The kids won't make any difference, yeah OK.

Remove this Banner Ad

I actually agree with most of the above points but besides Murphy - who we all agree with should be sacked - who else goes out and comes in?

Sholl - who I still have serious questions on - has had his best year and likely top 10 in B&F and should stay in. Smith is out. Mc Henry is out. ROB was dropped and we saw what happened (embarrassing from many perspectives inc list mgt). Himmelberg/Burgess are as useless as each other and will be gone for TT shortly. Strachan should never play again.

I think Curtin comes in despite appearing very shaky initially and also concerned what longer term damage could be done by playing him further if he isn’t up to it this year. A risk worth taking. Bond isn’t up to it. Edwards isn’t ready. Ryan, from most SANFL watchers hasn’t been up to a debut this year but I would be tempted to give a couple of games before the end of the year.

We are basically playing almost every available option already aren’t we? Hence why we are so young and inexperienced. We have dropped all the duds except Murphy also. Jones, who had his best half a season second half of last year, has been a major disappointment this year and perhaps could have been dropped earlier.

The cupboard is bare
 
The correlation between experience and wins only works because at most clubs, only good players reach high levels of experience and remain on the list
Perfect summation.

At what other club would Murphy and McSpudly have reached the same amount of games played? Over 150 games between them!
 

Log in to remove this ad.

The correlation between experience and wins only works because at most clubs, only good players reach high levels of experience and remain on the list

And absolutely no one has complained about experienced players who are performing like a player of their age and experience should in the roles that they've given getting games.
 
He is not going to hinder our development, completely the opposite

If we rely on him too much and don’t target Thilthorpe and Fogarty consistently with our forward entries it will.

You really think that when the heat is on Nicks and Thilthorpe has a quiet game that we won’t revert to doing whatever helps us win in the short term?
 
No different than dropping Dawson in defence

Not the same. Dawson is a part of our long term future, putting him in defence at times is and should be a move we go to when needed.

Like I said, I’d still be playing Walker, he just needs to be less of a focus of our forward structure.

My fear is that when there is heat on Nicks, he’ll become desperate for wins and go back to kicking it to Tex all the time.

We stunted Thilthorpe’s development last year, because Walker was having a career best year and we were trying to ride that to the finals. We simply cannot make that mistake again.
 
Not the same. Dawson is a part of our long term future, putting him in defence at times is and should be a move we go to when needed.

Like I said, I’d still be playing Walker, he just needs to be less of a focus of our forward structure.

My fear is that when there is heat on Nicks, he’ll become desperate for wins and go back to kicking it to Tex all the time.

We stunted Thilthorpe’s development last year, because Walker was having a career best year and we were trying to ride that to the finals. We simply cannot make that mistake again.
I just think is more the others need to take that mantel off Tex if they are up to it
 
Tex is still best 22

That’s not a development centric factor though. Being best 22 as a 34 year old in a rebuild isn’t enough. Needs to best dozen when he’s out there and whatever he’s doing needs to add value to our next flag push. Which requires him to be part of it, which, unfortunately for him, he won’t be.

This belief that players need these onfield mentors is rubbish. Who was Tex’s? Who was Hawkins’? Who was Jezza’s? Which Hawk great hung around to usher Dunstall and Dermie through?

If we are competing next year and Tex can prove he’s physically capable (last night he struggled), then he should be offered an extension. Otherwise we shouldn’t and if he’s still got petrol in the tank, he should go to a contender.
 
With half of last nights team less than 60 games played - Berry, Cook, Dowling, Hamill, Keane, Max, Murray, Nank, Rachele, Soligo and Taylor (and Himmelberg who doesn’t fit in previous category) and multiple more 50-100 gamers and then auto selections when fit / matured like TT, Worrell, Pedlar and Curtin (all under 50 games) and you hopefully get the picture ie we are exceptionally inexperienced and young already.

The question is how many more youngsters do you actually want playing? We only have around a handful of players over 100 games which must be some sort of record for our team with Sloane, Smith, Crouch and Milera injured (and ROB dropped in recent weeks)

Do you really think aiming to get younger when all objective stats shows the optimum games played (experience) and age is so much higher than our profile is the way to go to be successful.

One of us in living in fairy land. Perhaps it’s me.

PS is there really a need to create another sack Nicks derivative thread? Can’t you just add it to one of the multiple already floating around to stop people wasting time? Otherwise the normal crew rejoice and just happily replicate their default diatribe on a whole new thread.

Swapping Taylor to a full game for Murphy (or Ned) to sub most likely makes us better on the day and is an investment into our future. If it was preliminary final week, you probably struggle with that decision, but where we find ourselves, it’s an absolute no brainer.
 
That’s not a development centric factor though. Being best 22 as a 34 year old in a rebuild isn’t enough. Needs to best dozen when he’s out there and whatever he’s doing needs to add value to our next flag push. Which requires him to be part of it, which, unfortunately for him, he won’t be.

This belief that players need these onfield mentors is rubbish. Who was Tex’s? Who was Hawkins’? Who was Jezza’s? Which Hawk great hung around to usher Dunstall and Dermie through?

If we are competing next year and Tex can prove he’s physically capable (last night he struggled), then he should be offered an extension. Otherwise we shouldn’t and if he’s still got petrol in the tank, he should go to a contender.
How many players are currently playing in sides they are not going to be in their nxt premiership 😂
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

How many players are currently playing in sides they are not going to be in their nxt premiership 😂

Due to age and where the club sits on its development path? Tex is one, I think Goldy another. Hawkins too, ex Suns captain who I didn’t even realise was still on a list until he kicked a goal last night. But those clubs reasonably think they’re competing. We’re not though. Your argument is simplistic and infantile, I’d generally expect more from you, but we are talking about an ex-Norwood player, so I understand.
 
Due to age and where the club sits on its development path? Tex is one, I think Goldy another. Hawkins too, ex Suns captain who I didn’t even realise was still on a list until he kicked a goal last night. But those clubs reasonably think they’re competing. We’re not though. Your argument is simplistic and infantile, I’d generally expect more from you, but we are talking about an ex-Norwood player, so I understand.
And out comes the s*** arrogance that we come to expect because I differ from you, I apologise for reaching heights you couldn’t
 
we scream out for senior players to show leadership on the field, then we have one and he’s hindering our development

I’m not, I firmly contend that playing guys because of experience value to others is absolute garbage. As soon as that is required to explain (excuse) selection, then it’s time to go. Now, I’m not saying Tex is there yet, he’s certainly not and is definitely best 22. And if uninjured, remains high end. But that rubbish had been used to extend/play guys well beyond their genuine positive value to team performance.

In a rebuild phase, you need to be making decisions based beyond the best way to win or minimise loss this weekend. We need to be focussing on how best to develop our contending group. If Tex can play till he’s 38, fine, extend him if his body suggests so. Believing that TT and Fog won’t develop without Tex in the forward line is rampant stupidity. But there’s definitely a risk that him continuing to control forward structures and have lead leading ball directed his way will hamper/delay their development.
 
It’s not so much playing every available kid we can, it’s about giving them a chance when the older ones in the side aren’t performing. Recent players like Dowling and last night Taylor have shown enough to get a block of games while players like Smith, Murphy and McHenry keep ****ing up.
We are annoyed at his policy of selecting experience over youth without even giving youth a try.
Even subbing Cook off instead of Murphy was pathetic.

Surely it’s experience if they are performing, unfortunately those 3 have been terrible this year and expect for smith, maybe their whole career. No one can ever argue that Murphy or McHenry have performed to a decent level consistently. At least McHenry isn’t getting a contract or in the leadership group. Murphy is just so limited and no idea why he has reached 100 games, worst 100 play we have ever had


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 
That’s not a development centric factor though. Being best 22 as a 34 year old in a rebuild isn’t enough. Needs to best dozen when he’s out there and whatever he’s doing needs to add value to our next flag push. Which requires him to be part of it, which, unfortunately for him, he won’t be.

This belief that players need these onfield mentors is rubbish. Who was Tex’s? Who was Hawkins’? Who was Jezza’s? Which Hawk great hung around to usher Dunstall and Dermie through?

If we are competing next year and Tex can prove he’s physically capable (last night he struggled), then he should be offered an extension. Otherwise we shouldn’t and if he’s still got petrol in the tank, he should go to a contender.

What the!! When Tex plays, he gets the best defender and gives Fog or Tilly the 2nd or 3rd best. Which gives them time to develop their game without having the best guys hammering you. Fog has improved a lot in the last 2 years because he had the second defender on him, now that he has improved his game and strength, he has been able to handle the best and still perform at a good standard. No more of that crap be played 2 years ago when he was giving away frees and just trying to wrestle everyone.
Leadership isn’t just someone telling you what to do, it’s taking ownership of the whole forward line, which Tex has done for a long time and now Fog is ready to lead us into the future


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 
I just think is more the others need to take that mantel off Tex if they are up to it

Round 3 last year Walker didn’t play, Thilthorpe takes 3 marks inside 50 and kicks 5 goals.

Round 4 he had 18 touches, 9 marks (5 contested) and 6 score involvements.

Thilthorpe didn’t play more than 80% game time for the remainder of the year. I don’t know the numbers for targets inside 50 but from my observations we barely kicked it to him. Thilthorpe was rated elite for contested marking numbers but below average for marks inside 50.

Can’t blame him for not taking over when the opportunities haven’t been there.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

The kids won't make any difference, yeah OK.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top