In depth Wallace Interview - Club Corner

[Daigoro]

If I'm not wrong (but I can't remember any names now!) there are a few examples of players going back to the rookie list before making good players of themselves.  I'd be happy enough to send Roach and/or Jackson back than take a gamble on an effective pick 100ish.

ryan crowley is one. However, I agree with others and would prefer to just delist roach and jackson for new names personally.

 

[Tigers of Old]

You might be right there, AB. Cases could also be made for Kelvin Moore and Daniel Jackson for rookie spots too.

Could be McGuane.

 

[Tony Braxton-Hicks]

Or Limbach.

 

[hopper]

Just finished listening.  Geez, it's nice to have a coach who at least sounds like he has a plan.  Will be very interested to see what we get up to in trade week and the draft.  

Thanks for the link ToO.  Much appreciated.

 

[skybeau]

Yeah, perhaps McGuane and Limbach too...though Kelvin, Tommy and Daniel have been here for longer than those two (McGuane's younger, as I recall, too)...so they'd be considered first for a potential rookie spot, before Luke and Dean, in my opinion. Those two have another year to get themselves into the seniors before they get rookied/flicked, I'd hope.

 

[WesternTiger]

Yeah, perhaps McGuane and Limbach too...though Kelvin, Tommy and Daniel have been here for longer than those two (McGuane's younger, as I recall, too)...so they'd be considered first for a potential rookie spot, before Luke and Dean, in my opinion.  Those two have another year to get themselves into the seniors before they get rookied/flicked, I'd hope.

What are you talking about skybeau! :

Limbach wont be at RFC next year. :hihi

:wave Hi TM

 

[skybeau]

What are you talking about skybeau! :

Limbach wont be at RFC next year. :hihi

:wave Hi TM

Oh yeah, my mistake...I forgot that the guru of PRE had waved his magic wand of delisting over Limbach...

 

[Al Bundy]

thanks for the link great interview.

Reading between the lines you find Roach might be rookied.

He mentioned that someone might have to come back through as a rookie. I could be wrong but the only one I could think of was Roach.

Agreed.Perhaps two.Jackson & Roach but definitley reading between the lines one former listed player will be.

Why waste a rookie spot?

If they didn't show enough potential to remain on the list, why rookie them?

Get 5-6 NEW rookies.

Have to agree.
If the player hasn't shown enough in two or three years then why would they be expected to improve with what would be perceived as a big step back?
Better to cut your losses and try a new face at the club IMO.

Disagree, I think it will be great for him & could be late bloomer.

 

[skybeau]

Disagree, I think it will be great for him & could be late bloomer.

Agree...look what Andrew Raines did with the kick-up-the-pants one-year contract this year...Roachy needs that same kick-up-the-pants...and a rookie list with no promises after 2007 would be perfect for him.

 

[Tigers of Old]

Disagree, I think it will be great for him & could be late bloomer.

Agree...look what Andrew Raines did with the kick-up-the-pants one-year contract this year...Roachy needs that same kick-up-the-pants...and a rookie list with no promises after 2007 would be perfect for him.

Didn't Roachy have a one year contract same as Raines this year?

 

[skybeau]

Didn't Roachy have a one year contract same as Raines this year?

Dunno...but if you're gonna argue that side, who was given the better opportunity to prove himself?