The complete lack of key forwards coming through is agitating. Makes it hard for the 2's to have a proper structure. Surely we could have binned the idea of drafting our 23rd half back flanker and got in a KPF. Assuming we will trade for one or have a dip in free agency.
Not just key fwds if Miller plays seniors then there is only Nyuon. Same for ruckmen there is only Ryan atm.
Have always said we need to mirror what we want in the seniors in the two's.
That means at a minimum 4 key fwds and 2 tall fwds or third talls. The same in defence 4 KPDS two for seniors two for ressies with two third tall types in this instance we have two third tall types in the seniors with Grimes who can play KP if needed and Grimes.
it can be mixed a little as well instead of two third tall fwds one could be a fwd/ruck. it means if we play two ruckmen we need 4 on the list two to play ressies hopefully one at least is a ruck/fwd and ideally we want all of them at varying stages of devevelopment.
With lists of 44 then 16 talls of varying types is the ideal. It allows for development in the twos, depth for the seniors and leaves a massive amount of room for mids and flanker types to play both afl and two's.
In our three flags we had nine mids who were primarily mids but some could play else where at the same time. Ie Martin goes fwd or same with Bolton edwards.
If 9 is the number, then we want to mirror it in the twos and that means we want 18 mids all up whose primary role is mid. That still leaves 10 spots for small/med types who are specialist defenders or fwds on the flanks and pockets for both teams.
It is not written in stone but its a damn good starting point, it may be 16 mids with 12 specialist sml med flanker types. or it may be 15 talls with a 188 189cm medium.
Take it as a starting point then pencil in the types you need in each area and what types we don't have.
One thing for sure the holes are all there for people to see if they are willing to look.
