Athletes or Footballers?

[mightytiges]

With the draft camp and all there's appears to be a recruiting preference towards finding a good athlete who can be developed into a good footballer over finding a natural footballer and working on his athleticism. Tom Rischbieth who smashed the records in the time-trial and beep test is a perfect example. He was a late pick in most phantom drafts  prior to the draft camp but has rocketed up to an early 2nd rounder since. 

There are always rare freaks like Judd and our own Lids who have oodles of both natural football ability and brains and super athletism. Richo of course is an amazing athlete whose size makes him a dangerous power marking forward. But when you look at some of our other better players such as Bowden, Cogs, Newman, Browny and Johnson while super fit you wouldn't say they are super athletic in the jumping and running basketball sense. Browny is all skill and footy smarts. Often the natural athletes that we've had struggle when it comes to decision making and having a footy brain.

So which do you guys think is more value for modern AFL footy - a good athlete who can be developed in a footballer or a natural footballer?   

[letsgetiton!]

r players such as Bowden, Cogs, Newman, Browny and Johnson while super fit you wouldn't say they are super athletic in the jumping and running basketball sense.

i disagree with bowden, his evasive skills , baulking etc are very athletic,may not burn with pace but his balance and evasiveness is outstanding and he can leap if he wants too.

but getting back to the question, i dont think we need athletes, just footballers with pace, if they are natural footballers and have pace and speed in their legs , they are the ones to pick, because at the end of teh day its the footy smarts that wins over the athletes, ask greg williams michael voss etc

[Razorblade]

If you can get an uber-athlete with a high footy IQ your set, their skills will improve with time.

Getting an athlete with no footy IQ (Jackson) is risky because their lack of footy common sense will cause them to learn a few bad habits and naturally do a few stupid things, however with Jackson his natural instinct appears to be get the ball, and kick it 60 metres, which i don't really have a problem with.

It always pays off to have a excellent footballer who might struggle with athleticism in the midfield, as their skills and footy IQ will more often then not help win games.

Unfortunately in todays game it doesn't pay off to be a slow forward or defender, thats why you don't see many KPP's drafted who's athleticms is questionable (Look at Kirkby and Grundy last draft, both rated top 20, then got found out for lack of athleticism, both ended up in the rookie draft).

[Darth Tiger]

Agree with the sentiments that an athletic footballer is the obvious choice for drafting <30 pick, however it raises an interesting question for the >30.

Are athletic project players more likely in the future ? I am not sure as I think that clubs will apply draft risk profiles in greater detail and look to develop the project players via the rookie list in a more cost effective manner.

The shorter excellent footballers with minimal athletic ability will only be handy VFL level players (not up to AFL standard), and the tall KPP / Ruckman types may have a chance on the speculative picks >60.

[WilliamPowell]

So which do you guys think is more value for modern AFL footy - a good athlete who can be developed in a footballer or a natural footballer?   

I'd take the natural footballer every time. The unfortunate thing is there doesn't seem to be the number of natural footballers coming through these days - there are more athletes available at draft time.

As mentioned by others the natural athletes are proned to making bad decisions. While watching the Tigers this season a number of times it stood out like a beckon which players you'd call athletes first and footballers second - that's where I reckon so many of our turnovers came from.

The other thing is that you put a natural footballer against an athlete in a one on one and on most occasions the footballer will win the contest or at the least create an opportunity for a turnover or stoppage. This ability can make his opponent look rather average

[Razorblade]

Footballer = Contested ball winner
Athlete = Receiver/Finisher

Cogs, Polo and Foley are the types to win the ball, and Lids, Tambo, Meyer are the ones to finish it off!

As for drafting, if you are tall, athletic, and atleast 190cm you have a dam good chance of getting drafted, and if your a bottom age pick, then your set!

From 2004: Garner (27), Gibson (28), Lee (30) McGuane (36), Maric (40), Newton (43), Limbach (52), Tiller (54), Moran (58), Copping (59), Raso (77)

You will find that all of thuse guys are talls and rated as excellent athletes.

I haven't even looked at the top 25, as im sure a fair few of them are in the same boat!

Nearly every 1st round pick are very athletic (Griffen, Lewis and Monfries, McQualter and Willits are the only ones with ? around their athleticism).

From what i've seen and heard that season Griffen is a good enough footballer so it doesn't matter, Lewis isn't as slow as he was rated as a junior, Monfries is an in and under contested ball winner/feeder so it doesnt matter for him, McQualter hasn't done a lot and Willits is apparently a bust in waiting!

[mightytiges]

r players such as Bowden, Cogs, Newman, Browny and Johnson while super fit you wouldn't say they are super athletic in the jumping and running basketball sense.

i disagree with bowden, his evasive skills , baulking etc are very athletic,may not burn with pace but his balance and evasiveness is outstanding and he can leap if he wants too.

but getting back to the question, i dont think we need athletes, just footballers with pace, if they are natural footballers and have pace and speed in their legs , they are the ones to pick, because at the end of teh day its the footy smarts that wins over the athletes, ask greg williams michael voss etc

That's true X but Bowden seems to have cut back on his "baulking" in recent times IMO.  It's no point trying to fool and weave through half the opposition when at the end all your options are gone. The first option more often than not is the best strategy. Joel use to be the whipping boy of frustrated supporters because he would stuff up all the time trying to be too fancy. Bowden's re-emergence since he was dropped back to Coburg last year appears to have come from being more focussed on playing smart percentage footy.

Greg Williams didn't have leg speed but he had the quickest hands and brain and that's what made him a superstar in the midfield. There might be a question mark over him if he played now though.

Agree X that the ideal is a natural footballer with pace. Lids is the perfect example .

[letsgetiton!]

Greg Williams didn't have leg speed but he had the quickest hands and brain and that's what made him a superstar in the midfield. There might be a question mark over him if he played now though.

Agree X that the ideal is a natural footballer with pace. Lids is the perfect example .

i think ur right, if greg williamd played today he would just become a very good vfl player, i dont think even his fast thinking and hands woudl have gotten him a gig today, as the game has changed so much.

and lids is the kinda player who fits a fast footballer

[cub]

Name a "Great" of our game who is an athlete.

Carey = Footballer
Ablett (Snr)= Footballer
McLeod = Footballer
Voss = Footballer
Hird = Footballer

Just to name a few later day examples.

I think this taking atletes is wrecking the game and causing this type of Swans style game.

And Razor No offence but I wouldn't be putting Lids in the Athletes/Receivers class (even though he is) - The kid is still a genuine footballer above all else. 

[Razorblade]

I wasn't saying he wasn't a talented footballer, i just meant that he will not be the guy who goes in and gets the hard ball, he'll be the one who finishes it off from the 50 metre line!