I think Sam may be one of those players where he will do what he did on Saturday and keep competing and one day it will click and he'll clunk everything at AFL level and snag 7. I just wish he would start grabbing a few of these pack marks and he may be away, look at Oscar, clearly confidence is the trigger. I'm proud of Oscar this year and he's turned into an important cog in back 6. Only concern for me with Sam is his kicking for goal (like Hogan). Would be nice to see him start taking some marks. If Petrie can make it at AFL level then surely Sam will haha

12 hours ago, DemonAndrew said:

Ran hard, chased, tackled, flew at the contests

He will be a player

and had a mature experienced top 5 league  backman for an opponent.

Did his job in the first half, particularly in the first quarter where he got on the lead a bit, brought the ball to ground and tackled well.

Yeah he ran out of puff in the 3rd and couldn't do too much in the last but it's not easy being the 2nd or even 3rd option in this side. 

Look at the quiet games Pedersen, Watts, Hannan etc have had when the game has gone around them not through them. I'm glad he had another run at the top level and even if it isn't much he's made improvements in tackling and I think his leading is decent.

Our forwards start so bunched and run at unusual angles. It's not an easy system for any forward yet alone a young tall. Especially when the service dries up. It's a system designed to create pockets of space to kick the ball in to and to lock the ball in.

What I don't get is, why is Goodwin persisting with this bomb long game plan? Why wouldn't he say to Sam, lead to the right areas and we'll pass it to you. Crumbers still play a part if he drops it and seems much simpler to me. Unsure what is with the bomb long thing, maybe he wants to maximise pressure on defenders. Personally I'd prefer Sam to lead, mark, kick.

sure, weideman didnt have a great game but honestly his intensity and effort levels were far better than Watts has been dishing up and for that Watts will stay in the vfl for a while longer and rightly so.

12 hours ago, Watts the matter said:

The thing is Weideman didn't play a whole lot of football in his underage years so we have probably seen more of him now than Taylor saw when he drafted him.

Was a risk and is looking like we missed the best option at that pick (Curnow). This was a pick that was based on potential more than output. Curnow would have been another pick on potential but the main difference between the two is athleticism which will forever hold Weideman back in my opinion. 

 

and from a carl recruiter Carlton would have taken Weed over Curnow if they had the choice. 

10 hours ago, olisik said:

Carlisle had a field day on the Weeds, in fact aside from umpires he was what got them back in the game.

 

Weed has a good endeavour at times however it is blatantly obvious that he isn't fit enough for AFL. The kid can't even run out a quarter let alone a game at the moment.

He needs a brutal pre season otherwise we will see more of the same next year 

Yeah, Carlisle's ability to run off Weid killed us in the third qtr so in that sense he was actually inhibiting the team.

I reckon Harris Andrews will mark every ball kicked to him next week unless Tmac plays forward. 

2 minutes ago, Grimes Times said:

and from a carl recruiter Carlton would have taken Weed over Curnow if they had the choice. 

Those top picks can be  such a game of chance in the main and hindsight can be such a cruel teacher in these things.  I dont mean the weed ill and hope he turns into a good player but given the choice right now Im sure we'd go the other way.

Sometimes in cases like Oliver and Parish for example...while Oliver is clearly the freakish  standout, Parish is still a worthy choice. I think Curnow looks like the standout  so Im hoping Weed will  at least be a worthy choice. 

    Not much difference in similar build/type players in there second years averages        

                K     H     D     M   

Weed     3.4  4.6  8.0  2.6   

Moore   5.6  3.5  9.1  4.5

Daniher  7.6  3.7  11.3  5.3

Hipwood  6.3  2.3  8.5  2.8

Brown       6.9  3.3  10.2  4.5

Schache   5.5  3.6  9.1  3.9

 

Edited August 14, 20177 yr by Grimes Times

14 minutes ago, Dr.D said:

sure, weideman didnt have a great game but honestly his intensity and effort levels were far better than Watts has been dishing up and for that Watts will stay in the vfl for a while longer and rightly so.

I have to agree. Weideman was at least physical and provided a contest, he didn't flap at the first sign of body contact.

15 minutes ago, Grimes Times said:

    Not much difference in similar build/type players in there second years averages        

                K     H     D     M   

Weed     3.4  4.6  8.0  2.6   

Moore   5.6  3.5  9.1  4.5

Daniher  7.6  3.7  11.3  5.3

Hipwood  6.3  2.3  8.5  2.8

Brown       6.9  3.3  10.2  4.5

Schache   5.5  3.6  9.1  3.9

 

What do goals show? SC points? Just asking as I'm interested

He was terrible yesterday, outside his tackling there wasn't much else.  I agree that Watts should have been dropped and he will stay at Casey at least for 1 more week but this kid isn't ready for AFL football, he will get a game next week but I reckon that is more to teach Watts another lesson.

31 minutes ago, Dr.D said:

sure, weideman didnt have a great game but honestly his intensity and effort levels were far better than Watts has been dishing up and for that Watts will stay in the vfl for a while longer and rightly so.

Yep. And without actually saying it goody said as much in his post game presser. 

His response to the question about if watts and salem had donw enough for a recall was instructive.

Goody could not have been more cear all season that intensity and competiveness are non negotiables as playing your assigned role. Good coaching

 

1 hour ago, Grimes Times said:

and had a mature experienced top 5 league  backman for an opponent.

That is AFL football when you are a KPF.

12 hours ago, Moonshadow said:

Goodwin in after game presser:

"I'm a pretty happy coach to have him in our forward 50"

Think he might snag a few against Brisbane

But given the "Crunch" games ahead and possible finals Jack Watts MUST COME IN 

I still believe Weeds WILL make it but needs to hit gym and believe!

3 minutes ago, drdrake said:

He was terrible yesterday, outside his tackling there wasn't much else.  I agree that Watts should have been dropped and he will stay at Casey at least for 1 more week but this kid isn't ready for AFL football, he will get a game next week but I reckon that is more to teach Watts another lesson.

It sure wont be for his contribution to yesterdays result.

1 hour ago, Grimes Times said:

and from a carl recruiter Carlton would have taken Weed over Curnow if they had the choice. 

And Port would probably taken Toumpas over Wines!

2 hours ago, Grimes Times said:

    Not much difference in similar build/type players in there second years averages        

                K     H     D     M   

Weed     3.4  4.6  8.0  2.6   

Moore   5.6  3.5  9.1  4.5

Daniher  7.6  3.7  11.3  5.3

Hipwood  6.3  2.3  8.5  2.8

Brown       6.9  3.3  10.2  4.5

Schache   5.5  3.6  9.1  3.9

 

These sort of comparisons are silly. Weideman is so far off Moore, Daniher and Hipwood at this stage of his career it's not even funny. They are also all quick.

Hipwood 29 goals in his 2nd year.

Daniher 28 goals in his 2nd year.

Moore 24 goals in his 2nd year.

Schache has been a disappointment this season, but showed a heap more than Weideman last year.

Brown barely jumps at the ball so I don't really see the need the compare the two.

 

Eventually with Hogan and Weeds in Fwd line ,they will work together and the misfield will have to decide which is in a better position. NOT two of them in the same spot.

Geelong had a good win earlier in the year where Hawkins was the "decoy" and Harry T kicked the goals. This works if there are crumbers at the feet of both. We have got to learn that. Part of the development phase.

9 hours ago, Dr.D said:

sure, weideman didnt have a great game but honestly his intensity and effort levels were far better than Watts has been dishing up and for that Watts will stay in the vfl for a while longer and rightly so.

Maybe, or maybe the MC will emphasise winning and bring Watts back after he shows what he needed to show.

There should be no spite at the selection table.

9 minutes ago, rpfc said:

Maybe, or maybe the MC will emphasise winning and bring Watts back after he shows what he needed to show.

There should be no spite at the selection table.

Agreed. Goodwin is a solution based coach. When Watts has solved his problematic areas, he'll come back in. 

He competed but for me he was mostly ineffective at ground level, and when he got the ball he looked uncomfortable with it. It wouldn't surprise me if we give him another go to get some experience but truthfully I think we can do better with the players available. 

I watched his draft, I remember the commentators/hosts saying that as long as the Dees could get his body right, as he was coming off injuries, that they believed that the Weid could be the steal of the draft at No.9.

I like the kid, he's shown glimpses of what he can do, some of his handballs to hit a free player whilst under a pack have been brilliant. If he hasn't improved and playing consistent AFL in 2 more years, then I may, may, agree to trade. ?

Agree with others that he's miles from being AFL ready and has to be a question as to whether he'll ever make it.

Instead of destroying what ever confidence he still has, put him back to VFL, bring Frost back and send Tom Mc forward.  

I have no issues getting games into Sam, however we are pushing for finals. While he is in the 22, he isn't in our best 22 when finals are on the line IMO. Soon as Watts, Hogan are back the better.