Yeah but it took Clarke 7 years to learn how to kick, and that was just up in the air. Roberts looks smart, smart players are clutch players. Crazy to be lumping him in with past failures already because he’s not the next Bont or something. Future nothing pick for a potential starting flanker/mid. Get a grip folks
To be fair to Gleeson, he was on track to be a good player til he completly wrecked his ankle.
Not saying that’s you djr
Youre kidding? Even the commentators that regularly watch him on his draft video say hes a prolific user of the ball and you can see that in the draft video
I don’t really understand all this sliding business.
After analysing kids for years and agreeing with most phantom drafts, did all the recruiters and people in the know just suddenly realise 1 hour before the draft “HEY WAIT! This kid is deficient in this!”
Where did they all agree with phantom drafts, they are all speculation. The only real final analysis is draft night. In the final examination all the recruiters assessed him as 54 in the draft.
C’mon, that’s just a random list of players who didn’t make the grade- of which the vast majority of draftees after about P30 fall into.
Can go through any list and find countless examples.
I lumped him in with past forecasts≠pick number. I doubt (checks thread title) Roberts will be the big-bodied goal-kicking mid that Clarke was and that Blitz lusts for.
I’d expect he slid due to lack of standout afl traits rather than any clear deficiencies
Doesn’t appear to have electric pace, and perhaps has some questions marks on his size/contest work as far how that might translate when moves up to AFL level
You can be a dominant junior, make all Australian etc but this is against other kids obviously and they have to project how he may fare at AFL level in the future. Many draft ratings “experts” perhaps not thinking in the way AFL recruiters are at times
But he clearly has footy smarts, good skills, leadership etc. here’s hoping he can progress up and become a competent AFL player The Christian Salem comparison from a coach of his does appear a good one, Salem went pretty high in draft however
To me he looks a lot like Andy McGrath with more pace and a better kick.
Other clubs seemed to go after rucks/forwards in that second round. Maybe it was more needs based than just talent.
…. Can we get them fit and successfully develop our young talent this time? Finally?
Given one sixth of the team are non-tall defenders, of course we take a few. This must be one of the stupidest arguments I’ve seen on Blitz.
Oh you’re in the right forum if you’re looking for stupid arguments. Brace yourself, it gets worse.
Gotta be better than Mc Donut
So he should have been pick 1
And they’re all pretty ■■■■. I don’t see what Archie brings to the table.
The sliding thing happens ‘cause after the early part of the draft, clubs select players on need. The Salem comparison whets the appetite. And now, with huge emphasis on development, Archie has a better chance of becoming a valuable asset in the red and black. Upgrade on Massimo?
Worth a shot. I think the “physical attribute” thing is overrated - give me footy nous any day. It’s not what you’ve got it’s what you do with it.
Plenty of elite players running around the AFL without any particular elite physical attribute (size/speed/strength). Guys like Gulden and Butters spring to mind.