It's a fact that Carlton is the youngest team in the league if you look at the WHOLE list, i.e. all 44 or however many players you have on your list (so, including rookie listed players). Averages were as at March 24, 2005.

Carlton are the youngest side based on the above with an average age of 22 years, 282 days. West Coast are the second youngest side with an average age of 22 years, 296 days. Geelong are the next youngest with an average of 22 years, 325 days. Port Adelaide are the only side with an average age of its list being over 24 years old, being 24 years, 109 days. Otherwise all the other clubs have an average list age os 23 years and x amount of days...

We are also the most inexperienced side in terms of matches played at AFL level, averaging only 50 games, Geelong 52 and West Coast 53. Brisbane hae the highest average with 73 and Port Adelaide 71.

_________________
Formerly Blues-Back2003.

still - it confirms my belief that i think Geelong are a better and younger team than St.Kilda.

but - i probably base that on the fact that Geelong have done it themselves and not been handed a quality side so i rate them higher.

dont mind geelong actually - really rate there team and the fact they havent done it purely with draft picks gives me hope we too can do the same.

_________________
Got to love the stare Down by Setanta on Llyod

Hawthorn seemed overhyped to me given we have a similar but younger age demographic in terms of composition of team and have a number of first round picks - given a lot more latitude - I reckon they wont be beaten by only 19 points against freo on sunday- theywill be beaten by plenty
Best players are still the older ones crawford and everett
although ff is doing well and hodge doing well albeit he plays loose man in defence

counting rookies is inaccurate, they cannot play, some clubs have 6 some only 2, it distorts the figures

I admire your positivity Frank, but I think I agree with Elwood. Trouble with our youngsters is that they seem to be going backwards rather than forwards. Sporn, Wiggo and Livo, great triers all, but when are they ever going to be regulars in the seniors and feature in our best players. They were drafted nearly 5 years ago, Davies seems to be going worse now than he was in 2002. Quality is quality regardless of age and we just don't seem to have enough quality. Too many players seem to be going backwards not forwards. I think the club has a problem with our coaches abilities to develop players too. Players who are 22/23 and haven't established themselves as stars or potential stars aren't going to be more than battlers and we have way to many under 25s in that bracket.

A young list is only a positive if iy has the potential to take the team to the next level. Not many of our youngsters have the ability to do that.

I tend to disagree Frank...I think they gambled at the draft and chose well...while Everitt and Crawford are doing ok they have a decent spine with Hay, Croad, Mitchell Franklin and Williams( all be it not a true FF).
Hodge is the true leader and a very good player and kids like Bateman seemed to have lifted under Clarkson..
I thought Franklin, Roughead and Lewis was good recruiting....big built up kids who were ready to play and thats how I like em as you know well....

re: Trent Croad..I know you were keen on him ...put him in our defense and we look way better...they got rid of the greedy Rawlings.....another good move...I think Hawthorn have done well...

this is where i have to disagree Elwood, and it appears we will also we be at odds with each other

Everitt is doing more than OK - he is flying at the moment, and if he doesnt get suspended i reckon he is a fair show for the brownlow come season end.

Everitt, Mitchell and Crawford are the reason for the Hawks success. Their midfield is flying at the moment.

Williams is also flying at the moment.

Out of all those 4 - Williams and arguably Mitchell (think he is about 24 or so) you could consider young.

Hay = shit by the way.

Franking, Roughead and Lewis look the goods - but they have only shown it in glimpses, so i wouldnt rate them that highly.

And it is interesting to note how high everyone rates Hodge. while i reckon he is a talent, alot of the possesion he gets is very similair to the way Campo goes about it. Is Hodge a downhill skier as well?

_________________
Got to love the stare Down by Setanta on Llyod

There's an Irish rookie who can play

but an average is an average, no?

pretty sure robertson spent some time on your rookie list - you saying he cannot play?

Thats Ok Prez....disagreeing is part of the fun as Surrey and Synbad could probably tell you

Dont disagree Everitt is flying....Sam Mitchell..well I wanted Sam back in the old Blue View days when no one else did and was told he was too slow....he is flying also.. Crawford....I dont think he is as much of a factor as the other two...just my opinion.

Look while Hay is not in superstar form I wouldnt call him shite and I think he would get a gig in our backline....

Franklin.....gun in the making.....tall, athletic, booming kick...I reckon he has shown plenty....bit more weight and he will a very good player...

Roughead reminds me of Leppitch.....wont be as flashy as Franklin but will
effective as a key position player who can play avariety of positions.

I like Jordan Lewis as a player..while he was bagged for being slowish he also gets the footy and unlike our youngsters has the body size to shrug tackles and hold his ground..I think he has already had some 20 or so posession games and seems to have a reasonable skill level ...

The theme to Clarksons recruiting was big strong kids and not string bean schoolkids who liked like they had been playing in the kenyan U12's.

Luke Hodge....look I know what you mean and I'll concede he is playing the downhill skier role.....but I think he is capable of making it back up the hill without the chair lift to help him...I think Campo tends to use the chair lift a bit more..

We do agree on one thing Prez.....Bret Thornton for the captains job

Every club though is allowed a certain number of rookies - that they don't fill that quota is not the stasticians' fault.

If a club promotes a rookie who plays x amount of games in that season, should their average age not be factored in?

You have to do averages on a whole list.

Also, the reason why teams like Hawthorn are considered so "young" is because they threw all their top picks from last season into the deep end this season - even though they had little choice.

If Carlton played Russell, Hartlett, Blackwell etc we'd probably also be recognised as a "young" side. But who cares, we all know that we're the youngest side in the competition. The difference is that the Hawks are playing their 18 year olds and we're playing more the 20/21 year olds who aren't technically as young but they run right through the team. Hawthorn have 3 or 4 18 year olds which skews things a little in terms of perception of how "young" a side really is.

_________________
Formerly Blues-Back2003.

Wouldn't it be more interesting to rate the ages of those who take the field on a weekly basis?

All teams have about a dozen players under 20 - that's the nature of having to keep turning your list over each year. Because of that all averages are reasonably low.

What I'd like to see is an average age for those who took the field on a game by game basis. Add up the 22 games and average them and you'll get a better view.

I actually calculate that on a week-by-week basis for Carlton, but never for the opposition.

We always average around 24.

I agree to a certain point with wiggins sporn and livo although apart from wiggins the other two have played about 30 games largely due to injury and I do remember a few years ago at about 22 years of age both fev and houlihan were both determined not to be good enough(I know I bring this up all the time but it is a salient example)- still reckon they all will be good players but agree that their time is nigh- agree not going to be superstars
As you know Elwood a big fan of carrazzo and whilst again no superstar looks like a player
Davies is enigmatic it is hard to get a read on bentick and norman is struggling
but I do think that the performances of waite thorton and walker show that we have some real talent emerging
Heard mark harvey on AW last night wax lyrical about potential of walker so all is far from lost

A bit early to assess betts but is mercurial and has great potential
Simpson is another with potential and fisher certainly has lots of potential
Agree we need more talent and that is why without tanking if we end near the bottom it wont be the end of the world as we at least are able to access top 5 draftees and have some chance of accessing uncontracted player in the draft.
As for hawthorn yes I wanted croad a couple of years ago because I thought he was an untapped talent- were lucky getting priority picks.Hay is very injury prone and spider and CRAWFORD havent got much left- bateman is good
Hodge isnt an onballer and plays without an opponent but is improving but against hawthorn our boy waite who was selected in 2001 draft won the game for us even though hodge got 35 possessions
Moreover carrazzo did a very good job on williams
The expectation for hawthorn for the year were low at the start so 2 games out of 8 is seen as performing well- carltons 2.5 out of 8 is seen as ordinary given the raised expectations early on

fair point that

however, to show im not entirely positive all the time

its more the way that we have gone about things that have been dissappointing, especially over the last 2 weeks.

I dont midn the Dawks and the way they have gone about things and they have managed to pull of a couple of good wins.

still think we are a better team than quite a few above us at the moment, but we are not playing anything like i know we can.

_________________
Got to love the stare Down by Setanta on Llyod

Frank, Prez and anyone else.how long would you give Sporn, Livo and Wiggo to cement a spot and be influential players. Do they get another contract or is this year the chop for one or more.....
How do we judge them as well....comparisons to other 2000 draftees, games played, posessions...?

for me - they have all shown enough to warrent another contract.

Livo (32 games, debut 2002) - is a vital cog to our team now filling in FB

Sporn (30 games, debut 2002)- i rate very highly, he is a very talented footballer and if it wasnt for the last couple years of injury he would no doubt be held in the same regard as Houla.

Wiggins (50 games, debut 2001) - gets better and better with game time.


none of them have had a decent start to their careers with injuries playing a big part in why.

if they all hit the 70 - 100 game mark and they are at the same level, then we have a problem, but any played that is still under 50 games and shows something deserves to be retained.

_________________
Got to love the stare Down by Setanta on Llyod

Sporn was signed up for 2 years end of last season.

Here you go for this week:

name age
McLean, Brock 19.19
Sylvia, Colin 19.53
Bell, Daniel 20.1
Moloney, Brent 21.31
Jamar, Mark 21.78
Davey, Aaron 21.94
Ferguson, Ryan 23.64
Wheatley, Paul 24.1
Green, Brad 24.19
Johnstone, Travis 24.84
Whelan, Matthew 25.52
Read, Phillip 25.58
Bruce, Cameron 25.64
Robertson, Russell 26.49
Nicholson, Alistair 27.21
Yze, Adem 27.66
Holland, Ben 28.03
White, Jeff 28.25
McDonald, James 28.62
Brown, Nathan D. 28.76
Bizzell, Clinton 28.89
Neitz, David 30.32

Average Age 25.07

Interesting.
Geelong which is younger than Carlton has 41 listed players to Carltons 38.
Having 3 players listed as veterans enables them to list 3 kids.
Yet we cant include our rookies?


Figure distortion?

_________________
Looking forward to seeing our potential realised.