dannyboy wrote:
1. we should be careful of absolutisms - take a play we 'judge' to have something to offer - it may work out, it may not.
2. more punts on youth - you checked our efforts lately? We are taking the youth path with some mature bodies to assist.
3. Firstly Livo has gone 'backwards" (is it really backwards or greater expectations, more demands less support etc etc etc) anyway Livo has gone backwards because of injuries - blame that on Pagan too do we?
And We end up with a rotation of coaches because in the end (ie 100 pont losses0 gives everyone the shits and people will demand heads roll. its fine foir us to sit on our arses and spout this crap but we are tlaking about people with jobs, with income/familes/houses.lifestyles etc. They mayt be overpaid or underpaid. they are paid and are entitled to portect their ability to earn just like the rest of us.
4. Lets remember the club doesn't moan about it - we do. The club simply recruits who it sees fit and cuts from the list who it sees fit given a whole range of factors.
5. I agree
6. Take simmo, please take simmo - seems to have developed nicely given the way he was treated now we can soiut this and thats about him but the truth is HE SEEMS TO HAVE DEVELOPED NICELY. Fisher was played, Murph looks like he will be played... Seems to me The coaching staff makes calls on players. I want them to make calls not to treat everyone the same. Might not agree with their calls but I do like the way ourt kids are developing.
7. Unusual circumstances meant we tried a few things - Some didn't work - Norman almost did (did win a rising star) and Angwin was a talent. Setanata was also a risk and he is coming along.
8. Drafting in general - Kenna should never have been drafted. A FP has a minimal impact on a game unless the team is getting the ball down there efficiently. A good team can survive or manufacture a FP - A FP cant survive in a poor team. No short term fixes unless the club is genuinely competitive (ie one backman away from genuinely competing for a top4 spot etc). Again rememeber exclusion. We tried a few things. Kenna didn;t work, Betts did.
9. Actually I liked the point about no talking about fincances otherwise these seems to depend on the answers you want.
10. Agree though i do like Terry and Dempsey.
11. In your opinion. I like DeLuca, think he changes things around, makes it harder for opposition defenses. But thats just my opinion.
dannyboy.
my philosophy is based upon how the club should run - not what we have been doing (as deano requested that we avoid using the benefit of hindsight). However I will entertain you
On the points
1. I was actually referring to your non blockbuster player pickups - it it was pavlich on offer for pick 20 obviously I would take it. When it comes down to the 4th/5th round picks then the quality of the player you are bringing in IS going to be limited. In that respect I would always take someone younger who still has some physical development in them.
2. Our efforts lately have been ok - we didnt need any of the 2003 crop (teague/mcgrath/bannister included), nor imo did we need longmuir/chambers etc. That is what I refer to when I talk about a more youth orientated approach - go the whole way. Even if that means retaining franchina or manton an extra yr as cannon fodder for the young ones to develop physically. The policy should be dont do things 1/2 assed.
3. Livo - going backwards refers to the lack of player development. I'd contend that livo was no better in 2005 than in 2002. For a player in their teens/early20's that is a concern. I have never criticised livo as a player - only the lack of opportunities and faith shown in him by the coaching staff. A large proportion of AFL is believing that you are good enough - its a lot harder to believe when you are good enough when you arent given ample opportunity to show your wares or are benched everytime you mess up.
4. Actually I can recall several instances where the coach has gone on about how our kids havent been up to it physically. The club hasnt had a clear direction for 3 yrs on the playing list and hence many of the changes that they made have been questionable.
6. You miss the point. Why promote a young player into the ones and just give him 5 minutes? That is not showing faith in the kid. Showing faith is saying I'll give you a full game irrespective of how many touches you or your opponent gets provided you put in the effort. Its a lot easier to pick up the pace of the game that way. Also on Fisher - he was actually dropped early on in his first season despite showing something. That is not showing faith in a player. Similarly walker has yoyo'd between bullants and carlton. Russell got 5 mins, setanta got 5. What is the point of that? Either give them a proper go or keep them in the bullants for longer.
7. The point was about player temperment. One of the first things pagan did when he came into the club was talk about the importance of having players of good character and that was the only type of player they were interested in. In my view you either have that policy or you dont. If you do then you stick to it (which means you dont recruit norman/angwin). Setanta is different completely - there has never been a question about his character so his risk profile is different to the others and one that I would happily take on board (even if he fails as a player the impact on ither players via work ethic/commitment can only have a positive effect).
8. Though I'm not 100% certain my memory of the forums from back then was that Betts played a midfield in TAC cup and was restricted in 2004 due to OP and hence was more FP. In which case its a completely different recruiting scenario as the player has a LOT more flexibility than a specialist FP.
10. TD and Dempsey wouldnt be subject to the review given that they have just 'arrived' and we havent had a season with them to assess their impact yet. Mitchell seems to be doing a reasonable job with the ants but libba/elsaugh dont seem to have added anything to the club
Login
Register
FAQ
