Training Pre-Season 2023 (First game 18/3 v North)

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.

Log in to remove this ad.

Here's my WCE BF board whipping boy power rankings for the preseason

1 Gaff
2 Witherden
3 Williams
4 Petruccelle
5 Cripps
6 Waterman
7 Sheed
8 HEdwards
9 Duggan
10 Shuey
I reckon Williams is higher... for now
 
Here's my WCE BF board whipping boy power rankings for the preseason

1 Gaff
2 Witherden
3 Williams
4 Petruccelle
5 Cripps
6 Waterman
7 Sheed
8 HEdwards
9 Duggan
10 Shuey
Honestly cannot fault this.

Darling stiff to miss.
 
Needs more Rotham

Honestly cannot fault this.

Darling stiff to miss.
Rotham and Darling both with solid preseasons and flying a bit under the radar, I reckon. Darling as well finished last year well enough to avoid the list, but he's always one gimp dropped mark away from shooting back up there.

Darling was close with Shuey, but feel like there's a lot more ill feeling towards our captain for not stepping aside when his body is cooked.

Complaints about Rotham usually come down to complaints about our coaching and player development, so for such a borderline 22 player he is unfortunately too irrelevant for my rankings. Goes without saying this list looks very different if we include off-field gripes as well.
 
Would you really need a full time dietician? What would they do for 40 hours a week and 50 or so weeks a year? I would have thought you could have one you pay a consulting fee to to come up with a program for each player maybe.
Have them come in 1 day a week maybe to touch base. Id say after a couple of years the older guys would know what to be doing
 
Here's my WCE BF board whipping boy power rankings for the preseason

1 Gaff
2 Witherden
3 Williams
4 Petruccelle
5 Cripps
6 Waterman
7 Sheed
8 HEdwards
9 Duggan
10 Shuey

Excellent list. One possible inclusion is an another tall lad by the name of Nicholas Naitanui. Our resident dieticians here are always keenly studying his physique for any sign of “excess baggage” 🤣
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Would you really need a full time dietician? What would they do for 40 hours a week and 50 or so weeks a year? I would have thought you could have one you pay a consulting fee to to come up with a program for each player maybe.
It may seem trifling to the likes of you, but I have it on good advice it is dietitian. Well blow me down with a feather
You'd be surprised by how upset they get...

Sent from my motorola edge 20 fusion using Tapatalk
 
I figure Shuey and Nic Nat will take care of themselves. Their bodies are cooked and they won't play many games. Could even retire mid season.

Hurn is still in good form, so if the kids want his spot they'll have to earn it.

Gaff is the problem to me. If he plays like he did on Friday (lots of possession but lots of turnovers) he should be dropped, but I doubt the club will do it because they're stressing over him being one of the highest paid players at the club.
I think a decision has been made for financial reasons at board level to prioritise wins over development in order to prevent a bottoming out and Simpson has been given a directive to get us out of the bottom 4 at any and all costs, including dramatically slowing down player development. Thats why all the old players are still getting new contracts and appear to be being preferred in the 22.
 
I think a decision has been made for financial reasons at board level to prioritise wins over development in order to prevent a bottoming out and Simpson has been given a directive to get us out of the bottom 4 at any and all costs, including dramatically slowing down player development. Thats why all the old players are still getting new contracts and appear to be being preferred in the 22.

That’s quite the long bow you’ve drawn there

If the priority truly was wins over development I doubt we’re prioritising the draft like we have the last 2 seasons for a start

The only “old” players given new contracts at the end of last year were -

Naitanui- a necessity given our ruck stocks
Hurn - one of our best and most reliable defenders last year despite his age. Also happened to be among our best against Port
Shuey - club captain who they’ve backed to get his body right. Arguably could have been encouraged to retire last year but I don’t think he’s holding us back

Chesser, Ginbey, Hewed and Long are all being discussed as early season debutants, possibly as early as round 1
 
That’s quite the long bow you’ve drawn there

If the priority truly was wins over development I doubt we’re prioritising the draft like we have the last 2 seasons for a start

The only “old” players given new contracts at the end of last year were -

Naitanui- a necessity given our ruck stocks
Hurn - one of our best and most reliable defenders last year despite his age. Also happened to be among our best against Port
Shuey - club captain who they’ve backed to get his body right. Arguably could have been encouraged to retire last year but I don’t think he’s holding us back

Chesser, Ginbey, Hewed and Long are all being discussed as early season debutants, possibly as early as round 1
Simply using your draft picks, as opposed to trading them away, isn't prioritising the draft. It isn't some special state of affairs that rarely happens that inferences can be drawn from. It is just the normal state of affairs. Most clubs in most years use their top 30 draft picks. Or if they trade them the trade involves minimal movement in draft position such as trading pick 20 for pick 25 and a role player. The Tim Kelly and Luke Jackson deals where you completely trade out your early picks for an established player is the exception, not the norm. The mere act of using your picks and not doing a trade such as that is not prioritising the draft. Prioritising the draft would be trading out a bunch of tradeable players over 27 years old, and therefore not in your 5 year premiership plan, for draft picks, ala Hawthorn last year.
 
I think a decision has been made for financial reasons at board level to prioritise wins over development in order to prevent a bottoming out and Simpson has been given a directive to get us out of the bottom 4 at any and all costs, including dramatically slowing down player development. Thats why all the old players are still getting new contracts and appear to be being preferred in the 22.
Wow, there's the a few wild conspiracy theories in there......glad you're not on the "Board".
 
That’s quite the long bow you’ve drawn there

If the priority truly was wins over development I doubt we’re prioritising the draft like we have the last 2 seasons for a start

The only “old” players given new contracts at the end of last year were -

Naitanui- a necessity given our ruck stocks
Hurn - one of our best and most reliable defenders last year despite his age. Also happened to be among our best against Port
Shuey - club captain who they’ve backed to get his body right. Arguably could have been encouraged to retire last year but I don’t think he’s holding us back

Chesser, Ginbey, Hewed and Long are all being discussed as early season debutants, possibly as early as round 1

Stop ruining wild theories by throwing facts at them.
 
I think a decision has been made for financial reasons at board level to prioritise wins over development in order to prevent a bottoming out and Simpson has been given a directive to get us out of the bottom 4 at any and all costs, including dramatically slowing down player development. Thats why all the old players are still getting new contracts and appear to be being preferred in the 22.
It's clear to me that the elections for board members, coaching staff and team leaders was rigged by a cabal of satan worshippers determined to destroy the club.
We should invade lathlain and take our club back.
 
Simply using your draft picks, as opposed to trading them away, isn't prioritising the draft. It isn't some special state of affairs that rarely happens that inferences can be drawn from. It is just the normal state of affairs. Most clubs in most years use their top 30 draft picks. Or if they trade them the trade involves minimal movement in draft position such as trading pick 20 for pick 25 and a role player. The Tim Kelly and Luke Jackson deals where you completely trade out your early picks for an established player is the exception, not the norm. The mere act of using your picks and not doing a trade such as that is not prioritising the draft. Prioritising the draft would be trading out a bunch of tradeable players over 27 years old, and therefore not in your 5 year premiership plan, for draft picks, ala Hawthorn last year.
Trew, Winder, Clark, Jamieson, Bazzo, Hough, Williams, Ginbey, Hewett, Baker, Dewar, Long, Burgiel and Hunt agree with you, they were clearly not a priority consideration during the last couple of drafts. Your insight into the inner workings of WC is without parallel.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top