Or we could do nothing and back Vickery who is currently a better player than Longer to continue improving and pick a player in the draft who can impact (look at our track record in the past 4 years).
What would be less disruptive?
dont really get the comparison. longer is a genuine first ruck who will carry our ruck division for the next 10 yrs.
besides vickery is not a better ruckman than longer even now. the greatest list need we have is a good young ruckman who we can categorically say will take over from maric in the long term, and can fill the breach in the short term.
vickery is not that person i cant see him ever becoming a top ruckman he lacks the mongrel and ticker for the role.
vickery plays primarily as a kpp and i really think hes lacking in that role. imo we may take a step backwards in the short term but mcbean and if they warrant it elton/astbury should be developed in the ones as a kpf these are the players we should be comparing vickery to.
mcbean is doing something vickery is not clunking big overhead marks.
astbury is a hit up key forward whos been forced to play back for what ever reasons.its a joke.
elton is still very much a baby but he ticks one very important box for a kpf and that is he takes big contested marks.
imo vickery is not good enough to become a first ruckman.
imo hes not doing enough big man things if you like to play as a kpf. hes sort of a jack of both trades okay at both but master of none.
even if vickery becomes a very good player adams will too we wont lose on that deal.. thats the deal. its not vickery for longer.
longer for pick 11 is worth doing imo and addresses a need.
do we want adams. if so we need to offer gws a player that will suit their needs and a player that we think we can cover imo we can cover vickery with mcbean.
for me this debate is about hw we get our hands on both longer and adams. both imo will give us more long term than vickery.
sometimes you have to take a step back to take many forward. most tiger fans run from this notion.
