Player Watch Tyler Brown (Delisted 2022)

[Markfs]

I don't think player development is linear or predictable enough for it to be put through a timed cyclical system. I could be wrong, but I suspect when it comes to cutting or keeping the last couple on the list, it's down to the: "he might make it" guys. The question is "Tyler, the kid we'll get at pick 65 or that tall clumsy bloke who has been training with us hoping to get a DFA gig?"

i dont keep up with all the online lingo abbreviations.so what is dfa gig?

 

[Markfs]

i dont keep up with all the online lingo abbreviations.so what is dfa gig?

but at any rate you missed my point. If you keep mr65 brown for another year, do you keep the others for 6 years? Do you say to the 4 year player dropped off the list to keep brown, sorry but we felt in our waters that tyler is going to be a better player?

if footballers can live with such unfairness, then fair enough.

 

[sr36]

i dont keep up with all the online lingo abbreviations.so what is dfa gig?

Delisted Free Agent. There is a time period before the draft when you can add delisted blokes without having to draft them. That gets called the DFA window.

 

[Markfs]

footballers accept that they will be paid according to their ability or desirability. Do they accept that tyler brown

21

Tyler Brown

Age

25

Ht

192cm

Wt

84kg

Pos.

M/F

Career

Season

Last 5

D

11.0

3star

K

4.0

2star

HB

7.0

4star

M

1.0

1star

T

1.4

3star

CL

0.6

3star

D

11.0

3star

K

4.0

1star

HB

7.0

4star

M

1.0

1star

T

1.4

2star

CL

0.6

3star

D

11.0

3star

K

4.0

2star

HB

7.0

5star

M

1.0

1star

T

1.4

4star

CL

0.6

3star

gets 6 years to show his wares but others will get less time, because a coach or coaches thinks tyler will eventually get it? Maybe so. Maybe the ones getting dropped off the list have no option than to accept it but what about those left behind?

do footballers ignore notions of fairness and just accept the judgement of the coach?

 

[Markfs]

Delisted Free Agent. There is a time period before the draft when you can add delisted blokes without having to draft them. That gets called the DFA window.

well i know how it operates - generally speaking - but I dont get into abbreviations. I wish our system was more americanised - they would have a nice abbreviation. They're good at making those up.

 

[Markfs]

well the answer to the question about your DFA, I would give a kid a go who was delisted by GWS after 3 years and had a couple of good games, ahead of brown. If I talked to the kid and his isolation impacted his footy, I'd give him a go.

at any rate your scenario depends on circumstances. Generally speaking, I would find it hard to justify contracting brown beyond this season. Not just because of him but because it sets an unrealistic timeframe for others on the list. We can afford to keep every player on the list for 5 years if they are showing nothing.

lets see how it turns out... he may become nat fyfe next week

 

[ZEV]

I've always been comfortable that the people in charge put their love of the club above personal gain.

The club might have at times seemed like a boys club with Eddie at the helm but the intent has always been to bring in the best people in to help win flags.

We've come pretty damn close and got a few things wrong in the process. Corrupt? Never.

I think it's pretty naive to believe that there were no personal interests involved when the club tried to move Balme into the "director of coaching" job that no-one ever wanted, to appoint Gubby Allen who was under an AFL and ASADA investigation at the time and just happened to be mates with Ed and involved in how many trades between the two clubs?

 

[sr36]

well the answer to the question about your DFA, I would give a kid a go who was delisted by GWS after 3 years and had a couple of good games, ahead of brown. If I talked to the kid and his isolation impacted his footy, I'd give him a go.

at any rate your scenario depends on circumstances. Generally speaking, I would find it hard to justify contracting brown beyond this season. Not just because of him but because it sets an unrealistic timeframe for others on the list. We can afford to keep every player on the list for 5 years if they are showing nothing.

lets see how it turns out... he may become nat fyfe next week

I wasn't asking you that question. I was suggesting that was the question they'd ask. And I don't think it matters whether he's been on the list for two or five years. The number of years isn't a precedent that they have to stick to next time they're asking the same question about some other hopeful at the edge of the list.

 

[Markfs]

I wasn't asking you that question. I was suggesting that was the question they'd ask. And I don't think it matters whether he's been on the list for two or five years. The number of years isn't a precedent that they have to stick to next time they're asking the same question about some other hopeful at the edge of the list.

i know that they dont have to stick to it. there are no rules. The list committee is god. I dont know the psychology of the players. Maybe they accept that the list committee gives tyler 6 years to show something, and moves on another player after 2 years. Maybe that would have no impact on the players. Maybe they dont think like me. I accept that.

 

[loki04]

I reckon Mcrae would have regretted it about half way through the first quarter, when Saad was cutting Ginnivan up and Brown was moved on to Saad.

Ginni almost had another 2 on the board first half, uncharacteristic easy misses. Near certain goals from distance and difficulty.
Set up one early too.

Should of kicked 3 for the game.

 

[jathanas]

I think it's pretty naive to believe that there were no personal interests involved when the club tried to move Balme into the "director of coaching" job that no-one ever wanted, to appoint Gubby Allen who was under an AFL and ASADA investigation at the time and just happened to be mates with Ed and involved in how many trades between the two clubs?

We risk derailing here but I'd like to better understand how you define personal interest in this context.

Do you believe that the individual/s behind the decision to bring Gubby back in benefited directly in some way?

Gubby was experienced and proven to be competent at the role he was brought in to execute. The pending investigation certainly muddies the water but it could simply have been that this was not considered well enough.

The Director of Coaching move for Balme was just a clumsy way to try hold on to him.

 

[Bianconeri]

We risk derailing here but I'd like to better understand how you define personal interest in this context.

Do you believe that the individual/s behind the decision to bring Gubby back in benefited directly in some way?

Gubby was experienced and proven to be competent at the role he was brought in to execute. The pending investigation certainly muddies the water but it could simply have been that this was not considered well enough.

The Director of Coaching move for Balme was just a clumsy way to try hold on to him.

Imagine trying this move twice

 

[Markfs]

Do you believe that the individual/s behind the decision to bring Gubby back in benefited directly in some way?

So it's not corruption, it's not nepotism, it's cronyism....

 

[jathanas]

Imagine trying this move twice

Worked so well the first time...

View attachment 1414878

So it's not corruption, it's not nepotism, it's cronyism....

Well, thank you for the enlightenment Mark.

Could there be some truth in the idea that Ed believed Gubby would do a great job? I understand people will as a rule offer roles to those they already know. Networking is the way of the world. It's not cronyism if there is proper regard to one's qualifications.

 

[Markfs]

Worked so well the first time...



Well, thank you for the enlightenment Mark.

Could there be some truth in the idea that Ed believed Gubby would do a great job? I understand people will as a rule offer roles to those they already know. Networking is the way of the world. It's not cronyism if there is proper regard to one's qualifications.

well thats true....and i suppose it rests on how allen departed from GWS. We've drifted a long way from tyler. The question there is whether the current batch of kids will be given 5 years only to reward the club with 1 minute of good footy.

 

[stui magpie]

but at any rate you missed my point. If you keep mr65 brown for another year, do you keep the others for 6 years? Do you say to the 4 year player dropped off the list to keep brown, sorry but we felt in our waters that tyler is going to be a better player?

if footballers can live with such unfairness, then fair enough.

Just a point, Tyler was drafted at pick 50 in 2017, so this is his 5th season on the list, the past 2 which were Covid interrupted. He was always going to be a development player and is only 22 at the moment having played 24 games.
By comparison, Brayden Sier was drafted at pick 32 in the 2015 draft and was delisted at the end of 2021. 6 full seasons on the list for 27 games. By his own admission, he didn't want it enough and didn't do the work, Ty does on both counts. I'd keep him at least another season.

 

[frizzle]

Just a point, Tyler was drafted at pick 50 in 2017, so this is his 5th season on the list, the past 2 which were Covid interrupted. He was always going to be a development player and is only 22 at the moment having played 24 games.
By comparison, Brayden Sier was drafted at pick 32 in the 2015 draft and was delisted at the end of 2021. 6 full seasons on the list for 27 games. By his own admission, he didn't want it enough and didn't do the work, Ty does on both counts. I'd keep him at least another season.

Yeah I have no problem if we give him another year on minimum chips.
But it is definitely step up or ship out time.

 

[Markfs]

Just a point, Tyler was drafted at pick 50 in 2017, so this is his 5th season on the list, the past 2 which were Covid interrupted. He was always going to be a development player and is only 22 at the moment having played 24 games.
By comparison, Brayden Sier was drafted at pick 32 in the 2015 draft and was delisted at the end of 2021. 6 full seasons on the list for 27 games. By his own admission, he didn't want it enough and didn't do the work, Ty does on both counts. I'd keep him at least another season.

Its a good comparison but Sier proved himself able to play in 2018. I dont think Tyler has got anywhere near that. It's interesting when you say that Sier didnt want it enough. I'm sure Tyler does all the training but is he desperate to go on? I dont know the kid and maybe he's been told that he has another year so he's sitting back and plodding along. The question is always when you keep someone, is who do you drop off the list. Some people might say that it wont matter if tyler stays or goes, judging by his current output. I would argue that if he does 6 years at his current level, how is the rest of the playing group going to feel when some of them are judged more harshly. Some say list managers are gods and the players wont whinge. Him being a son of a gun makes him a target.

 

[whiskeytown]

Shouldn’t play another game this season until he’s getting 25 touches, 5 tackles, 5 clearances in the VFL on a weekly basis

Cause we just bought in a kid who has done those stats week in and out in the SANFL… who will deserve a go very soon

Cause Carmichael certainly won’t get the luxury of 5-6 years on the list to prove himself

 

[Matrix10]

well thats true....and i suppose it rests on how allen departed from GWS. We've drifted a long way from tyler. The question there is whether the current batch of kids will be given 5 years only to reward the club with 1 minute of good footy.

Considering the career average of an AFL footballer is 3 years , Tyler has just about expired twice over .

 

[Pie eyed]

footballers accept that they will be paid according to their ability or desirability. Do they accept that tyler brown gets 6 years to show his wares but others will get less time, because a coach or coaches thinks tyler will eventually get it? Maybe so. Maybe the ones getting dropped off the list have no option than to accept it but what about those left behind?

do footballers ignore notions of fairness and just accept the judgement of the coach?

Surely McFlie watched some vids before he took over the list and a had a chat with the development staff.
So at least 2 professional AFL coaches have seen something in him.

I honestly don't think what other delisted players think is fair every even enters the equation.

 

[Markfs]

Considering the career average of an AFL footballer is 3 years , Tyler has just about expired twice over .

in support of him, there are players from other clubs who hang around for ages. i've checked in the past. He's not alone. To me, the question is how long is long enough? He had his magic minute last weekend but I cant think of anything from his games that has made any impression at all.

 

[ZEV]

Worked so well the first time...



Well, thank you for the enlightenment Mark.

Could there be some truth in the idea that Ed believed Gubby would do a great job? I understand people will as a rule offer roles to those they already know. Networking is the way of the world. It's not cronyism if there is proper regard to one's qualifications.

Apologies for not replying to your earlier post.

We hired him to run the netball program, under an afl and ASADA investigation having just "resigned" from the afl run Giants. We had Neil Balme and then down the track we shafted him to replace him with Eddie's mate, Gubby. Let's not forget at the time our list had been ravaged by the introduction of the two new clubs.

Interestingly, Craig Lambert, also "resigned" from the Giants whilst under investigation as well.

Our club stated at the time, "Collingwood was also made aware at this time that both GWS and the AFL had concluded or were concluding separate investigations into the matter, From our discussions on this matter with various parties, Collingwood found no reason standing in the way of employing Allan."

Did we get rid of Grace and Hart around that time and ended up with Bucks' best mate Sando?

Without even going into all the staggeringly incompetent list decisions we made at the time, there may be a possibility that Eddie thought it was a great appointment.

I contend that it is more likely that Ed's future was directly linked to the success of failure of Bucks, and that the appointment of Allan gave Ed much more influence on football decisions, ones that he should not have been involved in. So, in my hypothetical version of events did Ed directly benefit? No, but only due to sheer incompetence and foolishness.

 

[Markfs]

I contend that it is more likely that Ed's future was directly linked to the success of failure of Bucks, and that the appointment of Allan gave Ed much more influence on football decisions, ones that he should not have been involved in. So, in my hypothetical version of events did Ed directly benefit? No, but only due to sheer incompetence and foolishness.

I never felt Ed had any questions about his future until the racism sagas. The questions were always about buckley.

Can I add my little bit to the discussion of the dysfunction at the time. When Geoff Walsh left the first time, Rodney Eade took over his job but only half his job..

"Pert said new interim director of football Rodney Eade would handle the on-field aspect of Walsh's role, and recruiting manager Derek Hine would handle player contracts."

In fact, I believe it went further than that. Derek Hine came under the responsibility of Pert....independent of Eade. I believe it was done to cater for Hine's ego.

It was dysfunction equivalent to what happened at melbourne....and it was overseen by Ed who thought structure and responsibility didnt matter as long as mates were around.

 

[jathanas]

Apologies for not replying to your earlier post.

We hired him to run the netball program, under an afl and ASADA investigation having just "resigned" from the afl run Giants. We had Neil Balme and then down the track we shafted him to replace him with Eddie's mate, Gubby. Let's not forget at the time our list had been ravaged by the introduction of the two new clubs.

Interestingly, Craig Lambert, also "resigned" from the Giants whilst under investigation as well.

Our club stated at the time, "Collingwood was also made aware at this time that both GWS and the AFL had concluded or were concluding separate investigations into the matter, From our discussions on this matter with various parties, Collingwood found no reason standing in the way of employing Allan."

Did we get rid of Grace and Hart around that time and ended up with Bucks' best mate Sando?

Without even going into all the staggeringly incompetent list decisions we made at the time, there may be a possibility that Eddie thought it was a great appointment.

I contend that it is more likely that Ed's future was directly linked to the success of failure of Bucks, and that the appointment of Allan gave Ed much more influence on football decisions, ones that he should not have been involved in. So, in my hypothetical version of events did Ed directly benefit? No, but only due to sheer incompetence and foolishness.

You raise good points.

Bucks was always going to surround himself with assistants he wanted. It's de rigueur for a senior coach appointment to be followed by a restructure of sorts at the assistant level.

It doesn't surprise that Ed would hire a mate, but I don't believe for a second that he would do it if he thought it would hurt the club. He poked in places that aren't a president's area of immediate concern i.e. the football program but I don't believe he or the current president have any say on which players get drafted. Influence? Couldn't prove that one way or another.

The club has persisted with the Brown brothers. Some are frustrated by this and perhaps rightfully so but they have not been granted their extended opportunity at the AFL level simply because of their surname.

It's a cut-throat game. Coaches and recruiters live or die by how well the players go in the big-time. Not sure anyone would stick their own neck out just so Cal and Tyler can realise their AFL dream.