Kepler Bradley

Remove this Banner Ad

Originally posted by Stevo
I'm with Marcuz, Bradley is a big punt, and Tenance would have been more sensible.

But we'll wait and see. I'd like to be proved wrong.

Exactly right Stevo - Tenace would have been the safe bet with 6. I would have thought our footy club would have learnt about first-round gambles by now. But as you said, I hope I am wrong.
 
Originally posted by Porthos
I can't think of many drafts where taking the best tall has backfired. I can't actually think of any.

2002 - Brennan
2001 - Polak
2000 - Riewoldt
1999 - Fraser
1998 - Longmuir
1997 - Gardiner

That makes me feel better. Thanks Porthos :D
 
Ah yes, 1997 was Ottens, wasn't it. 1996 was Gardiner.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Originally posted by bozza
Exactly right Stevo - Tenace would have been the safe bet with 6. I would have thought our footy club would have learnt about first-round gambles by now. But as you said, I hope I am wrong.

The whole draft is a gamble...the sooner we get rid of it and return to zoning, where each club can have a direct role in developing of young kids, the greater the competition will be (one only has to look at the players Essendon got from it's zones over 30 years to illustrate the point).
 
Originally posted by pazza
The whole draft is a gamble...the sooner we get rid of it and return to zoning, where each club can have a direct role in developing of young kids, the greater the competition will be (one only has to look at the players Essendon got from it's zones over 30 years to illustrate the point).

The AFL will never do that. They're too caught up in promoting a national game. Zoning is basically just SOO/VFL all over again.
 
Originally posted by Stevo
The AFL will never do that. They're too caught up in promoting a national game. Zoning is basically just SOO/VFL all over again.

I think they should allow junior clubs to train/ allign with AFL clubs share facilities etc seems a waste that calder train a (where ever it is) few km's from Windy Hill Futguts Mcmahon suggested this a while back it would save grassroots footy a fortune.
 
Originally posted by Sera
A bit harsh, Yak. You yourself have made several claims which didn't come true.

1. Fremantle would take Burges at 10
2. Freo would draft Duffield
3. Sydney would take an unheard of smokey at 45 or 47

Hmm, I think there were some others I can't think of right now. The point is you shouldn't be so quick so judge other people's opinions.

I don't agree that I was a bit harsh on him sera maybe a tad intemperate. Having said that I owe you an explanation re the three points you have raised. 1. Lets just say that I was asked to post that and I'll leave the rest to your imagination. 2. I was reliably informed that Duffield would be taken, I have since been told that owing to the way things panned out it wasn't possible. 3. OK so I got the pick wrong, but as with the Duffield scenario it all depends on what happens on the day. The smokey Matt Davis was able to be taken at 59 but originally it was planned to do him at 47, the bottom line is that he was the biggest smokey in the Draft and none of the Phantom Draft experts knew anything about him and probably still dont.
I'm a little sad that you are no longer my number 1 fan.
 
Originally posted by YAKUZA
1. Lets just say that I was asked to post that and I'll leave the rest to your imagination.

What do you mean by that?

I was disappointed with GOALden for posting that Surjan and Burges would be drafted in mid second round and then saying he only did sp based on all the hype.

If you are suggesting that you posted Burges @ 10 based on somebody asking you to do so and not on your knowledge I would find that pretty disappointing too. I hope that you can provide some more information and explain your above comment as I and number of other people do value your judgement.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Kepler Bradley

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top