club29 wrote:
Big Kahuna Boot wrote:
..injuries to prime movers will cloud 'coaching' assessments this season, and a fresh contract ext. won't see any coaching changes in the immediate future.. ..like it or lump it, we know this is what will happen..
..in regards to Gibbs, canna remember which poster thought he had 'corey enright' potential, but that opinion is 'optimistic'.. ..enright could easily slot into the majority of team's midfields with ease, and is far more 'hodge' like across hb than Gibbs will ever be.. ..enright is more like scotland.. ..similar styles and 'attitude'..
..Gibbs natural position is at HF.. ..we have options to play his role across hb, a few better than him.. ..we have zero across HF.. ..but instead we play a creative hf down back, and a chf down back too...and scratch our head when we continually break down [over diff seasons now too] across hf..
..buncha brainiacs..
That was me with the Enright call. I stand by it. Far more that that than a Nathan Buckley / Dangerfield type.
Gibbs has shown very little to say he is a natural HF. Can play HF but a natural? I dont think so. I doubt he would do anything to help our structure playing at hf currently. The problem is we are not winning the ball at the stoppages and that is something we all agree on and the stats show.
Most also agree that we have to match the congestion tactics of the other team but playing them one on one.
Gibbs can slot in around the back of that cluster of players and play a role we all know he is a natural at. Reading the play. Beating his man and orchastrating attacks. Enright style !
We have not better options than him at this role. That is why we look so much better when he is playing behind the ball. Check out each game this year again.....quarter by quarter and tell me what you see. Note down position he is playing, how is playing and how much we won/lost the quarter by.
..i agree that i wouldn't name his style as a buckley/dangerfield type to use your examples.. ..Gibbs pre-draft repeatedly showed his skills at HF, it was the main reason why we went at #1.. ..he did this as a bottom-aged skinny kid playing seniors for glenelg, a high standard comp. of seasoned hard footballers..
..for the same reasons you like him at HB [marking and kicking skills, reading of the play] is what made him so creative at HF pre-draft, and also during games at carlton [see late stages of last season for most recent examples]..
..yes stoppages are currently our biggest problem, but Gibbs as either a defender, or loose/kick behind play,, dont help our stoppages problems at all..
..scotland plays enright style, gibbs does not.. ..what you want gibbs to do, he can do off a wing, with a defensive sweeper role.. ..i'd rather him up at HF personally.. ..but enright he is not.. ..enright/scotland will back into packs time and again, gibbs rarely.. ..ppl on here question his hardness repeatedly, and you think him like enright?..
..scotland is far more courageous, will run/break the lines, has excellent kicking skills short and long off both feet.. ..he's a better option than gibbs across hb.. ..gibbs has played the majority of his games for us in the D50, he as of yet does not dominate that position, sure he plays well there some of the time.. ..but a player of his skill should play well almost anywhere on field.. ..but he could do a lot better than playing well.. ..at the blues he's spent by far enough time to put his hand up as a topline defender of the comp, and hasnt.. ..surprise surprise, its cos he aint a defender..
..edit -- using geelong as an example team, Gibbs plays less like enright and more like macky..