Geelong game moved and 4 put on LTI list

[bigpav]

I don't get you guys! if we have room in the salary cap, why not elevate 5 rookies, when players such as ruffles and groves come off the LTI and play a couple of wafl games drop the two who don't perform back.

There is no better ensentive for these rookies to keep there spot when they are at least on the main list and a chance of playing afl games

 

[dockers_bengals]

I don't get you guys! if we have room in the salary cap, why not elevate 5 rookies, when players such as ruffles and groves come off the LTI and play a couple of wafl games drop the two who don't perform back.

There is no better ensentive for these rookies to keep there spot when they are at least on the main list and a chance of playing afl games

Wouldn't it be better for them to earn it?

 

[legitimatic]

Wouldn't it be better for them to earn it?

Just because they'll be elevated doesn't grant them automatic selection in the 22, they will still have to earn their games, afterall they will only get 8 weeks to prove their worth.

 

[E Shed]

DeBoer (In the NAB) performed better than many senior list players, Crowley, MJ, Schammer, Suban.
Suban was very ordinary yet most still have him their best 22 for Rd 1. What's the difference? I know Suban's best is probably better than DB's but DB was probably more consistent last year. Suban played some ordinary games and a few good ones and 1 very good one but he was very slow to start.
I really rate Suban and have in my 22 but really if you are going to judge players on NAB then he wouldn't start Rd 1 either.

 

[dockers_bengals]

Just because they'll be elevated doesn't grant them automatic selection in the 22, they will still have to earn their games, afterall they will only get 8 weeks to prove their worth.

That is true but there is no point elevating a rookie unless he has shown he is good enough to be selected at some time.

IMO E-Shed,NAB Cup form is hard to judge due to coaches on both teams experimenting with players positions,time on the park and instructions they are given,so you would most the time go on last years form.

 

[E Shed]

Absolutely bengals which is why I find it puzzling that some are calling for DeBoers head after a few NAB games even though he's been given run with rolls and been far from the worst out there.

 

[DizzyHB]

DeBoer (In the NAB) performed better than many senior list players, Crowley, MJ, Schammer, Suban.

I really wouldn't say De Boer has performed better than MJ. I've been quite impressed with MJ in attack, he provides that second tall target to Pavlich, is great on the run and can crumb what he drops. Will be a very solid FF by the end of the year IMO.

 

[PapaJ]

I don't get you guys! if we have room in the salary cap, why not elevate 5 rookies, when players such as ruffles and groves come off the LTI and play a couple of wafl games drop the two who don't perform back.

Can someone confirm this for me? ... I don't think it works like that. You have to nominate a player for a player and when the LTI player comes back then the elevated player has to go back to rookie list. In our case, say they elevate VB for Groves, when Groves comes back you can't suddenly decide Pearce goes back because VB is lighting it up.

Again, not 100% on that, but that's how I thought it works.

 

[E Shed]

I really wouldn't say De Boer has performed better than MJ. I've been quite impressed with MJ in attack, he provides that second tall target to Pavlich, is great on the run and can crumb what he drops. Will be a very solid FF by the end of the year IMO.

I agree, just think he's looked rusty, dropping marks he would take at his best, not as clean on the ground as I've seen him. He needs a solid base of fitness & game time to be at his best MJ. He's a long way off that yet.

 

[Superkoops]

Can someone confirm this for me? ... I don't think it works like that. You have to nominate a player for a player and when the LTI player comes back then the elevated player has to go back to rookie list. In our case, say they elevate VB for Groves, when Groves comes back you can't suddenly decide Pearce goes back because VB is lighting it up.

Again, not 100% on that, but that's how I thought it works.

That is my understanding also Papa. My call would be:
Barlow - nominated rookie (available for all 22 games + finals)
DeBoer - Nominated for Solomon (LTI - available for all 22 games + Finals)
Silvani - Nominated for Grover (available to approx round 4/5); like for like
JVB & Pearce to be nominated as required for Thornton/Ruffles whom are both out for approx. 10 weeks and therefore will take them to round 9 of AFL season.

So I would hold off on nominating all 5 and when time arises add JVB or Pearce based on team selection. After seeing Selwood tear us a new one today Deboer still has a place in the team, especially with Crowley still finding his feet.

Can we still add another nominated full time rookie following the mid season break like last season?

 

[Latro]

Harvey mentioned in the press conference after todays game that only players who have earned promotion will get it.

 

[dont bowl there]

Harvey mentioned in the press conference after todays game that only players who have earned promotion will get it.

Wow that is stating the obvious from Harvs, unless the rookie is going to play that week I see no reason to elevate the guy. Barlow will get elevated as will de Boer but can't see any others playing round 1.

 

[malpaso]

Wow that is stating the obvious from Harvs, unless the rookie is going to play that week I see no reason to elevate the guy. Barlow will get elevated as will de Boer but can't see any others playing round 1.

I think Silvagni will be elevated, he needs to cover for Grover's absence. It also gives us the flexibility to move McPharlin into the forward line for a different look.

 

[E Shed]

Pearce easily showed enough to be elevated, as did Van Berlo. VB is hard at it and very tidy as a tagger or in defence. Been the surprise packet for me.

 

[Bradesmaen]

Pearce easily showed enough to be elevated, as did Van Berlo. VB is hard at it and very tidy as a tagger or in defence. Been the surprise packet for me.

Pearce should be delisted at the end of the season imo.

 

[dockers_bengals]

I think Silvagni will be elevated, he needs to cover for Grover's absence. It also gives us the flexibility to move McPharlin into the forward line for a different look.

No he doesn't need to be as Dodd can take up the space but that doesnt mean he shouldn't be.
Most the rookies have shown they could be elevated to me but it just depends how the coaching staff rate the pre season and how they followed their instructions.There has been times during the games they have thrown them in the deep end and it has looked bad as a whole but from that they could see who will stand up and who need more time.

 

[E Shed]

Pearce should be delisted at the end of the season imo.

See enough already eh? Sure he's slow and has an awkward kicking style but has shown he can rack up the possies, reads the play well and has a knack for kicking goals. I wouldn't play him in the backline but he makes a decent option across half forward.
Has potential to be more useful than some of the proven no hopers on the list.

 

[ballanFYNE]

Pearce easily showed enough to be elevated, as did Van Berlo. VB is hard at it and very tidy as a tagger or in defence. Been the surprise packet for me.

also handy up forward like he showed in his debut.

 

[Bradesmaen]

See enough already eh? Sure he's slow and has an awkward kicking style but has shown he can rack up the possies, reads the play well and has a knack for kicking goals. I wouldn't play him in the backline but he makes a decent option across half forward.
Has potential to be more useful than some of the proven no hopers on the list.

Chad Fletcher racked up possies, should we recruit him as well?

 

[E Shed]

Chad Fletcher racked up possies, should we recruit him as well?

I don't understand your attitude. You haven't given any reasons why you don't like Pearce, merely stated we should delist him. When I explained why I like him you simply pulled the old, compare him to some old hack based on a common (non defining) quality strawman.
It appears you are being belligerent simply for the sake of it.
As for Fletcher. I would definitely draft the 19 year old version of Chad Fletcher. Was an integral part of one of the best midfields of the last 20 or so years.
If you wish to continue being a dick, you are on your own from here.

 

[Bradesmaen]

I don't understand your attitude. You haven't given any reasons why you don't like Pearce, merely stated we should delist him. When I explained why I like him you simply pulled the old, compare him to some old hack based on a common (non defining) quality strawman.
It appears you are being belligerent simply for the sake of it.
As for Fletcher. I would definitely draft the 19 year old version of Chad Fletcher. Was an integral part of one of the best midfields of the last 20 or so years.
If you wish to continue being a dick, you are on your own from here.

So I say one thing and all of the sudden I'm being a dick? Wow.. Over reaction too much?

You said he was racking up possies and thats why we should keep him. I simply explained by the use of Chad Fletcher that possies mean absolutely stuff all. I would rather a guy who racks up 15 but uses them well compared to a guy who can rack up 30 and give half of them away.

Enough of a response for you oh gracious King of the internet?

 

[E Shed]

So I say one thing and all of the sudden I'm being a dick? Wow.. Over reaction too much?

You said he was racking up possies and thats why we should keep him. I simply explained by the use of Chad Fletcher that possies mean absolutely stuff all. I would rather a guy who racks up 15 but uses them well compared to a guy who can rack up 30 and give half of them away.

Enough of a response for you oh gracious King of the internet?

Getting there.
So you are saying that Pearce is like Fletcher in that knows how to find the footy but mostly butchers it? I would say Pearce is actually a pretty decent kick. Looks awkward but mostly finds a target. Plus he's good in front of goal, particularly on the run.
What I found surprising is that you are prepared to write him off so young with only a handful of games. I think he's shown a bit.

 

[purplepassion82]

Bradey doesn't like Pearces' 'kicking action' and in Bradeys world it equals Pearce CANT kick, is a crap footballer and has nothing going for him.

Bradesmaen Logic - if nothing else, it gives me a laugh.

 

[Bradesmaen]

Getting there.
So you are saying that Pearce is like Fletcher in that knows how to find the footy but mostly butchers it? I would say Pearce is actually a pretty decent kick. Looks awkward but mostly finds a target. Plus he's good in front of goal, particularly on the run.
What I found surprising is that you are prepared to write him off so young with only a handful of games. I think he's shown a bit.

Because of his ball drop he is easily closed down on and easier to smother. He's a slow footballer and slow thinking footballer. His kicking style leads to shanks too often because of the drop of the ball.

He's shown nothing but an ability to get the ball and butcher it. I hardly call that showing anything. If he played for any other club he'd be laughed at.

 

[estibador]

Pearce has been one of our most dangerous players all preseason when in 'supergoal' range. You can hardly compare a guy with that sort of hurt factor to Chad Fletcher.