2009 Draft Camp/State Screening invitees

[footyman]

There will be players who miss out and then wont have a clue what to do after it. The managers will get them tryouts for rookie spots etc or maybe a vfl contract.

If an AFL club wants a player to do a preseason or a VFL club wants to sign a player they will get in contact with them manager or no manager.

As for the pre-season training, I do know of player managers ringing AFL recruiting managers to "beg" for their clients to be given a preseason training invite. Something along the lines of "Can you do me a favour and have xx down for a couple of weeks training?".

Saving face when a player manager has signed a kid, pumped his tyres up and doesn't want egg on his face perhaps?

 

[footyman]

i think alot of kids who are pursed by managers almost have to make a decision once there all contacting them, there ruthless i've heard some things that can be detrimental to players season's, it can be such a big distraction for 17 18 even 16 year old kids and for those who are going to state screenings and stuff who are a little unsure on there future would problem be thinking in a different manner to those who are virtually pretty close to a draft dream, i know for a fact that one very highly rated previous AIS scholarship who hasn't had a season that was planned is wishing he had his time over he basically asked all agents to leave him be untill after national championship lasted about 3-4 days before he was receiving texts email's even adds on facebook's, so i think its not always a bad thing to chose if the kids are constantly being hounded and the managers dont have enough respect to regard there wishes

I think there is a lot of merit to what you say there, the managers do hound the kids into making a decision and it does become a distraction if they don't. In some cases it borders on harrassment, nobody wants people trying to sell them something ringing them day after day after day. And essentially player managers are salesmen.

But IGO's suggestion is a good one, that or tell them they'll be reported to the AFLPA if they don't back off and they'll quickly go away.

I think I could pick the worst offender of facebook adds in one guess.

 

[missionpossible]

This has quickly gone off topic but I have seen both sides of the player management issue.

From a recruiters position it can be good if they have a manager because you can go to their office and get them to organise the kids to come in one after the other. Saves a lot of time for the interstate clubs. On the other hand when you have 20 player agents calling you every week to talkup their kids you can quickly appreciate why RMs need support staff.

From a players point of view it is good to have someone who can explain the process and what goes on from here. In general they work very well with players when they are drafted interstate. However as far as the kid is concerned they contribute nothing that helps them get drafted.

 

[footyman]

This has quickly gone off topic but I have seen both sides of the player management issue.

I'll take full responsibility for that

 

[chb_25]

anyone know the northern boys invited?

 

[WatchOut]

Thats just being stupid, you're smart enough to know that the benchmarks for key position players are different than for midfielders. Temel doesnt have to run around the ground all day, McCallum does.

Go and have a look at some of these blokes people like you and Boundary Boy keep pumping up - without your blinkers on - and come back to me and tell me that they're foot skills are adequate. {quote]

Stupid is it - I thinks this weeks stats speak for themselves.

So many uninvitees with stats in the 30's. Not just from the Cannons and Jets - have a look at Jonno Nash's stats 16KE, 4 KIE (not bad "foot skills"). This kid was sensational, same as Liston - very impressive.

Now have a look at some of the invited ones. (This time I will leave out names)

I DC player for the Cannons - 2 kicks, 2 HB all which were receives. Couldn't win his own footy. Tom Campbell made a fool of him in the first quarter.

Another DC - 1 kick 1 UCM - how impressive - he did manage 6 HBs though. Odd how he was awarded 2 goals that weren't even his.

A little bit of athletic ability here may have helped. Their opponents out ran and out marked them all day.

I'm sick to death of these kids getting an easy run. Yes they may have the build for AFL but they can't play footy for jack sh*t.

With regards to the foot skills you are asking about, maybe you should watch the games and note that some of these boys I really enjoy watching generally are the players that win most of the clearances, the hard balls and contested footy and of course their foot skills may appear to be lacking because of the pressure kicks.

 

[footyman]

Stupid is it - I thinks this weeks stats speak for themselves. So many uninvitees with stats in the 30's.

It has been like that for at least 10 years. For as long as I can remember. Go back through history. I could create a list as long as my arm of terrific, hard bodied, inside ball winning, but underpaced or underskilled midfielders who haven't been drafted. I'm not saying it's fair, or that it's right, but that's how it is and isn't going to change unless AFL footy changes. The fact so many of these guys have not even gone on and had successful VFL careers indicates a problem.

Now have a look at some of the invited ones. (This time I will leave out names)

I DC player for the Cannons - 2 kicks, 2 HB all which were receives. Couldn't win his own footy. Tom Campbell made a fool of him in the first quarter.

Another DC - 1 kick 1 UCM - how impressive - he did manage 6 HBs though. Odd how he was awarded 2 goals that weren't even his.

You may as well name them, you're talking about Carlisle and Long.

I'm sick to death of these kids getting an easy run. Yes they may have the build for AFL but they can't play footy for jack sh*t.

Yeah they do get an easy run, I think AFL is going back towards the recruitment of "footballers" rather than athletes but we're not there yet.

With regards to the foot skills you are asking about, maybe you should watch the games and note that some of these boys I really enjoy watching generally are the players that win most of the clearances, the hard balls and contested footy and of course their foot skills may appear to be lacking because of the pressure kicks.

I've figured that. TAC Cup clubs love them. They always win B&Fs and coaches awards. And I like watching them too, but pretend you are at the MCG, watching an AFL final and see if you can imagine these guys cutting up the opposition and putting the fear of god into opposition sides on the big stage.

 

[WatchOut]

You may as well name them, you're talking about Carlisle and Long.

Yeah they do get an easy run, I think AFL is going back towards the recruitment of "footballers" rather than athletes but we're not there yet.

.

Im not talking about Long - I actually thought his first quarter was very good.

 

[footyman]

Im not talking about Long - I actually thought his first quarter was very good.

Lawton, sorry my mistake. Wrong "L".

 

[FairCall]

Originally Posted by WatchOut
Another DC - 1 kick 1 UCM - how impressive - he did manage 6 HBs though. Odd how he was awarded 2 goals that weren't even his.

Stats continue to just give some indication. Interesting how he "kicked" 2 goals but only had 1 kick for the day. You really have to be at the games or get feedback from someone who was to really be able to be informed.

 

[footyman]

Stats continue to just give some indication. Interesting how he "kicked" 2 goals but only had 1 kick for the day. You really have to be at the games or get feedback from someone who was to really be able to be informed.

Blame the Calder Cannons for that. The goalkickers are entered by the TAC Cup clubs, while the stats are provided by Champion Data. When the stats go in, the goalkickers as entered by the Cannons aren't overriden. Champion Data have correctly recorded the two goals to Temel.

Somehow Calder have credited Temel's two goals to Carlisle. I reckon we have a few Cannons people on this site, perhaps one of them can contact AFL Vic and have the mistake corrected.

 

[swannies]

Don't know much about many Interstate players which made me head to the stats from the National Carnival. What position does he play because he didn't have a big disposal average however he was the only player with 100% efficiency by foot with a very high 86.7% overall disposal efficiency.
So is he just skillful - what about footy brain, character and work rate. Appreciate a comment from someone who has seen him play a number of times. May give insight to maybe why he didn't receive an invite.
Be disappointing - big chance when in the premiership team - especially such a dominant one.

Sorry if this has been answered FC, but he's an athletic 190cm wingman, I guess. He comes from decent stock, in that his father played for Subiaco in the 70s/80s, so he's been around footy and got a decent footy brain. Work rate is very good, runs all day, is aggressive in the contest but only got 1 or 2? games for WA in the champs. I know his Peel coach was really disappointed and felt he was under utilised but when you're winning I suppose.

 

[Z_K]

You may as well name them, you're talking about Carlisle and Long.

Brother of my best mate plays for Calder, and I have been to two games at Coburg this year and have followed the kid's numbers for a while, and Carlisle tidy footballer. In one game he had 35 posessions, 18 marks from CHF/CHB and not one ineffective kick that I could see.

 

[in the Square]

Could someone please post the full DC listings. Someone mentioned HS had them listed.

 

[corncob95]

Anyone heard of the gippsland power invites to DC and SS?

??????? anyone

 

[forgetaboutit]

Quote:
Originally Posted by WatchOut
With regards to the foot skills you are asking about, maybe you should watch the games and note that some of these boys I really enjoy watching generally are the players that win most of the clearances, the hard balls and contested footy and of course their foot skills may appear to be lacking because of the pressure kicks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by footyman
I've figured that. TAC Cup clubs love them. They always win B&Fs and coaches awards. And I like watching them too, but pretend you are at the MCG, watching an AFL final and see if you can imagine these guys cutting up the opposition and putting the fear of god into opposition sides on the big stage.[/quote]

Just like the touted no1 pick Scully on low 60's% KE's during the nationals due to high contested footy count.

We will all be watching Scully at the 'G'. Extremely fair point Watchout with regards to how you would rank kicking.

Another point to remember is that if a player kicks a ball lace out to his teamate and the teamate drops a simple chest mark and the oponent gets the ball, the kick is clased as ineffective.

If a player kicks a ball to his teamate and it falls short and dribbles along the ground and his teamate picks it up on the bounce, the kick is classed as effective. So you really need to watch the games not read the stats to get a feel for how the boys can play.

 

[footyman]

Just like the touted no1 pick Scully on low 60's% KE's during the nationals due to high contested footy count.

We will all be watching Scully at the 'G'. Extremely fair point Watchout with regards to how you would rank kicking.

Another point to remember is that if a player kicks a ball lace out to his teamate and the teamate drops a simple chest mark and the oponent gets the ball, the kick is clased as ineffective.

If a player kicks a ball to his teamate and it falls short and dribbles along the ground and his teamate picks it up on the bounce, the kick is classed as effective. So you really need to watch the games not read the stats to get a feel for how the boys can play.

Scully also handballs a lot. Quick hands in tight. And gut runs like no other. He will worry opposition sides. Yes, you are right his effectiveness by foot is reduced by the crowding around him when he gets the ball.

Some of the guys being mentioned who missed out turn the ball over under zero pressure. We are talking about stuff like kicking the ball over the head of a teammate whose loose inside fifty and costing his side a goal. Or striding along the wing with nobody in a bulls roar, only to muff the kick along the ground or give the ball straight to the opposition. Over and over and over again. Poor skill. Poor decision making. Poor leg speed. Normally one or more of the above.

I'm not a bit fan of potting players weaknesses publicly so I'm not going to go into names and their associated problems.

I'd watch more games than most, so I'm more than comfortable with my thoughts and what I'm trying to say. If you and your mate from the Cannons disagree that's fine. There's no point shaking your head over certain players missing out on a state screening invite because they were never, ever a chance.

But given your long association in TAC Cup footy, is Steve McCallum any better than Dale May or Adam Cosham were? Is Dion Lawson any better than Cam Lockwood or Steve Kennedy were? Why are they all of a sudden going to get picked when better players in the past have not?

There are hundreds of rough edged midfielders floating around in the VFL, literally hundreds of them. And most of them are essentially the same.

 

[footyman]

Oh, and thanks for the lesson on statistics but I'll give you one. When a sample is taken across two seasons of footy, somewhere in the vicinity of 15-20 games a year and averaged out across those games, the data is going to be much more conclusive.

The impact of one game played in windy conditions where a number of kicks are classed an ineffective or where a couple of teammates spill simple chest marks is really not going to be reflected in the overall results. The deviation caused when averaged out has little impact, at the end of the year the stats generally will show the good users of the ball with a high efficiency and the poor ones with low efficiency.

If a guy has a kicking efficiency of 40% across an averaged out 12 games, it's generally going to be mean he's a poor kick. Nobody could be stiff enough to have teammates dropping marks off their chest week after week after week!!!!!! If he has a kicking efficiency of 40% in one solitary game it may be due to external factors.

 

[forgetaboutit]

I'd watch more games than most, so I'm more than comfortable with my thoughts and what I'm trying to say. If you and your mate from the Cannons disagree that's fine. There's no point shaking your head over certain players missing out on a state screening invite because they were never, ever a chance.

But given your long association in TAC Cup footy, is Steve McCallum any better than Dale May or Adam Cosham were? Is Dion Lawson any better than Cam Lockwood or Steve Kennedy were? Why are they all of a sudden going to get picked when better players in the past have not?

There are hundreds of rough edged midfielders floating around in the VFL, literally hundreds of them. And most of them are essentially the same.

Hold onto your horses FM, where have i been shaking my head over SS invites?

Just like your posts are there for all to read, so too are mine.

So post the facts mate and don't put up Bullsh1t to try and discredit mine.

 

[footyman]

Hold onto your horses FM, where have i been shaking my head over SS invites?

You haven't, but your mate WatchOut has.

Just because someone isn't going to SS or DC doesnt mean they wont get picked up. Going to be a strange draft. Let's evaluate it after pick 80 in the rookie draft.

 

[forgetaboutit]

You haven't, but your mate WatchOut has.

Just because someone isn't going to SS or DC doesnt mean they wont get picked up. Going to be a strange draft. Let's evaluate it after pick 80 in the rookie draft.

I've got no idea who watchout is, so i wouldn't call him my mate.

Would you call boundary boy your mate? you both follow the jets? or it at least appears that way.

Considering that we all provide regular opions on this forum, then we are bigfooty mates, yes?

In so far as Rookies, my opinion is that the afl clubs will look to hold onto their current ones (if they are better footballers now than at the begining of the season) and look to intake a lot more mature age guys from wafl, sanfl & vfl. It just gets very thin at the lower end of the underage stuff.

And next year you will see even more guys come from the state leagues.

Lets see how it all pans out in the end.

 

[borderbarry]

Is there anywhere that show which AFL clubs have nominated which boys?

 

[footyman]

I've got no idea who watchout is, so i wouldn't call him my mate.

Would you call boundary boy your mate? you both follow the jets? or it at least appears that way.

Considering that we all provide regular opions on this forum, then we are bigfooty mates, yes?

In so far as Rookies, my opinion is that the afl clubs will look to hold onto their current ones (if they are better footballers now than at the begining of the season) and look to intake a lot more mature age guys from wafl, sanfl & vfl. It just gets very thin at the lower end of the underage stuff.

And next year you will see even more guys come from the state leagues.

Lets see how it all pans out in the end.

I couldn't even tell you who Boundary Boy is, never met him/her. And I'm certainly not involved with any team in the TAC Cup. I respect that we have people on here who are, which is great, despite the fact sometimes it may cloud their opinions on players or they may have agendas in pumping certain players up. I think its good there is a 'community' of people on this forum who despite not having met, do enjoy sharing their thoughts on footy.

 

[footyman]

Back on topic, one of the most logical ways of getting more guys to testing is to extend the AFL club lists to 60 players.

The further down the list a club goes, the more likely the variance in the names that will be provided.

Perhaps that is something that could be done initially to extend the scope of testing.

 

[cAsEy_18]

Anyone heard the Dandenong DC and SS invitees?