Nic Nat criticisms starting to build

[Return to Glory 7,727]

Let's hope he now gets dropped

[Return to Glory 7,727]

Scully's that is.

[darkhorse72 1,725]

That [censored] Dwayne Russell just said that there will again be speculation that NN is carrying an injury this week, after another lean second half. I know DR hates MFC, but his views are endemic of the footy media. If NN struggles, it's because of injury. If Watts is struggling, he should be dropped.

given their fast declining ladder position, he may soon be putout to pasture if its true.

[P-man 13,168]

Was apparently getting bronx cheers in the final quarter when he got a touch.

[Binmans PA 26,053]

Was apparently getting bronx cheers in the final quarter when he got a touch.

Yep. Took a mark in the corridor and received ironic cheers. The commentators barely noted it.

[dees189227 10,769]

9 disposals 2 marks for Nic Nat. If he's injured dont play him. Its not an excuse for his performance.

[whatwhat say what 18,921]

Eagles are playing a very tall line up at the moment and it's not doing them any favours.

If they do sign Nic Nat on that mega buck deal that's been mooted a couple of players will have to be jettisoned.

Edited May 4, 2014 by DemonAndrew

[TGR 1,367]

And I still can't work out why GWS payed such massive overs for such an underwhelming player as Scully.

And I can't work out why MFC supporters have a go at him for taking the deal-squared of a lifetime.

He would have been an absolute and utter fool to say no to that offer.

Yes, he could have been more honest, but the system won't tolerate honesty.

I am going to buy shares in him btw.

[jabberwocky 2,301]

I just wanted to post something because i have a new avatar...

oi!

[Carrot Top 947]

9 disposals 2 marks for Nic Nat. If he's injured dont play him. Its not an excuse for his performance.

That's nearly as good as his AA year.

[John Crow Batty 8,255]

Can we trade him for Watts?

[mauriesy 6,790]

Over in the derby, Aaron Sandilands had the same number of possessions (21) as Dean Cox (12) and NicNat (9) combined. He had 50% more hitouts (38) than Cox and NicNat combined (13 each).

That means Fremantle have a 'bonus' player somewhere else on the field. Doubt the Eagles can keep playing NicNat in his current form.

[JackVineyForPresident 310]

He was rubbish today again.

I hope he gets the same treatment as Watts, because Nicnat has been pathetic

[John Crow Batty 8,255]

Reported today that NikNat has signed for 5 years for $4.000.000 to stay at WC. Obviously the criticism hasn't hurt.

[Binmans PA 26,053]

Well, that's good for the rest of the competition. He'll chew up a large portion of their cap and he's an overrated ruckman, occasional forward. I never understand drafting ruckmen in the top 5. Rookie list or late picks all the way for ruckmen.

[John Crow Batty 8,255]

Yep, nothing changes. Over rated, over payed, over hyped and over there.

[Nasher 33,047]

Well, that's good for the rest of the competition. He'll chew up a large portion of their cap and he's an overrated ruckman, occasional forward. I never understand drafting ruckmen in the top 5. Rookie list or late picks all the way for ruckmen.

To be fair, the guy has once in a lifetime athletic attributes. Pick 2 is over the top with the benefit of hindsight, but the idea that a player like him would have ever made it to the late pick or rookie list stage is laughable. You'd surely, at worst, take the risk that you could turn the freak althlete in to a footballer with a pick in the 20s at the lowest.

[TheoX 1,218]

Rubbish onfield, this contract is 50%+ for marketing.

[Binmans PA 26,053]

To be fair, the guy has once in a lifetime athletic attributes. Pick 2 is over the top with the benefit of hindsight, but the idea that a player like him would have ever made it to the late pick or rookie list stage is laughable. You'd surely, at worst, take the risk that you could turn the freak althlete in to a footballer with a pick in the 20s at the lowest.

Not a fan. I'd always draft the guy with skills and awareness over a learner. Maybe, I'm a conservative judge? I certainly wouldn't spend a top 5 or 10 pick on a ruckman. Unless, he was just as capable as a KPF. I'm just not for gambling on top picks. NN was a gamble.

Edited May 21, 2014 by AdamFarr

[Akum 2,660]

Rubbish onfield, this contract is 50%+ for marketing.

Yep, he's a Perth marketer's dream.

[CBDees 3,162]

Well, that's good for the rest of the competition. He'll chew up a large portion of their cap and he's an overrated ruckman, occasional forward. I never understand drafting ruckmen in the top 5. Rookie list or late picks all the way for ruckmen.

Surely Boyd, although drafted as a FF at 200+, was always going to be in this category as NN? If we have received a PP [like we were entitled to with 2 wins last year] then I doubt that we would of overlooked Boyd [as we did when we had the choice of JW or NN]!

[Binmans PA 26,053]

Surely Boyd, although drafted as a FF at 200+, was always going to be in this category as NN? If we have received a PP [like we were entitled to with 2 wins last year] then I doubt that we would of overlooked Boyd [as we did when we had the choice of JW or NN]!

Boyd's a KPF that can ruck. So yeah. I would have been very happy drafting him.

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

this 'marketing' angle is a laugh

the Eagles just print money they have no need for this

what is the value of having a bloke soak up the salary cap and disgruntle other players

what is the value of having a substandard player on the field (or in the twos) copping criticism

what is the value of losing matches in general because your side is weaker than it could be

why is such a high marketing value attributed to a player that is not actually very good at football?

makes no sense

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,397]

this 'marketing' angle is a laugh

the Eagles just print money they have no need for this

what is the value of having a bloke soak up the salary cap and disgruntle other players

what is the value of having a substandard player on the field (or in the twos) copping criticism

what is the value of losing matches in general because your side is weaker than it could be

why is such a high marketing value attributed to a player that is not actually very good at football?

makes no sense

I'm sure the Coach and Match Committees would deny it, but I suspect a player's pay packet influences a decision whether to drop him. Imagine the criticism any club would receive for dropping one of its highest paid players whether it be NicNat, Scully, Franklin or (hypothetically only, of course) Ablett?