His improvement is incremental, maybe even tangential. He is getting better, but too slowly for some. We know he has the skills, lacking in the application of pressure. The coaches see something, and are giving him every chance to fulfill their vision. He has shown there is something to work with. He still needs to be harder at the ball, and the player with the ball, and pressure is not yet as prominent in his vocabulary as it needs to be. A one year contract is all l would be willing to offer him at this stage, providing he continues on his current upward trajectory.
1 Like
I can’t see why it wouldn’t be 8 or 9 changes, personally. That’s about average around the league, and we’ve got quite a few still uncontracted
11 would be big, but not a huge shock.
My best guess would be
Clarke
Hooker
Zaha
Zerk thatcher
Cutler
Mosquito
Johnson
Ambrose
Gone
And Cahill given a 1 year, and dropped down to the rookie list
Still leaves Phillips, Guelfi & franga who aren’t contracted as far as I’m aware. They all could go.
No.
But you’d hope, next year the rest of our list will improve to the point where the spot that will replace him is a 3rd round pick, and that’s when he goes.
And we have the same discussion about another 26 year old.
192cm, athletic, aerobically fit, can kick it long and sweet… been a disappointment but could physically backfill a number of roles across the ground if he can get it together.
They’re the blokes you keep as depth… not the Guelfis. But Blitz has it in for blokes that don’t appear to go in hard enough, (see Langford up until this year).
Too many middle-aged blokes here who measure AFL potential based on their experience of playing club footy with fat blokes 20 years ago
5 Likes
Yep, well said. Cutler is in he team right now because of injuries. He is depth, and has played his role well for the team without being on massive coin. If we didn’t have him in the squad right now, who would be playing his role? An 18 year old kid who was pick 66 in the draft? Yeah, that would be so much better.
Some armchair experts call them “middling games” like they expect Kevin Bartlett to be the standard of your 30th best player in the team.
Some of us played against fat blokes 30 years ago.
1 Like
Knowing the great use and wonders of cuttlebone makes me think there might be a good use for Cutler after all.
Thanks for the perspective.
Sign him up.
2 Likes
or 40
2 Likes
Jesus dude. you’re on a forum where probably 98% of the members are armchair experts. pipe down.
1 Like
I don’t have a preference here. If he gets delisted, I’ll shrug and say “makes sense” and if he gets a 1 year extension based off his recent form, I’ll be ok with it.
Why would we keep him? If he’s showing a positive trajectory that the coaches can see, then they may want to keep him. As fans we see a fraction of what a player is doing. I think the key question is what have the coaches learnt?
If the coaches are happy with his improvement and capacity to improve further into 2022, then the next question is what the list needs. We fell to pieces this year due to depth or lack thereof. I don’t see the need to offload every single player outside the best 22 and draft 18 year olds. Gleeson and Cutler are probably competing for the same depth defender spot for 2022.
3 Likes
Great argument. Hard to see why we keep him around now that you’ve added that.
1 Like
Pretty much this. He’s done enough - but I won’t be sad if he goes.
That said, I think we’ve cut our list down pretty hard over the last couple of years (probably after not cutting hard hard enough prior to that). Given Ambrose/Zaharakis/Hooker are probably gone at the years end we are likely to be heading into 2022 with one of the least experienced lists in the league.
Given the talent we have in the ‘mid years’ of our squad (Merrett/Parish/Shiel/Stringer) I don’t think we are any chance of a multi-year tank - I think we’ll take our first rounders but it’ll be a slow build.
Implication? I think we are at a point where we keep a few more ‘strong bodies’ on the list as back up. Cutler / Clarke / Gleeson all fit the bill. No chance all three make the cut, but someone will.
1 Like
all of that is fair
1 Like
That’s a very low standard to justify his position though, esp seeing most of the players below him (at present) have had next to no football for 2 years, So I mean it’s not exctly a ■■■■■■■ high bar to be setting.
Also durham and snelling were lower than 3rd round rookie pick selections when they were picked up, hell they weren’t even picked up in the “normal draft”.
Hence the sentiment that WOB was pointing out is pretty valid, as in go and find players who can impact the starting 22 and improve it, is probably a better approach than to keep a depth player around in “development” years.
Probably.
That’s life though.
Realistically he does a couple of things well, some things not so well, and his career’s stagnated for 3 or 4 years now.
Gotta say if you’re assessing him over the past 3 weeks on the basis of effective use of the football, my assessment is that he remains in net negative territory!
1 Like
you made the comment in the first place.
anyway. ill be adding you to my ignore list so i dont have to read your boring passive aggressive sarcasm from now on. cheers 
Ha!
I think the biggest difference is I can’t remember a comically soft step away to avoid physical contact like has been his trademark previously.
Oh so I won’t be able to read anymore of your valuable insight? How ever will I manage? 
Bye champ.
Crocodile tears aside;
The reality is with Cutler he is doing well for a bloke who is about the 30th best player on the list. If the club is going well over the next couple years then he gets the flick. You get better as a club by replacing the bottom 5-7 players on your list every year, not cutting into your walk-up depth. Realistically we’re not cutting more then 6-7 players anyway. But for now, he should stay.
To those saying delist; I can only assume they place Cutler in that absolute bottom bracket of our entire list which I strongly disagree with, and frankly I think is silly.