GEELONG'S NEXT BROWNLOW MEDALIST?

Windy_Hill · Post by **Windy_Hill** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 7:02 am

Joel travels light to Cattery
08 December 2006 Herald-Sun
Michael Horan

FROM the moment Joel Reynolds was claimed as a 17-year-old by Essendon with its second pick in the 2002 national draft, he carried baggage -- heavy baggage.

Fresh start: Joel Reynolds is feeling a lot more positive at Geelong than when Carlton forward Brendan Fevola kicked seven goals on him in Round 7. Picture: George Salpigtidis

To be a classy-looking junior who always seemed a likely type is one thing, but to be the grandson of Bombers triple Brownlow medallist Dick Reynolds is another.

Through five years until his recent delisting at Essendon, Reynolds, still just 22 and with 38 AFL games to his name, barely had a clear shot at his football dream.

The athletic left-footer also had to deal with a litany of untimely injuries that ruined four pre-seasons as osteitis pubis, glandular fever, an ankle reconstruction and a bad hamstring tear during a professional foot race conspired against him.

However in the lead-up to Tuesday's pre-season draft, Reynolds is bursting with fitness and enthusiasm for a second crack after enjoying a healthy preparation with Geelong.

"I'm in the best shape of my life. I'm fitter, stronger and feel like I'm ready to explode. I know in my own mind I'm really ready to continue AFL football, and I've never been keener to prove it," Reynolds said yesterday.

Having grown up in Geelong and being taken in the same draft as Gary Ablett Jr and Jimmy Bartel -- both old Geelong Falcons teammates -- Reynolds has felt right at home at the Cattery in his bid to win an AFL lifeline.

Reynolds had the option of staying at Windy Hill to do another pre-season or trying his luck at another club that had shown interest, the Western Bulldogs, or down the road at his home town.

"I was happy to opt for Geelong, to come home and have a few home-cooked meals with Mum and do the best possible pre-season. It's been great and I feel terrific," Reynolds said.

Half a decade in AFL ranks has been hard on a player who came straight out of school, and Reynolds admits there were times when he questioned whether it was worth it.

"It's a cut-throat industry," he said. "But I really want this. I'm treating every session at Geelong like it might be my last."

The skinny kid who turned up at Essendon weighing 71kg is now a 85.5kg athlete.

"I'm hungrier than ever. I've given this pre-season everything. I've worked hard on my endurance and the numbers show there have been significant gains," he said. "All I can do is wait and see what happens on Tuesday."

jimmyc1985 · Post by **jimmyc1985** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 7:13 am

Lol Windy, good use of capitals on the thread title - you had me fooled for a minute, and i thought it was going to be an article about Selwood or Hawkins!

But seriously, what a crock that article is. He had 5 f****** years on an AFL list and 38 chances to show something and succeeded only in proving he's nowhere near it, but the article claims that he's "barely had a clear shot at his football dream". And what's this rubbish about associating Reynolds with being "athletic" - to me, when he played he looked about as athletic as Dick Reynolds would be in his current state.

At least Joel has a sense of reality - "I'm treating every session at Geelong like it might be my last." Joel, i've never heard a more realistic word spoken, because if Geelong have the slightest eye for talent then it's very likely you will partake in your last ever AFL training session in the not-too-distant future.

BenDoolan · Post by **BenDoolan** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 7:57 am

jimmyc1985 wrote: And what's this rubbish about associating Reynolds with being "athletic" - to me, when he played he looked about as athletic as Dick Reynolds would be in his current state.

Madden · Post by **Madden** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:08 am

Why the vitroil guys?

I thought he was a dud, and im glad we delisted him too. But if he goes on to do well then good on him.

jimmyc1985 · Post by **jimmyc1985** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:29 am

Staggy, i wasn't directing the vitriol towards JR himself - i was rubbishing the article which i consider factually incorrect and one-sided.

Crowny · Post by **Crowny** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:51 am

I think Essendon did the right thing by delisting him but good luck to him if he suceeds elsewhere.

beer-man · Post by **beer-man** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:55 am

Come on, he can run all he likes, he was always reasonably athletic.

Its when they get the footballs out and expect him to hit a target, or put the ball through the big sticks and not out on the full, that they will see his true potential.

DYSON#2 · Post by **DYSON#2** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 11:59 am

look i wish the kid best of luck, i hope he can prove us all wrong because i know he can play very good football. good luck JR

Rossoneri · Post by **Rossoneri** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 12:05 pm

Windy_Hill wrote: Joel travels light to Cattery
The athletic left-footer also had to deal with a litany of untimely injuries that ruined four pre-seasons as osteitis pubis, glandular fever, an ankle reconstruction and a bad hamstring tear during a professional foot race conspired against him.

They forgot to mention that being unable to kick, handpass, tackel or show courage have also conspired against him.

Waste of 5 f****** years.

gringo · Post by **gringo** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 12:27 pm

The athletic left-footer also had to deal with a litany of untimely injuries that ruined four pre-seasons as osteitis pubis, glandular fever, an ankle reconstruction and a bad hamstring tear during a professional foot race conspired against him.

Having injuries was the only thing that kept Reynolds at Essendon for five long years! Had he put in the performances he did with injury free pre-seasons, it would have taken all of ten minutes for the club to realise that he is shitter than a shit wrapped in shit at football and delist him. The injuries prolonged the inevitable. If he gets a game at Geelong, I'm going to point the car west and try my luck as well.

robrulz5 · Post by **robrulz5** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 10:25 pm

I hope Geelong take him.

Mrs Mercuri · Post by **Mrs Mercuri** » Sun Dec 10, 2006 7:15 pm

Crowny wrote:I think Essendon did the right thing by delisting him but good luck to him if he suceeds elsewhere.

I agree, we can't keep everyone on the list. He had been at the club long enough and it was time to let other young guys have a go.

I didn't think the Cats had a pre season pick...

nathanskinner · Post by **nathanskinner** » Tue Dec 12, 2006 4:01 pm

they took him

ealesy · Post by **ealesy** » Tue Dec 12, 2006 5:23 pm

see and this is where the rooki list and new mature age rookie are inherently wrong.

How can I guy who has had 5 years in the system and has played 38 games of AFL football is deemed worthy of a spot on the rookie list because he happens to be under the age of 23.

While you have a guy like Brad Smith who was overlooked for an initial shot at the AFL, work his arse off in the lower levels to earn a chance at the big-time only to be cut down with consecutive knee injuries. He's never played an AFL game but because he happens to be over 23 and has been on an AFL list he is suddenly deemed unworthy of being a rookie.

f****** ridicoulous in my opinion, guys like Brad Smith far more deserve a spot on the rookie list, than guy who has had plenty of opportunities to make it at AFL level but hasn't been able to.

uptick · Post by **uptick** » Tue Dec 12, 2006 5:31 pm

I can't wait for the time someone like this Brad Smith dude has an elder brother who is a top line QC who had his dinner reservation cancelled to enable Vlad to fill his fat face with xmas pudding, decides to take the AFL to court, and finishes this stupid system off for good. The bloody clubs should be allowed to have as many players of any background they like on their lists. Sure put an overall salary cap on the clubs, but who cares if one club has 55 playes all getting $150,000 and another club, 38 players getting whatever, its a free world, we're all adults just get on with it. Stuff these endless restrictions.

swoodley · Post by **swoodley** » Tue Dec 12, 2006 6:07 pm

uptick wrote:I can't wait for the time someone like this Brad Smith dude has an elder brother who is a top line QC who had his dinner reservation cancelled to enable Vlad to fill his fat face with xmas pudding, decides to take the AFL to court, and finishes this stupid system off for good. The bloody clubs should be allowed to have as many players of any background they like on their lists. Sure put an overall salary cap on the clubs, but who cares if one club has 55 playes all getting $150,000 and another club, 38 players getting whatever, its a free world, we're all adults just get on with it. Stuff these endless restrictions.

An interesting idea but it opens up another can of worms...club x goes with option A (big list on smaller wages) versus club y who goes for option b (smaller list paying bigger $$$).

As soon as a player establishes himself, he will want the dollars and if club x won't pay (or if club y offer more than club x) then the player wants to move.

The change that I would like to see is that the clubs can have an extras/rookie list and put players of any age and from any background on it up to a limit of 6-8.

uptick · Post by **uptick** » Tue Dec 12, 2006 7:31 pm

swoodley wrote:
uptick wrote:I can't wait for the time someone like this Brad Smith dude has an elder brother who is a top line QC who had his dinner reservation cancelled to enable Vlad to fill his fat face with xmas pudding, decides to take the AFL to court, and finishes this stupid system off for good. The bloody clubs should be allowed to have as many players of any background they like on their lists. Sure put an overall salary cap on the clubs, but who cares if one club has 55 playes all getting $150,000 and another club, 38 players getting whatever, its a free world, we're all adults just get on with it. Stuff these endless restrictions.
An interesting idea but it opens up another can of worms...club x goes with option A (big list on smaller wages) versus club y who goes for option b (smaller list paying bigger $$$).

As soon as a player establishes himself, he will want the dollars and if club x won't pay (or if club y offer more than club x) then the player wants to move.

The change that I would like to see is that the clubs can have an extras/rookie list and put players of any age and from any background on it up to a limit of 6-8.

I agree with your analysis, butr that proves my point, let the clubs wrok though all the issues themselves, they'll find a solution that suits the club, one size doesn't fit all , except if your Vlad.

jimmyc1985 · Post by **jimmyc1985** » Tue Dec 12, 2006 8:06 pm

uptick wrote:I can't wait for the time someone like this Brad Smith dude has an elder brother who is a top line QC who had his dinner reservation cancelled to enable Vlad to fill his fat face with xmas pudding, decides to take the AFL to court, and finishes this stupid system off for good. The bloody clubs should be allowed to have as many players of any background they like on their lists. Sure put an overall salary cap on the clubs, but who cares if one club has 55 playes all getting $150,000 and another club, 38 players getting whatever, its a free world, we're all adults just get on with it. Stuff these endless restrictions.

On what grounds would the QC be able to take the AFL to court in the instance of Brad Smith? "The vibes" argument, perhaps? Mabo? The law of bloody common sense?

uptick · Post by **uptick** » Tue Dec 12, 2006 8:36 pm

jimmyc1985 wrote:
uptick wrote:I can't wait for the time someone like this Brad Smith dude has an elder brother who is a top line QC who had his dinner reservation cancelled to enable Vlad to fill his fat face with xmas pudding, decides to take the AFL to court, and finishes this stupid system off for good. The bloody clubs should be allowed to have as many players of any background they like on their lists. Sure put an overall salary cap on the clubs, but who cares if one club has 55 playes all getting $150,000 and another club, 38 players getting whatever, its a free world, we're all adults just get on with it. Stuff these endless restrictions.
On what grounds would the QC be able to take the AFL to court in the instance of Brad Smith? "The vibes" argument, perhaps? Mabo? The law of bloody common sense?

You said it
"The law of bloody common sense?[/quote]", Actually restraint of trade.

jimmyc1985 · Post by **jimmyc1985** » Tue Dec 12, 2006 9:30 pm

uptick wrote:
jimmyc1985 wrote:
uptick wrote:I can't wait for the time someone like this Brad Smith dude has an elder brother who is a top line QC who had his dinner reservation cancelled to enable Vlad to fill his fat face with xmas pudding, decides to take the AFL to court, and finishes this stupid system off for good. The bloody clubs should be allowed to have as many players of any background they like on their lists. Sure put an overall salary cap on the clubs, but who cares if one club has 55 playes all getting $150,000 and another club, 38 players getting whatever, its a free world, we're all adults just get on with it. Stuff these endless restrictions.
On what grounds would the QC be able to take the AFL to court in the instance of Brad Smith? "The vibes" argument, perhaps? Mabo? The law of bloody common sense?
You said it
"The law of bloody common sense?

", Actually restraint of trade.[/quote]

You either enjoy making subtle, sarcastic humour, or embarassing yourself. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume it's the former.

Bombertalk

GEELONG'S NEXT BROWNLOW MEDALIST?

GEELONG'S NEXT BROWNLOW MEDALIST?

Re: GEELONG'S NEXT BROWNLOW MEDALIST?