In my votes today... composed and effective. Good tackles and wins his own footy

today he reminded me of his neafl highlights video. not surprising really , but still, a big step up to afl

On 4/8/2016 at 10:05 AM, Dr. Gonzo said:

He's 21 and has had no experience playing in the AFL. He may not be a "kid" but he is under developed. What has he proven? Why does he get a pass straight to the seniors when others are made to "bang down the door" in the VFL (the way it should be)? I'm highly suspect of this decision, of course I'd love to be proven wrong but it doesn't fill me with confidence, in fact I can see it being a disaster if he has only 5-10 touches, is towelled up and made to look like a fool by one of their bigger forwards and panics under pressure causing even more turnovers in our back half (our achilles heel).

Well based on yesterday's performance I was proven wrong and gladly so.

Don't you love it when previous posts come back to bite you on the arse? This is one example of where I'm happy to admit it though

I was hoping he'd be another Jason Taylor NEAFL gem and so far he's proving that to be the case.

The thing that has surprised me most is that he actually plays quite tall which is a surprise.

The addition of Wagner and Dunn is clearly more effective and has changed the dynamic of the back-line for the better.

Obviously it's two games in but Wagner has already demonstrated why the coaches have given him the nod over Garland. Yesterday he showed more aggression, intensity, skill, composure and intercept play than I have seen from Garland in years. No exaggeration. I'd go as far to say that if Garland had played like that yesterday, ye ol' trusty posters in Wiseblood and co would be PM-ing me in sheer excitement as to what they'd witnessed whilst in addition asking that I go into space and take my helmet off.

Whilst there were still some moments of hesitancy and poor decision making from young Wagner, his proactive and positive contribution far outweighed those negative aspects of his game. 

Wagner also showed his appetite for intercept marking, something Garland has in the past been known for. Another positive for the young fella.

On a positive note for Colin, it's good to hear he had a solid game for Casey. All of these things bode well for the MFC at large. Remember that.

Dees.

 

21 minutes ago, Clint Bizkit said:

I was hoping he'd be another Jason Taylor NEAFL gem and so far he's proving that to be the case.

The thing that has surprised me most is that he actually plays quite tall which is a surprise.

Looks shorter than his listed height of 189cm.

Great to have another strong overhead in the back six.

21 minutes ago, stevethemanjordan said:

Looks shorter than his listed height of 189cm.

Great to have another strong overhead in the back six.

And I think the opposite! (Although based on TV viewing only)

Happy to admit being one who poured scorn on him being picked.

So happy to be wrong.

Did I hear they saw him when they went up to check out VDB?

1 hour ago, stevethemanjordan said:

The addition of Wagner and Dunn is clearly more effective and has changed the dynamic of the back-line for the better.

Obviously it's two games in but Wagner has already demonstrated why the coaches have given him the nod over Garland. Yesterday he showed more aggression, intensity, skill, composure and intercept play than I have seen from Garland in years. No exaggeration. I'd go as far to say that if Garland had played like that yesterday, ye ol' trusty posters in Wiseblood and co would be PM-ing me in sheer excitement as to what they'd witnessed whilst in addition asking that I go into space and take my helmet off.

Whilst there were still some moments of hesitancy and poor decision making from young Wagner, his proactive and positive contribution far outweighed those negative aspects of his game. 

Wagner also showed his appetite for intercept marking, something Garland has in the past been known for. Another positive for the young fella.

On a positive note for Colin, it's good to hear he had a solid game for Casey. All of these things bode well for the MFC at large. Remember that.

Dees.

 

No need to make it about Garland. We only played 2 key defenders against Essendon and again the last two weeks, Dunn has replaced Garland, not Wagner. Both Wagner and Lumumba have taken turns on the 3rd tall forward as the medium options. They compliment each other well. Lumumba has run and athleticism, Wagner has intercept marking and skills. 

If the zone can be set up right and teams don't have 3 dominant talls then we will stick with 2 key defenders and using mid sized guys. 

Dunn was solid one on one, and good with the ball when he made smart decisions, his kicking can be a weapon. But he was all at sea in the notion of zone defending and when to be aggressive and leave his man. He'll always be the right match up for teams who have a big marking option deep, he just needs to adapt to the new game plan and also looks a bit short of confidence and fitness.

22 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

No need to make it about Garland. We only played 2 key defenders against Essendon and again the last two weeks, Dunn has replaced Garland, not Wagner. Both Wagner and Lumumba have taken turns on the 3rd tall forward as the medium options. They compliment each other well. Lumumba has run and athleticism, Wagner has intercept marking and skills. 

If the zone can be set up right and teams don't have 3 dominant talls then we will stick with 2 key defenders and using mid sized guys. 

Dunn was solid one on one, and good with the ball when he made smart decisions, his kicking can be a weapon. But he was all at sea in the notion of zone defending and when to be aggressive and leave his man. He'll always be the right match up for teams who have a big marking option deep, he just needs to adapt to the new game plan and also looks a bit short of confidence and fitness.

In total disagreeance.

Whatever way Roos 'spins' it to the media, Wagner is a direct replacement for Garland and adds a whole lot more.

Dunn replaced O-Mac with the Essendon game being the only exception as Dunn was deemed not ready. Garland was required to play 'taller' than usual as part of our rotating defence on that awful day.

He has since been replaced by Wagner who is a centimetre or two off Garland's height. He can play tall and small like Garland but as I have said, adds a whole other dimension that we were in need of and that Garland wasn't offering. That's the reality of it.

Dunn and McDonald are now our two KPD with Wagner playing Garland's position.

1 hour ago, DeeSpencer said:

No need to make it about Garland. We only played 2 key defenders against Essendon and again the last two weeks, Dunn has replaced Garland, not Wagner. Both Wagner and Lumumba have taken turns on the 3rd tall forward as the medium options. They compliment each other well. Lumumba has run and athleticism, Wagner has intercept marking and skills. 

If the zone can be set up right and teams don't have 3 dominant talls then we will stick with 2 key defenders and using mid sized guys. 

 

One thing that I have noted all season is our pressure up the ground has been excellent, bar the stinking garbage fire of the Dons game. You know what this leads to, opposition players having to bomb the ball in long and high or looking to squeeze the ball into a way to small area where we have numbers back and can pick off/bring to ground the ball.

Has been enjoyable to watch when 'on'. Allows the defence to get back and position nicely as we saw yesterday.

What really impressed with Wagner was his composure. 

2 hours ago, nutbean said:

What really impressed with Wagner was his composure. 

go and re-visit his highlights video. composure is his middle name

7 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

go and re-visit his highlights video. composure is his middle name

You're confusing name with occupation. Wagner was a composer.

Sir Wagner scored votes in The Age

 

COLLINGWOOD v MELBOURNE
(Peter Hanlon)
Jack Viney (Melbourne) 8
Nathan Jones (Melbourne) 8
Dom Tyson (Melbourne) 8
Josh Wagner (Melbourne) 7
Jack Watts (Melbourne) 7
 

16 minutes ago, Petraccattack said:

Sir Wagner scored votes in The Age

 

COLLINGWOOD v MELBOURNE
(Peter Hanlon)
Jack Viney (Melbourne) 8
Nathan Jones (Melbourne) 8
Dom Tyson (Melbourne) 8
Josh Wagner (Melbourne) 7
Jack Watts (Melbourne) 7
 

No love for Gawn...

26 minutes ago, Petraccattack said:

Sir Wagner scored votes in The Age

 

COLLINGWOOD v MELBOURNE
(Peter Hanlon)
Jack Viney (Melbourne) 8
Nathan Jones (Melbourne) 8
Dom Tyson (Melbourne) 8
Josh Wagner (Melbourne) 7
Jack Watts (Melbourne) 7
 

Like any given week, the coaches votes are of real interest.  Thought Wagner might feature this week but he missed out  - Pendlebury marked a bit low I thought too.  Here they are ...

10 Jack Viney (Melb)
7 Jack Watts (Melb)
4 Nathan Jones (Melb)
3 Adam Treloar (Coll)
2 Dean Kent (Melb)
2 Scott Pendlebury (Coll)
1 Tom McDonald (Melb)
1 Steele Sidebottom (Coll)

 

AFLCA Leaderboard
29 Luke Parker (Syd)
28 Tom Lynch (GC)
23 Sam Mitchell (Haw)
22 Jack Viney (Melb)
22 Jack Ziebell (NM)
21 Patrick Dangerfield (Geel)
21 Robbie Gray (PA)
20 Todd Goldstein (NM)
20 Aaron Hall (GC)
18 Matt Priddis (WC)

 

Cheeky rising star nom?

Wagner is too old for the Rising Star, by about 5 weeks. Turned 21 in November.

Just watched the replay and Wagner was very solid. Very cool for a 2nd gamer.

Hunt did some good things as well. Not overawed by the occasion.

A lot to like about our young brigade.

I admit to doubts about Wagner. I just thought he didn't look ready, both in his NAB games and against Norf. Especially in a game where I expected Pies to hit us hard, and to get in the face of all our young guys, which they certainly did.

But he stepped up very well indeed. He was solid defensively, his disposal was mostly great, he seems to like the hard stuff, and he finds space and gets into space well on the rebound. Certainly has the full toolkit. Almost Salem-like except bigger & stronger. He could easily hold down a spot in defence long-term.

 

6 hours ago, Macca said:

Like any given week, the coaches votes are of real interest.  Thought Wagner might feature this week but he missed out  - Pendlebury marked a bit low I thought too.  Here they are ...

10 Jack Viney (Melb)
7 Jack Watts (Melb)
4 Nathan Jones (Melb)
3 Adam Treloar (Coll)
2 Dean Kent (Melb)
2 Scott Pendlebury (Coll)
1 Tom McDonald (Melb)
1 Steele Sidebottom (Coll)

 

So breakdown has to look something like:

5 - Viney
4 - Jones
3 - Watts
2 - Pendlebury
1 - McDonald

5 - Viney
4 - Watts
3 - Treloar
2 - Kent
1 - Sidebottom

Love trying to work these out. Clearly Roos would have given Tom Mc a vote, as Buckley wouldn't even notice a player like that.

So did Roos or Buckley give Pendlebury or Kent 2?

And who had Watts at 4 and no Jones? Probably Roos again I'd say