so what about Johns, Lee and Neagle?

bowzer · Post by **bowzer** » Sat Dec 02, 2006 3:09 pm

Now that we have Gumbleton and a long list of key fowards and ruckmen in Hille, Laycock, Ryder, Lee, Neagle, Johns, Lucas and Lloyd also taking into mind that Gumbleton has already been touted to ready and firing by round one.

what does this mean for the fringe KP players like Lee, Johns and Neagle?

With Mal Michael expected to come to Essendon and to play Full back with Fletcher going to CHB and possibly at some time forward, this leaves Lee, Johns and Neagle very little room for a place on the team. The forward line will most likely be occupied by the usual faces such as Lloyd, Lucas, Hird, Monfries and Lovett with the constant rotation of players who will always end up forward at some stage ie Hille, Laycock, MJ, Campo, Dyson, Mcveigh and Mcphee. Not to mention the new cats on the block Jet (leroy Jetta) and the matured and ready Alwyn Davey.

so with the issue of CHB being solved for the present time and the forward looking more packed then an 8am Melbourne train line has the 'Messiah' been replaced by Gumbleton? will Neagle ever get to carry on his family name? and will Lee ever get to make a name for himself?

discuss.

Crowny · Post by **Crowny** » Sat Dec 02, 2006 3:18 pm

Good post Bowzer. I reckon there is still room for guys like Lee, Johns and Neagle on the list as the club has to plan for the retirement of guys like Fletcher, Lloyd, Lucas and Michael in 2 years time.

Lee, Johns and Neagle are 21 or less and will take time to develop as KPPs. By them being on the list means that the club has a succession plan in place for Fletcher, Lloyd etc. One of the queries raised by some people on this forum is what will happen to the club when Lloyd etc retire and I would like to think that the club has planned for it so it doesnt leave a gaping hole in the team.

BenDoolan · Post by **BenDoolan** » Sat Dec 02, 2006 3:22 pm

And what about Jay Nash?

Whoever is ready, in form, and is deserving of a game should be picked regardless of reputation. If their form warrants selection, then the new kids should be selected ahead of those who aren't quite in touch. To be honest, I can't see the new recruits being selected for the first game, although, Gumby may be the exception.

Not sure where Jay Neagle is at with his development, but if his pre-season condition and form warrants a game then so be it.

jimmyc1985 · Post by **jimmyc1985** » Sat Dec 02, 2006 3:30 pm

BenDoolan wrote:And what about Jay Nash?

I thought the same thing to myself exactly 389 times this year. The mention of the number 389 may seem a little cryptic, but i'm guessing you know what i mean.

Anyone who can execute the fundamental skill of the game (kicking) as well as Nash should be in our starting 22.

Essendon4eva · Post by **Essendon4eva** » Sat Dec 02, 2006 3:35 pm

Al it means is every player must be at the top of their game. There is pressure on every player in every position.

swoodley · Post by **swoodley** » Sat Dec 02, 2006 4:08 pm

At this stage, Johns will be ahead of Gumby in the race for a spot in the team.

Neagle is only 18-19 so he has plenty of time on his side.

Lee will get his chance this year as there are sure to be injuries and suspensions that will leave a place for him.

bomber_girl · Post by **bomber_girl** » Sat Dec 02, 2006 5:11 pm

Jay Nash has a beautiful kick, should easily be in the 22

Windy_Hill · Post by **Windy_Hill** » Sat Dec 02, 2006 6:11 pm

I call this, a nice problem to have.

Depth across all positions is the key to a successful side as it allows you to cover injuries to first choice players and also creates competition for spots.

I absolutely guarantee you CJ will be training the house down given the arrival of Gumbleton.

Now that he has made the grade after so many years of disruption, do you really think he's gonna give up his place

Gatsid · Post by **Gatsid** » Sat Dec 02, 2006 8:06 pm

I still like the idea of having Mal at FB, Lee at CHB and having fletcher playing the sweeper position where he practically plays either FB or CHB just cutting out opposition moves, I mean it will help Lee develop as he has a constant back up and Fletcher's rebound with NLM and McPhee on the flanks will be a huge attacking drive.

Ps: That was first said by Sismis, so not my idea but I love it.

2QIK4U · Post by **2QIK4U** » Sat Dec 02, 2006 9:09 pm

Gatsid wrote:I still like the idea of having Mal at FB, Lee at CHB and having fletcher playing the sweeper position where he practically plays either FB or CHB just cutting out opposition moves, I mean it will help Lee develop as he has a constant back up and Fletcher's rebound with NLM and McPhee on the flanks will be a huge attacking drive.

Ps: That was first said by Sismis, so not my idea but I love it.

I totally agree. It will do the likes of Lee and Gumby (if played there) a huge amount of confidence to go for the ball knowing that they have both Fletch and Michael to back them up.

antcl · Post by **antcl** » Sun Dec 03, 2006 4:58 pm

Neagle (and Nash) aren't KP talls. They're best approach will be to force themselves into the midfield, or as tallish back/forward flankers.

Johns in my view is our 3rd best tall forward, and unless Gumbleton is absolutely amazing in his first season, I'd expect Johns to stay there.

Lee in my view will probably be played as the third tall defender, or CHB.

Our problem is that after these guys, the only 'spare' talls we have is Gumbleton. We're damn light on in this area depending on how many years we get out of Lloyd/Lucas/Fletcher/Michael.

j-mac31 · Post by **j-mac31** » Mon Dec 04, 2006 1:42 pm

Neagle isn't that good - most clubs did not consider him good enough to be drafted and from what I read, it seems Sheeds only got him as a favor for his mother.

Johns needs to go back to the VFL and learn how to play good footy consitently.

Lee and Bradley should also play for Bendigo, both in the backline only. They must aim to be the replacements for Fletcher and Michael when they retire.

Windy_Hill · Post by **Windy_Hill** » Mon Dec 04, 2006 2:02 pm

j-mac wrote:Neagle isn't that good - most clubs did not consider him good enough to be drafted and from what I read, it seems Sheeds only got him as a favor for his mother.

Johns needs to go back to the VFL and learn how to play good footy consitently.

Lee and Bradley should also play for Bendigo, both in the backline only. They must aim to be the replacements for Fletcher and Michael when they retire.

Harsh call on Johns. If you apply that theory evenly, 3/4's our team would be playing for Bendigo

swoodley · Post by **swoodley** » Mon Dec 04, 2006 4:25 pm

j-mac wrote:Neagle isn't that good - most clubs did not consider him good enough to be drafted and from what I read, it seems Sheeds only got him as a favor for his mother.

Johns needs to go back to the VFL and learn how to play good footy consitently.

Lee and Bradley should also play for Bendigo, both in the backline only. They must aim to be the replacements for Fletcher and Michael when they retire.

Neagle was taken as a father son pickup and as a very young player. He probably would have not been drafted until this year when the talk was he would have been at least top 20.

Johns will learn a hell of a lot more playing next to Lloyd, Hird and Lucas than he will playing for Bendigo. They will teach him where to run to in real game situations and this is something he would not learn playing VFL.

Bradley should be played on the wing and Lee on a HBF so that he can learn from Fletch whilst he is still playing.

Getting AFL experience into these players is what is needed now...not wasting time playing in the VFL.

DYSON#2 · Post by **DYSON#2** » Mon Dec 04, 2006 11:37 pm

I dont know how Jay was played in VFL 2006, but according to VFL website he played 8 seniors in VFL and booted 2 goals.
In 2005 with Gippsland he booted 60 from 18 matches.

So anyone know if he got much game time in VFL? Was he played in Different positions?

antcl · Post by **antcl** » Tue Dec 05, 2006 1:14 pm

j-mac wrote:Neagle isn't that good - most clubs did not consider him good enough to be drafted and from what I read, it seems Sheeds only got him as a favor for his mother.

Johns needs to go back to the VFL and learn how to play good footy consitently.

Lee and Bradley should also play for Bendigo, both in the backline only. They must aim to be the replacements for Fletcher and Michael when they retire.

Johns is developing nicely as a 3rd tall. Its pretty tough as a young forward to have Glass playing on you! His development should continue in the AFL as far as I'm concerned. Showed terrific signs (although he aint there yet).

From what I can gather, oppinions were split on Neagle. He was playing as a bottom-aged player with no pre-season, which are pluses. However, he was a smallish leading forward, with the best delivery in the TAC competition. And there was talk we'd want to keep the F/S selection free in 2006 for Jake Foulds (who didn't come on). Most said that if Neagle wasn't F/S, he'd have been left for this year, but many thought he'd be worth picking up then. Did we overpay? Perhaps. But given the strength of this draft and the possibility we would also want Foulds, I can understand moving when we did.

That said, I don't hear that he's going to be a KP player, but is more shaped like a Ricciutto. Which explains why he can play FF. The question is whether he can develop his tank and ball getting skills sufficiently. We'll see.

So, if Lee & Bradley are kept at Bendigo, who are you suggesting picks up the 3rd tall defensive spot? Or CHB, unless you want to try to oldish FBs at CHB for the first time in their careers?
Personally, I don't think Bradley is a CHB/tall defender, but I am certain one of him, Lee or Gumbleton will need to spend a lot of time down there this year. Which will be good for their development.

DYSON#2 wrote:I dont know how Jay was played in VFL 2006, but according to VFL website he played 8 seniors in VFL and booted 2 goals.
In 2005 with Gippsland he booted 60 from 18 matches.

So anyone know if he got much game time in VFL? Was he played in Different positions?

I think he got a decent amount of time, but he wasn't playing at FF.

swoodley · Post by **swoodley** » Tue Dec 05, 2006 1:50 pm

DYSON#2 wrote:I dont know how Jay was played in VFL 2006, but according to VFL website he played 8 seniors in VFL and booted 2 goals.
In 2005 with Gippsland he booted 60 from 18 matches.

So anyone know if he got much game time in VFL? Was he played in Different positions?

I think he spent a fair bit of time playing in the backline during 2006

j-mac31 · Post by **j-mac31** » Wed Dec 06, 2006 12:34 pm

Neagle played mainly back for Bendigo, but was out injured for a lot of the season.

antcl wrote:So, if Lee & Bradley are kept at Bendigo, who are you suggesting picks up the 3rd tall defensive spot? Or CHB, unless you want to try to oldish FBs at CHB for the first time in their careers?
Personally, I don't think Bradley is a CHB/tall defender, but I am certain one of him, Lee or Gumbleton will need to spend a lot of time down there this year. Which will be good for their development.

I'd love to see Lee playing as the third tall defender, but can't see that happening with Sheeds - he'll stick McPhee there if the opposition has a third tall forward.

I'd rather have Gumbleton up forward than Johns. Top 4 pick in the so called super draft - he's obviously got talent. Johns on the other hand missed three years with injury and hasn't played that well very often yet.

If Bradley is going to play on the wing he is a ****** waste of a top ten pick. Could have picked up someone like Tenace with speed and skill, not a slow, unco, shitfull skills wingman.

snitzel · Post by **snitzel** » Wed Dec 06, 2006 2:54 pm

i think people have to stop baging kep, iv seen him do some great things, he has been up forward and kicked a few goals in a game he just needs more time and then u'll be eating ur words..