Trigger warning for those who won’t read the age…
Fluffy fluffy fluff.
And I’m saying that is one of the pieces of evidence that the club didn’t just recruit them as a back flanker or utility, but drafted them for the midfield. In my opinion, if they’re recruiting guys who on the night they think will be midfielders, then that is evidence they were rated on that criteria. Not that we’re taking flankers/utilities and transforming them.
I mean, you referred to Ridley and Begley as utilities and forwards, when Ridley has played midfield over the last two years, and Begley played the last part of the season in the midfield. The club then says on draft night they’re future midfielders. But you don’t seem to accept that.
2 Likes
I didn’t list anyone as anything. I just joined in the conversation but fair enough because the original user names in the quotes are gone. Anyway, I think we’re just talking about different things, or perhaps the same thing from different angles. You seem to be of the opinion that if we draft someone who has not played predominantly in the midfield but do so judging them as a midfielder and intending for them to play midfield, then we’re not trying to turn them into a midfielder because we’ve assessed them as midfielders. My opinion is that if the preponderance of evidence for a player is of them playing in a different position, but we judge and recruit them with the midfield in mind, then we’re aiming to turn them into a midfielder because that’s not their primary position.
Unless I’ve misunderstood you it’s just a question of semantics.
Lot of midfield, must play midfield, was not a pure midfielder in the draft, we draft flankers and try turn them into midfielders. Hey lets be just like Collingwood, draft, trade, all pure midfielders. Did I mention Midfielders, midfielders win you games, it is the most important part of the ground. Midfield.
Not aimed at you Split round but that sums up the mentality around here, and with the commentators, player ratings, super coach, etc. The midfield is only part the puzzle, and equally as important as the backs and fwds, but no more so.
What is extremely important though is that you have fwds and backs that can play in the midfield for rotational purposes. Midfield must run deep. But there is no point having too many players who can play midfield and no where else.
Sorry, I may be conflating you with someone else. As you pointed out, the old usernames who posted each bit has changed.
I’m really saying that U18 positions are not “real” positions like they are in AFL. For example, taking Carlisle or Hooker forward, or playing Stanton or Jerret back is definitely changing their positions because they’ve played 5+ years in those positions (at either AFL or VFL level), with the associated training, preseasons, tactics training etc.
However, I don’t see an U18 player in the same light. They tend to get moved around, some coaches play for wins others for drafting, some have rubbish around them while some are squeezed to other positions. They’re still growing, both in skills and bodies. They don’t have the history of playing a single position at a high level with tactics. Unless we’re going to start considering U16 form in a whole new light.
So I believe they are far more malleable. Now, there are some players who will have played exclusively a single role, and with their attributes seem best suited to it. But there are many who for one reason or another (often their body isn’t quite ready) will be playing roles that isn’t their future one. Especially in the championships where they’re trying to gel a side from a whole heap of sub-teams.
1 Like
Has anyone noticed how clean he is below his knees, FFS he will be gold. The last player we had like that, and it has been posted, was Wanganeen. They were both so clean below their knees, quick, excellent disposal. The only difference was Wanga was a great mark, whereas we haven’t seen that from McGrath. The amount of goals Wanga set up between 93-96 was amazing, this guy will do the same, and I hate to say it, because I have seen Wanga at his peak, but maybe more. Remember in his first season Wanga did SFA. If you fools can’t see how clean Macca is, and the huge upside you are kidding yourselves. How good was Wangas GF when playing in the middle for Port, just take note he did have a career after Ess. If we have another player comparable with him we are very lucky. He has only played two games,and the second was better than the first.
3 Likes
Gun.
{ I felt the thread needed a short post }
1 Like
You do realise his knees are about 6 inches above the turf?
8 Likes
So was wamganeens, and stuff the short post!
1 Like
Bit more than that, I’d say 8" … but the reason him & wangas were/are so clean below them, … is that they always kept their socks up.
1 Like
I take notice and will leave now.
I have a feeling this fellow will be like Zerrett but maybe even better.
Could do a lot worse than adopt him as a role model.
2cm shorter and 2kg lighter according to their EFC profiles.
1 Like
Knees? I haven’t seen mine in years
Check him out in the latest highlights video. hes going to be special
1 Like
Nice to see him taking a run off half back at 1:05, although I was a bit surprised he didn’t handball over the top to Walla. Still, he showed great composure to wear the tackle and fire off an effective handball.
2 Likes
Hoping his trend of getting better each game continues this week in Bendigo 
Has 0 hitouts after 2 games. I’m concerned!
9 Likes
Less frees paid against him in the ruck than Smack though…
7 Likes
I have to strongly disagree with playing this kid as a “shut down” defender.
I feel frustrated for him. He looks like a bird with his wings clipped. Free the kid, let him fcukin fly!! Can’t understand why his not on the wing/hbf playing creative football (like tippa did last year) He loves to handball and flick it around.
6 Likes
Agree. Was hardly sighted yesterday