2004 Draft Revisited

Which "Blunder" is greater?

  • Roughead before Griffen

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Tambling before Franklin

    Votes: 1 100.0%

  • Neither, All the Players Will be Stars

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    1

Remove this Banner Ad

UpTheGuts said:
Sorry if me calling you tiny brain has you upset.

Maybe you should apologise for calling Realistic Tiger an idiot and a TWIT (your caps) in the one post, you black kettle you....
Click to expand...
I said try.;)
 
Franklin has shown glimpses in hes career. Tambling has shown nothing. But to suggest one is better than the other or what drafting blunders she did/ he did is quite stupid. FFS we are comparing two players after 2 yrs of senior footy.

WHo knows how much Franklin will get better. WHo knows what tambling will do when he goes into the midfield (hes playing in the FP, which isnt really hes natural position which therefore makes the argument more stupid). But lets give them a couple more years when they reach/ dont reach there playing peak.

Far out this is turning out to be the new version of the Hogde/ Ball/ Judd debate.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

In 2006, Franklin averaged 11 disposals a game, 4 marks and 2 goals. That's not exactly miles off what people expect of him - ie 15 disposals, 8 marks and a couple of goals. At 19, that is a tremendous effort for a "non-KPP".
 
dipper86 said:
Ouch someones a touch upset, The only people that say Tambling is and will be better than Franklin are Richmond supporters, rather sad and clinging onto hope considering the comprehensive way Franklin has performed better than Tambling.

Franklin has performed better in every facet of the game apart from uncontested possessions ( Tambling has him well covered in that aspect of the game )

Franklin has shown alot more than Tambling who for a forward pocket lerks up at the wings to inflate his stats and has no effect on games what so ever, He avgs less contested possies even though he avgs more possies per game, that ratio from contested to uncontested is once again greater than Franklins proving once again Tambling is the uncontested ball king.

As for Shulz, well he's playing in the backline now, that pretty much sums that one up.

:) What a joke.
Click to expand...
No one is upset, I am standing by the player that wears the Richmond jumper the same as you are stnding by the guy that wears the Hawks jumper. To put it another way think if the Hawks had of gone with Roughead and then got Tambling while the Tigers got Deledio and Franklin. Obviously Buddy who has performed better along with Deledio would have had Hawks fans questioning why they took Roughead ahead of Buddy. The simple fact is as an unbiased poster has put it, why is everyone comparing a couple of kids that have finished their second year especially when 1 is a KPP and the other will be a midfielder. I could imagine the crap that would be going on if Tambling was kicking goals like Franklin at his size, the fact is he does not. He and Buddy are totally different players.

As I meantioned last night in 04 when Tambling was drafted the Tigers had seen Schulz kick 6 goals against the Lions and show some promise as a KPP. In the past 2 years he has suffered some nasty injuries a broken ankle and a broken collar bone to name 2. The Tigers have also recruited Hughes, McGuane, Riewoldt, Pattison in the same period and while they may not all have the same profile as Buddy they will hopefully do the job that Key Forwards are required to do, kick goals. Like I also said last night I am not denying that Buddy has talent what I am saying is that for me I would rather see a kid his size using it more to his advantage by taking marks (contested or not) not reading the ball of the back or front of packs and getting goals that way. Perhaps I am too harsh in that I expect a guy that is as big as Buddy would do that mnore often.

Finally you're happy with your lot and we for the most part are prepared to give Tambling the time in the middle to show what we hope he will. Remember Buddy is playing the position he is supposed to whiel Tambling is just starting to move into the middle.
 
Realistic Tiger said:
Facts are not excuses Parrot. Try and remember that.
Click to expand...

Richmond supporters excuses for Tambling’s terrible performance compared to Franklin. Hard to make sense of some of them, but here goes.

So far…..

1. Terry said at the draft he wasn’t expecting him to play well until he was 23 years old

2. Terry was told by footydraft.com that Tambling was better than Franklin, so it wasn’t his fault for the drafting gaff

3. Tambling’s preseason training has been interrupted

4. Even though Franklin kicked 6 goals against the Tiges, he didn’t take enough marks

5. Tambling is playing in the forward pocket, and one day will play midfield (don’t understand that one but it sounds good)

6. Tambling picked up a lot of possessions in the Weagles 100+ point Richmond thrashing, even though they were in junk time

7. Tambling always wants to improve when he trains and therefore is better than Franklin

8. Franklin plays as a forward pocket

9. Franklin plays as a KP forward

10. Franklin is more effective at ground level

11. Tambling is too light weight, but will put on weight

12. Tambling takes mostly uncontested marks

I'm sure I've missed some. :)
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

parrot said:
No we use Hughes - the best recruiter there is. We'll leave footydraft.com to Terry. :)
Click to expand...
But Parrot, 3 of the selection that footy draft suggested for the Blues in 05 they ended up getting. Surely that is worse than Terry just looking at the list as you claim. Maybe Hughes is just the guy who does the phantom selections there.:thumbsu:
 
DynamoUltra said:
I thought Franklin was on a HFF and is starting to move into CHF... How is this any different to Tambling being moved into the middle?
Click to expand...
Franklin is a KP forward who currently plays in the forward line. Tambling is playing forward with occasional runs in the middle.
 
Realistic Tiger said:
http://www.footydraft.com/2005/11/

Parrot it seems the Carlton recruiting staff use the footydraft boards opinion to make their choices as well.
Click to expand...

parrot said:
No we use Hughes - the best recruiter there is. We'll leave footydraft.com to Terry. :)
Click to expand...

Realistic Tiger said:
But Parrot, 3 of the selection that footy draft suggested for the Blues in 05 they ended up getting. Surely that is worse than Terry just looking at the list as you claim. Maybe Hughes is just the guy who does the phantom selections there.:thumbsu:
Click to expand...

Parrot what's the matter your rantings are being shown up and you have no reply so you ignore it.

parrot said:
Did I add that excuse to the list? Let me know if I've missed some excuses for the Tambling draft blunder. :)
Click to expand...
Responsed to a question not an excuse.
 
Melbdave81 said:
Tiger get your facts right mate, it was actually 4 :thumbsu:
Click to expand...
And yet here is Parrot accusing Wallace of using footydraft for his recruiting decisions. Wallace 'followed' one of the suggestions, Deledio, but to follow all 4 sort of blows a hole in Parrots point. No wonder he went quiet.
 
Realistic Tiger said:
And yet here is Parrot accusing Wallace of using footydraft for his recruiting decisions. Wallace 'followed' one of the suggestions, Deledio, but to follow all 4 sort of blows a hole in Parrots point. No wonder he went quiet.
Click to expand...

Where is your evidence to say he followed footydraft. Its a stupid as saying Wallace followed footydraft when drafting Deledio. Our first 3 picks in the draft were no brainers given what we needs and even Edwards was pretty much a given. The whole world was stunned when you took Deledio;) . Getting sucked in Realistic
 
Melbdave81 said:
Where is your evidence to say he followed footydraft. Its a stupid as saying Wallace followed footydraft when drafting Deledio. Our first 3 picks in the draft were no brainers given what we needs and even Edwards was pretty much a given. The whole world was stunned when you took Deledio;) . Getting sucked in Realistic
Click to expand...
Parrot was the one making claims that Wallace uses Footy Draft to make his decisions. I simply provided evidence that showed Carlton followed the suggestions of Footy Draft practically pick for pick the year after.
 
Realistic Tiger said:
Parrot was the one making claims that Wallace uses Footy Draft to make his decisions. I simply provided evidence that showed Carlton followed the suggestions of Footy Draft practically pick for pick the year after.
Click to expand...

As i said you have or are yet to provide any evidence that we did follow footydraft. They did there picks and we did ours, they happened to match, im sure the footy department didnt wait till a day out to make the picks
 
Melbdave81 said:
As i said you have or are yet to provide any evidence that we did follow footydraft. They did there picks and we did ours, they happened to match, im sure the footy department didnt wait till a day out to make the picks
Click to expand...
4 selections made in a phantom draft weeks before the actual draft and they happen to be the same, either coincidence or Hughes got lazy.:p

About as much proof as Parrot's respected recruiters who are/were of the opinion that Tambling is/was a hack. Unlike Parrot there is 'proof' that Carlton made the same selections that footydraft suggested they make.;)
 

Remove this Banner Ad

2004 Draft Revisited

Similar threads

mfcrox
  • Poll
Better #1 Draft Pick - Nick Riewoldt or Luke Hodge
2
Replies
28
Views
3K
TheUnicorn
TheUnicorn
Back
Top