Or thought ours were better than and have realised we were wrong?
What if they were good enough just not #fromagoodfamily
Can they protect the kids?
God forbid. I ■■■■■■■ hate the idea that six months ago we re-signed players because there was nobody in the entire country better or with more upside, nobody better than guys who are six injuries away from getting a game. Now suddenly we’ve spotted players who could provide something useful to the senior team, players who’ve played at best a handful of state league games since we last saw them. By definition, every single one of these players was available last year, any of them could be on our rookie list already.
Then at the end of this year we’ll give a couple of players who can’t crack the team a one year extension because there’s just nobody available that late in the draft, the depth isn’t there, so why waste a pick? And then come May 2020, there’ll be an undiscovered ■■■■■■■ gem.
Rant retracted if we just pick up some big lump as a backup ruckman.
I remember last off-season, one explanation that filtered out of the club was along the lines of: “When you add too many new players, it places a strain on the coaches, their development efforts are spread thin, and you have to spend too much on soft cap to support inexperienced players”.
If I restate that most cynically, coz that’s how I feel sometimes: “Yeah we’re only really going with a list of like 35 genuinely prospective players, because we can’t really be bothered putting in the effort to work with more”.
That development issue was why we don’t have 3 Cat-B rookies. Guys who are completely new to the game definitely do take up a lot of coaching resources. Players coming from an AFL pathway, especially mature players, would take far less.