-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Tiger Delistings Announced / Miller's comments on SEN [Merged]
- Thread starter MC
- Start date
SCOOP said:
EXACTLY! He is just a lot more eloquent. Wish he was employed at the RFC.
It didn't take a huge footy brain to see the state of our list coming. The PRE archives are full of proof of that.
It doesn't take a genius to work out if your taller players take longer to develop, you should get them in order as a priority, before you start chasing and drafting flankers to complement them.
Pretty much everything I have read of mojo's posts today I have agreed with 100%
No 'pie-in-the-sky' stuff. Just sensible, well-balanced, achievable ways we could have used our draft situation and why we needed to address particular needs as a matter of urgency.
Even as a non-Richmond supporter you can almost feel the bewilderment in his words that some of us were too passionate to express as eloquently.
Cheers Mojo. What he said.
skiptomystu said:
Reading back through the thread a little and my opinion is still thr swame on the recruiting of McMahon. Addeed to Morton and I dont like the implication of building from the outisde in. I understand Terry is building a small fleet footed team who will run and gun. But I still believe finals football is won by a different brand of football. In the home and away rounds when the game is much more open then the Dogs/Tigers style will look very attractive and at times ( I mean Dogs more than the Tigers obviously on recent form). So the Dogs in 2006 at times looked irresistable. I thought they may struggle toi makr the 8 in 2007 because of there style of game and opponents woriking them over this year. They lost the little bit of grunt they did have with Cross being out a lot and those fleet footed runners had little support to feed it out with not much inside presence and poor rucks with the demise of Darcy and no key forwards.
Tigers are heading down this path as well. Make some effort in drafting Hughes and Riewoldt of recent times and picking up Polak to build a spine in the future. But it also requires development and the right sort of game plan. Polak might be tall and big bodied and be a very good mark but if he does not play at CHB then whats the point of the exercise?
You either work on his kicking and play him at CHF or play him at CHB on the power forwards and use Thursfield on the quick leading types. Polak on Gehrig and Thursfield on Riewoldt. Thats the sort of thing I would have done thtis year. I like Thursfield and remember watching him in person play on Riewoldt a while ago before he hurt his knee and watching his body work and running ability. He got inside Riewoldts mind that day as he was able to stay with him on the lead as well as the recover and repeat leads.
He will play pretty tall and fill out a few kgs each year. But he is never going to be suited to a stand and wrestle power forward. They are slowly going out of the game but a number of the better forwards can lead as well as stand and mark under a high ball. Just depends on who there opponent is.
Havinf said all that and my distate of the McMahon and Kingsley pickup from before (at the time) and so on. I am realistic and not here to take easy pot shots. But to talk football. I like a number of the youngsters on the list. I think the list is it better shape than under Frawley. But there is not enough presence down the spine and in the midfield yet. But the level of run and skill is increasing.
I have not given up on Tambling. He is an easy target and he is not a footballers footballer. His body langauge could be better and he is not able to push through pain and discomfort and does not stay involved enough. His pace is 1 way and he does not run hard enough. He does not seem to hurt. He makes errors and does not attack the contest as if his life depended on it the next time he has a chance to atone. But sometimes in traffic he slips out of a tackle and shows a bit of grunt as well as footwork. Then nails a tackle and spins the player as he drives with his legs and I think there is something there. But to often its just a 10m lead with him on the end of an easy kick and not really influencing the game.
He is 3 years in and has had injuries and is playing in a poorly performed team and is trying to make a fist of football in Melbourne. It is not easy and I think he will continue to progress and frustrate at times. But I am just picking him out of a hat as a discussion point.
As I have said a number of times I like just about everyone from 2006. Not that keen on other years but thats fair enough.
JON I would also not give up on. Players once they feel they belong and have the physical preparation can improve way beyond what you can think at times. JON does not have the feeling as if he has made it and does not have the physical preparation. He can sprint and jump but does not have the running power and the kgs to compete really. he is not scared but he lacks the size and the know how to compete at half back in the air and on the ground. He will do the odd thing that will stand out but you can see the apprehension in his eyes when he has the ball. Wondering what to do and whether to carry the ball and the worry about making an error. Rather than some little bit of confidence and calmess and time on the ball to use it to advantage.
So I am expecting some reasonably exciting football at times for Richmond next year. A couple of thrashings against the power sides who are physical and hunt teams down. But I saw genuine improvement at the end of 2007 and a much better spread of contributors and a lot better contest in the middle of the ground. I expect this to continue for 2008. But there is an unhealthy reliance on a number of the old players and added to that a number of them have serious injury histories. Anyone who relies on veterans a great deal to be competitive means they are at the mercy of the injury gods with the pace of the game.
Thats life with Simmonds, Bowden, Richo and Brown all being important players and all veterans and 2 coming of serious injuries.
At least the kids got exposed to how hard AFL really is in 2007 and that will hold them in good stead long term and accelerate there development. Youngsters playing key roles rather than bit parts on and off the bench.
I, for one, would love for the Tigers to have the problem that our gameplan isn’t well suited to finals. That would imply that we were at least playing finals regularly.t-rob said:
When I read that Carl Peterson was delisted I was shocked for a number of reasons. Reason number one I didn't think that we could delist a player who had only been on the list for a year. Reason number 2 because of his o.p and other injuries he never got a chance to see what he could do. So do you think we will pick him up again as a rookie listed player?
Col.W.Kurtz said:
I have not quite worded that right. It was just a brief discussion on style and a comment on the Dogs from 2006 who looked exciting and would make top 6 in 2007 according to some. There game plan and style was found out by teams who knew how to counter it as well as players being 1 dimensional and a list that was unable to come up with plan B.
The Tigers are looking to build a similar list and game plan. Long term even if its successful and the players turn out as hoped I dont think it the sort of style that will win big games regularly.
That was really my point.
I see Geelong and WC as tough physical sides who can shut teams down as well as run hard forward. With workmen like talls who are versatile and do the job and while not elite overall are very effective. Very strong ruck divisions and multiple options up forward with the right sort of structure. Not 1 dominant key tall but a number of options. Also a defense that is versatile and players who can cover just about everybody and cant be manipulated into mismatches easily.
ILuvLids said:
You can delist a player after 1 year. But the 2nd year of his contract goes into the salary cap for 2008 even though he has been cut. Its not done often and its obvious why.
Its only done when the player is so fsr away from making it and has no chance of ever being ready that you stop wasting time and resources on developing them (Austin Lucy - Essendon)
or
You cut them due to them not working hard enough or being a bad infleunce on the list as a whole. Maybe sending the message to other kids on the list at the same time who were close to being in the same situation (Collard- Freo)
Disco08 said:
He is 90kgs and disinterested. He is shy and not coachable and does not want to mix with team mates and does not gel in the football environment. Hates training and sees football as a bit of fun and training and preparation and coaching as a chore.
On talent lkast year he was a top pick easily. But no Vic club wanted him due to how he presented at draft camp for interviews with his lack of motivation to move from home and his lack of condition. Heavy there and heavier now and even more disinterested in doing the hard yards.
I ranked him highly early in 2006. Got to sit in on things at camp and then would not have bothered with drafting him to any Victorian club for any pick under 50 as the sort of attitude he has shown this year is what I thought he might do if he was drafted interstate. The fact he has done it in WA just shows how immature and unready he is for the AFL environment.
I hear a couple of clubs are weighing things up and wondering what they could do with him. So anything is possible I suppose. Might be worth a shot for a club who needs a goal kicking small and the time and patience to turn himself around.
mojo31 said:
This will be our downfall.
The footballing public have fallen for a myth that the game has changed so much when really the same style of football between 1980 onwards has had the same elements. Be accountable, have the ability to run forward and be creative, natural football instincts, tough at the contest. That simple. Sure the skills have got better but the sides that won flags were in the top three or four for skills in that year and the players are fitter but the game has not changed.
That is way a guy like Ashley Hockey & Dan Connors will slip into round 4 and beyond and smart clubs will pick them while we give up pick 19 for the Jordy types.
SCOOP said:
I thought the Dogs would come unstuck this year. Injuries hurt them but in the end they were a long long way off. I see some similarities with the Tigers and what they are building. But Foley, Connors, Riewoldt are 3 old fashioned hard nosed footballers with attitude who I like who might be able to infleunce things in the future.
The Deledio, JON, Tambling, Edwards free running types are very valuable as well. Edwards I felt at the time was a very good pickup. Might be skinny and small but he really puts his head over it and will run all day and make the transition as an AFL footballer. I dont like Deledio in traffic sometimes. He looks uncomfortable and lacks confidence and know how when he is surrounded. Is caught ball watching or standing still rather than being a shark opn the prowl. He is mince meat by not moving enough in close. Foley on the other hand is always pushing off and lining his body up with the ball and running through. Keeps his legs moving when tackled and will fend off as well as keeping his steps short in tight so he can change direction easily and feint to buy some time. Deledio on the other hand is more of an open field runner with his high steps and long strides. Its all about angles and body types as well as skills and know how.
But i was impressed with Deledio standing up as a forward at the end of the year. Taking some strong marks when he was man marked and had pressure. Not cheap goals but once done when he had an opponennt and both knew the ball was coming and he was not taking anyone by surprise. 1 on 1 he was a handfull. Played to all his cms and kgs.
I just dont think picking open field runners of 1 type or another over just about any other type of player with 75% of toip 30 picks is the way to go. You can of course pinch a kid like Foley in the rookie draft and do a good trade and make some progress that way. But its also about the percentages and your priorities.
Geelong went after Corey and Bartel and Selwood and so on with top picks over a period of time. They took a chance on Varcoe as a small road runner and a skinny toothpick in Mackie who had no "position". But they have also tempered this with genuine hard footballers who can perform under pressure.
WC have gone after Hurn, Judd, Waters, Kerr etc over the last 6 or 7 years with early picks. All hard as nails. Pinched a rookie like Priddis but also made ball winners a priority. So outside linkmen like Rosa drafted later in the draft can run and run and be effective as they have been matched with the right mix of inside players to use some speed on the flanks.
So both clubs started inside and worked there way out. thats how I would describe it. Richmond are maybe doing it the other way.
Hawthron started with Hidge and then Mitchell and then took Lewis early. Now they are adding Ellis and Birchall, Muston, Young and so on who are the ball carriers with the skinny bodies. Similar pattern to Geelong and WC. They also pinched Sewell but used resources as well to nail down the centre square.
Agree Mojo.
Edwards, Connors and Riewoldt are more of the natural types that we need. But just one you think we have that philosphy in place we go after Jordy. He is essentially a better version of players we already have and as I have stated before blokes developement paths and stops players progressing quickly in the ideal spot (HBF) while taking a heft slice of cap room.
I still think that Tambling is not a lost cause by any stretch and he too may become that pinball type player in traffic, he has ability to split gaps and move in small spaces in a flash but he will never be a feeder and bring others into the game. I hold high hopes for Connors and see him progressing into another Jordan Lewis with much more polish. Some of this things Connors did in that Geelong game were astounding for a guy with three games. The handball over the shoulder may have been my highlight of the year. And with Edwards like Evo put it, moves and plays like Dale Thomas, maybe with more of a midfiled slant and less goal kicking ablity. But we have the mix right with these three. I just felt that a Jack Grimes/Pat McGinity/Selwood at 19 or 18, along with a tall at 18 would have been a real positive move in list management and given a clear picture of what we are trying to build. Inside players first, then our flankers.
Edwards, Connors and Riewoldt are more of the natural types that we need. But just one you think we have that philosphy in place we go after Jordy. He is essentially a better version of players we already have and as I have stated before blokes developement paths and stops players progressing quickly in the ideal spot (HBF) while taking a heft slice of cap room.
I still think that Tambling is not a lost cause by any stretch and he too may become that pinball type player in traffic, he has ability to split gaps and move in small spaces in a flash but he will never be a feeder and bring others into the game. I hold high hopes for Connors and see him progressing into another Jordan Lewis with much more polish. Some of this things Connors did in that Geelong game were astounding for a guy with three games. The handball over the shoulder may have been my highlight of the year. And with Edwards like Evo put it, moves and plays like Dale Thomas, maybe with more of a midfiled slant and less goal kicking ablity. But we have the mix right with these three. I just felt that a Jack Grimes/Pat McGinity/Selwood at 19 or 18, along with a tall at 18 would have been a real positive move in list management and given a clear picture of what we are trying to build. Inside players first, then our flankers.