Re: 23 and under
Posted: Thu Sep 22, 2011 4:42 pm
Was just personal opinion. Fair call.boncer34 wrote:Jimmy and the blokes in charge are happy with him. Maybe Browne doesn't like himbut I'll stick to listening to some others.
The great forum in name of the Essendon Football Club
http://bombertalk4.com/
Was just personal opinion. Fair call.boncer34 wrote:Jimmy and the blokes in charge are happy with him. Maybe Browne doesn't like himbut I'll stick to listening to some others.
Opinions is what this forum is built on.Gossy7 wrote:Was just personal opinion. Fair call.boncer34 wrote:Jimmy and the blokes in charge are happy with him. Maybe Browne doesn't like himbut I'll stick to listening to some others.
Well Filth, this is something you also say almost every year. You continually say how it's not the talent that's the problem, first it was Sheedy, then it was Quinn, then it was Knights.......................it's always something, but heaven forbid, anyone wearing red and black just being oridinary.filthy2 wrote:[
The only statement I totally disagree with you on is "every time this year that one of the better sides made us play them one on one, our talent was miles away from being up to it"....we are the equal in talent in most cases or better in a few but are years away physically hopefully being adressed in the next 6 months....or the start of said addressing.
No. Not at all. Regardless of if he was a number 1 or 80 it doesn't take a way the fact that he won't play 100+ games, let alone 50. He's no good and won't be any good.jimmyc1985 wrote:Bit harsh aren't you Gossy to be rubbishing a bloke we picked up with pick #80 in the fifth round of an ordinary draft? Most of the guys drafted in the fifth round have obvious deficiencies in their game and the odds are heavily stacked against them making it to 100+ AFL games.
No way you can tell after a year. Odds are, like Jimmy said that he won't make it, but you never know. Needs another year or two to make a proper judgement.Gossy7 wrote:No. Not at all. Regardless of if he was a number 1 or 80 it doesn't take a way the fact that he won't play 100+ games, let alone 50. He's no good and won't be any good.jimmyc1985 wrote:Bit harsh aren't you Gossy to be rubbishing a bloke we picked up with pick #80 in the fifth round of an ordinary draft? Most of the guys drafted in the fifth round have obvious deficiencies in their game and the odds are heavily stacked against them making it to 100+ AFL games.
Very, very true.danstar84 wrote:No way you can tell after a year. Odds are, like Jimmy said that he won't make it, but you never know. Needs another year or two to make a proper judgement.Gossy7 wrote:No. Not at all. Regardless of if he was a number 1 or 80 it doesn't take a way the fact that he won't play 100+ games, let alone 50. He's no good and won't be any good.jimmyc1985 wrote:Bit harsh aren't you Gossy to be rubbishing a bloke we picked up with pick #80 in the fifth round of an ordinary draft? Most of the guys drafted in the fifth round have obvious deficiencies in their game and the odds are heavily stacked against them making it to 100+ AFL games.
I'm sure most people thought that Crameri was gone last year, and look at him now.
Yet I havn't seen his progress for a year. I've seen it for the last 10 years. I know the sorts of blokes that can make it, and those who can't/won't. Like his brother, simply won't make it.danstar84 wrote:No way you can tell after a year. Odds are, like Jimmy said that he won't make it, but you never know. Needs another year or two to make a proper judgement.Gossy7 wrote:No. Not at all. Regardless of if he was a number 1 or 80 it doesn't take a way the fact that he won't play 100+ games, let alone 50. He's no good and won't be any good.jimmyc1985 wrote:Bit harsh aren't you Gossy to be rubbishing a bloke we picked up with pick #80 in the fifth round of an ordinary draft? Most of the guys drafted in the fifth round have obvious deficiencies in their game and the odds are heavily stacked against them making it to 100+ AFL games.
I'm sure most people thought that Crameri was gone last year, and look at him now.
I'm not sure what the all the fuss is about regarding Melksham. He's not particularly skilled, not particularly quick, not really a ball winner and not very big. I've never seen him grab a game, or even part of a game by the scruff of the neck and really change the shape of it. To compare him To Heppell is folly.filthy2 wrote:Of course we are miles away Rob....that is why I pulled the 23 and below out to highlight:
a) There is some young serious talent there making up what? 66% of the list. 21 players.
b) They have years and now a serious EFC from the Pres down in place to ensure they will be the best they can be going forward.
I would have thought that Melksham in his only first 2 years has shown enough that he will be up there with the Hepps and so on, Crameri left a huge hole when he went down just before the finals and Pears is rated our best back according to Lloydy so.....![]()
As regards the past, you get a sore neck looking back....let us look foward with a bit more confidence at least.
As I say we'll see.Happily it won't be for want of effort or money (anymore the latter).
Not disagreeing with you, because I'll admit I know next to nothing on the guy apart from his limited exposure this year, but why won't he make it? What's he distinctively lacking? For instance is easy to say Slattery won't make it because he lacks skill, constantly gives away stupid free kicks, etc. From what we saw of Ross, he looked ok, nothing special but I didn't pick up on anything that he was horrible at so to speak. From what you're saying I'm guessing you've either played with or against him, what haven't we yet seen that we're going to see?Gossy7 wrote:Yet I havn't seen his progress for a year. I've seen it for the last 10 years. I know the sorts of blokes that can make it, and those who can't/won't. Like his brother, simply won't make it.danstar84 wrote:No way you can tell after a year. Odds are, like Jimmy said that he won't make it, but you never know. Needs another year or two to make a proper judgement.Gossy7 wrote:No. Not at all. Regardless of if he was a number 1 or 80 it doesn't take a way the fact that he won't play 100+ games, let alone 50. He's no good and won't be any good.jimmyc1985 wrote:Bit harsh aren't you Gossy to be rubbishing a bloke we picked up with pick #80 in the fifth round of an ordinary draft? Most of the guys drafted in the fifth round have obvious deficiencies in their game and the odds are heavily stacked against them making it to 100+ AFL games.
I'm sure most people thought that Crameri was gone last year, and look at him now.
I think he's looked pretty good for a two year player and he goes in when it's his turn, but I do think he needs plenty of improvement if he's going to be very good. AT this stage he probably projects to be a good 4th or 5th midfielder at best.gringo wrote:I'm not sure what the all the fuss is about regarding Melksham. He's not particularly skilled, not particularly quick, not really a ball winner and not very big. I've never seen him grab a game, or even part of a game by the scruff of the neck and really change the shape of it. To compare him To Heppell is folly.
This.Windy_Hill wrote:Wouldnt it be best to judge the real value of these guys when they have 40-50 games under their belts? Its rare to see a young kid hit his potential before this milestone.
He still has a very light frame, hopefully he fills out over summer and grows into a man. Give him time and he'll be very good player for a very long time. Not every bloke can be a ready made AFL player like Heppell and Hurley. Look at Dane Swan, you wouldn't say he was particularly skilled, quick or big and he spent years in the system before he came good. Now he's a superstar, hopefully we are sitting on a future superstar.j-mac31 wrote:I think he's looked pretty good for a two year player and he goes in when it's his turn, but I do think he needs plenty of improvement if he's going to be very good. AT this stage he probably projects to be a good 4th or 5th midfielder at best.gringo wrote:I'm not sure what the all the fuss is about regarding Melksham. He's not particularly skilled, not particularly quick, not really a ball winner and not very big. I've never seen him grab a game, or even part of a game by the scruff of the neck and really change the shape of it. To compare him To Heppell is folly.