the club shared my sentiments regarding the value of draft picks.

I've been following footy for a long time and I see what everyone likes about Watts. That's the easy part. I also see what he does poorly. And I see that we have a number one draft pick entering his 4th year that is a mile off being a key forward. I find that disappointing. Others get excited by him playing a nice outside role with a few clever goal assists in a seconds match. Each to their own. I know Watts' capabilities and I won't let him off the hook. If Hurley had Watts' attributes he'd be an all-time great. Watts will play 200 + games, that's not in question.

Neeld will get the best out of Watts if he plays him as a roaming wing/high half forward. But Neeld has already stated that he'll play him as a key forward and he's certainly been playing him deep. He won't dominate games in that role. It will be interesting to see if Neeld changes his tune and plays Watts where he's likely to have the most impact. Watts has the capacity to dominate as a key forward, but he's not ready. He doesn't know how yet. Do you persist with him as a forward, or do you get the most out of him playing him somewhere else as his body develops ? I don't know the answer, although other footy experts believe he should be played down back, where he'll really learn what's required of a key forward. He'll learn how they go about it, as in, where they run; how hard they work; the timing of their leads; their appetite to hit packs and cause spills; how they lead, double back and lead again; how they create space for themselves, etc.

I note that no-one challenges my positive comments re Tynan, Tapscott and Couch. Those comments are accepted because they're found to be pleasing. Watts' natural talent doesn't impress me. It's what he does with it that I'm interested in. Right now he doesn't know how to use that talent, other than playing an attractive outside role. That will impress some, but not me. If he was pick 50 I'd cut him slack and think we'd picked up a real talent, as a pick one I'm left underwhelmed. Some will say that the number his name was read out doesn't matter. they'll say that once you're on an AFL list it doesn't matter how you get there. I disagree. It matters a lot. A club makes a massive investment in a pick one and those type of picks help define your club and its destiny.

So BH, you have concerns about how we drafted in 2008. As you said, we needed a key forward, and it's an area that I strongly believe you need 2 of in any given team (just look at the list of premiers and how their forward line is structured). So, as Watts isn't currently that "key forward" that you wanted, so you are disappointed with our 1st selection. Considering you claim to know so much about football, and by the sounds of it your drafting expertise is soooo good, what were our options with the number 1 draft pick of 2008? Watts, like $cully in 2009, was quite simply the best player in the draft. When you have a pick as golden as that number 1 pick is, would you have preferred the Club picked on needs rather than best available? That's exactly how your posts are sounding, and I think it's quite funny that you, of all people, are making such idiotic comments.

Let's pretened that Watts wasn't in that draft. It would be almost assured that we take Nik Nat with our number 1 pick. Would he be that "key forward" that we so desperately need for premiership success?

Regardless of where he plays, or has played to date, Watts was the best player in that draft, and we had to take him. Obviously the Club knows that even if he were to become a KPF, premiership sides need 2 or more of that type, hence going and getting another one (ie Mitch Clark).

The other thing about this KPF role - what is the definition of a Key Position Forward? Perhaps what some want from KPF, ie crashing packs, is perhaps not the only definition of such role. I wouldn't say Riewoldt is a big pack-crasher, sure he goes for contested marks, but his ambition is to mark the bloody thing. Clark will jump, and if he can't take the mark, he's happy to clean up anyone in front of him. Maybe the KPF role you want Watts to play isn't what he is able to play, but that's not to say that he isn't a KPF. The Club got a bloke that can play your definition of that KPF (Clark).

However, there are definitely areas that Jack can improve on, and if he can do that, he will be a great. He needs to take big contested marks against quality opposition, not just provide a contest. I want him to go in to a marking contest and believe nothing other than he WILL mark that ball, exactly like Riewoldt has done for many years. When you have that attitude or mindset, crashing packs doesn't form part of his role as KPF.

[Lil_red_fire_engine 10,163]

No, he's not what the MFC hoped they were drafting.

I know that 26 disposals and a couple of goals from a wing/half forward will excite nearly every Melbourne supporter. I also know that if I criticize my own, especially Watts, I'll have others think ill of me. He was drafted as a key forward and right now he's nowhere near it. He's a mile off. He just doesn't play that way. And if you took the effort to go to Cranbourne you'd see that. Or perhaps not. You'd probably see a tall, classy player that did some nice things and walk away really happy.

As I said, I watch footy differently to most of you.

How about you judge the guy on what he is rather than what you hoped he would be. Ignore the fact he is not a power forward and that he was a number one pick. 26 possies, a couple of goals and a handful of assists is a dominant display in any ones book whether you see it or not. Be disappointed that he is not what you hoped for but judge his performance for what it is.

[Grandson of a gun 276]

I'm concerned because I know how important the 2008 draft was to our future premiership chances. We had 3 picks in the top 20 and we had to get them right. We needed a key forward and we didn't get one. And for varying reasons Bleeze and Strauss have hardly got on the park. We tanked for picks the following year, so it's pretty obvious the club shared my sentiments regarding the value of draft picks.

I've been following footy for a long time and I see what everyone likes about Watts. That's the easy part. I also see what he does poorly. And I see that we have a number one draft pick entering his 4th year that is a mile off being a key forward. I find that disappointing. Others get excited by him playing a nice outside role with a few clever goal assists in a seconds match. Each to their own. I know Watts' capabilities and I won't let him off the hook. If Hurley had Watts' attributes he'd be an all-time great. Watts will play 200 + games, that's not in question.

Neeld will get the best out of Watts if he plays him as a roaming wing/high half forward. But Neeld has already stated that he'll play him as a key forward and he's certainly been playing him deep. He won't dominate games in that role. It will be interesting to see if Neeld changes his tune and plays Watts where he's likely to have the most impact. Watts has the capacity to dominate as a key forward, but he's not ready. He doesn't know how yet. Do you persist with him as a forward, or do you get the most out of him playing him somewhere else as his body develops ? I don't know the answer, although other footy experts believe he should be played down back, where he'll really learn what's required of a key forward. He'll learn how they go about it, as in, where they run; how hard they work; the timing of their leads; their appetite to hit packs and cause spills; how they lead, double back and lead again; how they create space for themselves, etc.

I note that no-one challenges my positive comments re Tynan, Tapscott and Couch. Those comments are accepted because they're found to be pleasing. Watts' natural talent doesn't impress me. It's what he does with it that I'm interested in. Right now he doesn't know how to use that talent, other than playing an attractive outside role. That will impress some, but not me. If he was pick 50 I'd cut him slack and think we'd picked up a real talent, as a pick one I'm left underwhelmed. Some will say that the number his name was read out doesn't matter. they'll say that once you're on an AFL list it doesn't matter how you get there. I disagree. It matters a lot. A club makes a massive investment in a pick one and those type of picks help define your club and its destiny.

Yawn.

How's life up there in that castle Ben? I didn't realise that your opinion of Watts was so important. I'm sure that the coaching department will sit up and take notice.

If Watts ends up getting 20 touches a game and having a hand in a few goals each week for the Demons and continually sticks the balls straight down Mitch Clarke's throat i'm sure the club will be gutted.

[Geddy Lee 582]

I'm concerned because I know how important the 2008 draft was to our future premiership chances. We had 3 picks in the top 20 and we had to get them right. We needed a key forward and we didn't get one. And for varying reasons Bleeze and Strauss have hardly got on the park. We tanked for picks the following year, so it's pretty obvious the club shared my sentiments regarding the value of draft picks.

I've been following footy for a long time and I see what everyone likes about Watts. That's the easy part. I also see what he does poorly. And I see that we have a number one draft pick entering his 4th year that is a mile off being a key forward. I find that disappointing. Others get excited by him playing a nice outside role with a few clever goal assists in a seconds match. Each to their own. I know Watts' capabilities and I won't let him off the hook. If Hurley had Watts' attributes he'd be an all-time great. Watts will play 200 + games, that's not in question.

Neeld will get the best out of Watts if he plays him as a roaming wing/high half forward. But Neeld has already stated that he'll play him as a key forward and he's certainly been playing him deep. He won't dominate games in that role. It will be interesting to see if Neeld changes his tune and plays Watts where he's likely to have the most impact. Watts has the capacity to dominate as a key forward, but he's not ready. He doesn't know how yet. Do you persist with him as a forward, or do you get the most out of him playing him somewhere else as his body develops ? I don't know the answer, although other footy experts believe he should be played down back, where he'll really learn what's required of a key forward. He'll learn how they go about it, as in, where they run; how hard they work; the timing of their leads; their appetite to hit packs and cause spills; how they lead, double back and lead again; how they create space for themselves, etc.

I note that no-one challenges my positive comments re Tynan, Tapscott and Couch. Those comments are accepted because they're found to be pleasing. Watts' natural talent doesn't impress me. It's what he does with it that I'm interested in. Right now he doesn't know how to use that talent, other than playing an attractive outside role. That will impress some, but not me. If he was pick 50 I'd cut him slack and think we'd picked up a real talent, as a pick one I'm left underwhelmed. Some will say that the number his name was read out doesn't matter. they'll say that once you're on an AFL list it doesn't matter how you get there. I disagree. It matters a lot. A club makes a massive investment in a pick one and those type of picks help define your club and its destiny.

Thanks for your posting and thoughts about the game. It's nice to hear from someone who was actually there.

I don't agree at all with some here - Chook, Outside fifty, bing - that we should just let him be what he wants to be, which sounds like a hippie-parenting method. He needs to be moulded into a powerful explosive agile forward - a la Skinny Ox - or we are royally up [censored] creek.

[The Chazz 4,077]

Thanks for your posting and thoughts about the game. It's nice to hear from someone who was actually there.

I don't agree at all with some here - Chook, Outside fifty, bing - that we should just let him be what he wants to be, which sounds like a hippie-parenting method. He needs to be moulded into a powerful explosive agile forward - a la Skinny Ox - or we are royally up [censored] creek.

Was Garry Lyon a "skinny Ox"? Did he just bash and crash packs? You can be a dominant KPF without Ox's or Neitz's crash abilities.

[Blind_turn 36]

How good is Demonland. Years ago I used to hang out to read the footy section to get what proved to be a few, shallow, ill informed comments about Melbourne. This thread is why I love this site. The discussion is heated and passionate but so far has not deteriorated into mindless abuse and insults. I can see both sides of the Jack Watts debate and frankly there is nothing more I would rather to talk and read about on a Sunday morning less than a week away from the start of a new season.

Good on ya Demonlanders!

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

2 Goals, 26 possessions (that's 26 ...) and named in the best. Think I could live with that.

yeah but he was at the game, you just read a match report

I know exactly what he means by MFC supporters being too easily impressed, it's one of the main reasons we haven't been near contenders for a decade

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

I'm concerned because I know how important the 2008 draft was to our future premiership chances. We had 3 picks in the top 20 and we had to get them right. We needed a key forward and we didn't get one. And for varying reasons Bleeze and Strauss have hardly got on the park. We tanked for picks the following year, so it's pretty obvious the club shared my sentiments regarding the value of draft picks.

I've been following footy for a long time and I see what everyone likes about Watts. That's the easy part. I also see what he does poorly. And I see that we have a number one draft pick entering his 4th year that is a mile off being a key forward. I find that disappointing. Others get excited by him playing a nice outside role with a few clever goal assists in a seconds match. Each to their own. I know Watts' capabilities and I won't let him off the hook. If Hurley had Watts' attributes he'd be an all-time great. Watts will play 200 + games, that's not in question.

Neeld will get the best out of Watts if he plays him as a roaming wing/high half forward. But Neeld has already stated that he'll play him as a key forward and he's certainly been playing him deep. He won't dominate games in that role. It will be interesting to see if Neeld changes his tune and plays Watts where he's likely to have the most impact. Watts has the capacity to dominate as a key forward, but he's not ready. He doesn't know how yet. Do you persist with him as a forward, or do you get the most out of him playing him somewhere else as his body develops ? I don't know the answer, although other footy experts believe he should be played down back, where he'll really learn what's required of a key forward. He'll learn how they go about it, as in, where they run; how hard they work; the timing of their leads; their appetite to hit packs and cause spills; how they lead, double back and lead again; how they create space for themselves, etc.

I note that no-one challenges my positive comments re Tynan, Tapscott and Couch. Those comments are accepted because they're found to be pleasing. Watts' natural talent doesn't impress me. It's what he does with it that I'm interested in. Right now he doesn't know how to use that talent, other than playing an attractive outside role. That will impress some, but not me. If he was pick 50 I'd cut him slack and think we'd picked up a real talent, as a pick one I'm left underwhelmed. Some will say that the number his name was read out doesn't matter. they'll say that once you're on an AFL list it doesn't matter how you get there. I disagree. It matters a lot. A club makes a massive investment in a pick one and those type of picks help define your club and its destiny.

fantastic post, agree 100%

don't be put-off by those here that want to shoot the messenger. I for one read through these reports rolling my eyes until I came to yours and realised I was reading an honest one

[Ouch! 2,034]

People keep saying he is being groomed as a key forward, ok I agree, but CHF not FF as that key post. CHF requires a lot more mobility and a good engine these days. Watts has this.. what he needs is to will himself to the contest, and get a little more bulk in the next few years and I think he will be great for us. Clark is the Big key FF, which gives Watts more time to learn the craft.

How exactly is Watts being played (and more importantly taught) differently to Reiwoldt (Nick) in his early career? They played him back, he played on the wing, and he didn't have the bulk to sit up there as a key forward.... what he did learn to do is improve his engine and gut running, and for a while there Reiwoldt was unstoppable and ran multiple opponents into the ground. (kicking never improved though greatly though.)

What do people want Watts to be? a J Brown? Forget it... Q Lynch erm,.... no thanks. I personally hope Watts could end up i a few years like Petrie/Reiwoldt type model..... give him time. Petrie is what 26? only in the last couple of years really imposing himself on the contest...

I liked his game last year... I will ignore the hype of the preseason slagging off of Watts by media, and watch over the next 2-3 years before casting judgement....

[binman 37,992]

2 Goals, 26 possessions (that's 26 ...) and named in the best. Think I could live with that.

There's only one Jack Watts. If he becomes the first 196 cm small forward, so be it. So much of the criticism of him comes from expectations of what he should be. Perhaps we should just give him a chance to be what he is.

I absolutely agree. I don't understand this obsession with him being a KPF (i include Neeld in this). So that's what we drafted him for - so what. Why (partic at this stage) force him to play a position where we won't get the best out of him? He is such a good user of the ball (in a team of mainly spuds when it comes to effective use of the ball) i would rather he has 25 kicks per game (and 3-4 goal assists) than 8 and one goal as a KPF. He also doesn't get nearly enough credit fro how unselfish and team orientated he is. Last night he sounds he gave several goal assists in a game where he could have been excused for trying to shore up his own chances of round 1 selection with a bag of goals.

I recall people happily comparing him to Hird. I for one wouldn't mid a player of that ilk running around for the dees. In any case static KPF's are a thing of the past and we spent 600k per year for a big lug in Clark so we don't need him in that role at present

[Biffen 12,323]

Hird is a good comparison to Watts .

Still pretty handy without crushing bodies and smashing apart packs .

[Hannibal 5,814]

Blah blah blah Considering you claim to know so much about football, and by the sounds of it your drafting expertise is soooo good, what were our options with the number 1 draft pick of 2008? Blah blah blah

I was a strong advocate of drafting Watts in 2008. Not for the first time I got it wrong. I'll be happy if I see far more physicality and competitiveness. Even last night he didn't compete in some marking contests, but instead spectated. That said, he worked his way into the game and did some nice things. But he didn't do anything that I didn't expect at this level. We are talking about VFL footy.

Some people like to dumb it down by referring to Jonathan Brown, but that's not the issue. James Hird stated on radio the other day that Michael Hurley is the most competitive player people have seen at Essendon in 25 years. I don't expect Watts to play like Hurley, or to have his competitive streak, because I recognise that they're very different beasts, but right now he's the antithesis of Hurley and that doesn't overly thrill me. There's a reason that Hurley was just put on a five year contract and is tremendously regarded in AFL circles. I believe Watts has more natural ability.

If the 2008 draft was re-done tomorrow where do you think Watts would come ? In my opinion he wouldn't make the first round. Some of you are pretty cruisey about that.

[Dee-licious 1,800]

So far people have said a lot of correct things about JW on this thread. Those who went last night were able to get the full picture of what we are talking about (those who didn't I hope our comments have been clear enough to give you a good picture). Jack did not play as a key forward "crashing packs" "taking big marks" "physically imposing himself on the game". He waited outside of packs for the ball to be handed to him then 2 players would try to tackle him - he kinda didn't care - summed up his options and more often then not made the best one. The first half of the game he played what I would call a Goddard game, swept across half back to half forward marshalling everyone and utilising his skills and the fact he was taller and bigger than all of the midfielders.

The second half he played a very high centre half forward role. Think Trav Cloke sending it inside 50; not Trav Cloke inside 50 taking marks. Which would have been great if we had a strong FF in the square (Tommy Mac you will get there). To be honest that is probably a perfect role for him. He has great kicking skills, can lower the eyes, hit someone on a lead and if that someone is Mitch Clark/Brad Green/Aaron Davey/Jeremy Howe it doesn't matter we will get goals from it.

We have all watched a lot of footy and know the Melbourne players strengths and weaknesses pretty well (even if at times we don't admit it). However, I think we are all kidding ourselves if we claim to have any idea of what Neeld's best 22 is, or how each player will be used before we see them run out on the park for real. I think Watts is in the best 22 and I think his best role is as a Utility until our 3rd year brigade have their break out season(s). The media will hammer him but if he is having 20+ possessions per week and kicks 30 for the season I'll be happy - especially because he is still young enough to win the rising star (the 40 games counts him out but sheesh he is still young).

[The Chazz 4,077]

blah blah...

If the 2008 draft was re-done tomorrow where do you think Watts would come ? In my opinion he wouldn't make the first round. Some of you are pretty cruisey about that.

That's not the arguement BH. You are disappointed with him because he hasnt become the KPF that "you" want. Nice try, but failed dismally.

[green_machine 36]

If the 2008 draft was re-done tomorrow where do you think Watts would come ? In my opinion he wouldn't make the first round. Some of you are pretty cruisey about that.

You make some good points but this a ballsy call. You are basically saying that watts will not be top ten at a club an so will always be a borderline selection. Is this you view?

I personally think he will at a minimum reach consistently selected and will probably end up in the first five selected. Not there yet but that is my view.

[Hannibal 5,814]

That's not the arguement (sic) BH. You are disappointed with him because he hasnt become the KPF that "you" want. Nice try, but failed dismally.

Who said it's not the argument ? Mark Neeld thinks it's the argument by his comments on Watts recently. He mentioned how Watts was picked as a key forward, what the club has invested in Watts, and why he's going to play him as a key forward. Yet you say, 'it's not the argument" ? FMD.

You're right, he's not the key forward "I" want, but he's also not the key forward the club wanted.

Edited March 25, 2012 by Ben-Hur

[Hannibal 5,814]

You make some good points but this a ballsy call. You are basically saying that watts will not be top ten at a club an so will always be a borderline selection. Is this you view?

No, it's not my view. I marvel at Watts' natural ability and believe that he'll start to "get it"; and I also have faith in the club's ability to develop him. My position is as things stand today. I think he's a work in progress, but has a long way to go. If he plays an outside winger's game at Casey with the occasional foray forward I won't salivate, in fact, I'll find it a little disappointing. If that's the role they're going to play him in the AFL this year then that's fine, but it's not what's being earmarked.

i suspect they were trying to get him involved in the game and get his confidence up by playing on the wing, and to this end they probably succeeded.

[Clanger King 9]

Still talking about Jack Watts.... WOW!!! What else could he do? He got 26 and kicked 2, countless goal assist. What's it going to take.....? That's 44 goals and a brownlow if takes that into AFL.

if he's not a CHF so be it. Go and get one!!! All I know is that thos stats are going to help the MFC in the long run.

Edited March 25, 2012 by Clanger King

[The Chazz 4,077]

Who said it's not the argument ? Mark Neeld thinks it's the argument by his comment on Watts recently. He mentioned how Watts was picked as a key forward, what the club has invested in Watts, and why he's going to play him as a key forward. Yet you say, 'it's not the argument" ? FMD.

You're right, he's not the key forward "I" want, but he's also not the key forward the club wanted.

Obviously you and the club share the same view - so, can you please tell me on behalf on the Melbourne Football Club, what type of Key Position Forward you all wanted Jack Watts to become?

The question I asked you, which you tried to avoid, was the fact that we had the number 1 draft pick in 2008 - should we have taken Watts? Was Watts the best player in the draft? When you have the number 1 draft pick, do you pick the best or needs? We probably thought we had both boxes ticked with Jack, but as he hasn't lived up to that standalone, crash/bash KPF, the Club did the right thing and went and got such player.

I have as higher expectation on Watts becomming a star KPF as you do. It's just that at the moment, your definition of the type of KPF that you want him to be is unrealistic, and it would appear that the Club doesn't think the same as you do, otherwise they wouldn't have got Clark.

[Demon Dynasty 15,404]

Neeld will get the best out of Watts if he plays him as a roaming wing/high half forward. But Neeld has already stated that he'll play him as a key forward and he's certainly been playing him deep. He won't dominate games in that role. It will be interesting to see if Neeld changes his tune and plays Watts where he's likely to have the most impact. Watts has the capacity to dominate as a key forward, but he's not ready. He doesn't know how yet. Do you persist with him as a forward, or do you get the most out of him playing him somewhere else as his body develops ? I don't know the answer, although other footy experts believe he should be played down back, where he'll really learn what's required of a key forward. He'll learn how they go about it, as in, where they run; how hard they work; the timing of their leads; their appetite to hit packs and cause spills; how they lead, double back and lead again; how they create space for themselves, etc.

I have no idea what Neeld and the FD are expecting from Watts in the medium to long-term. Maybe they have no fixed position at this point and are still assessing the player and the best role for him, and then the best role for him within the current team confines/requirements. Maybe they have a firm idea already. Who knows.

The 2 obvious options though are, as you said, a KPF or a half forward playing a high lead up game, drifting into the mid mid field (probably wide at this point). In addition he'll no doubt be used in various other positions in the short term, as seen fit by Neeld & co. as a utility.

In the next 1 to 2 seasons I can't see his role changing in a big way from its present one, unless Neeld/ the FD and of course Watts himself are able to bulk him up big time from where his body is atm in order to place him in a KPF role. If the FD (and i don't include Neeld/Craig here as they've only just walked in the door) had him marked as a future KPF (pre Neeld) then to date they've done a pretty average job in building a body on him that would allow him to play that role from later this year or next IMO. And you would think by next year (year 5 and 3 full pre seasons under his belt) this would be pretty close to happening. However, he's at least 2 to 3 pre-seasons away from playing and holding down a KPF posi on a regular basis IMO. So that would put him in a potential KPF role from 2014 at the earliest, IF he can build a body that allows him to play it. Maybe they never had him marked in such a role. Others on here and obviously within the club would know where they saw him in the medium to long term prior to Neeld arriving i'm sure.

So that leaves him playing a half forward/playing high/hit up/ and an outside utility role, occasionaly drifting across HB as well when needed. Maybe he'll end up turning into more of a Gazza type player by the time he fully develops in 2 to 3 years, rather than a KPF. If he's being positioned into this type of role then i suspect his playing style wont change all that much from what he's doing atm. Obviously he should, and more than likely will, get a whole lot better at it and could be quite a big star playing this sort of role.

However, there's also still time to mould and build him as a KPF too under Neeld. He'll need to take some big leaps forward in building his physique in the next few years though if he's going to be successful here. A big leap in power/size and strength will help him mentally to play this role for longer periods in future, and with a heap more confidence when hitting those packs hard.

If he puts his mind, and body to it, i believe he can be successful in either role. He still needs to build the bod even if he's heading for a more outside role. Not telling anyone anything new here but he (along with others at this stage of their development, no he isn't alone!!) gets pushed off the ball too easily a little too often in the hard contests atm and having a stronger/bigger physique will also help him stick more tackles.

He's a work in progress that shows glimpses of something special during patches of a game. Nothing unusual for a player at this stage of his development playing in such a high level. This will improve as his tank and physique improves no doubt.

We know Wattsy has plenty of class once he gets the ball and uses it well. Unfortunately he doesn't have many friends here, so i guess the FD need him to play the utility role around the ground until or unless they find serious alternative classy ball users/disposers, allowing Watts to play a different role more of the time.

My gut feel is, if Neeld and the boys can develop 2 or 3 of those alternatives in the mid field (eg., Gysberts/Couch/Magner/Others) and 1 or 2 off half back (Blease/Others?) over the next year or 2, then Wattsy will gradually be moved more towards a KPF type role. If these options don't come on as Neeld & co. might expect or we can't find enough of them, then expect Watts to remain playing his present utility/occasional outside forward role for most of the time....for quite some time.

Either way, he's gonna be a beauty mate eh! B)

Edited March 25, 2012 by Rusty Nails