nutbean

Do some research - hitting a hundred tackles is a rarity - setting "benchmarks" is about setting the bar high but also making it realistic and achievable- you don't set an athletes benchmark as achieving a PB every week as you setting him up to fail. I have heard commentators suggest that when a team makes 80 tackles they rarely lose. As an aside, I think Clint said elsewhere that the quality is most important - tackles where the player getting tackled is able to get his hands free and handpass is detrimental to the team as it takes the tackler out of the play. Tackles that stick are whats important.

Some players will run past him as his leg speed is not as it once was and he will shank the odd kick but every week I go to the football and know exactly what Daniel Cross will bring to the table. I wish you could bottle his greatest strengths the difference between his best and worst games - he may not be our best player but is always in the top 5 or 6 when he gets beaten in a contest or makes a mistake it drives him to make up for it in the very next contest - he doesn't drop his head. his ability to run from the first to the last contest, getting to the right spots and doing the little team things He may not be Roo's most talented import but surely the rest of team ( and coaches) must look at the way he plays and appreciate his efforts and want to emulate the way he goes about it.

Setting benchmarks are about setting levels that are achievable. You do know how rarely teams get to 100 tackles. FYI - our 88 tackles was the highest of any team this weekend.

What I liked is that he attacked every contest. That level of commitment is what is required week in and week out.

At quarter time we remarked how off his game Vince was. He must have heard us because he then proceeded to tear it apart for the rest of the game.

nothing hurts more when you tell a person you barrack for Melbourne and they look at you with a sad, sympathetic look and then nod slowly and say " ohhhh ...you barrack for Melbourne". No one hates us - they just feel sorry for us. I'm with you - embarrassment is easy compared with pity.

I am going to use (a greater percentage of ) the players as an excuse - they are just not good enough both in desire and talent.

There in itself is your contradiction - You say in one breath that are older players aren't great and then in the next breath that are older players should be leading the way. That is exactly the point - the older players aren't leading the way because they are decidedly average and not great by any stretch of the imagination ! Why these older are not great is because they cannot be relied on to lead the way in spirit and effort - apologies to Daniel Cross and Nathan Jones.

I don't think it is irrelevant at any time as the successful sides have a great blend of mature and youth. The mature taking the pressure off the youth. Others here keep banging on about us having the 9th oldest list. If they looked at the quality we have at the "mature" end of our list they would understand why this is a nonsense figure to keep banging on about. The likes of Hawthorn dont harp on endlessly about the Andersons and Hartungs , like we do about Hogan and Brayshaw because they have Hodge, Mitchell, Roughhead, Burgoyne. That they may have the oldest list may mean something as look at the quality of those senior players. I understand why Roos brings in the older players as whether you are in the premiership window or not you need the mature bodies and minds to take the heat off the youngsters. The problem is that great mature players don't grow on trees and the one's we have imported added to what have is adequate at best.

I think both answers are correct - Would you start him as CHF week in and week out ? No... If you dump the ball long onto his head in a crowded forwarded line - umm no - too small . However think Jeff Farmer - I can remember times when he was on fire we emptied out the forward line and left him one on one - he was our full forward, centre half forward and small forward. Petracca ( purely based on his TAC physique and attributes and output) was a difficult match up in the forward line - too quick to put a big defender and too strong and good overhead to put a smaller defender on. If he continues that form in the AFL I can see him rotating midfield and forward as well. Again if the TAC form continues and we can isolate him on an opponent one on one he will be good. Edit - we played Russell Robertson as a CHF at 184cm but the same applied to him as Petracca and farmer - the ball has to come in a certain way for them to be successful. Contrast Hogan - he can outbody the bigs, take a jump and mark and run players off their feet - he is your model for a CHF.

Average age - and the core of mature players is very important - unfortunately we have been unable to develop (or keep) our players so they are backbone of the club like they at Hawthorn and Sydney. These players are so important to take pressure off the youth and allow them develop. Roos has recognised this ( as did Neeld) but we have bought our mature players at a garage sale so as you rightly point out they are fairly ordinary. Our youth is good and I hope they are not hampered by the lack of older talented players with experience, mentorship, leadership. A perfect example is Billy Hartung who is one of the Hawks mid rotation who can develop unseen behind the likes of Mitchell, Lewis, Hodge etc

Your namesake - was not particularly quick, disposal could be iffy - but brought it each and every week. The two closest we have is Jones and Cross. The best and worst efforts of most of our team is too wide. When most of the team bring the same effort the junior brought to the team on a weekly basis we will see a rise up the ladder.

You are remembering Jnr too fondly - his best season was an average of 23 disposals and his career average was a touch under 18. (Tyson,Viney and Jones have higher disposal averages than Junior. Daniel Cross has the best average of all current players - I do note that possessions are cheaper and easier than in Juniors day) But you are 100% right in bringing up Junior as the example of on-field leadership and every week brought the basics - tackling, running, effort, intent, desire and pressure. The closest we have had is Nathan Jones with Cross a close second.

nailed it.... The Richmond game was on the 24th April - look at posts from that date...

Sydney - Franklin and Tippet, Kennedy, McGlynn ( and good value out of Mumford) Port have taken in ordinary footballers in White and Schulz and have turned them around. Ebert has been good as has Monfries and you can now add Polec and Ryder to the list... But Freo hasn't had the same success

I agree with this but would add that you are dealing with very limited data on immature 18 year olds.

Where would you rather spend your time - Port Douglas or Mt Druitt - Hawthorn have the luxury of being a destination of choice when it comes to trading in players from other clubs.

Our list is a work in progress and unfortunately is one of the worst in the league. We need every player to be available. I would argue taking Kent, Viney, Salem ( after his hammy) and Hogan out of our team is more significant than a team like Hawthorn who can lose champions like Hodge and Lewis, and then Lake and number one ruck in McEvoy and not even miss a beat. It's not an excuse - it's a sad reality.

2010 - hallahan, litherland ( they did pick up a late gem in Puopolo) 2009 - Grimley, Williams, Hooper ( again two late pick ups in Duryea and Stratton) 2008 - Schoenmakers !, Lisle, Lowden, Savage 2007 - they nailed 2007 2006 - thorp, morton ( yeah - they took one of those as well !), Moss Plenty of misses.....

thanks DD and I also a believer that if you put a footballer into a poor environment it is not going to help their cause. I also keep referring back to the Gunston initiation - 2 years behind Roughie and Franklin as the third tall - taking the 3rd best defender from the opposition. Which forward from our team takes the oppositions best defender ? A 6 gamer in Jesse Hogan.

He was no gun when he left us - in 2004 he started to emerge as a player the same way we are seeing Salem emerge - then he broke his foot and missed the back half of the season. He got better and better became a gun for Adelaide around 2007.

I can only see a spot for Dawes if helps takes the pressure off Hogan. Do you think he has done that this year ? I have been an unabashed member of the Chris Dawes fan club - I love what he does off the ball - his second efforts, he desire to chase and tackle, block and shepherd. Unfortunately that is not enough - you also need to get the ball and kick a few goals as a forward - he is not doing that. [Pederson] brought more to the table on Saturday than Dawes has for the year,

agreed. Being absolutely clinical - if you didn't know his draft position he would be a delist conversation the same as many others. The saving grace as you say - is how many can you turn over and he is still only 3 years in - but he has shown little to recommend him as a footballer to date. I will compare him to both JKH and Salem - last season was their first. Did they knock my socks off ? no, but both showed something here and there during the season. JT has to show something before years end.

Barnaby meant business - it was going to be curtains for those dogs. (Hughes guys make me laugh)

This where we get blinded by what pick someone was drafted. Not sure if he will or won't be on the list next year - the only reason I say that is because of his low draft pick. From Toumpa's year Evans and Nicholson were promoted rookies - Stark and Clisby were rookied that year. Has Jimmy shown more than Evans or Clisby ? Probably not. We cut them as they were speculative draft selections. Terlich is also from that draft and I don't t think he will be there at years end. Matt Jones ? who knows. I think the point is - players don't have input as to where they are selected in the draft - but do the low draft picks get longer - toumpas ? I don't know the answer.