How does that work?
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 10 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
How do we fit Gumbleton, Lloyd, Lucas and Neagle in the forward line?
- Thread starter Smyth94
- Start date
- Tagged users None
How does that work?
Jörmungand
Debutant
I'd love for this to actually be a problem.
flyin'high
Debutant
thats the way i'd go about it as well , also i think knighter will do somthing like that
It's a problem on paper only.
The opportunity cost of questioning this scenario is uglier than the one we potentially have. The only real downside is the suitabilty of Rok, should that opportunity come to pass. Rok would be tremendous but it does place severe pressure on Mcphee's role if we needed to keep nubile options open for those four and Rok.
There have been a lot of good comments on the topic and concur with the idea that it would be unusual to havve all of them cherry ripe for a starting 22. But even so, rotating them through various positions and the bench is obvious. And the game time needed by Neagle and Gumbleton xx/100 mintues against the tiring lloyd and lucas over the same game time period forthe next 2/3 years might mean a sublte interplay of transitions.
It possibly also means we have to consider the run from the backline and the middle with a greater defensive quotient as these guys are less prone to offer a naturally defensive play. I haven't got the answers but happy to have the conundrum
What in the name of heck is a nubile option. Nubile meaning young, fresh, verdant
As I see it, the first full season Gumbie plays will spell the end for Scottie. For now, Gumbie could also be fit into the backline - and same with McPhee, although I think a few clubs had worked him out a bit too well as a full time defender.
As I see it, the first full season Gumbie plays will spell the end for Scottie. For now, Gumbie could also be fit into the backline - and same with McPhee, although I think a few clubs had worked him out a bit too well as a full time defender.
- Dec 18, 2007
- 11,024
- 6,856
- AFL Club
- Essendon
- Other Teams
- Non that play Essendon
HF: Riemers Lloyd Neagle/Gumby
F: Davey Lucas ROK
Pretty devistating fwd line if u ask me
Sure is!! I would be tempted tp play Lucus across the Half-back line, with he long racking kick into the forward would cause the opposition all sorts of problems.
Adding Prismall and ROK and if our side can be fit then on paper at least we have potentially a very good side.
lolol
Nubile meaning marriageable and ripe, an attractive proposition all round. Working Gumbleton, lloyd, lucas and neagle into a 22. and there is something sexy about those four working in some arrangement together, but if you were so differential to the descriptive context for making the most suitable fit for them on topic, why did you seize upon the first definiton you found??? Sometimes what you learn on pr0n sites, "Nubile meaning young, fresh, verdant" does not always equate to the context nor adequately round out your language skills, Slats
Nittpicking but I suppose you had to try and find something
http://dictionary.reverso.net/english-synonyms/nubile
In any event my post was less concerned with who would follow but the topic as posted.
i just dont think lucas could play effectively at CHB.. i dont think he has the speed off the mark to go with most CHF's- eg reiwoldt, buddy/roughhead, pavlich..
it would be worth a shot though
Why would Lucas?Gumby or anybody else be playing CHB when we have Ryder 2 year into the role and coming along solidly along with Daniher nad Pears who were drafted as Key Defenders? Lloyd will stay at FF Lucas CHF and Gumby/Neagle will be rotated throughout the season as a 3rd tall option. ROK has more options than a 3rd tall he could be played off the wing or as a rebounding defender and rested forward so would be a solid pick-up. He could also take the reigns up forward when Lucas and Lloyd have either dropped off or retired in 2 years time while Gumby and Neagle are still hitting their prime.
I doubt Lucas would play at ChB. And what is the rush with the transitions .....because these four will not slide automatically into the EFC forward line 2009. As i said before, the problem is purely on paper at this stage. We need these kinds of hybrids to factor our team structure going forward. These four are intergral to the bombers 2009 regardless of what is pontificated on this board. How it settles is really more of a question for another post season discussion. Not just now. We are blessed with some riches where it counts, but nothing has matured yet.
Lets let this problem to play itself out. We will not be the worse for it come sept 09
ant555
The Oracle
- May 4, 2004
- 35,861
- 55,520
- AFL Club
- Essendon
- Other Teams
- Penrith Panthers
How many games does Ryder actually play CHB ? He plays more games deeper in defence.
I would suggest that Ryder will be more our Full back next year as it is likely he will be asked to take the best opposition forward.
It will not surprise me at all if Gumby ends up playing some time as a defender , particulary if he gets fit enough to have a good run of games and both Lloyd and Lucas are playing.
Oh and by the way Daniher was not drafted as a defender. He was drafted as a tall who has shwon some ability to play at both ends. He is more than likely going to be a much better forward than defender if you go by his games so far. All his better form has been as a CHF.
yaco55
Hall of Famer
I agree that Ryder will play deeper in defence and take the best forward.
I do know that ultimately Gumbleton will be our key forward in time.
I do know that ultimately Gumbleton will be our key forward in time.
- Dec 18, 2007
- 11,024
- 6,856
- AFL Club
- Essendon
- Other Teams
- Non that play Essendon
I was thinking Lucus could be a loose man across Half-back rather than CHB
eth-dog
Tier 1 WW Player
heres an idea:
HF: ROK-Lucas/Gumbleton-Jetta
FF: Davey-Lloyd/Neagle-Monfries.
Gumby/Lucas playing CHF, Lloyd and Neagle FF, rotating 50/50
HF: ROK-Lucas/Gumbleton-Jetta
FF: Davey-Lloyd/Neagle-Monfries.
Gumby/Lucas playing CHF, Lloyd and Neagle FF, rotating 50/50
No problems with the line up there
but we must have about 50 percent of our salary cap in that forward flank/pocket
Similar threads
