- Aug 18, 2018
- 31,839
- 54,145
- AFL Club
- Geelong
Menegola is an outlier. Most of the time you get delisted it's career overIf he improves and is any good, he will have still have a ‘shot’ in the future. He is only 21. Look at Menegola
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
AFLW 2024 - Round 10 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Menegola is an outlier. Most of the time you get delisted it's career overIf he improves and is any good, he will have still have a ‘shot’ in the future. He is only 21. Look at Menegola
A small shot is better than no shot.I think taking someone local would have been a good start ... such a sort go...why draft them?
I just want milk that taste like milk....Do we really need to persist in the "Mate" thing.. you started I responded ... it has little do with being friendly...
I am 100% in agreement that all are entitled to their own opinion. And if we discuss first rather use the diminutive tone by using Mate as the first word in a post maybe we can discuss without it going sideways.
So fresh start.
The standard might be good.. it might be better than GFL... but even Stewart moved from GFl to the VFL to show his worth. It is still not SANFL or VFL .... which is what id like to see him play in before bring in another sub 180cm player to a list drenched in options. We have a sub 180 player on our VFL list that I know plays VFL to a reasonable standard. But as much as the comp it the player type. Show me a tall tearing that comp a part id probably be more likely to risk it. Thats the area on our list id be adding late or in a rookie spot...especially when we have access to Chlosey and Riccardi.
Most of the time you get delisted after 2 or more years, so that is completely different to 3 months.Menegola is an outlier. Most of the time you get delisted it's career over
At the time, I was completely dumbfounded why we even selected Williams. Even more so now. Clearly we were set for small forwards in the short term.
I thought maybe we see him developing into a mid or a back pocket with time. But we have now delisted him which makes his selection just even more bizarre. Not sure what we were expecting of him in that time frame.
I do feel for the kid. I wish him nothing but the best. It highlights what a ruthless business this is..
He's 21, though, so the expectations are different to your usual draftee coming from the juniors. You expect they're closer to being ready to go and further along in physical development, much like Close was. Judging by his comments, perhaps they felt he wasn't far enough along and couldn't see the scope for further development. It would be hard to argue that he deserved a spot more than others on the list who had been delisted.Most of the time you get delisted after 2 or more years, so that is completely different to 3 months.
He is a small forward, a position where we have plenty, and we were tight on list spots.
And yet SDK was available at 19 - point being that rankings don’t always reflect the ultimate value to a team. But at his height and agility he was likely to rapidly be needed in our defence.Sure I'd take a guaranteed clone of SDK, that's not what is on offer. If it was it wouldn't be available at our pick 8
At the time, I was completely dumbfounded why we even selected Williams. Even more so now. Clearly we were set for small forwards in the short term.
I thought maybe we see him developing into a mid or a back pocket with time. But we have now delisted him which makes his selection just even more bizarre. Not sure what we were expecting of him in that time frame.
I do feel for the kid. I wish him nothing but the best. It highlights what a ruthless business this is..
I'd take him as a rookie. I reckon the Cats tried too hard to sort out his injuries by changing the way he went about it. The way we play now seems to celebrate those things. Always thought he was a ripping bloke and deserves to have a crack in full flight.Cockatoo wasn't that much of a reach most clubs with picks in the 10-20 range had interviewed him, sometimes you just need a bit of luck and hes had very little.
Always a chance. Would be the only place I would have thoughtClark may pay us back if we get him and head to Pieland eventually?
Did he take a full list spot or Rookie? If Rookie then we've got a few open there due to Close/Atkins upgrades.Most of the time you get delisted after 2 or more years, so that is completely different to 3 months.
He is a small forward, a position where we have plenty, and we were tight on list spots.
I can see the reasoning,. In regards to Clark ... Perhaps Mackie and Co see more in Bruhn as a similar type and thus would look to others like Busslinger.An ITK poster on the WCE board seems to think we'll take Busslinger with our pick, even if Clark is available. Interesting.
An ITK poster on the WCE board seems to think we'll take Busslinger with our pick, even if Clark is available. Interesting.
This is one of them, if you go through the posters history you'll find a few other things. List Mgmt. - Contract and Trade Discussion - 2022 Off Season EditionIf it's alright, copy paste the post or point me to which board/page, can't seem to find the post you're citing
yup totally - so it was another injury after Wells selected him which was the common thread on all of them.Wasn't Motlop's shoulder issue also caused by Hawkins knee?
So do I FWIW.An ITK poster on the WCE board seems to think we'll take Busslinger with our pick, even if Clark is available. Interesting.
It makes the most logical sense positionally now that we have added a couple of mids but it would be hard to pass up Clark or even PhillipouSo do I FWIW.
I think a very good player was there but some bodies aren't built for AFL.I'd take him as a rookie. I reckon the Cats tried too hard to sort out his injuries by changing the way he went about it. The way we play now seems to celebrate those things. Always thought he was a ripping bloke and deserves to have a crack in full flight.
I did not think about Bruhn when i was saying get Mackenzie, no way we will get Mackenzie he is the same type as Bruhn...but if we want Clark and miss out i would take Hewett he is the same as clarkI can see the reasoning,. In regards to Clark ... Perhaps Mackie and Co see more in Bruhn as a similar type and thus would look to others like Busslinger.
An ITK poster on the WCE board seems to think we'll take Busslinger with our pick, even if Clark is available. Interesting.