| TalkingCarlton http://www.talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/ |
|
| The delisting of Brett Johnson - was it such a good idea? http://www.talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=6043 |
Page 1 of 3 |
| Author: | phoenix johnson [ Wed Oct 12, 2005 9:04 am ] |
| Post subject: | The delisting of Brett Johnson - was it such a good idea? |
Now, some may argue that his skills are crap, his pace is non existent and he has no place in the side, but what other options do we have for an in and under midfielder? Kouta - I think most, if not all, of us agree that Kouta is pretty slow these days and should be played out the goal square next year and until the end of his days. He probably could have short bursts in the midfield, but let's face it he can no longer play the way he used to. AB - He's a funny one is AB. While I do rate him, in 2006 he is going to have to play well in more than the last 5 games of the season to justify his spot on the season. I get the feeling he is Pagan's preferred in and under option in the midfied and he will start off 2006 in the middle. Luke Blackwell - An unknown and will probably get a taste of senior action in 2006, but like most debutants under Pagan he will get limited game time unless he does something special. Or do we go down the path of turning another player, such as a Cory McGrath into an inside midfielder? Nick Stevens could be an option, but for mine he is more of an in between. He can play both the inside and outside midfielder role. Should Pagan look at turning Nick into a full time in and under or does he rely on the likes of AB and Kouta, while adding more in and unders to the side, before he allows Nick to play his natural game like he did at Port Adelaide? I just think guys like Prendergast and Bannister should have been delisted before Johnson. When we are crying out for blokes to win the ball and use to our advantage, apart from Kouta, no one at Carlton wins the ball better than Brett Johnson. Your thoughts? |
|
| Author: | molsey [ Wed Oct 12, 2005 9:07 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
PJ, Johnson tried hard but the weaknesses you talk about at the start are surely the reasons you seek. Add his height and inability to play as a negater and what do you have? A part time clearance player. Johnson had some good games but just could not finish off his efforts with good kicking. Without being a defender, you have to wonder what role he can play. I for one am happy with this, the other delistings, plus I expect a couple more. We can't pretend anymore, it's time to remove the list fillers. |
|
| Author: | bluehammer [ Wed Oct 12, 2005 9:09 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
PJ we've had this drunken discussion a few times and I'm with ya 100%. I would have really liked to see Brett retained, yes his disposal is sub par, but he could be part of a midfield rotation that is guaranteed to get the ball. I reckon 7/10 contested balls (Jarusa, please verify) he wins. "Will he be part of our next premiership team"? No. But I reckon he still has plenty to offer in the extraction department. |
|
| Author: | phoenix johnson [ Wed Oct 12, 2005 9:11 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
All good reasons, Molsey, but I was more or less saying who is going to win the ball for us in 2006? Unless we draft a discard from another club, we are looking pretty thin in the inside midfielders department. That is of course we turn guys like Stevens or McGrath into full time inside midfielders. |
|
| Author: | molsey [ Wed Oct 12, 2005 9:17 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
phoenix johnson wrote: All good reasons, Molsey, but I was more or less saying who is going to win the ball for us in 2006?
Unless we draft a discard from another club, we are looking pretty thin in the inside midfielders department. That is of course we turn guys like Stevens or McGrath into full time inside midfielders. And what i was trying to say is that even if Johnson wins it he doesn't get it out and we don't score from him. His kicking is poor, conversion frustratingly so. Clearly it didn't work for us in 2005 when he played. You answered your question in the first post.- we will have to support AB and Blackwell and thrust some youngsters into it. We shouldn't even think about Stevens as inside, he'll try, but his effectiveness is outside. Just like Campo, but I'm told he's leaving us! |
|
| Author: | phoenix johnson [ Wed Oct 12, 2005 9:22 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
But can AB play more than 5 good games at the end of the season? Hopefully someone like Jesse D can be promoted, come on to the list and make a difference. |
|
| Author: | mjonc [ Wed Oct 12, 2005 9:28 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
phoenix johnson wrote: But can AB play more than 5 good games at the end of the season?
Hopefully someone like Jesse D can be promoted, come on to the list and make a difference. We will know the answer to that when Pagan gives him the opportunity to play a full season in 2006. AB tackles rate is magic, put $100 on the nose he wins the tackle count in the AFL next year. |
|
| Author: | Sydney Blue [ Wed Oct 12, 2005 9:29 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Darren Hulme was a better in and under than Brett Johnson but he got delisted. |
|
| Author: | Elwood Blues1 [ Wed Oct 12, 2005 9:30 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Benticks late season form probably finished Johnson and having Blackwell and Jessie Smith as potential extractors as well meant there wasnt room for Johnson... Didnt think he was our worst performer and I would have chopped a few before him...hopefully we take Essendons lead and swing the axe a bit more.. |
|
| Author: | Wild Blue Yonder [ Wed Oct 12, 2005 9:33 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I'll barely remember Johnsons name after the first round. Never going to be able to do enough. |
|
| Author: | spf [ Wed Oct 12, 2005 9:48 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Sydney Blue wrote: Darren Hulme was a better in and under than Brett Johnson but he got delisted.
In hindsight we should have kept Hulmey and not picked up Johnson. Really when you think about it we just swapped one for the other. At least Hulmey was Carlton and actually a bit of a leader as well. Having said all this good luck to Brett for the future it's a pity the game has no room for players such as these anymore. |
|
| Author: | Lace Out [ Wed Oct 12, 2005 9:51 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Look he has his talents, but there's no use keeping a player if he is good at getting the ball and giving it to the opposition...His kicking lacked penetration... Good luck in the future brett. |
|
| Author: | TheGame [ Wed Oct 12, 2005 11:17 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I would have kept him over Wiggins, Bannister and Prenda. None of these guys can't even find the footy so their run is irrelevent. |
|
| Author: | blu944 [ Wed Oct 12, 2005 11:26 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I'm hoping the club have had some positive talks with Selwood and are confident he they can pick him up in PSD. Otherwise it seems odd given there are probably about 3 others i'd let go before him |
|
| Author: | mikey_m [ Wed Oct 12, 2005 11:38 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
TheGame wrote: I would have kept him over Wiggins, Bannister and Prenda. None of these guys can't even find the footy so their run is irrelevent.
Bannister and Prenda are contracted. Not sure if Wiggo is. I would think the club is looking at this year and next to get rid of all these fringe players. The ones without contracts will go this year and the ones with 1 year to run will most likely all be gone by next year. If we get rid of all of the this year and replace them with draftees they will have to be on our list for a minimum 2 years. Bad list managmenet and bad financially to get rid of the 10 or 12 that we need to all in 1 year. |
|
| Author: | BlueWorld [ Wed Oct 12, 2005 11:45 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The delisting of Brett Johnson - was it such a good idea |
phoenix johnson wrote: I just think guys like Prendergast and Bannister should have been delisted before Johnson.
You're probably right but they were saved by having contracts. Didn't play a game after rd 16 (don't think he was even named as an emergency) so the writing was on the wall. It was probably between him & Bentick but he took full advantage of his opportunity & is now the preferred player. |
|
| Author: | Wojee [ Wed Oct 12, 2005 11:46 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Contracts are the only thing saving several players. I'd say that in two years the team will be almost completely turned over again. |
|
| Author: | Andain [ Wed Oct 12, 2005 11:58 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Wojee wrote: Contracts are the only thing saving several players.
I'd say that in two years the team will be almost completely turned over again. 1 year. The contracts of Prendergast, Livingston, Sporn, Longmiur, Chambers and Bannister all finish at the end of next season. |
|
| Author: | Headplant [ Wed Oct 12, 2005 12:54 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
He tried hard but could not be consistent and had poor disposal. And he was out of contract, which with the financial situation is also an issue which needs to be managed. My guess is that if Campo goes and Lappin stays, we will lose perhaps one more player, depending upon PSD. |
|
| Author: | The Tyrant [ Wed Oct 12, 2005 1:19 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Yes Delisting Brett Johnson = growth |
|
| Page 1 of 3 | All times are UTC + 10 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|