Barometers for 2011, Who do you think will be the keys

[The Rusty Trombone]

dude you are debating with people that only cough up the here and now and what the here and now stats say. What they dont understand is the here and now stats for those here and now players, that they keep spruiking as second best this, third best at that..and the ridiculously stupid stat, most "effective" disposals, equate to us leaping to 15th, with their super "effective" stats.
Its that ingrained mind set that has besieged them over the last 2 decades that their is no one to do better. e.g the Pettifers, Hydes etc of this world that carved out careers because there was no one better. So we didnt try anyone because we were scared we would finish below the position we finished -LAST.
At the end of the day those that understand what is required to compete at the top know all to well what is required.
The clean out of the plodders is nearly complete...enter Grigg, Houli , Conca and a Foley and we start changing the scene and see if those "effective" stats start being effective FFS.
I mean shit, if these top stats dudes were that "effecive" why on earth would we draft 3 players for those positions?

I think it's safe to say that RT and Razor understand yours and Santas rationale Cogga everyone does and and it certainly is not a ground breaking theory but they are merely pointing out that you 2 will not get your wish this year until the replacements develop. A blind folded person with caterax locked in the boot of a car can see that.

Don't worry Hardwick is going to blood a heap again this year but these 2 players are important so he can do that. 2012 will be a different thing. We all look forward to the time where we have more skillful midfielders with bigger bodys than Tuck and Jackson but we'll have to be patient.

These 2 guys will be the Obree's and the Lockyers of our next Flag it is just not time to give them the boot just yet. Malthouse didn't cut these guys at the end of 2006 because he got Pendlebury and Thomas at the end of 05. I think RT and Razor have shown you this statisticly and articulated this enough times over that a infant could understand.

And as for your arguement ' YES WE GET IT ' we all got that about Tuck and Jackson years ago your not a football prophet Santa.

 

[Slattery_20]

Games played by Thursfield & Miller; and # of goals of your 2nd & 3rd goalkickers.

0 for the 1st two; and 30+ for the 2nd two, and you'll be laughing.

 

[CoggaRules]

Tell me Cogga who is going to replace 'plodders' like Tuck and Jackson? You mention Grigg Houli & Conca in your post, now as good as we hope they turn out none of them have played a game for our club yet, so in reality who knows how they are going to turn out. I mean christ 6 years ago we all had high hopes for guys like Tambling Meyer Pattison & Polo, 6 years on and 3 of them are long gone, while Tambling moved on 4 months ago.

Speaking of what it takes to compete, we had 4 players, 2 of thems 'plodders' in Tuck and Jackson averaging 20+ disposals and 8+ contested possessions in 2010, Collingwood had 7 players averaging 20+ disposals & 8+ contested possessions, while Geelong had 5 players that averaged 24+ disposals & 10+ contested possessions.

Any wonder we seem to constantly go around in circles in terms of bouncing between 9th & last, because as soon as we seem to find some players who can compete supporters like you & Santa want to move them on and replace them with someone who might be better. How about we actually wait until we find players that are actually better before we replace them?

whoever is going to replace is up in the air, all i suggested was that the focus in drafting was to find replacements. Now we wait and see if they are what we were looking for. I said it way back, when Tuck becomes a bit player, i.e. depth from the bench and or from 2s then we will have risen up the ladder. At this stage he is just filling a role, and doing it well. The fact that we shopped him around and got no takers says it all dude...I am not knocking him, he is doing a good job, but a better more polished inside mid has to be found to take over, who gets it as many times as Tuck and makes 90% of the gets count.

 

[_RT_]

whoever is going to replace is up in the air, all i suggested was that the focus in drafting was to find replacements. Now we wait and see if they are what we were looking for. I said it way back, when Tuck becomes a bit player, i.e. depth from the bench and or from 2s then we will have risen up the ladder. At this stage he is just filling a role, and doing it well. The fact that we shopped him around and got no takers says it all dude...I am not knocking him, he is doing a good job, but a better more polished inside mid has to be found to take over, who gets it as many times as Tuck and makes 90% of the gets count.

Fair enough with regards Tuck, especially since he is getting on abit, although he could quite possibly play another 3-4 years. But why do we necessarily need to replace Jackson, who is yet to turn 25 and has played 83 games?

 

[santa claws]

Fair enough with regards Tuck, especially since he is getting on abit, although he could quite possibly play another 3-4 years. But why do we necessarily need to replace Jackson, who is yet to turn 25 and has played 83 games?

because at 25 hes shown himself to be nothing but ordinary. in fact tuck is a better footballer. at 25 he is lambasted by most in the football world at 25 he is about as good as hes going to get.

atm if we were to get rid of one it should be jackson. at least tuck has a better footy brain and thats really saying something.

as has been said ad nauseum we need to get their replacements in our system it should have happened 3 yrs ago.
as has been stated hopefully pat contin will be one of those replacements but how much hope does one have for rookies to make it.

we do need to find a way to release cotchin to almost a permanent outside role of course we want him to go get it when needed though.
same for martin we want him more on the fringes of packs rather than smack bang in the middle of them.
we have two excellent well rounded players who need to be released outside as much as possible. unfortunately they are being asked to play more inside because of a lack inside quality.

the club says we need outside mids i disagree we need quality inside mids enabling us to release two very good well rounded mids to outside roles.

 

["The Roar Is Back"]

because at 25 hes shown himself to be nothing but ordinary. in fact tuck is a better footballer. at 25 he is lambasted by most in the football world at 25 he is about as good as hes going to get.

atm if we were to get rid of one it should be jackson. at least tuck has a better footy brain and thats really saying something.

as has been said ad nauseum we need to get their replacements in our system it should have happened 3 yrs ago.
as has been stated hopefully pat contin will be one of those replacements but how much hope does one have for rookies to make it.

we do need to find a way to release cotchin to almost a permanent outside role of course we want him to go get it when needed though.
same for martin we want him more on the fringes of packs rather than smack bang in the middle of them.
we have two excellent well rounded players who need to be released outside as much as possible. unfortunately they are being asked to play more inside because of a lack inside quality.

the club says we need outside mids i disagree we need quality inside mids enabling us to release two very good well rounded mids to outside roles.

I don't think you can play with more than 1 midfielder who can only play inside at anytime . The ideal situation is to have at least 6 midfielders who can play inside and out . In that area I think we have 2, Martin and Cotchin , with Foley a bit of an each way bet , not quite purely an in and not effective enough as an outside mid to be considered a player who can play outside and inside . A strange explaination but i hope you understand. Looking at our squad we do have an abundance of those who can play outside , some have the argument for that reason we must keep the purely insiders , I personally think we need to encourage some of those outsiders to either starve or become more inside !
Ideally or midfield would include , our 2 x quality mids who can play in and out, Martin and Cotchin , foley who can play as solely inside , with some adding bonus of occasionslly hurting as an outsider, leaving a spot for 1 inside and two outsiders as a balance . Ideally as mentioned above I'd prefer the Jack or Tucky type to hurt the opposition more whilst outside and prefer our outside types become more inside , it's a balancing act and each will have their own thoughts !
I just think there is more chance of our outside type winning inside ball than our purely inside type hurting the opposition whilst outside ?

 

[CoggaRules]

because at 25 hes shown himself to be nothing but ordinary. in fact tuck is a better footballer. at 25 he is lambasted by most in the football world at 25 he is about as good as hes going to get.

atm if we were to get rid of one it should be jackson. at least tuck has a better footy brain and thats really saying something.

as has been said ad nauseum we need to get their replacements in our system it should have happened 3 yrs ago.
as has been stated hopefully pat contin will be one of those replacements but how much hope does one have for rookies to make it.

we do need to find a way to release cotchin to almost a permanent outside role of course we want him to go get it when needed though.
same for martin we want him more on the fringes of packs rather than smack bang in the middle of them.
we have two excellent well rounded players who need to be released outside as much as possible. unfortunately they are being asked to play more inside because of a lack inside quality.

the club says we need outside mids i disagree we need quality inside mids enabling us to release two very good well rounded mids to outside roles.

have to disagree with that dude...although i understand the damage he can do on the outside..but if ever there was a duplicate of a Brodders, this guy is it when it comes to presence and knowing where he is when arms and legs are flying left right and center...and that in his first year...this kid, barring any unforeseen circumstances is a ****ing genius, as is Cotch...leave him in the middle and protect him in his early years by changing him up to the outside..but he is de man who can thread the eye of the needle at will.

 

[Rayzorwire]

whoever is going to replace is up in the air, all i suggested was that the focus in drafting was to find replacements. Now we wait and see if they are what we were looking for. I said it way back, when Tuck becomes a bit player, i.e. depth from the bench and or from 2s then we will have risen up the ladder. At this stage he is just filling a role, and doing it well. The fact that we shopped him around and got no takers says it all dude...I am not knocking him, he is doing a good job, but a better more polished inside mid has to be found to take over, who gets it as many times as Tuck and makes 90% of the gets count.

Hehe...just like santa, for years you've knocked Tuck constantly and taken issue with people who've simply said exactly what you say above. Last season you both had to grudgingly shift your arses from the 'Tuck must go yesterday' camp to the above position, which - as you surely both realise - is identical to the position of those you've had heated arguments with for years.

It's revisionism at its finest and pretty amusing, but not as funny as that thread you started where you spun one of your frequent anti-Tuck tirades into a 'The fact that Travis Tuck is so much better than Shane and we chose the dud brother is blatant evidence of how useless this club is' rant...

Between the fact that Travis hadn't shown a lot compared to what Shane was managing, the fact we never had an opportunity to draft Travis, and how both their careers have gone since you stated that, it stands out as 24-carat California Gold.

 

[The Rusty Trombone]

because at 25 hes shown himself to be nothing but ordinary. in fact tuck is a better footballer. at 25 he is lambasted by most in the football world at 25 he is about as good as hes going to get.

atm if we were to get rid of one it should be jackson. at least tuck has a better footy brain and thats really saying something.

as has been said ad nauseum we need to get their replacements in our system it should have happened 3 yrs ago.
as has been stated hopefully pat contin will be one of those replacements but how much hope does one have for rookies to make it.

we do need to find a way to release cotchin to almost a permanent outside role of course we want him to go get it when needed though.
same for martin we want him more on the fringes of packs rather than smack bang in the middle of them.
we have two excellent well rounded players who need to be released outside as much as possible. unfortunately they are being asked to play more inside because of a lack inside quality.

the club says we need outside mids i disagree we need quality inside mids enabling us to release two very good well rounded mids to outside roles.

So you want Martin and Cotchin to play more outside and you want to drop Tuck and Jackson to enable this to happen. Makes about as much sense as deck chairs on a submarine.

Prophetic stuff Santa

 

[_RT_]

because at 25 hes shown himself to be nothing but ordinary. in fact tuck is a better footballer. at 25 he is lambasted by most in the football world at 25 he is about as good as hes going to get.

Tell me Claws how does an 'ordinary' footballer finish a season ranked 65th in the AFL for disposals, 18th in the AFL for tackles, 27th in the AFL for 1st possessions, 17th in the AFL for clearances 11th in the AFL for centre bounce clearances & 24th in the AFL for contested possessions?

atm if we were to get rid of one it should be jackson. at least tuck has a better footy brain and thats really saying something.

as has been said ad nauseum we need to get their replacements in our system it should have happened 3 yrs ago.
as has been stated hopefully pat contin will be one of those replacements but how much hope does one have for rookies to make it.

we do need to find a way to release cotchin to almost a permanent outside role of course we want him to go get it when needed though.
same for martin we want him more on the fringes of packs rather than smack bang in the middle of them.
we have two excellent well rounded players who need to be released outside as much as possible. unfortunately they are being asked to play more inside because of a lack inside quality.

the club says we need outside mids i disagree we need quality inside mids enabling us to release two very good well rounded mids to outside roles.

Tell me Claws who is going to pick up the slack when it comes to winning inside ball if we do as you suggest and get rid of either or both Tuck & Jackson while also playing Cotchin & Martin more on the outside? So far you've mentioned Contin a rookie listed player who is yet to even be elevated and at this stage seems to be nothing more than the next board hyped player. So who else is there on our list right now that can, not might, but can do it?

 

[_RT_]

I don't think you can play with more than 1 midfielder who can only play inside at anytime . The ideal situation is to have at least 6 midfielders who can play inside and out . In that area I think we have 2, Martin and Cotchin , with Foley a bit of an each way bet , not quite purely an in and not effective enough as an outside mid to be considered a player who can play outside and inside . A strange explaination but i hope you understand. Looking at our squad we do have an abundance of those who can play outside , some have the argument for that reason we must keep the purely insiders , I personally think we need to encourage some of those outsiders to either starve or become more inside !
Ideally or midfield would include , our 2 x quality mids who can play in and out, Martin and Cotchin , foley who can play as solely inside , with some adding bonus of occasionslly hurting as an outsider, leaving a spot for 1 inside and two outsiders as a balance . Ideally as mentioned above I'd prefer the Jack or Tucky type to hurt the opposition more whilst outside and prefer our outside types become more inside , it's a balancing act and each will have their own thoughts !
I just think there is more chance of our outside type winning inside ball than our purely inside type hurting the opposition whilst outside ?

Just wondering whats wrong with the following setups, which tie in with what I was talking about last week with regards using Cotchin and Martin both inside and outside:
First rotation:
Wings: Conca Morton
Centre: Martin
Ruck Rover: Tuck
Rover: Foley
Half Forward: Cotchin Houli
Bench: Jackson Grigg Edwards

Second rotation:
Wings: Grigg Houli
Centre: Cotchin
Ruck Rover: Jackson
Rover: Edwards
Half Forward: Martin Morton
Bench: Conca Tuck Foley

*These are just 2 rotations, obviously there are more variations you can use depending on the situation/matchups.

With Cotchin Martin Foley & Edwards(underrated as an inside/outside option IMO) we have 4 players capable of playing inside/outside roles. Tuck & Jackson who are the pure inside types doing all the grunt work i.e. either winning possession or creating space for others to get free. This leaves us with guys like Morton Conca Houli & Grigg as the outside types who use their kicking ability to hurt.

To me this sort of set up provides the balance you're after while also giving the players the best possible chance of running out games so that come the last quarter we're still able to compete.

 

[Madtiger2006]

The teams have just come in for the Round 1 game. Let's have a look at the match ups. So no need to fight about who will play, here are the teams

FB connors mcguane newman
FF betts henderson houlihan
HB gourdis astbury deledio
HF hampson waite gartlett
C edwards cotchin conca
C armfield judd simpson
HF houli post morton
HB joseph bower gibbs
FF taylor reiwoldt griffiths
FB russel jamieson white
FOLL browne martin foley
FOLL warnock muphy carazzo
INT graham grigg webberley rance
INT kruezer yarran robinson collins

 

[The Rusty Trombone]

The teams have just come in for the Round 1 game. Let's have a look at the match ups. So no need to fight about who will play, here are the teams

FB connors mcguane newman
FF betts henderson houlihan
HB gourdis astbury deledio
HF hampson waite gartlett
C edwards cotchin conca
C armfield judd simpson
HF houli post morton
HB joseph bower gibbs
FF taylor reiwoldt griffiths
FB russel jamieson white
FOLL browne martin foley
FOLL warnock muphy carazzo
INT graham grigg webberley rance
INT kruezer yarran robinson collins

That is hilarious MT! Your a real card at times. Those made up teams are just so out of whack it's funny. Can you do what you think will be the real line up and I'll save it and check it out on the night.

 

[Madtiger2006]

That is hilarious MT! Your a real card at times. Those made up teams are just so out of whack it's funny. Can you do what you think will be the real line up and I'll save it and check it out on the night.

That's the lineup i want to see. I reckon it's the best future lineup we could use for Round 1. Don't forget King isn't playing. So obviously Morton would play at half forward. Same with Houli. We recruited him to play forward/midfield. Post at CHF, Reiwoldt at FF obvious choices. Griffiths as 3rd tall forward? Taylor as roving pocket, even though he's tall. Edwards and Conca on the wings. Astbury at CHB and Mcguane at FB obviously. Newman, Deledio and Connors as defensive smalls and Webberley ahead of Moore, because Gourdis is on the bench for height in defence. Martin, Foley and Cotchin in the midde, Browne and Graham the rucks. Grigg the additional midfielder on the bench as well as spare parts Rance. Couldn't be any better than that

 

[The Rusty Trombone]

That's the lineup i want to see. I reckon it's the best future lineup we could use for Round 1. Don't forget King isn't playing. So obviously Morton would play at half forward. Same with Houli. We recruited him to play forward/midfield. Post at CHF, Reiwoldt at FF obvious choices. Griffiths as 3rd tall forward? Taylor as roving pocket, even though he's tall. Edwards and Conca on the wings. Astbury at CHB and Mcguane at FB obviously. Newman, Deledio and Connors as defensive smalls and Webberley ahead of Moore, because Gourdis is on the bench for height in defence. Martin, Foley and Cotchin in the midde, Browne and Graham the rucks. Grigg the additional midfielder on the bench as well as spare parts Rance. Couldn't be any better than that

I think you should go back to the drawing board and put the team in that is going to win the game. Have a think and try again and work on some of those match ups. Henderson will not be playing for a start. Tuck and Jackson will be on the line up as it is a big game and they can both be rely'd upon. Just have another crack

 

[CoggaRules]

Hehe...just like santa, for years you've knocked Tuck constantly and taken issue with people who've simply said exactly what you say above. Last season you both had to grudgingly shift your arses from the 'Tuck must go yesterday' camp to the above position, which - as you surely both realise - is identical to the position of those you've had heated arguments with for years.

It's revisionism at its finest and pretty amusing, but not as funny as that thread you started where you spun one of your frequent anti-Tuck tirades into a 'The fact that Travis Tuck is so much better than Shane and we chose the dud brother is blatant evidence of how useless this club is' rant...

Between the fact that Travis hadn't shown a lot compared to what Shane was managing, the fact we never had an opportunity to draft Travis, and how both their careers have gone since you stated that, it stands out as 24-carat California Gold.

aaahhh my old foe erayzorhaed. the FACT that you effectively miss is this.
Shane is there because we aint go no better and that team that has no better has by and large wallowed in the mire throughout his entire career. i.e. another to add to the lucky he played for the tiges, because anywhere else he would have played 1.5 games and be wallowing in the 2s or beyond.
Get the picture now fool?
You see if Travis, who has once again been given a chance, after he ****ed up big, been a tiger, he too would have clocked up 100 games, but alas a better team who had better, the better we are looking for, picked him up.

 

[Rayzorwire]

You fail to account for the fact that Shane has beaten Hawthorn's mids on several occasions, while Travis was barely considered worth rotating through there.

You fail to account for the fact that Hawthorn has traded or floated players higher up the pecking order than Travis and we haven't been interested in any of them, while we have continued to play Shane in key roles.

It's commonly accepted that sides need 8+ players to rotate through the midfield, so for you to assert that all sides in the comp have that many midfielders better than Tuck is ridiculous.

He not only features highly in raw stats throughout all categories, he's also elite in the subjective performance ratings which heavily punish the errors and ineffective disposals his game is supposedly rife with.

If we fielded a midfield with 8 Tuck's or a side with 22 Tuck's we'd watch a lot of very scrappy games with endless 1:1 contests, but we'd be unbeatable and sides would dread the physical punishment of playing us.

 

[Madtiger2006]

I think you should go back to the drawing board and put the team in that is going to win the game. Have a think and try again and work on some of those match ups. Henderson will not be playing for a start. Tuck and Jackson will be on the line up as it is a big game and they can both be rely'd upon. Just have another crack

I wouldn't want to see Grigg, Tuck and Jackson in the same team. I'd rather us only take one tagger into the game. I'd prefer us to go head to head in the middle. If you really want us to tag Judd, Deledio would be the perfect match up. But I'd rather use Deledio on Gartlett in defence. He's the danger and Deledio will be able to cover him imo

 

[CoggaRules]

You fail to account for the fact that Shane has beaten Hawthorn's mids on several occasions, while Travis was barely considered worth rotating through there.

You fail to account for the fact that Hawthorn has traded or floated players higher up the pecking order than Travis and we haven't been interested in any of them, while we have continued to play Shane in key roles.

It's commonly accepted that sides need 8+ players to rotate through the midfield, so for you to assert that all sides in the comp have that many midfielders better than Tuck is ridiculous.

He not only features highly in raw stats throughout all categories, he's also elite in the subjective performance ratings which heavily punish the errors and ineffective disposals his game is supposedly rife with.

If we fielded a midfield with 8 Tuck's or a side with 22 Tuck's we'd watch a lot of very scrappy games with endless 1:1 contests, but we'd be unbeatable and sides would dread the physical punishment of playing us.

yeah i guess we would be unbeatable. Problem is that you will end up with the current problem, which we are trying to solve, do you know what that is?
Its where you then come up against sides which have a midfield or its 22 made up of, Bartels, Crosses, Hayses etc etc, you will be blown away and end up with an unbeatable record against sides in the bottom 4...while being smashed by sides in the top 4.
You see when it comes to turning on the blowtorch to light up a game and secure the win, or putting the breaks on an oppositions run in order to turn the game your way, a coach will invariably have his A team midfield in there, with the anchor being an inside genious. Can you see the difference now fool?

 

[santa claws]

have to disagree with that dude...although i understand the damage he can do on the outside..but if ever there was a duplicate of a Brodders, this guy is it when it comes to presence and knowing where he is when arms and legs are flying left right and center...and that in his first year...this kid, barring any unforeseen circumstances is a ****ing genius, as is Cotch...leave him in the middle and protect him in his early years by changing him up to the outside..but he is de man who can thread the eye of the needle at will.

atm we cant move both martin and cotchin out of inside roles. i reckon cotchin is the one to give license to atm to play more outside.i reckon he is more a natural outside player anyway. thats not to say he wont get a bit inside after all hes a well rounded player.

martin well such a big body we have no choice atm but to play him mostly inside.
i still maintain he would be devestating getting a little recieve from someone like foley at the bottom of the pack. get him on the move where he can use his power and strength get into the clear and deliver.
who do you want on the outside martin or foley to me there is no comparison foleys kicking is ordinary at times but he is second to none at the bottom of packs.

foley to do cotchins role tuck to give foley a break in rotations. geez someone like caddy would be handy if ready to go and so would hallahan.heres hoping conca can get a bit inside as well but what ive seen hes more outside.

 

[santa claws]

whoever is going to replace is up in the air, all i suggested was that the focus in drafting was to find replacements. Now we wait and see if they are what we were looking for. I said it way back, when Tuck becomes a bit player, i.e. depth from the bench and or from 2s then we will have risen up the ladder. At this stage he is just filling a role, and doing it well. The fact that we shopped him around and got no takers says it all dude...I am not knocking him, he is doing a good job, but a better more polished inside mid has to be found to take over, who gets it as many times as Tuck and makes 90% of the gets count.

good post well said. and your right tuck has always been praised for his bolloking inside work its always been good and acknowledged as such. but his defensive, outside, and decisiion making has been ordinary hes your typical glass half full. its scary to see him with ball in hand on the outside.

up to this yr both tuck and jackson have been very much required because of the simple fact there has been no one else. but the call to replace both has been long and consistant.

as you say noone wanted a glass half full in tuck not even gc who probably need a few experienced big bodied inside players but they didnt even give him a glance.

and im with you im not knocking him ive admired his inside work in the main but ive been rightly critical of other areas of his game.surprise surprise so has the new regime. and i reckon most other clubs.

i have so often asked how many skill deficient players can we take into games but have said if we have to take 3 or 4 in tuck should be one of them. at the same time we needed to look for a replacement.
all glass half fulls need to be replaced sooner or later.

its my opinion that with cotchin and martin we have two potentially devastating outside players who can go inside if need be. atm they play inside who can go out.
when i look at martin i think mark ricciuto. big tough well rounded with a huge hurt factor on the outside.

to me the need for an outside mid was not paramount but the need for another quality inside mid was. hence my leaning to caddy and halahan as far as list management goes. thus freeing up the other two. especially after we traded for grigg who is a big wingman and was taking houli in the psd.im looking to replace glass half fulls not ignore the problem.

to replace jackson and tuck you have to get similar types into your system apart from martin last yr i dont think we have really done that. and as stated martin can play outside as well.
heres hoping contin can make it and be an actual upgrade on one of them.

the simple fact remains with tuck and jackson integral parts of our midfield we continue to get belted and have low finishes. both have played some good footy you dont last as long as they have without doing so.
but like you say until they become bench players or seconds players we will be able to measure our improvement and success in very small increments.

 

[_RT_]

the simple fact remains with tuck and jackson integral parts of our midfield we continue to get belted and have low finishes. both have played some good footy you dont last as long as they have without doing so.
but like you say until they become bench players or seconds players we will be able to measure our improvement and success in very small increments.

Is it possible that the reason we've been belted and have had low finishes in recent years has more to do with the support around guys like Tuck and Jackson rather than Tuck and Jackson themselves?

I mean its pretty hard to have a real impact as an inside ball winner when the blokes you're feeding it out to feature among others guys like: Tivendale Johnson Hyde Raines Pettifer Howat & Polo. Its only really been in the last couple of years where they have improved their outputs have they had some genuine quality in Cotchin Martin & Foley and even then Cotchin and Foley have effectively been missing or below full fitness for most of the last 2 years.

 

[CoggaRules]

Is it possible that the reason we've been belted and have had low finishes in recent years has more to do with the support around guys like Tuck and Jackson rather than Tuck and Jackson themselves?

I mean its pretty hard to have a real impact as an inside ball winner when the blokes you're feeding it out to feature among others guys like: Tivendale Johnson Hyde Raines Pettifer Howat & Polo. Its only really been in the last couple of years where they have improved their outputs have they had some genuine quality in Cotchin Martin & Foley and even then Cotchin and Foley have effectively been missing or below full fitness for most of the last 2 years.

Agree with all that you suggest re. who was there and who is now there dude.
I disagree with your suggestion about their output improving though. The same stats are being produced by them, but the improved quality around masks the real deal. We need more polish to compliment the outside polish.
i.e. there is to much hinging on Cotchin's etc inate talent to turn the disposal into something. Imagine if the give to Cotchin had him cruising ahead looking to put it down JR's throat, instead of having to dodge, weave, duck a coat hanger and then after all that, having to regain composure to do the same.

At the end of the day and especially in Tucks case, IMO a boost to his long term career would be becoming a stock standard, relief depth player that plays limited minute. Would even suggest it would boost our fortunes as well.
Not many teams can have an A group of mids in the middle for the 100 minutes..its in how strong your second stringers are that makes the difference, i.e to hold on while the a graders grab oxygen. The top teams' second tier mids, invariably dont only hold on, but extend the lead and the coach can leave the a graders on the oxygen until the b team starts to tire. Hence they seem to be able to exert max pressure for the whole game.

 

[_RT_]

Agree with all that you suggest re. who was there and who is now there dude.
I disagree with your suggestion about their output improving though. The same stats are being produced by them, but the improved quality around masks the real deal. We need more polish to compliment the outside polish.
i.e. there is to much hinging on Cotchin's etc inate talent to turn the disposal into something. Imagine if the give to Cotchin had him cruising ahead looking to put it down JR's throat, instead of having to dodge, weave, duck a coat hanger and then after all that, having to regain composure to do the same.

At the end of the day and especially in Tucks case, IMO a boost to his long term career would be becoming a stock standard, relief depth player that plays limited minute. Would even suggest it would boost our fortunes as well.
Not many teams can have an A group of mids in the middle for the 100 minutes..its in how strong your second stringers are that makes the difference, i.e to hold on while the a graders grab oxygen. The top teams' second tier mids, invariably dont only hold on, but extend the lead and the coach can leave the a graders on the oxygen until the b team starts to tire. Hence they seem to be able to exert max pressure for the whole game.

Beg to differ regarding the output, especially in Jacksons case. In the last 4 seasons his average disposals have gone from 14 in 07 to 22 last year with 09 being his best year with 23 per game. In the same period Tuck has had averages of 22, 25, 27 & 25.

The one thing we can agree on though is that when these 2 do become bench players and/or Coburg players we'll be in a much better position list wise. The thing is I don't see that happening for at least another 18 months as the kids get some meat on their bones that will allow them to compete against the better midfields.

 

[santa claws]

Is it possible that the reason we've been belted and have had low finishes in recent years has more to do with the support around guys like Tuck and Jackson rather than Tuck and Jackson themselves?

I mean its pretty hard to have a real impact as an inside ball winner when the blokes you're feeding it out to feature among others guys like: Tivendale Johnson Hyde Raines Pettifer Howat & Polo. Its only really been in the last couple of years where they have improved their outputs have they had some genuine quality in Cotchin Martin & Foley and even then Cotchin and Foley have effectively been missing or below full fitness for most of the last 2 years.

we have been belted for lots of reasons over the yrs. imo the 3 or 4 main reasons are. 1 lack of structure, 2 lack of size, to me these two things allow you to compete at least.
3 lack of skill/decision making and 4 lack of enough quality spread thru the list. 3 and 4 imo enable you to at least go up against and at least push the better sides if not defeat them. a lack of skill and to many shit decision makers reduces the team to abject mediocrity.

no and its only opinion but jackson and tuck are a part of an ongoing problem that we suffer with the second two.
as cogga rightly points out as long as both are integral to our midfield we will struggle. as he rightly points out when they become bit players or depth players rather than important cogs we will improve as a side. i still maintain we should only play one of them and we should be actively looking for their replacements.

we finished 15th for a reason it wasnt all down inexperience and age.

there are things that can be fixed relatively quickly hardwick can and has done something about structure and player size these two things will make us more competetive. what he cant fix quickly is a good spread of quality getting games into those who are up to it and fix players footskills.

nathan foley is an ordinary kick but at least he has a good footy brain rarely makes a poor decision and is very good inside. i still think edwards when under pressure a very poor user when he can find some time hes good.white is appalling mcguane ditto king ordinary connors is sopposedly very good but regularly turns the ball over with howlers. graham poor nason ordinary rance poor grigg sheesh what is the knock on his game again. gourdis anyone.
look i know you totally disagree. im just voicing an opinion ive had enough of the pros and cons of each player and the whole debate. people will rate them how they see fit thats well and good. some of us justifiably imo dont rate them as highly as a lot of richmond supporters.

i wont change my opinion on the two, that opinion is we have to do better than tuck and jackson all im saying is imo we should be looking to upgrade on them ive been saying it for a fair while now. they are a part of a problem that has dogged the club for yrs.