One-Eyed Richmond Forum
Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: Stripes on September 14, 2010, 03:30:44 PM
-
Looking at our list to look for holes I would order each player in each postion as such. I would play the 'Italics' players in the team first on current form/potential.
Tall Forwards - (2 or 3)
Riewoldt, Griffiths, Post, Rance, Westoff
Current Quality/Depth Rating= 6/10
We have the Coleman medalist who is still only 21. Griff has shown a few signs that he could be a great CHF for us in the future but time will tell. We have 2 young average toilers as backups and a development player lining up in Coburg reserves at present.
Mid/Small Forwards - (3 or 4)
Collins, White, Nason, Taylor,
Current Quality/Depth Rating= 4/10
Collins popped up this year and White used his increased size and speed to cause some headaches but overall crumbing/small scoring options remains an area we need more of. Hopefully Taylor can be that crumber as well as marking option too but has shown little to date.
Defensive Forwards - (1)
King, Hicks, Nahas,
Current Quality/Depth Rating= 4/10
In the later half of the year little King made this spot his own using his natural aggression to contain forwards while peeling off and then using his penerating kicks to hurt them the other way. Hicks has promise but will need time and Nahas has gone backwars and may not survive the cull.
Inside Midfielders - (3 or 4)
Cotchin, Martin, Foley, Tuck
Current Quality/Depth Rating= 9/10
Cotchin and Martin are already very good midfielders could, by all signs, turn elite. Foley was class but injury ended his season before it began and could haunt him in the future. Tucky played back but was moved back into the middle more as the year progressed and remains a 'contested-ball monster'. He still lacks the polish and poise of Cotch and Martin though. Our strongest area of the ground imho.
Outside Midfielders - (2 or 3)
Morton, Edwards, Webberley
Current Quality/Depth Rating= 3/10
Edwards had a breakout year and Morton came back into the team and played well. Webberly was also very goo in his first season. While signs a positive it remains an area we are weak. We need more players with speed and elite desposal by foot to lift our side in the future. I'm not sure if our current outside midfielders will get to that level.
Taggers - (1 or 2)
Jackson
Current Quality/Depth Rating= 5/10
Jackson is incredible important to our midfield structures both containing the oppositions most damaging ball user and laying the blocks/physical work needed to create the space for our players to work in around the stoppages. Jackson has the speed, endurance and athletism to stay with almost any player. While he remains relatively young we do need another player to take his place if he is injuries/suspended. We have no depth here.
Tall Defenders - (2 or 3)
Moore, McGuane, Astbury, Gourdis, Thursfield, Grimes
Current Quality/Depth Rating= 8/10
While our tall defenders are still average at present we have built up a great deal of depth and potential in this area. In fact we have created a healthy competiton for places at present.
Mid/Small Defenders - (3 or 4)
Deledio, Newman, Connors, Farmer, Tambling, Dea
Current Quality/Depth Rating= 7/10
Our running backline is excellent with our best uses playing behind the ball. Conversely though we lack the type of small/mid defenders who can shut down a dangerous small forward such as a Milne. We have depth and potential here though.
Rucks - (1 or 2)
Graham, Vickery, Browne
Current Quality/Depth Rating= 4/10
Graham was exceelent early but ran out steam. Vickery also showed good signs but ran his race early too. Vickery has excellent movement for a big fellow but seemed to be still learning how to play this year. Browne remain raw. Three rucks is not enough on a list.
I have not included from our current list for varius reasons - Simmonds, Cousins, Polak, McMahon, Polo, Thompson, Hislop, Roberts,
So looking at the list our biggest areas to improve are imho -
1. Outside Midfielder
2. Small/defensive forward
3 Ruck
4 Tagger/midfielder
5 Tall forward
6 Small/Mid Defender
7 Tall Defender
8 Inside Midfielder
Stripes
-
Nice post Stripes.
-
Nice post Stripes.
Thanks Con65! What's your thoughts - inside mid before tall forward?
-
#1 need is highly skilled tall mids IMO
We should do well with pick 6 with one of heppell/gaff/polec
our 2nd national draft pick is very important. I'd love the club to trade for a 3rd top 30 draft pick.
-
#1 need is highly skilled tall mids IMO
We should do well with pick 6 with one of heppell/gaff/polec
our 2nd national draft pick is very important. I'd love the club to trade for a 3rd top 30 draft pick.
You don't rate Atley?
I agree regarding the importance of our second pick - this is where I would look for the best tall either ruck or forward/utility. If we could get another pick in the 30s that would be worth a first round pick in other years imo.
Stripes
-
Wouldn't mind a talented utility that can play the role of Lids, going forward more though, perhaps on an opposite wing/half back position.
-
Great thread.
#1 need is highly skilled tall mids IMO
Agree. Pretty obvious to me quality outside midfielders are the biggest requirement.
I'd be taking a couple of youngsters and if the dollars permit chase a more mature player in Mundy as well.
-
Are people happy with the order/position I have placed players in? Do people believe my ratings are correct?
I thought I would receive more - 'you're speaking rubbish!' and 'you are over-rating/under-rating our list/players!' - replies.... ??? :shh ;)
Stripes
-
Are people happy with the order/position I have placed players in? Do people believe my ratings are correct?
I wouldn't have had Foley as an inside mid. He's more of an outside run and carry player to me (when 100% fit). And the beauty of Martin and Cotchin is that they could probably slot into either role - outside or inside.
But the point still stands - we need to improve our uncontested possession more than we need to improve our contested possession, so whether we get a giant, a dwarf or defender, mid, whatever — the most important thing is that they must be a great kick and a good decision maker with good character. Andrew Gaff ticks those boxes.
-
Are people happy with the order/position I have placed players in? Do people believe my ratings are correct?
I wouldn't have had Foley as an inside mid. He's more of an outside run and carry player to me (when 100% fit). And the beauty of Martin and Cotchin is that they could probably slot into either role - outside or inside.
But the point still stands - we need to improve our uncontested possession more than we need to improve our contested possession, so whether we get a giant, a dwarf or defender, mid, whatever — the most important thing is that they must be a great kick and a good decision maker with good character. Andrew Gaff ticks those boxes.
I thought Gaff was more of an inside midfielder than out while Atley was billed as the better user? What's your thoughts?
-
Gaff is definitely not an inside mid. He's a gut-running accumulator with a very nice left foot. Not to say he can't win a contested possession, but that isn't his strength.
-
Are people happy with the order/position I have placed players in? Do people believe my ratings are correct?
OK Did draft up a reply along those lines Stripes but thought your work deserved to be allowed to flower in all it's glory without nitpicking, :) however if you want
1 Outside Midfielder - agree and we really don't have a goal-kicking mid outside of Morton. Would really like some more fast, big-bodied, skillful ones. DRAFT.
2. Small/defensive forward - don't really agree since we have King, Nason and Hicks for the single spot. NOT A PRIORITY.
3 Ruck - agree we need more than 3 but do we draft another junior or pay very heavily for a second rate senior one. NOT FIXABLE SHORT TERM.
4 Tagger/midfielder - don't know if we need more since it's a spot that Tuck, Connors, Morton, Newman, King and Edwards should shoulder. NOT A PRIORITY.
5 Tall forward - we have Jack as one of the best and just have to wait on the others you mention. NOT A PRIORITY.
6 Small/Mid Defender - as you've noted we have enough and may have too many if we want to develop our young mids off HBF. NOT A PRIORITY.
7 Tall Defender - agree we have enough and like the tall forwards, just have to wait and see. NOT A PRIORITY.
8 Inside Midfielder - think this is a bigger problem than you think. We need 3/4 and you name 4. Take out Tuck to a more defensive role and Foley still doubtful with injury and we are short. We really can't lose with going after these types since the excess can be used as flankers. DRAFT.
The category you don't mention in your summary is the mid-sized Forward where you've listed Collins, White, Nason and Taylor.
I think Nason is more of the small defensive forward while White is the same or more of the outside running midfielder.
I would like to see us get a similar type player to Taylor and this is where players like Mundy and Knights fit into peoples plans. CAN WE TRADE.
So IMO We need to draft inside and outside midfielders who can develop off the flanks depending on their skill set. A taller, marking, mid-sized forward wouldn't hurt but is still a tricky one to draft.
Later picks can be used to future proof for key position and rucks but I would hope we can pick up a more mature midfielder with a late draft or even rookie pick.
-
Are people happy with the order/position I have placed players in? Do people believe my ratings are correct?
OK Did draft up a reply along those lines Stripes but thought your work deserved to be allowed to flower in all it's glory without nitpicking, :) however if you want
1 Outside Midfielder - agree and we really don't have a goal-kicking mid outside of Morton. Would really like some more fast, big-bodied, skillful ones. DRAFT.
2. Small/defensive forward - don't really agree since we have King, Nason and Hicks for the single spot. NOT A PRIORITY.
3 Ruck - agree we need more than 3 but do we draft another junior or pay very heavily for a second rate senior one. NOT FIXABLE SHORT TERM.
4 Tagger/midfielder - don't know if we need more since it's a spot that Tuck, Connors, Morton, Newman, King and Edwards should shoulder. NOT A PRIORITY.
5 Tall forward - we have Jack as one of the best and just have to wait on the others you mention. NOT A PRIORITY.
6 Small/Mid Defender - as you've noted we have enough and may have too many if we want to develop our young mids off HBF. NOT A PRIORITY.
7 Tall Defender - agree we have enough and like the tall forwards, just have to wait and see. NOT A PRIORITY.
8 Inside Midfielder - think this is a bigger problem than you think. We need 3/4 and you name 4. Take out Tuck to a more defensive role and Foley still doubtful with injury and we are short. We really can't lose with going after these types since the excess can be used as flankers. DRAFT.
The category you don't mention in your summary is the mid-sized Forward where you've listed Collins, White, Nason and Taylor.
I think Nason is more of the small defensive forward while White is the same or more of the outside running midfielder.
I would like to see us get a similar type player to Taylor and this is where players like Mundy and Knights fit into peoples plans. CAN WE TRADE.
So IMO We need to draft inside and outside midfielders who can develop off the flanks depending on their skill set. A taller, marking, mid-sized forward wouldn't hurt but is still a tricky one to draft.
Later picks can be used to future proof for key position and rucks but I would hope we can pick up a more mature midfielder with a late draft or even rookie pick.
May get your wish will Houli...
Maybe recruiting Gaff would fix the midfield problem as he plays inside and out?
A midsized forward is a bit of a waste as long as you have a tall forward who is good at ground level too such as what I hope Griff will be. In reality we are still lacking depth almost everywhere but probably defence and inside mids have been looked at first which is why I have them as least in needing of being drafted for at present.
Stripes
-
May get your wish will Houli...
Maybe recruiting Gaff would fix the midfield problem as he plays inside and out?
A midsized forward is a bit of a waste as long as you have a tall forward who is good at ground level too such as what I hope Griff will be. In reality we are still lacking depth almost everywhere but probably defence and inside mids have been looked at first which is why I have them as least in needing of being drafted for at present.
Houli - NO. Is not my wish, more of a nightmare.
Never been convinced even before his drafting, nothing he has done since has changed my mind, simply confirmed his deficiencies.
A single recruit will not fix the midfield. THREE more might if they all develop.
Don't think a midsized forward is a waste but maybe Collins, Taylor and Hislop are enough given a midfielder or two will rotate there as well.
Defense? Think we've got enough possibles there and we will get trainee midfielders there next year. Like the midfield, IMO defense needs time playing together.
Interesting to look at a Tambling/Lions trade which may get us one of their kids (unlikely), Clarke (very good last year) or Sherman (good last year), any of which fill another hole.
-
recruit the spine i say. Ruck, Tall backs, inside mid, then tall forwards
-
recruit the spine i say. Ruck, Tall backs, inside mid, then tall forwards
maybe not that order, depends on the talent available.
-
sheesh when looking at quality overall we desperately need all types.
jeezus h Geez just look at the smalll forward situation we have a shedload king white nason gilligan nahas hicks and we had roberts bloody hell what an ordinary lot of players. where the bloody hell is the class the polish the smarts.
what about rucks, graham please what a battler browne and vickery who truth be told should probably both be developing at coburg and with both absolutely no guarantees that they will make it.
we are screaming out for a genuine big bodied full back theres a lot of eggs in the one rookie basket with gourdis. you can go on and on.
-
Looking at our list to look for holes I would order each player in each postion as such. I would play the 'Italics' players in the team first on current form/potential.
Firstly a great topic and OP Stripes :clapping.
Tall Forwards - (2 or 3)
Riewoldt, Griffiths, Post, Rance, Westoff
Current Quality/Depth Rating= 6/10
We have the Coleman medalist who is still only 21. Griff has shown a few signs that he could be a great CHF for us in the future but time will tell. We have 2 young average toilers as backups and a development player lining up in Coburg reserves at present.
I agree with your italic selections as far as mid-long term Stripes but at present it's Jack then daylight despite Griffs being our lucky charm this year. Rance would go into the tall defender category moreso than tall forward for mine. Post was disappointing this year at either end of the ground and Westhoff is a long way off to be classed as depth. Depth wise I'd give us a 3/10. In desperation after Griffs did his shoulder we tried McGuane and even Thursty forward and that was a total failure as they kept dragging their man to the contest where Jack was. We need another key forward to add depth IMO.
Mid/Small Forwards - (3 or 4)
Collins, White, Nason, Taylor,
Current Quality/Depth Rating= 4/10
Collins popped up this year and White used his increased size and speed to cause some headaches but overall crumbing/small scoring options remains an area we need more of. Hopefully Taylor can be that crumber as well as marking option too but has shown little to date.
Defensive Forwards - (1)
King, Hicks, Nahas,
Current Quality/Depth Rating= 4/10
In the later half of the year little King made this spot his own using his natural aggression to contain forwards while peeling off and then using his penerating kicks to hurt them the other way. Hicks has promise but will need time and Nahas has gone backwars and may not survive the cull.
I'd give both these groups a 2/10 at this stage. Really we got hardly nothing consistently out of small or midsized forwards as far as good scoring. I'd doubt they gave opposition coaches any sleepless nights. It's still a wait and see approach for Nason and Taylor after just one year in the AFL. I wouldn't have Taylor and Nason together in the same category. Taylor is 189cm so he's your midsized forward who is capable of playing tall on the lead as well as small and smart when the ball hits the ground; Nason on the other hand is your small roving forward. With Morton moving into the midfield we lost a mid forward who could kick goals. We need 1-2 more at least. It's interesting that midsize forwards have been the main avenues for goals in the top sides this year. Where is our next Stevie Johnson, Didak or Rioli?
I wouldn't have a separate group for defensive forwards. A small forward should be a defensive forward as well. Dangerous both offensively around the goals and defensively chasing down and tackling opposition players inside forward 50. Kingy was our best at it this year but he's really only filling in until someone of more natural ability and skill takes his place on our list. Nahas isn't up to it while Hicks is very small. I agree with Redan that White is more an outsider midfielder/finisher than strictly a small/mid forward. Collins likewise. Having said that a small forward is probably the last piece of the puzzle for Hardwick given his experience at Hawthorn. Rioli being the last piece for the tilt at the 2008 flag when drafted in 2007.
Inside Midfielders - (3 or 4)
Cotchin, Martin, Foley, Tuck
Current Quality/Depth Rating= 9/10
Cotchin and Martin are already very good midfielders could, by all signs, turn elite. Foley was class but injury ended his season before it began and could haunt him in the future. Tucky played back but was moved back into the middle more as the year progressed and remains a 'contested-ball monster'. He still lacks the polish and poise of Cotch and Martin though. Our strongest area of the ground imho.
I don't think I'd give it a 9/10 which would put our inside mids in the top bracket of the comp. ;) but contested footy is a strength of ours at least from the perspective that when we can match other sides in the contested footy we are usually competitive. Cotch and Martin are our class mids whereas Tuck is a honest reliable toiler. Foley's future is up in the air having missed the best part of two seasons. We lack depth as we found out when Cotch was rubbed out for 4 weeks and Jacko 3. You can't have enough ballwinners IMO.
Outside Midfielders - (2 or 3)
Morton, Edwards, Webberley
Current Quality/Depth Rating= 3/10
Edwards had a breakout year and Morton came back into the team and played well. Webberly was also very goo in his first season. While signs a positive it remains an area we are weak. We need more players with speed and elite desposal by foot to lift our side in the future. I'm not sure if our current outside midfielders will get to that level.
Agree with your summary here Stripes. Hard to find the elite quality current on our list that we need as outside and linebreaking mids that gut-run in both directions all day. As you said a major area of weakness.
Taggers - (1 or 2)
Jackson
Current Quality/Depth Rating= 5/10
Jackson is incredible important to our midfield structures both containing the oppositions most damaging ball user and laying the blocks/physical work needed to create the space for our players to work in around the stoppages. Jackson has the speed, endurance and athletism to stay with almost any player. While he remains relatively young we do need another player to take his place if he is injuries/suspended. We have no depth here.
I wouldn't have this as a separate category. Bartel tags for Geelong at times and he's a class mid. In the long term we need quality mids who can do multiple roles so we are versatile and can cover injuries. Jacko is okay but if he was upgraded I wouldn't be disappointed.
Tall Defenders - (2 or 3)
Moore, McGuane, Astbury, Gourdis, Thursfield, Grimes
Current Quality/Depth Rating= 8/10
While our tall defenders are still average at present we have built up a great deal of depth and potential in this area. In fact we have created a healthy competiton for places at present.
As far as tall defenders who are spoilers then yes we have depth in that area. However a modern backman needs to rebound and distribute the ball outside defensive 50 as well as he defends. From the later viewpoint I'd give us a 4/10. Moore is not too bad while Astbury has shown he do both roles. Thursty and McGuane are strictly old school defenders. Gourdis is still unknown and has question marks over his footskills whereas Grimes is too young to judge. We have too many of the same type of tall defender and we need a bigger body defender. I can't see moving forward with all 3 of Thursty, McGuane and Moore. McGaune being moved out of defence this year and tried up forward makes him vunerable and possible trade bait for mine. I don't think he has the footy smarts to take us up the ladder.
Mid/Small Defenders - (3 or 4)
Deledio, Newman, Connors, Farmer, Tambling, Dea
Current Quality/Depth Rating= 7/10
Our running backline is excellent with our best uses playing behind the ball. Conversely though we lack the type of small/mid defenders who can shut down a dangerous small forward such as a Milne. We have depth and potential here though.
Agree with your summary here Stripes.
Rucks - (1 or 2)
Graham, Vickery, Browne
Current Quality/Depth Rating= 4/10
Graham was exceelent early but ran out steam. Vickery also showed good signs but ran his race early too. Vickery has excellent movement for a big fellow but seemed to be still learning how to play this year. Browne remain raw. Three rucks is not enough on a list.
While we still struggle big time in the ruck at times it's not a high priority to deal with at this stage. Also the top 5 sides this year have first ruckman that weren't developed. They were traded for in their mid-late 20s: Jolly, Ottens, Gardiner and King, Hudson and Mumford. With free agency coming we can wait and poach a decent mature ruckman as required.
So in terms of draft needs....
A ballwinning mid or two who can play outside, works hard both ways and has elite footskills with penetration.
A tall key forward
A bigger body key defender/rebounder
A classy midsize forward
-
Mick malthouse says you need 31 players on the list
and 9 as back up
that should be our aim
-
One of the regulars on Tiger-Talk posted this earlier today. I have a fair idea who the 'source' is and if I'm correct then the guy is a Richmond supporter employed elsewhere within the industry who has a very good football brain but make of it what you will:
Had an email exchange with a notable Richmond Guru. He was happy to forward this on provided his identity remain clouded - please no public guessing.
Worth a read.
Here are the salient bits:
---
I suppose I got Richmond wrong in one sense. Fremantle found a way to win despite putting little experience out onto the park.
I have always felt that it is the 23-28 year olds who win you games. Plus a veteran or two and a kid or two to complete the mix. Fremantle plucked kids from the draft and won which I have never believed possible. Almost half their team had less than 30 games in them.
Makes me think that the comp is getting weaker and weaker for talent. Heading more to a star-system surrounded by some honest goers. Watching some of the guys that St Kilda have surrounded Reiwoldt with really strikes it home for me. Carlton won games with no forward line or backline, just on the back of a group of midfielders and role players.
I think that makes it easy for a club to finish 14th or 7th in any given year. I think the gap between finishing between 8th and 4th is much larger than the challenge of getting into the 8. And then the step from top-4, to a contender is bigger again.
So I think Richmond might get into the 8 next year. But I don't know how much I value that anymore.
More specifically.
Most clubs are emphasising defenders who can go to anyone. Play on talls and shorts (eg Moore and Newman who can take on all comers). Richmond might be going a different way with the determination to recruit Post, Astbury and co. Grimes is more 'modern'. Similarly forwards should be able to play low (goal square) and high (half-forward) and switch up their roles from being a running, roaming, leading type - to a target man. I don't know if Richmond are going that way with Vickery, Reiwoldt, Griffiths and Astbury who seem
more specialised.
I also think that the assumption that all our smalls are destined to develop and stay is false. My theory is that Richmond are conducting an open-audition. Nason, King, Nahas, Roberts (gone), Gilligan (going) and Hicks. Long term none of them is elite, and there are probably only two or three 'jobs' available for them. Similar story with White, Webberley, Tambling, Edwards.
A lot of Tiger fans talk about a long list of young talent who will all develop and become a team. I actually see 3-4 contests. 3-4 roles in the team being fought over by 20 blokes. I mean Connors, Rance, Polo, O'Reilly, Dea, Grimes, Thursfield, Collins (?) might actually all be after 1 or 2 spots in defence. Probably Thursfield's spot. I don' think they can all make it.
Getting something out of Morton and Connors is the big positive - both have elite talent. Polo probably only got his career because he tagged Morton so well, so highly was Morton regarded as a midfield junior. The midfield of Deledio, Martin, Cotchin, Foley is elite. Edwards, Tuck and Jackson provide good grunt and flesh out the numbers. Moore and Newman are top drawer defenders. White goes OK. Connors and Morton are the could-be-anythings.
We need Reiwoldt to prove that he can play in a forward set-up, not just one-out seeing 90% of the inside-50s.
Tambling to get back to his best. White to stay where he was this year. I really like Astbury at both ends, he is going to be very important to us going forward. Hace always like Collins as well.
Both Browne and Graham are almost handy second-stringers ... we need a top ruckman but plenty of teams have won without one.
Connors, Vickery, Taylor, Rance, Tambling, Morton - that is the key 6 for us. Those guys fulfill their promise and we get much better. They don't and we lack the depth to cover them. Everyone else is pretty much where you'd expect whether it be playing well, or being a role player. 5 of them (not Rance) are potential match winners on their day.
I think we need an elite ruckman. Better small forwards. Better mid-size defenders who can also play small. Some hard running midfielders who push back into defence and then push forward. Key forward options to complete Reiwoldt. Some physical / defensive pressure in midfield with a view to Tuck and Jackson (29 and 25 next season) not being able to sustain all the blue-collar work. Easy !!!
Interesting if RFC are actually after Houli. He played most of his career as a forward/mid. Mostly forward of the ball and a goalkicker with an occasional run on the ball. So he is a like-for-like replacement for Roberts and another one added to the competition for a small forward spot.
http://sports.groups.yahoo.com/group/tiger-talk/message/93878 (http://sports.groups.yahoo.com/group/tiger-talk/message/93878)
-
I think we need an elite ruckman. Better small forwards. Better mid-size defenders who can also play small. Some hard running midfielders who push back into defence and then push forward. Key forward options to complete Reiwoldt. Some physical / defensive pressure in midfield with a view to Tuck and Jackson (29 and 25 next season) not being able to sustain all the blue-collar work. Easy !!!
Has he left any positions out that we dont need? It sounds like we got Riewoldt and need 17 more palyers.
-
I think we need an elite ruckman. Better small forwards. Better mid-size defenders who can also play small. Some hard running midfielders who push back into defence and then push forward. Key forward options to complete Reiwoldt. Some physical / defensive pressure in midfield with a view to Tuck and Jackson (29 and 25 next season) not being able to sustain all the blue-collar work. Easy !!!
Has he left any positions out that we dont need? It sounds like we got Riewoldt and need 17 more palyers.
:) but true Chuck if we want to become a contender. As he said, he thinks we can make the 8 next year but that's not necessarily a sign of significant improvement or a capable list. To become a contender we will need to top up or bolster most of these areas and continual turnover is how to go about it, keeping the best we have and then trying to improve on them.
-
I think we need an elite ruckman. Better small forwards. Better mid-size defenders who can also play small. Some hard running midfielders who push back into defence and then push forward. Key forward options to complete Reiwoldt. Some physical / defensive pressure in midfield with a view to Tuck and Jackson (29 and 25 next season) not being able to sustain all the blue-collar work. Easy !!!
What a pile of overwrought crap. To win a premiership next year that's what we need. How about we develop a team?
Elite ruckman - wait and see otherwise trade in if necessary like Ottens, Jolly, Hudson, Gardiner, Mumford, Warnock.
Small forwards - 2 or 3 jobs for Nason, King, Hicks, White, Tambling, Edwards but none are elite based on very little experience in most cases.
Midfielders - names 4 as elite and 3 to do grunt work. Add Connors, Collins and Morton that he mentions and the hard running will come with time and a couple more kids to share the load.
Key Forwards - geeeezz give Griffiths, Post, Astbury and Rance some time and experience playing together. Not to mention Taylor.
Physical pressure - we have the draft to replace older players like Tuck and Jackson.
-
What a pile of overwrought crap. To win a premiership next year that's what we need. How about we develop a team?
Elite ruckman - wait and see otherwise trade in if necessary like Ottens, Jolly, Hudson, Gardiner, Mumford, Warnock.
Small forwards - 2 or 3 jobs for Nason, King, Hicks, White, Tambling, Edwards but none are elite based on very little experience in most cases.
Midfielders - names 4 as elite and 3 to do grunt work. Add Connors, Collins and Morton that he mentions and the hard running will come with time and a couple more kids to share the load.
Key Forwards - geeeezz give Griffiths, Post, Astbury and Rance some time and experience playing together. Not to mention Taylor.
Physical pressure - we have the draft to replace older players like Tuck and Jackson.
Why is it such a pile of crap RT? He said that's what he thought we needed to be a contender - do you not agree? If we fill some of those spots by developing then great, if not then we keep getting in new players by draft or trade to improve on the ones we let go - how is that theory a "pile of overwrought crap"? Do you believe we have the major base of our next premiership side on board now? He mentions 12 players that are of a sufficient standard now or will be with a little further improvement and 6 that are a key to our future improvement. Surely you don't think the club can now afford to sit on it's hands and wait a few years to see if the development in the rest of the squad is of a sufficient standard for us to become a contender? I fear you will be sorely and forever disappointed if so.
-
Makes me think that the comp is getting weaker and weaker for talent. Heading more to a star-system surrounded by some honest goers. Watching some of the guys that St Kilda have surrounded Reiwoldt with really strikes it home for me. Carlton won games with no forward line or backline, just on the back of a group of midfielders and role players.
I also think that the assumption that all our smalls are destined to develop and stay is false. My theory is that Richmond are conducting an open-audition. Nason, King, Nahas, Roberts (gone), Gilligan (going) and Hicks. Long term none of them is elite, and there are probably only two or three 'jobs' available for them. Similar story with White, Webberley, Tambling, Edwards.
Some quite salient points, St Kilda has a lot of honest toilers in their lot, as did Sydney in 2005-06. Even Collingwood of this year have just a generally higher standard, but are even over the ground.
I think hes right on the "Open Audition", its the right way to go to develop a core of elite players, which we don't have right now.
Of those small he lists I only reckon Nason and maybe King have longer term futures. So its time to recruit more kids. I would get rid of Hicks, if he can't get a game this year when we were trying out pretty much everyone, including the Irish recruit then he won't make it. Don't clog the list with him.
-
Makes me think that the comp is getting weaker and weaker for talent. Heading more to a star-system surrounded by some honest goers. Watching some of the guys that St Kilda have surrounded Reiwoldt with really strikes it home for me. Carlton won games with no forward line or backline, just on the back of a group of midfielders and role players.
I also think that the assumption that all our smalls are destined to develop and stay is false. My theory is that Richmond are conducting an open-audition. Nason, King, Nahas, Roberts (gone), Gilligan (going) and Hicks. Long term none of them is elite, and there are probably only two or three 'jobs' available for them. Similar story with White, Webberley, Tambling, Edwards.
Some quite salient points, St Kilda has a lot of honest toilers in their lot, as did Sydney in 2005-06. Even Collingwood of this year have just a generally higher standard, but are even over the ground.
I think hes right on the "Open Audition", its the right way to go to develop a core of elite players, which we don't have right now.
Of those small he lists I only reckon Nason and maybe King have longer term futures. So its time to recruit more kids. I would get rid of Hicks, if he can't get a game this year when we were trying out pretty much everyone, including the Irish recruit then he won't make it. Don't clog the list with him.
Hicks did get a game after being elevated off the rookie list. Wasn't his fault he couldn't play earlier as we didn't have any more long term injuries.
-
I would get rid of Hicks, if he can't get a game this year when we were trying out pretty much everyone, including the Irish recruit then he won't make it. Don't clog the list with him.
He played 3 senior games. ???
-
Why is it such a pile of crap RT? He said that's what he thought we needed to be a contender - do you not agree? If we fill some of those spots by developing then great, if not then we keep getting in new players by draft or trade to improve on the ones we let go - how is that theory a "pile of overwrought crap"? Do you believe we have the major base of our next premiership side on board now? He mentions 12 players that are of a sufficient standard now or will be with a little further improvement and 6 that are a key to our future improvement. Surely you don't think the club can now afford to sit on it's hands and wait a few years to see if the development in the rest of the squad is of a sufficient standard for us to become a contender? I fear you will be sorely and forever disappointed if so.
Overwrought was the word I used. I do agree with most of what he says but it is phrased very negatively, as I pointed out in my reponse.
I agree that's what we need to be a contender . That's why I posted my second sentence.
Yes I believe we have the base of our next premiership on board now. Names 12 and adds another 6 who are critical - I'd say that's a fair base for any club.
I don't think we should sit on our hands but nor do I think it is time to panic and make premature calls on kids in their early years. As an example simply look at the post that followed about Hicks.
The development of players has only started this year and some more mature players have been permanently damaged by Wallace et al and need to be replaced.
After Wallace's second draft I was convinced we would not even be competitive for another 8 years - four more thru Wallace and four to repair the damage.
The club in general and Hardwick (and his staff) are tracking much better than I had hoped. I am really scared of pressure coming at a club moving in the right direction.
IT IS YEAR ONE, but not even draft one of the Hardwick period.
-
Hicks played alright for mine...
-
Hicks played alright for mine...
That's a hoot.
:lol
-
Duncs said he wants a foot rub, best you waddle on over
-
i read this topic with interest, with most have some or no idea what is required
Our list top 22 players is okay, but is ''wanting ""
Players who are outside our 22 need to be serious looked at with an "'exit "' strategy in place at the club eg rance etc.
We need the following in priority.
Tall back player who plays in D50 and can take overhead marks eg S.Fisher or N Mawell type.
This would then release players like Lids who then plays on ball or through the corridor.
Lids is currently a "'band aid "' solution.
Griffiths can play and will assist Jack Riewoldt down forward, as will Post.-Post can also play back, then you have Astbury as well.
therefore its fair to assume that we will try and "'off load"' one of the following. McGaune, Moore or Thursfield as 2 of the 3 are earmarked for Coburg in 2011.
Hicks will go back on the Roookie list and is a player in devlopment with a 12 month expiry date, hard to see him being successful due to his light frame, worth noting his dad was built like a branch stick and still is
Nahas should be moved on,
Am totally amazed that posters rate Rance, cant play I am afraid, looking good doesnt mean you can play
So we need a tall back and then just pick the best players available and then turn over the bottom of our list
-
Robbie is contracted for another year Jack and no other club will trade for him. So we are stuck with him in 2011.
Question Jack ..... What is your top 22 of our list then?
-
Robbie is contracted for another year Jack and no other club will trade for him. So we are stuck with him in 2011.
Question Jack ..... What is your top 22 of our list then?
Not who played in the last game, thats for sure
-
Lids, Cotchin, Foley, Riewoldt, Griffiths, Astbury,Collins,King,Newman, Tuck,
Edwards,Graham,Vickery, Jackson,White,Post,Connors, Moore, White ,Martin, Thursfield,
Morton.
-
Lids, Cotchin, Foley, Riewoldt, Griffiths, Astbury,Collins,King,Newman, Tuck,
Edwards,Graham,Vickery, Jackson,White,Post,Connors, Moore, White ,Martin, Thursfield,
Morton.
I know you think Matt White is a quality bloke Jack but I didn't realise how good you thought he was until this! ;D
-
I think he is our best 22, but things could change after the first 6 rounds in 2011.
He is ahead of Nahas and any other light weight that mascarades around as a small forward, LOL
Anyway, I meant to put in Richard Tambling, he is scrapes in, in front of Farmer
-
Lids, Cotchin, Foley, Riewoldt, Griffiths, Astbury,Collins,King,Newman, Tuck,
Edwards,Graham,Vickery, Jackson,White,Post,Connors, Moore, Tambling, Martin, Thursfield,
Morton.
Cheers Jack.
So as a rough side?
B: Thursfield Moore Connors
HB: Newman Post Deledio
C: Morton Cotchin Edwards
HF: Collins Griffiths Astbury
F: White Riewoldt King
R: Graham Martin Foley
Int: Vickery, Tuck, Tambling, Jackson
Missing?
* A bigger body defender
* Tall back player who plays in D50 and can take overhead marks eg S.Fisher or N Mawell type - who'll free up Lids currently a band-aid option.
* Classier quick small and midsize forwards
* More midfield class on the bench to add better depth underneath our top tier mids and who also have pace to play outside on the spread and kick goals from the midfield.
-
MT, exactly what i said earlier.
A big bodied defender
-
me and MT agreeing :clapping
-
If you select the youngest 22 players on the list that you think will be playing for rfc 2011.
And put them into a team.
This is a intersting way to see what area we are weakest in
-
shows how far we are away - a long way!
-
Nice MT and Jack.
Good to see a young side with a fair bit of development left in it. With good recruiting, upgrades of players and natural development we might just end up with a decent football team yet. :thumbsup