What we need.

[Sismis]

I believe we have a good list and our current woes are a function of our education/rebuilding process and injuries.

One area where i am not a optimistic is our ability to turn potential into A grade. I think we have recreuited very well we seem to have the talent, and year after year we see this players who look like they are on the track to genuine championdom but they never seem to get there.

Names like McPhee, Lovett, Monfries, who thundered onto the park and looked set to take us to the next level, have not reached their anticipated heights.

We need a dedicated team to take guys like this to the next level. I'm talking psychologists, past champs etc what ever it takes.

A look at the games this weekend will show how far behind we are in this area. With the exception of McVeigh and Davey and our veterans, we have noone making a claim on that team.

[Windy_Hill]

Fully agree Sis. Am constantly bemused by this very issue, why our young guys look a million dollars on days but then never kick on???

Monfries is a perfect example.

[bomberflyer]

Totally agree. I heard a Sheedy interview the other day on MMM following the Anzac Day game and I think he struck the nail on the head. Young kids get drafted and have people piss in their pockets right through their junior ranks about how good they are and when they get to an AFL club they think they are champions already and the job is done. And then they eventually realize that isn't as easy as they first thought and they can't alone rely on ability to carry them through. He said a lot of them need to grow up and toughen up and a significant number can't handle the grips of reality.

Seems like there needs to be expectations set from day 1 that just because you're drafted doesn't mean you've made the big time. Eventually at the end of the day they need to realize that more draftees don't make it than do and those key points need to reinforced early so that they don't get too comfortable. I would be shocked if this doesn't happen.

I remember in my late teens when I was at cricket training and Bob Simpson gave us a talk after we were a bit lax during fielding. He said, "Don't think that you're good because you're in an elite junior squad, at the end of the day you're only here because you inherited an ability when your parents had a naughty one night." I was a little shocked for a 17-18 year old, but when you mature I guess it makes you think "He was right". Lesson being - ability and hard work need to go hand in hand.

[andrewb]

What we need is for the next two years to pass really quickly and for our supporters to get off the backs of what are some truly quality kids.

I'll back that response up using Mark McVeigh as an example:

1999-00 (10 games): Debuted and played 10 games in two seasons. May have been injured in 2000 - can't remember - but couldn't break into a very strong side. Showed some promise and great skills at times.

2001-03 (71 games): Became a regular member of the team and averaged between 10 and 12 disposals a game over those three seasons. I remember when I used to sit at the footy in those years and whenever spike got the ball I'd nudge the people who I was with and say "watch this" as he rammed it down Lloyd or Lucas's throat. We were fairly successful so there wasn't much pressure on McVeigh to perform.

2004-06 (60 games): Essendon started to wane big time and most of the blokes that had been carrying us had either left the club or had started to wane themselves. Expectations were high on the 23 year old McVeigh to step up and start performing. Unfortunately, we didn't have many guys who could really do damage, and other teams started to recognise the damage he could do so he started getting a bit of attention. There was a lot of video available of him and teams broke down his weaknesses (particularly his temper). His performances were fairly stagnant and he got himself in trouble a lot with silly frees and 50m penalties. Averaged about 14 disposals a game and supporters started to call for his head.

2007-08 (25 games to date): Established himself as a true leader of the club and this year has begun to perform at elite level. Would have been close to leading the brownlow after three rounds.

So, basically it took McVeigh about eight years and nearly 170 games to establish himself as an elite midfielder in this competition. Compare the careers to date of our young midfield brigade - Stanton, Watson, Nash, Houli, Monfries, Dyson etc. to McVeigh's early career and you'll find that they're pretty comparable and most of them are actually miles ahead of where he was. Now they just have to work out how to iron out the kinks in their games and the best of them (Watson and Stanton) need to learn how to break tags. Two years from now we're going to be laughing.

Here's a link to his career stats if you're interested... you can compare them to any of the above and our current crop will come out favourably:

http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/pc-e ... rk-mcveigh

[Makaveli]

^ I agree with what your saying, Mcveigh did take a long time, but the reason he became good is because he changed his game. In his first few seasons he was a pussy, then he decided to harden up, i often compared Dyson to Mcveigh and hope/d that dyson would take the same path, but i just can't picture him hardening up like Mcveigh did, which is what is separating Dyson from being and average player to becoming a good player like Mcveigh.

[bomberflyer]

To me 170 games is a lot of time to wait for a return on investment. If that is going to be the status quo at Essendon and we are going to be happy with that then there are plenty of bad times ahead. But, if we make realistic assessments, demand more and expect more then we can only get better quicker.

[BenDoolan]

To me 170 games is a lot of time to wait for a return on investment. If that is going to be the status quo at Essendon and we are going to be happy with that then there are plenty of bad times ahead. But, if we make realistic assessments, demand more and expect more then we can only get better quicker.

I think the 170 games is related to the word "elite" rather than the 80 - 100 games for him to become a very good consistent performer.

[tom9779]

what we need is an ounce of luck as well I think.

I mean our fitness training cannot be that inadequate.
We cannot be THAT dirty to warrant more than average suspensions.
Our coaching staff cannot be that bad to allow such big thumpings....

[nathanskinner]

Mcveigh is a perfect example. I think if he can do it, the guys we have now can. He was skinny, soft, and tried to tak a hanger in every contest.

With the side as good as it was in his younger years (99-2002) he had to work harder and improve to actually get a game. Just being on our list at the moment warrants a game.. so the improvement must come from within

[Windy_Hill]

What we need is for the next two years to pass really quickly and for our supporters to get off the backs of what are some truly quality kids.

I'll back that response up using Mark McVeigh as an example:

1999-00 (10 games): Debuted and played 10 games in two seasons. May have been injured in 2000 - can't remember - but couldn't break into a very strong side. Showed some promise and great skills at times.

2001-03 (71 games): Became a regular member of the team and averaged between 10 and 12 disposals a game over those three seasons. I remember when I used to sit at the footy in those years and whenever spike got the ball I'd nudge the people who I was with and say "watch this" as he rammed it down Lloyd or Lucas's throat. We were fairly successful so there wasn't much pressure on McVeigh to perform.

2004-06 (60 games): Essendon started to wane big time and most of the blokes that had been carrying us had either left the club or had started to wane themselves. Expectations were high on the 23 year old McVeigh to step up and start performing. Unfortunately, we didn't have many guys who could really do damage, and other teams started to recognise the damage he could do so he started getting a bit of attention. There was a lot of video available of him and teams broke down his weaknesses (particularly his temper). His performances were fairly stagnant and he got himself in trouble a lot with silly frees and 50m penalties. Averaged about 14 disposals a game and supporters started to call for his head.

2007-08 (25 games to date): Established himself as a true leader of the club and this year has begun to perform at elite level. Would have been close to leading the brownlow after three rounds.

So, basically it took McVeigh about eight years and nearly 170 games to establish himself as an elite midfielder in this competition. Compare the careers to date of our young midfield brigade - Stanton, Watson, Nash, Houli, Monfries, Dyson etc. to McVeigh's early career and you'll find that they're pretty comparable and most of them are actually miles ahead of where he was. Now they just have to work out how to iron out the kinks in their games and the best of them (Watson and Stanton) need to learn how to break tags. Two years from now we're going to be laughing.

Here's a link to his career stats if you're interested... you can compare them to any of the above and our current crop will come out favourably:

http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/pc-e ... rk-mcveigh

If a player has not shown what he has got after 50 games, then you know not to expect much more from that point forward. McVeigh is an exception.

[gringo]

What we need is for the next two years to pass really quickly and for our supporters to get off the backs of what are some truly quality kids.

I'll back that response up using Mark McVeigh as an example:

1999-00 (10 games): Debuted and played 10 games in two seasons. May have been injured in 2000 - can't remember - but couldn't break into a very strong side. Showed some promise and great skills at times.

2001-03 (71 games): Became a regular member of the team and averaged between 10 and 12 disposals a game over those three seasons. I remember when I used to sit at the footy in those years and whenever spike got the ball I'd nudge the people who I was with and say "watch this" as he rammed it down Lloyd or Lucas's throat. We were fairly successful so there wasn't much pressure on McVeigh to perform.

2004-06 (60 games): Essendon started to wane big time and most of the blokes that had been carrying us had either left the club or had started to wane themselves. Expectations were high on the 23 year old McVeigh to step up and start performing. Unfortunately, we didn't have many guys who could really do damage, and other teams started to recognise the damage he could do so he started getting a bit of attention. There was a lot of video available of him and teams broke down his weaknesses (particularly his temper). His performances were fairly stagnant and he got himself in trouble a lot with silly frees and 50m penalties. Averaged about 14 disposals a game and supporters started to call for his head.

2007-08 (25 games to date): Established himself as a true leader of the club and this year has begun to perform at elite level. Would have been close to leading the brownlow after three rounds.

So, basically it took McVeigh about eight years and nearly 170 games to establish himself as an elite midfielder in this competition. Compare the careers to date of our young midfield brigade - Stanton, Watson, Nash, Houli, Monfries, Dyson etc. to McVeigh's early career and you'll find that they're pretty comparable and most of them are actually miles ahead of where he was. Now they just have to work out how to iron out the kinks in their games and the best of them (Watson and Stanton) need to learn how to break tags. Two years from now we're going to be laughing.

Here's a link to his career stats if you're interested... you can compare them to any of the above and our current crop will come out favourably:

http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/pc-e ... rk-mcveigh

If a player has not shown what he has got after 50 games, then you know not to expect much more from that point forward. McVeigh is an exception.

Agreed. Each player needs to be assessed on their individual merits. I'll do some brief assessing now if you like:

Monfries: slow and weak. Prospects: slow and weak.

Stanton: soft, slow and weak. Prospects: soft, slow and weak.

Johns: junk. Prospects: junk

Etc etc.

[bombercol]

I agree that every player has to be reviewed constantly to refine what changes to our list need to be and what players we require and what player we feel won't get us to reach our goal.

andrewb that was a really good breakdown of Mark McVeigh's career. As correctly pointed out though early in his career he was preferred behind a number of other established players in a strong team and came up the pecking order when these blokes were traded away or released. To his credit he has been able to raise the bar every year as his responsibilities as a more senior player increases which also came with him getting more midfield time.

The thing that McVeigh has experienced that our younger crop haven't is that he was part of the club when it was at its best, and would at the time not have received the same attention from opposition clubs as some of his team mates.

You look at players like OK, Monfries who seems to be every one's new punching bag. He started off fantastic was running into blokes twice his size to get the ball and has now found the going a bit tough. He has played his entire career while the club has been on its knees (ladder wise) and where there has not been much confidence or success amongst the entire playing group. He is now having to cope with the situation that with all of our injuries and his excellent start to his career, opposition clubs are paying him a lot more attention than before as his is seen as a threat. He has to learn from this to make him a better player. I haven't given up on Gus yet.

Stanton was one of our best players last year, we've lost Hird as our general, he's wearing Hird's number and I think has been tagged by the opposition's best each week. That didn't happen last year. He now has to find a way to overcome this to get better. I certainly haven't given up on him yet either.

Johns is capable but I think Neagle's game last week and with a couple back soon, Johns has the battle of his life for the next 15 matches, but we'll see.

With so many injuries and such a depleted side, bloke that would normally get the third or fourth best to mark them (in there area of the ground) are now getting the best or second best opponent. It gets even tougher for our younger list.

The cream will always rise to the top in the end (even if it gets knocked down a few times). It's only round 7 of what we all knew at the beginning was season 2008 part one of the rebuild of EFC resurgance.

[andrewb]

If a player has not shown what he has got after 50 games, then you know not to expect much more from that point forward. McVeigh is an exception.

Come on Windy, I expect better than that from you.

Is a 21 year old who has played 50 games for a team that has been losing in anyway comparable to a 24 y.o. who took longer to break into a winning outfit? One would assume the 24 y.o. is far ahead in their development.

There are lots of players who have shown heaps of potential at 50 games and gone nowhere and conversely there are plenty of examples like McVeigh.

Geelong were looking to offload Jimmy Bartel a few years ago if you'll remember...

And as for Gringo - calling 21 y.o. and 22 y.o. players weak? That's the stupidest thing you've ever written (and there have been some crackers). I'm really not surprised that Stanton looked weak being tagged by Kane Cornes who is 27 and has been playing the game at the top level for 10 years. f*** off. You're not even a supporter.

[robbie67]

If a player has not shown what he has got after 50 games, then you know not to expect much more from that point forward. McVeigh is an exception.

Please tell me that not YOU. Whose opinion I really respect hasnt bought into this one as well? Rodan, Cox, Newman, Bateman, Fevola, Michael, Stenglien. Just a small sample of quality players that are running around now, that prove this theory wrong.

Dipierdomenico, Greg Williams, Bartel, Woewoden (ok he was crap), Libba are Brownlow Medalists that prove this theory wrong.

Garry O'Donnell played 100 reserves games. Dean Wallis should have been AA CHB in 2000.

This theory just isnt true. Their is more pressure on them to get better quicker these days because of the size of the lists, but they all develop at different rates. Some are great right away, like Judd. Others take a few years, like Bartel, and Cox. Some take more than a few years like Fevola and Wallis.

[BenDoolan]

Andrew, personally, I thought McVeigh has been terrific since 2005. He was played as a back pocket / tagger in that period 2004 - 06. While he may have given away some silly frees, he did some excellent defensive jobs for us in that period. I thought his 2006 was great - and deserved to be right up there in the B&F. He really played that role well, and even became an attacking defender while shutting down the likes of Judd / Farmer / Burgoyne / and other dangerous types of that ilk. Naturally, he gradually improved from 2004 through to 2006.

[doogle]

"And as for Gringo - calling 21 y.o. and 22 y.o. players weak? That's the stupidest thing you've ever written (and there have been some crackers). I'm really not surprised that Stanton looked weak being tagged by Kane Cornes who is 27 and has been playing the game at the top level for 10 years. f*** off. You're not even a supporter."

Kane Cornes is 25. Kane Cornes — Date of Birth: January 5, 1983

Drafted 2000 - playing for about 5 years not 10.

As a matter of interest, he went pick 20.

We had pick 17 and picked James Davies.

Pick 19 was Daniel Kerr.

Round Pick Player Recruited from Club
Priority 1 Nick Riewoldt Southport Sharks St Kilda
1 2 Justin Koschitzke Murray Bushrangers St Kilda
1 3 Alan Didak Port Adelaide Magpies Collingwood
1 4 Luke Livingston Bendigo Pioneers Carlton
1 5 Andrew McDougall Perth Football Club West Coast
1 6 Dylan Smith Sandringham Dragons Kangaroos
1 7 Laurence Angwin Dandenong Stingrays Adelaide
1 8 Daniel Motlop North Adelaide Roosters Kangaroos
1 9 Kayne Pettifer Murray Bushrangers Richmond
1 10 Jordan McMahon Glenelg Western Bulldogs
1 11 Trent Sporn North Adelaide Roosters Carlton
1 12 Shaun Burgoyne Port Adelaide Magpies Port Adelaide
1 13 Ashley McGrath South Fremantle Football Club Brisbane Lions
1 14 Daniel Harris Bendigo Bombers Kangaroos
1 15 Simon Wiggins Tasmania Devils Football Club Carlton
1 16 Scott Thompson Port Adelaide Magpies Melbourne
1 17 James Davies Xavier College Essendon
2 18 Daniel Kerr East Fremantle Football Club West Coast Eagles
2 (F/S) 19 Jason Cloke Eastern U18 Collingwood
2 20 Kane Cornes Glenelg Football Club Port Adelaide

Funny how drafts work out.

We got Ted Richards before
2 29 Jamie Charman Northern Eagles Brisbane Lions

Sam Hunt before
3 33 Martin Pike Kangaroos Brisbane Lions
3 39 Adam McPhee Dandenong U18 Fremantle
3 42 Daniel Pratt Northern Eagles Kangaroos
3 43 Mark Williams South Fremantle Football Club Hawthorn
3 44 Josh Hunt Bendigo U18 Geelong

Jordan Bannister before
4 50 Domenic Cassisi East Fremantle Football Club Port Adelaide
4 51 Dion Woods Perth Football Club Fremantle
4 52 Amon Buchanan Geelong U18 Sydney Swans
4 53 Hayden Skipworth Woodville-West Torrens Football Club Adelaide Crows (playing at Bendigo)
4 56 Daniel Cross Murray U18 Western Bulldogs
4 60 Corey Jones Sturt Football Club Kangaroos

Marc Bullen before
5 67 Graham Johncock Port Adelaide Magpies Adelaide Crows

Dean Cox came off the rookie draft for the eagles
Dean Cox East Perth Football Club West Coast Eagles

[F111]

We could have done better, but see what the scum picked up with their 3 top 20 picks!!

[quote="doogle"]"

1 4 Luke Livingston Bendigo Pioneers Carlton

1 11 Trent Sporn North Adelaide Roosters Carlton

1 15 Simon Wiggins Tasmania Devils Football Club Carlton


Funny how drafts work out.

[Rossoneri]

And there have been quite a few hacks who have gone before some of our better players, there is no exact science to it. At the moment, as Robbie has pointed out, we are paying for our poor recruiting from 2000-2004.

[Windy_Hill]

If a player has not shown what he has got after 50 games, then you know not to expect much more from that point forward. McVeigh is an exception.

Please tell me that not YOU. Whose opinion I really respect hasnt bought into this one as well? Rodan, Cox, Newman, Bateman, Fevola, Michael, Stenglien. Just a small sample of quality players that are running around now, that prove this theory wrong.

Dipierdomenico, Greg Williams, Bartel, Woewoden (ok he was crap), Libba are Brownlow Medalists that prove this theory wrong.

Garry O'Donnell played 100 reserves games. Dean Wallis should have been AA CHB in 2000.

This theory just isnt true. Their is more pressure on them to get better quicker these days because of the size of the lists, but they all develop at different rates. Some are great right away, like Judd. Others take a few years, like Bartel, and Cox. Some take more than a few years like Fevola and Wallis.

Rob, the Jesuit Priests use to say, "Show me the boy at Seven and I will Show you the Man" - its the same in Footy. I can absolutley say that only a very very small percentage of all AFL players can play 50 games and NOT show you their long term Talent. SO in the main, what you see at 50 games, is pretty much what you get. I dont expect any of our 50 game kids that have question marks on them at the moment are likely to become James Bartel overnight.

[Rossoneri]

Seeing as its the week off, we should have a look at the elite midfielders running around and see how they were like in their first 50 games. Feel free to add names as you go along.

Bartel - didnt show much. Was slow and unskilled, Geelong wanted to trade him.
Judd - Was a star, kicking let him down in his first season but from then on has not put a foot wrong.
Ablett - Likewise, could tell from his first 10 games he would be a star
Mitchell - off the rookie list, some said too slow.
Hodge - Started slowly, maybe struggled with the #1 pick tag hanging on him. People said that Hawthorn screwed themselves by not picking Judd.

So even some of the great players running around at the moment had rocky starts.
Feel free to add some more, they are the ones I have come up with already.