How would our list go, if they were doing draft screening?

[Dyer Disciple]

Yes well, obviously fitness it not be all and end all.

Doesn't account for footy smarts, professionalism/discipline, sheer talent/tricks etc

It's just about as having as many tools at your disposal to decrease the chance of making a mistake.

No one said it was a definitive way of choosing a superstar. Just one aid of many.

 

[Stuart]

Keep measuring the kids at the start of the day.... woohoo- they are the fastest kid at the start of the day. The kid who'll win you a game of footy isn't at the start of the day, he's the kid at the end. Lawnmower & all.

 

[Disco08]

I've seen plenty of games that were over at half time.

 

[pahoffm]

Keep measuring the kids at the start of the day.... woohoo- they are the fastest kid at the start of the day. The kid who'll win you a game of footy isn't at the start of the day, he's the kid at the end. Lawnmower & all.

That's why there are such things as beep tests & VO2Ms, so that endurance can be tested.

 

[TigerMasochist]

I've seen plenty of games that were over at half time.

And we've also seen plenty of games that we're supposed to be over at half time that became nightmares for laughing supporters when the game actually finished.
Ask Geelong fans what Hawthorn and West Coke have done to them on their own dunghill.
Much happier watching fit footballers play the game than superfit athletes running around like headless chooks making mistakes and taking wrong options because they are drilled over and over to do by reflex rather then knowing and using their best options.

 

[Smilodon]

There's another reason to ask the fundamental question on the thread - how would the current list perform if they were draft screening?

That's to get an insight into how much CHANGE there is between a player at 17 years old and a mature player.

I know that the draft tests are designed to get to base phsiology but how much difference could a player expect after three or four years full training on an AFL list?

This would be good to know because it would help in draft selections in concluding how much upside certain players had. This would be particularly important in later selections.

I suspect that many clubs are already collecting this information but that they keep it very close because it would give a competetive advantage.

 

[Dyer Disciple]

There's another reason to ask the fundamental question on the thread - how would the current list perform if they were draft screening?

That's to get an insight into how much CHANGE there is between a player at 17 years old and a mature player.

I know that the draft tests are designed to get to base phsiology but how much difference could a player expect after three or four years full training on an AFL list?

This would be good to know because it would help in draft selections in concluding how much upside certain players had. This would be particularly important in later selections.

I suspect that many clubs are already collecting this information but that they keep it very close because it would give a competetive advantage.

Exactly! Well said

 

[Willo]

There's another reason to ask the fundamental question on the thread - how would the current list perform if they were draft screening?

That's to get an insight into how much CHANGE there is between a player at 17 years old and a mature player.

I know that the draft tests are designed to get to base phsiology but how much difference could a player expect after three or four years full training on an AFL list?

This would be good to know because it would help in draft selections in concluding how much upside certain players had. This would be particularly important in later selections.

I suspect that many clubs are already collecting this information but that they keep it very close because it would give a competetive advantage.

Are we doing it Smiles?