Author Topic: Jack Graham that is [merged]  (Read 240642 times)

Online Tiger Khosh

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 4464
  • For We're From Tigerland
Re: Jack Graham that is [merged]
« Reply #1065 on: August 13, 2023, 11:09:37 PM »
Not specific to the graham debate, but I don’t buy into the fact that some players tackling numbers are inflated because they are slow and second to the ball. There are plenty of slow players who aren’t high volume tacklers and there are plenty speedy players that are.

Offline WilliamPowell

  • Administrator
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 40310
  • Better to ignore a fool than encourage one
    • One Eyed Richmond
Re: Jack Graham that is [merged]
« Reply #1066 on: August 14, 2023, 07:23:16 AM »
Reminder 👇👇👇👇👇

We've been very lenient with regard to some of the posts in this thread, probably way too lenient

So I am only going to say this once. There has been and continues to be alot of clear baiting and trolling in this thread. It stops tonight.

Disagree with another poster no issue but the constant sniping and baits stop now. Stick to the topic and debate it on its merits

 :banghead :banghead

What I've just edited and removed is exactly what I was referring too. Stick to the topic, keep the baiting of other posters out of the discussion

Can we make it any clearer
"Oh yes I am a dreamer, I still see us flying high!"

from the song "Don't Walk Away" by Pat Benatar 1988 (Wide Awake In Dreamland)

Offline Simonator

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 2888
Re: Jack Graham that is [merged]
« Reply #1067 on: August 14, 2023, 09:31:25 AM »
I’m just not sure where his best position is… you’d think inside mid but I just don’t know if he has the speed and power to compete against the likes of Oliver, Cripps, Petracca, Neale, the list goes on.
Might be a sign it’s worth looking at a trade

Offline Willy

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 5105
  • All up inside ya.
Re: Jack Graham that is [merged]
« Reply #1068 on: August 14, 2023, 09:31:57 AM »
Trade bait for mine.

Online Damo

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 4498
  • Member of famed “Gang Of Four”. Ground the airbus!
Re: Jack Graham that is [merged]
« Reply #1069 on: August 14, 2023, 09:49:58 AM »
Trade bait for mine.

Would we get anything for him ?

Offline Diocletian

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 19427
  • RWNJ / Leftist Snowflake - depends who you ask....
Re: Jack Graham that is [merged]
« Reply #1070 on: August 14, 2023, 10:46:18 AM »
Reminder 👇👇👇👇👇

We've been very lenient with regard to some of the posts in this thread, probably way too lenient

So I am only going to say this once. There has been and continues to be alot of clear baiting and trolling in this thread. It stops tonight.

Disagree with another poster no issue but the constant sniping and baits stop now. Stick to the topic and debate it on its merits

 :banghead :banghead

What I've just edited and removed is exactly what I was referring too. Stick to the topic, keep the baiting of other posters out of the discussion

Can we make it any clearer

LMAO -didn't even mention another poster in the post you removed -dunno how merely questioning Graham's alleged top speed is "baiting" just because it might trigger certain people. - yet you've still left at least one abusive post towards me up. (not that I care because I thought it was hilarious but  at least show some consistency or get a new job as an AFL umpire.)   :shh
"Much of the social history of the Western world, over the past three decades, has been a history of replacing what worked with what sounded good...."

- Thomas Sowell


FJ is the only one that makes sense.

Offline Willy

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 5105
  • All up inside ya.
Re: Jack Graham that is [merged]
« Reply #1071 on: August 14, 2023, 10:53:07 AM »
Trade bait for mine.

Would we get anything for him ?

Not sure. Dangle the bait out and see.

Our midfield is too slow and Hopper and TT are locked in on long deals with big money.

Online Damo

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 4498
  • Member of famed “Gang Of Four”. Ground the airbus!
Re: Jack Graham that is [merged]
« Reply #1072 on: August 14, 2023, 10:58:29 AM »
Trade bait for mine.

Would we get anything for him ?

Not sure. Dangle the bait out and see.

Our midfield is too slow and Hopper and TT are locked in on long deals with big money.

Agree

Offline Diocletian

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 19427
  • RWNJ / Leftist Snowflake - depends who you ask....
Re: Jack Graham that is [merged]
« Reply #1073 on: August 14, 2023, 11:24:51 AM »
Apart from his two premiership medals and finals performances, I'd imagine his work ethic and much vaunted leadership qualities would be the main thing that would attract any potential suitors. :shh
"Much of the social history of the Western world, over the past three decades, has been a history of replacing what worked with what sounded good...."

- Thomas Sowell


FJ is the only one that makes sense.

Offline lamington

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 2872
  • For We're From Tigerland
Re: Jack Graham that is [merged]
« Reply #1074 on: August 14, 2023, 11:46:23 AM »
I think age and time is catching up with him. I’m still a massive fan of him and think his poor output is a byproduct of our poorly executed game plan (whatever that is).

His positive traits for mine is he normally sticks his tackles and when delivering ball inside 50 or lining up for goal he usually kicks it to our advantage. But he can’t get the pill nearly enough these days. I don’t know if he could be used like a Jacob Townsend like defensive forward as last roll of the dice or we just bite the bullet and say with 6-6-6 and the stand rule the game has moved passed him.

I love this guy to bits and I’ll salute his 2019 PF and 2017 goal haul forever

Online Damo

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 4498
  • Member of famed “Gang Of Four”. Ground the airbus!
Re: Jack Graham that is [merged]
« Reply #1075 on: August 14, 2023, 03:53:16 PM »
I think age and time is catching up with him. I’m still a massive fan of him and think his poor output is a byproduct of our poorly executed game plan (whatever that is).

His positive traits for mine is he normally sticks his tackles and when delivering ball inside 50 or lining up for goal he usually kicks it to our advantage. But he can’t get the pill nearly enough these days. I don’t know if he could be used like a Jacob Townsend like defensive forward as last roll of the dice or we just bite the bullet and say with 6-6-6 and the stand rule the game has moved passed him.

I love this guy to bits and I’ll salute his 2019 PF and 2017 goal haul forever

Age and time catching up with him ?
He is 25yo, what absolute BS

The 2017 and 2019 parts I agree a million percent

FooffooValve

  • Guest
Re: Jack Graham that is [merged]
« Reply #1076 on: August 14, 2023, 04:13:52 PM »
He'll be better next year if he can get a full preseason in. He's missed a fair chunk of the past two preseasons IIRC, a bad hammy and this year the toe. He's one of our hardest workers but has let himself down this year with poor kicking.

Offline the claw

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 4259
  • For We're From Tigerland
Re: Jack Graham that is [merged]
« Reply #1077 on: August 15, 2023, 11:01:12 PM »
He is a liability as a mid and he certainly isn't a fwd.Yet we play him in these roles.

Not many say it but our midfield stocks are dire and Graham is a part of the problem.

Our best 5 mids by some margin after retirements.
Vets
Martin 32 187/87 still playing good footy but alas even he is not the player he once was.Yet we are are still heavily reliant on him.
Prestia 32 175/84 Im gunna be real  kind and say his season was servicable. Truth is he is in serious decline. One more year will probably see him out.

Prime
Hopper 27  187/87 a very servicable inside mid but needs pace around him and a injury free run at it imo.
Taranto 26 188/87 Another big inside mid and currently our best mid.
Bolton 25  175/77 Our x factor mid only behind Tarranto and is also our best small fwd.

Mature
Graham 26 181/82  very ordinary mid. We also play him elsewhere often
Short 28 178/78 not a mids a hole. we play him elsewhere often for good reason.
Baker 26 173/72 hate to bag this guy so i won't, but i will say he is just average as a mid. Also he plays other roles often.
Ross 23 187/85 should not put him here because we just dont play him as a contested mid but a winger. Reckon he would be okay in the role.

Juniors
Sonsie 20 181/?? God knows whats going on with him. Cant get a game in front of the 4 above as a mid spells trouble.
Green 20 179/76 have not seen much but what i have seen have grave doubts. Also we call him a mid but was more a defender.
Dow 22  183/83 Cannot get a game in front of non mids.
Campbell 19  182/74 actually like this kid but he is a fwd first who can go thru the midfield.

That is imo dire. Take the two 32 year olds out and there is just three good consistent mids. Also the lack of bigger taller mids is mindboggling, only Ross outside of  dusty and the two in the prime bracket at 187cm can be called a big mid and he plays wing. No big mid younger than 23 or 26 if you exclude Ross.It just does not make sense. The numbers are also a big concern.

Playing Jack Graham does nothing to alleviate any of the midfield problems we have going fwd imo.

Offline lamington

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 2872
  • For We're From Tigerland
Re: Jack Graham that is [merged]
« Reply #1078 on: August 16, 2023, 12:52:42 AM »
I think age and time is catching up with him. I’m still a massive fan of him and think his poor output is a byproduct of our poorly executed game plan (whatever that is).

His positive traits for mine is he normally sticks his tackles and when delivering ball inside 50 or lining up for goal he usually kicks it to our advantage. But he can’t get the pill nearly enough these days. I don’t know if he could be used like a Jacob Townsend like defensive forward as last roll of the dice or we just bite the bullet and say with 6-6-6 and the stand rule the game has moved passed him.

I love this guy to bits and I’ll salute his 2019 PF and 2017 goal haul forever

Age and time catching up with him ?
He is 25yo, what absolute BS

The 2017 and 2019 parts I agree a million percent

I forget he’s like Cunnington and just looked old even when he was 18! My bad. Ok he should still be running games out. But then not everyone’s body is built to play into their 30s. Out of context example but Dan hannerbury for example? Peaked really early then body broke down fast

Offline the claw

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 4259
  • For We're From Tigerland
Re: Jack Graham that is [merged]
« Reply #1079 on: August 17, 2023, 09:43:23 PM »
Not specific to the graham debate, but I don’t buy into the fact that some players tackling numbers are inflated because they are slow and second to the ball. There are plenty of slow players who aren’t high volume tacklers and there are plenty speedy players that are.

In Grahams case its true though. Its simple he is regularly second to the ball !!!!!!!!