cj69 wrote:
Yes they do play to a plan. They have been recruiting quick players with good skills as they believe that is the way the game is going. They have a definite plan and structure. They are well drilled and will get better and best of all they give their supporters hope and excitement.
To me it is no conincidence that they are player better more consistent football since Lucas and Fletcher have gone out of the side. Maybe there is a lesson in that?
As for not being highly skilled that is way off. Wait until their kids get 40-50 games into them and get more confidence. They will be very very good.
That's way too simplistic.
Every team, and I mean every team, would like nothing more than to recruit a swag of quick, well skilled players.
You make it sound as though all a club needs to do is say "right, we need quick players with good skills", and then go and get them, but it's nowhere near that simple.
The point with Essendon* is that they have held onto their older quality players and used them to take the group forward, the only players they have cut or traded were utility types like Johnson, Peverill and Soloman and young players like Bradley who they made an early call on, but you seem to be advocating that Carlton dispense with players who youdeem deficient and play young players regardless of their performances, ability or potential.
You advocate players like Pfeiffer, Ellard and Anderson and say that we can live without Stevens, Houlihan, Fisher, Russell and a few others.
A first 22 team of the make up that you suggest would be barely competitive, with no guarantee that in two or three years time the young players we have invested so much faith in will be capable of taking the club forward.
It's still highly debatable that some of the young players currently in our senior team will prove good enough, and yet you want to introduce another half a dozen.
It's a knee jerk reaction and a recipe for disaster which could well see another 4 or 5 years (or more given the upcoming drafts) at the tail end of the ladder.
Maybe we should have traded Fevola, Thornton and Houlihan three or four years ago, but the only time we seriously considered trading Fev the only thing on the table was a late second round pick, Thornton would have netted two mid second rounders, so it's unrealistic to suggest that we would now be better placed.
Players like Bannister, Houlihan, O'Hailpin and Fisher can fill roles in a well structured, well coached team and are of more long term value than a fourth round draft pick in my opinion.
For what it's worth I think we should look to trade some of our younger players who have some currency, rather than throw away players with experience and ability, in some cases limited I'll admit, just for the sake of it and for no worthwhile return.
Essendon* traded Richards to Sydney for Dempsey - win/win.
You want to throw the baby out with the bath water.