#32 Travis Colyer


#1905

Huh? Lloyd & Hampson didn’t play in the GF so yes they are types of players Richmond moved past to become a better team. Lloyd was only drafted in 2013 so been on their list 5 seasons & will very likely be delisted at years end, Hampson of course has already retired & was on their list for 5 years.

Dixon has been on WB’s list for 7 years & had 2 seasons of clearly well above average performance. In 2015-2016 he was one of the best small/medium forwards in the game with 40 & 50 goal returns. Only a really desperate person would try to compare his career to Colyer’s . Dixon has now had 2 poor seasons so I would expect he is most likely facing delisting.

Do you mean Matthew Spangher the guy delisted 2 years ago after only 4 years on their list? Seriously are you not seeing how these guys are nothing like holding on to a guy for 9 seasons for an average of about 10 games per year (allowing for 2016) & not many of those games can be regarded as better than average?

OK Shoenmakers, you may have found 1 player comparable in terms of being on their list for an extended period & not being a particularly good player. Does that mean you believe that was somehow a good list management decision for Hawthorn? In their last GF Shoenmakers was 2 years younger & had already played more games that Colyer has now but if you use my standard then yes I believe Shoenmakers should have been delisted before now & I think you will struggle to make a case to suggest that would have been the wrong list decision. Once again I will be very surprised if he is not delisted at years end.

If you want some better comparisons try players like Dyson who also played 9 seasons for not much, Slattery 8 seasons & now we have Jerrett up to 7 seasons. Does anyone really think that was good list management?

Now once again I said they had to be best 22 & at least middle or above average at 24+ or should be delisted. There is no point retaining players who have never been able to give you a sustained return or at least have some exposed good form & reason to believe they can replicate that form or reason to believe they can get even better (reach a high standard). Colyer has a few good games spattered over 9 seasons. Thats simply not justifying of more time on the list. As I said I’m happy to give him the rest of the year given the unique situation of the saga but if he’s not playing decent footy by the end of the year he should clearly be moved on.


#1906

I’m not comparing them to Colyer.
I’m comparing them to your sweeping list management assertion.
Which you have now modified to 24+ rather than your original 24 and over statement.

All good lists have older depth players.
Live with it.


#1907

Huh? My original post stated 24+, just in case you don’t understand that means 24 & over. If you get to 24 & have not yet cemented a place in the best 22 over your career or at least had a period of good football as a base, then you will be delisted at just about every other club. No other club retains older players simply for depth. Older players can transition out of the best 22 & become depth but are almost never then retained for any further seasons.


#1908

You just can’t admit you were over exaggerating initially can you?
Now it’s ok to keep “transitioning” some older players.
If you’d qualified your initial list management assertions you would have actually come close to the reality of Colyer.
Once best 22. Now on current form unlikely.
Between now and the end of the year a judgement will be made as to his spot next year.
Form, injury prep, capacity for improvement on current form, and depth we have in his role, will all play a part.
Slash & burn list strategy is bullshit. Look at Carlscum.


#1909

I think a few years ago coyler was important to our team because he had pace, which we really lacked at that stage. Now he’s not as critical as we have that outside run in our best 22. He’s still good depth and I believe he is still valuable.
I find often guys returning from a long injury get themselves up for a big first game and then have a down game next up. I’m hoping he can turn it around because you can never have too much pace in your side.


#1910

Been think that about Colyer too.
His deficiencies had to be tolerated because his strength of breaking the lines WERE needed for a side that had Stanton,Jobe,Howlett,Hocking,Hepp.

We have the speed now in Saad McKenna McGrath,Fanta Wulla.

Hes very tradeable imo.


#1911

How was I exaggerating? Colyer has not fit my criteria at any stage. His only stretch of decent footy was 4 years ago and even then it was a few good games for half a season. My contention that I stand by and you’ve not countered is that his record is not enough to have had this long on our list and there would be few if any successful exceptions throughout the league.

By 24 a player should be at or very close to their peak, if that peak isn’t actually that good then they need to be moved on. You will find this is the case with the vast majority of players over the entire league. Clubs almost never hang onto depth players in this age bracket which is exactly why a guy like Jerrett who has played footy this year & been emergency a few times will certainly be cut in spite of being closer to best 22 than younger players.

By transitioning older players I mean you simply move them out of the best 22 as their decline & younger players development overtake each other. You would never re-sign an older player with the intention of them being purely for depth. Look at Stanton last year, he was considered best 22 at the start of the year but was transitioned out of the side & became a depth player. Retaining him for another year would have made no sense.

Again go through the league & look at the players from his draft. I’d argue his return would be less than any other player still on their original list. We have a history I believe of hanging on to players for too long & I gave examples of this. I can’t think of a single example of a player who was kept for 9 years then became a good footballer. I could see what he potentially offered as far as his pace was concerned but he’s still not showing signs that he has any other weapons or is overcoming the deficiencies that have plagued his career (like fumbling). Again players in their mid 20’s very rarely suddenly overcome shortcomings. The potential that keeps us persisting with younger players needs to be realised by a certain point & I believe that’s by age 24.

As for the Carlton analogy, which 24+ aged players did they cut that you believe was a bad decision? I’d suggest Carlton’s issues have compounded from repeated poor draft choices outside their top end picks rather than cutting players early.


#1912

If we could choose from our VFL list I would swap Colyer for Hind in a flash


#1913

Surely you’d swap out Jerrett, not Colyer?


#1914

I would swap Jerrett out for Younan and he could play this week for Stringer


#1915

Jbomber, I think you’re taking a very biased and inaccurate read of Colyer’s career. The simple reality is that when available since about the middle of 2014 (when he established himself), he has been pretty much picked. The coaches do not appear to consider him fringe.

It also ignores the SAGA. With one or two exceptions, every single player EFC kept from the SAGA has gone backwards. Probably the only exceptions are Belly and Hooker. This was not known when the club re-signed these players. Although there were some WTF moments (Myers for 3 years), generally Blitz was in alignment with the contracts offered. During 2016 plenty of Blitzers considered Colyer a priority to re-sign, and I don’t recall many complaints about him receiving a 3 year deal.

Now, in hindsight his performances post SAGA versus pre-SAGA have taken a significant dip. Despite that, he is still played whenever he is available. So frankly, the way you’re describing him seems pretty out of whack with reality.


#1916

Yeah but his main weapon SPEED isn’t the commodity it was.
As in, we have plenty of line breakers now, where pre 2016, we didn’t.

Put him up for trade to a side that needs speed.
And we may even snag a 2nd rounder, albeit late.

We’ve unearthed plenty of gems there.


#1917

Colyer was exceptional prior to injury and then the Saga. Last year he was woeful and should have been playing VFL to find touch, and this year he should have spent an extended period in the VFL post injury to find form and fitness rather than being rushed into the 22.

But his spot on the list should not be debated (yet). When fit and firing he is a match winner. He may never get back to this level, but I’m prepared to give him next year to find out. If he is still terrible next year then he should be delisted at that point.


#1918

I also remember him being cleaner pre-SAGA.


#1919

If it wasn’t for injuries I really doubt Colyer would have been rushed back as quick as he was. Will be interesting to see what happens if/when all of Zaka, Parish and Fanta are available again


#1920

A lot of muck-throwing during those times, it’s true.


#1921

I think you’re forgetting pre Ban he was only a forward, granted was cleaner with disposal there.

Last year he actually returned from the ban as a midfielder. And in that sense actually took his game to a new level. Albeit at times struggled with fumbling the ball and turnover.

This year in the North game played midfield and was clean. And used speed to good effect.

I don’t know why we wlukdn’t back him in.


#1922

I disagree completely with that. Maybe earlier in his career, but not in 2014/2015


#1923

Has only played two senior games this year but indications are that he has moved from being a depth player to a list clogger.


#1924

Even earlier in his career he wasn’t. Now where he lined up on field that’s a different matter…