i think to survive as a small crumbing forward you need to be a natural footballer with great goal sense, and unfortunately im sure Dan covers either of them off. I would prefer to perservere with him as a tagger

I don't much rate Nicholson either. See my posts above where I think he's only at best a defensive player due to his attributes and on par with a Dennis Armfield. But there is an attitude coming through in this post of yours that you sound sad that you are your friends have been overlooked for Nicholson.

The rookie draft is a perfect place to take chances on athletes/athletic footballers and develop them. Skills are definitely taught at AFL clubs especially good ones. In fact a lot of players increase their skills by massive amounts it just doesn't show if they never make it to AFL standard. I'd give you Mark Blicavs as an example of a guy who was developed as an athlete and has increased his skills monumentally. Add Kurt Tippett as well if you like.

Fact is you need elite fitness and it damn helps to have speed to play AFL. In fact each club needs a balance of guys with elite speed otherwise you will get overrun by quick sides.

I feel Nicholson was upgraded from the rookie list too quickly and has also suffered from mix development messages like a lot of our players. At the same time I still agree he's not good enough. But we have the rest of the season to continue his development and to see what comes of it. I'd rather have Nicholson on the list than Gillies who not only lacks talent but also lacks physical attributes to play AFL.

Interesting observations.

Having played with and against some great players, I believe there are many out there who are better all round players than Nicholson. I understand he got a spot on our list due to his running ability but that's not enough to get a spot on an AFL list in my eyes and I'll say it again, MFC have been the worst drafters in within the AFL over a number of years. Most would agree within the AFL.

I understand international rookies and project big men have to learn the basic skills of the game if they're to get anywhere. That's why you can't compare Kurt Tippet to Nicholson. Kurt is a monster who possesses many more attributes than Nicholson straight off the bat. All he needed to do was learn the basics of the game and he was going to be a dominant player. He had height, strength, aggression, agility, coordination and his understanding of the game was fine for a player who was to play KPF.

Compare that to Nicholson's.... A small (183cm) non-key position, lightly built player who possessed elite endurance, good speed and agility.

Here's what he was missing. Aggression, basic football skills, decision making, ball handling.

Do you know how many players are out there of his height who can run all day, are quick and are also missing those attributes? Too many.

As for fitness or running ability. This is one of the most hit and miss subjects of all time. Whilst some can be 'naturally good runners', the truth of the matter is that anyone can get super fit with the right application and desire. Take Gary Ablett Jnr for example. All he did was lift his work rate to a level he never knew about and look what happened. If Sylvia had the same application, he could have been a star of the competition also.

As for the being upgraded too early bit, I agree 100%. But I guess that's what happens when a club drafts and develops so poorly over a number of years.

It really makes it easy to understand why we are in the place we're in.

What are you talking about?

I am not assigning blame to anyone but I am making the point - that I have made previously, and will make again - that our recruitment problems from the past have left us in the shape we are in.

If you ignore the past, you may not avoid repeating it in the future.

That is the point, in hindsight they were (possibly) mistakes, at the time they weren't, I take it clairvoyance is one of your strong suits

It certainly does matter - there is a onus, a responsibility, to get those picks in the first and second round right.

Nicholson was taken in the RD and only took a spot on the Primary List this year. If his recruitment is a 'failure' it is of infnitesimal significance.

Of course there others on the list who were picked from the ND, however this thread is about Nicholson is it not?

We are discussing the player at hand, and even though he was from the rookie draft, I believe had we not had such a sub-standard recruiting department, he would not be on our list.

Edited July 3, 201312 yr by stevethemanjordan

17 disposals at 82.4% efficiency - 6 marks - 4 clearances - 3 rebound 50's - 3 inside 50's - 11 tackles - 112 Dream Team points.

All while chasing one of the best mids currently in the game.

To add to this he gave away 5cm in height, 7kg in weight and 146 games in experience.

On this game he a least deserves a bit of credit.

Geez give the kid a break. Was one of our best last week.

Not a bad idea OP, but I prefer him being able to break the lines a bit, it's hard to do that as a forward pocket-type player.

One of our best? He got some good stats, but he was playing as a tagger on a guy who got 31 touches and 3 goals.

17 disposals at 82.4% efficiency - 6 marks - 4 clearances - 3 rebound 50's - 3 inside 50's - 11 tackles - 112 Dream Team points.

All while chasing one of the best mids currently in the game.

FCS start giving our young players a chance to develop.

Yes, chasing a mid who who got 31 touches and 3 goals.

Can't believe people keep missing that important point...

I think he tags Dan Hannebery this week.

Oh lord.... Look at Nicho's opponents stats from last week, Hannebery will get 80 touches and 17 goals this week if Nicho tags him.

That is the point, in hindsight they were (possibly) mistakes, at the time they weren't, I take it clairvoyance is one of your strong suits

They were mistakes. They are the reason our list is bereft of good midfielders.

I will take your acidic remark and retool it: picking 18 year olds is a form of 'clairvoyance.'

The entire football world seems to not want us to get draft assistance because we cannot foresee which of those teenagers will become better than others.

That's partially true, however other clubs have got those choices right and they do not require a convenient 'out' about hindsight, clairvoyance, or any other magics - they just draft really well with the picks that matter.

It is the reason those teams are up the top, and we are in a terrible spot.

Unless, you have a problem with me pointing out reality.

Which can be quite biased I have found.

Yes, chasing a mid who who got 31 touches and 3 goals.

Can't believe people keep missing that important point...

That is because Griffin wasn't that influential when it counted.

It taken us to fall over for Griffin to do a Steve Bradbury.

Considering Griffin has carved it up this year and is arguably the best player in the league - other than Ablett - on form.

Nicho done a good job to pick up touches himself.

Dan Nicholson is a liability. As of next year, I don't want to see him in our starting 22. He is an athlete, not a football player.

Another drafting mistake during the BP days to go with many others.

He was a rookie selection give him a break

Yes, chasing a mid who who got 31 touches and 3 goals.

Can't believe people keep missing that important point...

But in the first 3 qtrs what did Griffen touches amount to, not much, the last qtr was a team surrender, Nicho's first game as a tagger against a guy who is in red hot form, hard task masters indeed, I wouldn't mind seeing him have a crack at Hanneberry....

Yes, chasing a mid who who got 31 touches and 3 goals.

Can't believe people keep missing that important point...

Wasn't missed at all. Which makes my point of "To add to this he gave away 5cm in height, 7kg in weight and 146 games in experience. On this game he a least deserves a bit of credit." even more relevant.

Which you conveniently left out....

Did you know that for the first quarter Sylvia took Griffen at all the centre bounces?

Wasn't missed at all. Which makes my point of "To add to this he gave away 5cm in height, 7kg in weight and 146 games in experience. On this game he a least deserves a bit of credit." even more relevant.

Which you conveniently left out....

Did you know that for the first quarter Sylvia took Griffen at all the centre bounces?

Haha that's a big reach there mate... I don't think they give us any premiership points for playing smaller players... He got some ball, but his opponent smashed him.

He was a rookie selection give him a break

Old dee, please. Enough with the breaks.

I want this club to improve.

Give ME a break.

They were mistakes. They are the reason our list is bereft of good midfielders.

I will take your acidic remark and retool it: picking 18 year olds is a form of 'clairvoyance.'

The entire football world seems to not want us to get draft assistance because we cannot foresee which of those teenagers will become better than others.

That's partially true, however other clubs have got those choices right and they do not require a convenient 'out' about hindsight, clairvoyance, or any other magics - they just draft really well with the picks that matter.

It is the reason those teams are up the top, and we are in a terrible spot.

Unless, you have a problem with me pointing out reality.

Which can be quite biased I have found.

I'll just put two examples, when we got Morton at 4 we received congratulations from everybody else, Cook was U18 AA and was expected to go top 10.............every club has poor choices......why do you think suddenly mature age recruits are being picked up........less of a chance of failure

Considering Griffin has carved it up this year and is arguably the best player in the league - other than Ablett - on form.

Now the excuses are getting even more out there.

I'll just put two examples, when we got Morton at 4 we received congratulations from everybody else, Cook was U18 AA and was expected to go top 10.............every club has poor choices......why do you think suddenly mature age recruits are being picked up........less of a chance of failure

Why are you defending those choices?

I don't care that unnamed people 'in the know' thought we drafted well.

We didn't.

It doesn't matter that it was the rookie draft, there are still players I play with and against in the Amo's who would contribute far more than an ability to 'run'.

So is your position that instead of recruiting Nicholson, we should have recruited some other guy from the ammos who also probably wouldn't have made it?

I'm all for moaning about our drafting, but honestly, WGAF if we drafted an ordinary player with pick 14 in the rookie draft. The probability of getting good players that deep in to the draft is slim, so the consequence of blowing it is immaterial. If you stood it next to the consequence of those botched first rounders, you wouldn't even be able to see it.

But in the first 3 qtrs what did Griffen touches amount to, not much, the last qtr was a team surrender, Nicho's first game as a tagger against a guy who is in red hot form, hard task masters indeed, I wouldn't mind seeing him have a crack at Hanneberry....

I wouldn't mind seeing him have a crack in the VFL. He won't be on our list next year if we're actually going anywhere.

Nothing against the guy, he's clearly an excellent trainer, but just not quite good enough.

Haha that's a big reach there mate... I don't think they give us any premiership points for playing smaller players... He got some ball, but his opponent smashed him.

Beat him maybe... Smashed him wrong.

Look, all I'm saying is give 'the kid' a bit of credit where it is due.

Frawley was a total spud early on: couldn't kick straight and could not pick up the ball below his knees.

Garland was a brain fade specialist who played loose.

Neitz had concrete hands.

Cam Bruce was a pretty boy.

Flower was too skinny.

This kid has played 28 games and is improving at a faster rate each month. Stick him on Hannebury and let's see what he does. Plonk him on half back and give him license to run and carry. He might be a total waste but that is not proven yet.

Edited July 3, 201312 yr by Maldonboy38

Beat him maybe... Smashed him wrong.

Look, all I'm saying is give 'the kid' a bit of credit where it is due.

I gave him credit for getting some ball, I also gave him a thumbs down for how well his opponent played.

To me, it sums him up. He'll just not quite make it.

I gave him credit for getting some ball, I also gave him a thumbs down for how well his opponent played.

To me, it sums him up. He'll just not quite make it.

You may be right but you are 'still' failing to take into consideration the difference in experience, height, weight etc.

It was not the correct match up to begin with and Nicho did well all things considered. I reckon this was a test by NC to see how he went on a bigger, stronger more experienced opponent.

Dunn would have been a more ideal match up on Griffen and Nicho would have done a better job on Liberatore who was clearly best on ground.

You may be right but you are 'still' failing to take into consideration the difference in experience, height, weight etc.

Whatever you reckon Neeldy.

Edited July 3, 201312 yr by stuie