2015 Player Review - # 4 Jack Watts

[Bombay Airconditioning 6,359]

Good thing list decisions are made by professionals and not by social medal voting as happens with reality TV shows, then.

On topic, I'm confused by the B&F voting. How does any player score so relatively poorly yet play so often? I would have thought a player with those sort of scores would have been in and out of the team a lot more.

By professionals do you mean the coaching panel that dropped him for the last game?

With regards to the B&F players may not rack up high numbers but "play their role".

[Pates 9,660]

Interesting that Ty Vickery was from the same draft and has had very similar criticisms over the journey but he has come pretty good this year (albeit stuffed a golden chance for the tigers to get back in the game yesterday). People kept saying time and time again he would be a gun, now I'm not saying he's done that but he's certainly become an important player for them.

Time has come for Watts, I personally think he won't be at Melbourne next year, as to what we'd get for him who knows.

Edited September 14, 2015 by Pates

[jnrmac 20,055]

Had a really good few months before he, and a few others, went back to his usual ways.

Even if it is only to bump up his trade value to a decent level.

Unless part of a package, I can't see him getting anything worth his value.

We can rewrite 2015 to say that we will take ND35 for him (the proverbial packet of chips) but it won't make it true, and it won't make it a good trade.

No he didn't. A few months is 12 weeks. He played well for 5 or 6 weeks after droping himself.

The fact he finished 18th in the Bluey says it all. the coaches don't rate him. They know what he can do,. They know what he is instructed to do. They see what he does.

Jack is a bust sadly.

[jnrmac 20,055]

Good thing list decisions are made by professionals and not by social medal voting as happens with reality TV shows, then.

On topic, I'm confused by the B&F voting. How does any player score so relatively poorly yet play so often? I would have thought a player with those sort of scores would have been in and out of the team a lot more.

Well I think garland played poorly but he scored well in the B&F . the coaches are measuring him against the role he has been given. I assume this is his ability to beat his opponent. I criticise him for some of his dumb decision making and his lack of offenisve capability but the coaches know a lot better than me or any of us.

Jack clearly didn't do what the coaches want or what they think he is capable of.

[beelzebub 23,313]

He's starting to remind me of Sylvia. We kept thinking he was a wasted talent, the penny needs to drop etc. The reality is neither of the players are as talented as we think they are. This is as good as it's going to get.

might very well be the reality

[rpfc 28,263]

No he didn't. A few months is 12 weeks. He played well for 5 or 6 weeks after droping himself.

The fact he finished 18th in the Bluey says it all. the coaches don't rate him. They know what he can do,. They know what he is instructed to do. They see what he does.

Jack is a bust sadly.

Even Roos gave him a good '8 or 9' weeks when he dropped him for the last game. So you stole a month and I gave him one...

And the top 10 players poll votes, Watts isn't that in many games, even when he had his good 'couple' of months, he contributed and played his role (something I appreciated) but he doesn't create for himself and doesn't do defensive roles or get hard footy so polling in B+F is not his bag...

His ceiling is valuable role player in a good team, and that's not nothing, but it's not transformative. If we are asking for top 10 pick like someone said we were, how does a good team get that to give to us?

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,693]

By professionals do you mean the coaching panel that dropped him for the last game?

With regards to the B&F players may not rack up high numbers but "play their role".

One of us isn't understanding the other. The numbers I was referring to were the ratings given to him by the coaches, not his stats or any other statistical metric. If he had played his role satisfactorily to the expectations of the coaches, I would have expected him to get more votes in the B&F. That he didn't score that many votes, I can only assume he wasn't performing his role adequately enough often enough. Hence my query as to why he played so many games of quality which clearly must have disappointed the coaches.

[jnrmac 20,055]

Even Roos gave him a good '8 or 9' weeks when he dropped him for the last game. So you stole a month and I gave him one...

And the top 10 players poll votes, Watts isn't that in many games, even when he had his good 'couple' of months, he contributed and played his role (something I appreciated) but he doesn't create for himself and doesn't do defensive roles or get hard footy so polling in B+F is not his bag...

His ceiling is valuable role player in a good team, and that's not nothing, but it's not transformative. If we are asking for top 10 pick like someone said we were, how does a good team get that to give to us?

Nice try at sugar coating it but you can't simply try to support his year with that. So polling in the B&F isn't his bag, tagging isn't his bag, winning contested footy isn't his bag....his bag, whatever it is, doesn't do much for the MFC.

[rpfc 28,263]

Nice try at sugar coating it but you can't simply try to support his year with that. So polling in the B&F isn't his bag, tagging isn't his bag, winning contested footy isn't his bag....his bag, whatever it is, doesn't do much for the MFC.

Oh, it wasn't sugar...

I was being facetious.

My own team has a couple of softies that do their thing on a flank and wing and we keep them in there because they provide pace and skills that a couple of harder fringe players do not have.

We prefer to win games with a balanced side than lose on a principle.

And that's my view if Watts stays in 2016.

[The heart beats true 18,110]

I want Jack gone for one very simple reason:

I'll never have to read about should he stay or should he go again on D'Land

[Lucifers Hero 39,600]

I want Jack gone for one very simple reason:

I'll never have to read about should he stay or should he go again on D'Land

A futile hope!!

...the new threads will be either: 'thank god JW is gone, he is a spud! ' or 'OMG how on earth did we let JW go, he is a star'!

DL's will always have a love/hate relationship with the enigma that is Jack Watts!

DL will never let go!!!

Edited September 14, 2015 by Lucifer's Hero

[stuie 7,374]

Not sure why so many are bashing Watts based on his Bluey result. Most of you flat out want him gone, yet by finishing 18th that would mean he's picked in our starting team every week right? That's if you want to read into these results the way most of you are.

[The Song Formerly Known As 6,479]

i hope he stays, but he will be a much better player somewhere else.

Sadly he is majorly symbolic of our mistakes of the past.

[Gator 17,281]

Not sure why so many are bashing Watts based on his Bluey result. Most of you flat out want him gone, yet by finishing 18th that would mean he's picked in our starting team every week right? That's if you want to read into these results the way most of you are.

What an insanely stupid argument. But completely on point and good for a laugh and for that I say thank you.

[stuie 7,374]

What an insanely stupid argument. But completely on point and good for a laugh and for that I say thank you.

You don't think people are basing too much on Bluey results?

These guys says hi....

[beelzebub 23,313]

Oh, it wasn't sugar...

I was being facetious.

My own team has a couple of softies that do their thing on a flank and wing and we keep them in there because they provide pace and skills that a couple of harder fringe players do not have.

We prefer to win games with a balanced side than lose on a principle.

And that's my view if Watts stays in 2016.

relevance to AFL ?

Nada id suspect. Thats no disrespectful Rpfc.. just perspective

AFL is elite. No room for passengers at this level. What you do at yours is up to you.

[Deestroy All 14,262]

Roos on 360 was asked if Jack will be there next year.

My translation of Roos speak is: he'll be traded if there's a decent offer.

Edited September 14, 2015 by Deestroy All

[Moneider96 1,045]

After seeing roos on afl 360, I doubt watts will be here next year

[beelzebub 23,313]

Roos on 360 was asked if Jack will be there next year.

My translation of Roos speak is: he'll be traded if there's a decent offer.

no prizes there. Obvious really

[Deestroy All 14,262]

no prizes there. Obvious really

Just letting anyone know that didn't watch it.

[dazzledavey36 54,285]

Its quite Obvious after seeing Roosy on 360 that Watts and Howe will be our main trade baits.

[beelzebub 23,313]

Just letting anyone know that didn't watch it.

thankyou. I realise. Not a slang at your goodself. Just putting Roos -speak into perspective.

Jack's had his chance at Gosch's m Time to find a new home. Best for all .

[Bombay Airconditioning 6,359]

Can someone please explain how he's going to tear it up somewhere else?

He's been worked out.

For the last time....apply the finals template.

[Bombay Airconditioning 6,359]

If he's on the table this year we can't be fussy because whatever is offered it will be less next year.

[beelzebub 23,313]

The idea i find 'cute' is the notion of we MUST keep Jack for he'll surely blossom elsewhere. It's irrelevant to us really. It's about what Jack brings to us.

Its about us. If Jack doesn't ADD to us..then....