First pick next year?

[GeeCat]

if geelong were to get hawkins and say another kpp forward like riewoldt, do you think nablett would stilll get a game?

Abit vague in questioning, considering talls these days have many different roles in different forward structures. I suspect it would have to come down to how we organise our own forward structure, what roles become available, and the pecking order of our forwards.

For what it's worth though, I wouldn't think Hawkins and Ablett would be fighting for the same forward role.

 

[Turbocat]

hahaha can someone answer my question???

ignore the 2yr old collingwood supporter!!

Will Nathan get the chance in our forwardline with Tom & another tall at our club? Any players position in the side always relies on him being the best option of those available to be selected. All players must show they are worthy of their position in the side and on the list. One might just as well ask will Lonergan or Gardiner or Playfair or who ever get there chance once TH arrives. But who is in the weakest position?

So I answer you with more questions. How many have shown enough of the type of stuff that makes a club persist? How many have kicked a bag or two or made defenders troubled by their presence? Not many but Nathan has. He has shown very thin amounts of performance but the quality is worth persisting with. He can crunch a backman, he can take a strong mark, he kick a nice goal. In his short under prepared time at the club and in the side has shown more than most other talls.

An article in today’s paper by Tim Watson makes a comment about Toms arrival must just be a very good thing for Nathan, spurring him on challenging him to higher performance. Lets hope he is right. Lets hope that Tom and NA become a deadly duo that light up our scoreboard and get hearts a pumping fro all the followers of the “Hoops”

 

[worthogs]

hahaha can someone answer my question???

ignore the 2yr old collingwood supporter!!

Yes there is a future for NAB

HE can play remember he is still a new player learning to play at the highest level, he didnt have the right preparation to get into AFL and has shown some snippets that he will star.

He needs to become a bit selfish and learn to use the Ablett instinct, just like GAj is doing this year. Up till last year Gaj was a bit too team orientated, this year he is backing his skill to do the job and I can see NAB doing the same.

For what its worth get a tall if we can esp another tall, preferably a defender.

 

[Turbocat]

Are you talking about our old Full Back Gary Malarkey? I not a 100% sure , Geecat would know but I dont think Gary has any future draftees on the horizon.
I think there are quite a few names around Couch and Neal were also eligible this year but dont appear to be obvious picks.Not all F/S's are Tom Hawkins in fact most are not. Further down the track Donohue and Brad Nankervis who is apparently showing some form over at South Barwon , may give us few options. The interesing thing will how they change the payment scheme for F/S's. I have no doubt if we were taking Tom next year he would cost us our R1 pick

Geecat , I know you have a pretty good handle on our future supply of players from FatherSons. I heard a whisper this morning that , and mind you this is way off , that there is another Hawkins boy on the farm.Can you confirm this at all?
Before I'm accused of being obsessed with 13 year olds , I just thought Id mention it since "Cats!!" brought up the subject of future Father Sons , even though he may be several years away from being able to assess his football abilities.

 

[GeeCat]

Geecat , I know you have a pretty good handle on our future supply of players from FatherSons. I heard a whisper this morning that , and mind you this is way off , that there is another Hawkins boy on the farm.Can you confirm this at all?

I'm fairly certain Tom's only sibling is his sister, who we all know of via Jimmy. That being said, I don't pretend to know too much of these prospects' families, simply that they display something early on that warrants the attention of the club.

The next 'big one', as far as I know, is Larry Donohue's boy, Adam.

 

[rizzo]

G.Ablett Hawkins Chappy
Ottens N.Ablett SJ

Id like that lots haha. However do you think Nablett could make it as a CHB?

 

[GeeCat]

Are you talking about our old Full Back Gary Malarkey? I not a 100% sure , Geecat would know but I dont think Gary has any future draftees on the horizon.

Methinks he's confused Malarkey for Bairstow's lad, who also plays his footy across the Nullarbor in WA. Toby is eligible next year, and may be the prospect in question.

 

[Seb]

I would like to see us pick up a player with real leadership who is middle-ranged in height.

We have a few players with potential - Bartel, Ling, Corey, Enright et al, but none of them are out and out superstars of the game. However, i think if Cresswell had stayed, Bartel would be a very different player.

Maybe a Moss/Leigh Adams type? They both seemed to be quite solid, hard ball winners.

We have the luxury of Hawkins, which means we do not necessarily have to draft another KPP. Though, we could go for a Riewoldt/Kosi situation with Hawkins and another tall, maybe Jack Riewoldt.

In the end, i think we should just choose the best available, whether that be a tall or a small. But I don't want any introverted, boring onballers. I want players with flare (Clayton Collard or Leeroy Jetta?) or strong leadership qualities.

 

[catta29]

I'm fairly certain Tom's only sibling is his sister, who we all know of via Jimmy. That being said, I don't pretend to know too much of these prospects' families, simply that they display something early on that warrants the attention of the club.

The next 'big one', as far as I know, is Larry Donohue's boy, Adam.

Actually heard Frank Costa interviewed on SEN the other morning and he was encouraging the boys to keep pushing for the AFL to keep the father son rule as is because Tom Hawkins has a younger brother back home. Not sure what age he is or even if he plays footy but he is out there.......

 

[C4[2]Yo`DooR]

I could see the Cats picking up someone like jetta/collard .... would work hand in hand with Mr. Varcoe.

 

[GeeCat]

Going on abit of a tangent to the original topic of the thread, but in regards to the mystique surrounding the existence of another Hawkins, I've just received confirmation regarding the lad.

Still very young (at least by footballing potential standards), but there is another down at the farm.

 

[Lance]

Don't be bloody greedy. You've already got the best player for next year?

 

[macca69]

Proud would be just the sort of player Geelong need IMO

 

[Turbocat]

Don't be bloody greedy. You've already got the best player for next year?

A Carlton supporter telling us not to be greedy , what a riot!
Thats like Quentin Tarantino telling a group of film students not to put too much swearing in films or not to be overly violent or bloody because it will effect the storyline or turn people off.

Greed! come back and talk to me about greed when you have suffered on the bottom of the ladder for a decade or two or perhaps when you have a fantastic side develloped from your own toil rather purchased and rorted from elsewhere.

As far any future FS goes , I wonder what or how it will all work. I just wonder , have we just seen the last ever, great U18 Champs, from a future FS? If the propossed changes come in and some sort of panel or even just the other clubs have to "bid" on a FatherSon , then why would any club want to risk raising the value of him. Take Tom this year, was there any doubt that we would draft the kid , no matter what his u18 Cahmps series was like? NO. He was was destined for the Hoops , no matter what. Previous to the Champs he was consider a good player but just how good was debateable. After the first 2 games he became , maybe #1 pick.When our next FS comes thru, whether it be young Donohue or Nankervis or the next Hawkins or whoever , I just wonder how happy we will be to watch him flying. The era of FS Ducks and Drakes may just about here.

 

[Turbocat]

Back on topic

Im sitting here watch FoxFooty waiting for the Cats to come on. Hawthorn is serving it right up to WC. And Buddy Franklin , boy I like the look of him.6 goals down in Tassie the other week and now showing a bit again.Has a big future!
It only seems like yesterday that people thought he was a #1 and the he had a shocking U18Champs.He ended up going at 5 but they way he is coming along he really does look the goods.
Last year Mitch Clarke was crook before the Champs had and dropped down
and I just wonder how long before he really shows what he can do.
Sometimes big guys have a few bad games and can look ordinary , so with this in mind I think we would be very silly not to take Sellars if he around at our pick.

 

[catempire]

Turbo, re father-son changes - I can't see how a panel of experts situation would be workable. It's just too subjective to put the power in the hands of a few to decide how good a player is going to be and what they are "worth".

Up until this week, I wasn't sure that a bidding system would work either. The suggestion is now that any team can pick any father son candidate but once that pick is made, the father-son club has the first right of refusal. So, say in the upcoming draft, if Carlton or Essendon with pick 1 picked Tom, it would then be up to Geelong to say, no we'll take him with our first round pick. So we wouldn't actually have to match the pick, but we would have to match the round. I think this could work.

 

[Turbocat]

Turbo, re father-son changes - I can't see how a panel of experts situation would be workable. It's just too subjective to put the power in the hands of a few to decide how good a player is going to be and what they are "worth".

Up until this week, I wasn't sure that a bidding system would work either. The suggestion is now that any team can pick any father son candidate but once that pick is made, the father-son club has the first right of refusal. So, say in the upcoming draft, if Carlton or Essendon with pick 1 picked Tom, it would then be up to Geelong to say, no we'll take him with our first round pick. So we wouldn't actually have to match the pick, but we would have to match the round. I think this could work.

CE , I agree that having clubs prepared to actually put their pick on the line is much better than some theory driven panel but I’m still not sure that it will all go as smooth as some think , I think it will lead onto quite a few other problems.

Lets think about your eg. Carlton at P2 call Toms name and we finish on top and we say we will match it using our R1 pick (P16). No probs if you are the top side.

However , lets think reverse for a minute. Imagine we finish at the bottom and Carlton finish on top. They say the will take him with their R1(P16). We are now faced with a very real chance we may have to pass up a FatherSon. Tom is an exception , his talent and potential is outstanding and with Tom we would probably just suck it up and take him but most FS are not as obviously good as Tom. Lets say our Father Son player is not Tom Hawkins , lets say our Father Son was pretty good player like a Ben Ried a borderline R1,R2 pick.Would we be prepared to pass over Gibbs and Hawkins and Gumbelton and the rest to take our FS? The team that has a R1 (P16) has little to lose. They finished on top, they have a good side. To them Ben Ried was probably P15-P20, if the have to take him they will be happy enough but for us to take him we , the bottom side with minimal talent , we will have to give up the best young kids in the draft to take him Father Son. Instantly , one can see it favours sides that finish higher , much more than the current system does.

Think about the players we have taken Father Son. Were we prepared to pay our R1 pick for Gary Jr in 2001? He was considered an R2-R4 pick yet if some club for what ever reason saw more in him than all the others, maybe talent , maybe name, we would have to have used a much lower pick on him than we thought he was worth. In 2001 that would have meant , no Bartel or Kelly or SJohnson. Now , we can say it would have be worth it but back then I’m not sure we would have drafted him R1? Every club has different needs and rates players differently because of it. All it takes for one club to take a risk , like we did with Mackie and it can be very , very , sticky for a Family that has strong links to a club.

What do you do if you have more than one Father Son in one year?Do you have to trade to get extra picks to match bids?What about the lesser Father Sons. Is it going to work the other way for them? Can we say we think he is worth on a Rookie spot? I don’t think so , I bet there is some sort of minimum., like R3.

Maybe they can make it work, I just don’t think it will be as easy as they think itv wil be. After all they thought set penalties for the tribunal would be a better system and I have no doubt its worse than ever.

 

[catswhiskers]

IMO always pick the best available player. Only possible exception is ruckmen. If you have a shortage of ruckmen you cannot go without drafting one. This may force an earlier pick than his talent would call for.

With the f/son rule I thought that that the club would have to nominate the rround pick they were going to use. Then other clubs could get the palyer with an earlier round pick. e.g geelong nominate donohue in a couple of years as a round 2 pick (lets hope it is 32). Any club could grab him first with a pick from 1-15. but not 17- 31.

 

[catempire]

TC, while it would create tough decisions, I think it's the only workable system. GAJ wouldn't have been picked until second round anyway, we wouldn't have had any problems. A non-father-son team isn't going to throw a high pick at a player just to be difficult. The good thing about the system is that they actually have to commit the pick and it is in the fs-club's hands to "trump" it.

I take your point on the issue of the second father son in one year. That would be something that would need to be worked through. I don't have the answer off the top of my head.

If they want to change the system, I think it's going to have to be something like this. They won't understand the difficulties of doing it all until the sit down and analyse it. Could be interesting.

 

[baywatch5]

IMO The Father / Son ruling should not be changed or altered in any way.

In reading some of the suggestions they all have flaws and in different scenarios will all come unstuck. This has all come about because yes Geelong are benifiting this year in succuring Hawkins (Possible top 5) with our 3rd round choice. Some are suggesting we should have to sacrifise our selection in the round "experts" believe he would go in an open draft. That being 1st round. Let me ask this, Where would these "experts" have rank N.Ablett in an open draft? A kid playing for Modewarre?

These are Geelongs F/S Selections over the years:
1995 - S.Fletcher
1997 - M.Woolnough (2nd round), M.Scarlett (3rd round)
1998 - D.Clarke (2nd round)
2001 - G.Ablett jnr (3rd round)
2002 - T.Callan (3rd round)
2003 - M.Blake (3rd round)
2004 - N.Ablett (3rd round)

Like any kid drafted, they don't always work out. Some of these are not worthy of there selection, others are bargains. Is just the way it goes. Didn't brisbane claim J.Brown via F/S??? Arguably the best player in the comp....

Heres a few more:
Whitnall, D.Fletcher, J.Watson, M.Richardson, J.Bowden, B.Cousins, L.Darcy.
(Hawthorn could have taken S.Tuck )

This is a part of our great game we should leave as is. Lets not make it any harder for son's to follow in the fathers footsteps. Yes Geelong are benifitting this year with young Hawkins. But its where he want's to be.... Can you imagine J.Brown, M.Richardson or G.Ablett playing elsewhere??? Or how about James Hird or Stephen Silvagni's sons not finding there way to both essendon and carlton?