How Does Our Midfield Rate with Shiel

Talk about everything Essendon. Past, Present and Future if it's about the Bombers this is the place to be.
User avatar
Windy_Hill
Champion of Essendon
Posts: 11632
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 10:23 pm

How Does Our Midfield Rate with Shiel

Post by Windy_Hill » Tue Oct 09, 2018 6:24 pm

Assuming the deal gets done and Shiel joins the Dons, where does that place our often criticised Midfield compared to the best in the competition?


Who do we have and how do they rate



Shiel - A
Merrett - A
Smith - B+
Heppell - B+
Zaharakis - B
McGrath - C+
Parish - C+
Langford - C+
Myers. - C
Guelfi - C-
Mutch - D
Colyer - D
Clark - E

However - you could probably add the likes of McKenna/Saad as Midfielders of sorts with their run and deliver style of play. They are not simply lock down defenders.

Add to that Stringer providing very effective clearances cameos. (I read we win 80% of clearances when Jake is in the centre bounce)

Finally you have the luxury of also swinging the likes of Fantasia and McDonald-Tippungwuti into the mix from time to time.

We can also look forward to continued improvement from McGrath, Parish and Langford. All could develop into at least B level players.

Without doing team by team analysis, I see us as having at least a Top 6 rated Midfield. Add in out KPP strength, particularly in defence (Francis, Hurley, Hooker, Ambrose) and solid options up forwaard (A fit Daniher, Stringer, Laverde, Stewart and Brown) then it would be simply mental weakness or coaching that will stop this team making finals in 2019

User avatar
Gimps
Champion of Essendon
Posts: 7809
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 12:11 pm
Location: Bumfuck Idaho

Re: How Does Our Midfield Rate with Shiel

Post by Gimps » Tue Oct 09, 2018 7:28 pm

Langford as good as McGrath... Jesus.

Rover99
Regular Senior Player
Posts: 1080
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2015 10:23 am

Re: How Does Our Midfield Rate with Shiel

Post by Rover99 » Tue Oct 09, 2018 8:15 pm

Gimps wrote:
Tue Oct 09, 2018 7:28 pm
Langford as good as McGrath... Jesus.
Double wow. Is that the right Windy?? #-o

User avatar
Windy_Hill
Champion of Essendon
Posts: 11632
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 10:23 pm

Re: How Does Our Midfield Rate with Shiel

Post by Windy_Hill » Wed Oct 10, 2018 12:25 am

Relative to the competition I would say McGrath and Langford are in the same bracket. Would suggest upside for both of them but Langford physically and in terms of growing into his role had a pretty decent year. He continues to receive great reviews from within the football department in terms of his intrinsic and potential ability

McGrath had a transition year and whilst he showed a bit moving into the midfield, still has a fair bit of development ahead of him. I dont think he was necessarily the better player in 2018 out of the two of them.

However, if I was a betting man, I would suggest McGrath has the bigger long term upside based on his pedigree and what he has shown to date.

So for now at least, I have them in the same bracket

2018 Stats - FWIW

Games Played. AMc 20. KL 16
Ave Disposals. AMc 19.9. KL 17.9
Goals. AMc 5. KL 9
Clearances - AMc 1.3. KL 2.2
I50 - AMc 1.2. KL 3.4
Ave SC Points. AMc 71.4. KL 80

User avatar
patoman
On the Rookie List
Posts: 240
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 12:57 pm

Re: How Does Our Midfield Rate with Shiel

Post by patoman » Wed Oct 10, 2018 7:34 am

Agree with the points above. I think Langford will be a really good player... I think McGrath will become the better of the two players long term... I think Dave “Long left boot” Myers must be looking at our list and wondering if he’ll get a game this year!!! I believe like many others I’ve said most years if DM can have a good year and deliver on his legendary potential we could be good in the midfield... this is the first time we can look at the list and say if DM breaks down again it really doesn’t matter vingertje I hope he has a great year and finally shows why we picked him over Cyrill but if not we have sooo much to get excited about in that mids group I really don’t think we’ll notice!! Caaarrnn those Mighty Bombers for 2019!!! :D

User avatar
Windy_Hill
Champion of Essendon
Posts: 11632
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 10:23 pm

Re: How Does Our Midfield Rate with Shiel

Post by Windy_Hill » Wed Oct 10, 2018 8:33 am

Rover99 wrote:
Tue Oct 09, 2018 8:15 pm
Gimps wrote:
Tue Oct 09, 2018 7:28 pm
Langford as good as McGrath... Jesus.
Double wow. Is that the right Windy?? #-o
Is there a wrong Windy?

User avatar
Windy Hille
High Draft Pick
Posts: 702
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 7:49 pm

Re: How Does Our Midfield Rate with Shiel

Post by Windy Hille » Wed Oct 10, 2018 10:05 am

My views on ratings following current form - not potential...

Shiel - A
Merrett - A
Smith - A
Heppell - A
Zaharakis - B
McGrath - C+
Parish - C+
Langford - B
Myers. - C
Guelfi - C-
Mutch - D
Colyer - D
Clark - E

Crazyman
Champion of Essendon
Posts: 6830
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 12:51 pm
Location: Sydney (Don't hold it against me)
Contact:

Re: How Does Our Midfield Rate with Shiel

Post by Crazyman » Wed Oct 10, 2018 11:22 am

Windy Hille wrote:
Wed Oct 10, 2018 10:05 am
My views on ratings following current form - not potential...

Shiel - A
Merrett - A
Smith - A
Heppell - A
Zaharakis - B
McGrath - C+
Parish - C+
Langford - B
Myers. - C
Guelfi - C-
Mutch - D
Colyer - D
Clark - E
Bit harsh on Zaka and McGrath, very generous on Myers and Colyer.

Rover99
Regular Senior Player
Posts: 1080
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2015 10:23 am

Re: How Does Our Midfield Rate with Shiel

Post by Rover99 » Wed Oct 10, 2018 1:54 pm

Windy_Hill wrote:
Wed Oct 10, 2018 8:33 am
Rover99 wrote:
Tue Oct 09, 2018 8:15 pm
Gimps wrote:
Tue Oct 09, 2018 7:28 pm
Langford as good as McGrath... Jesus.
Double wow. Is that the right Windy?? #-o
Is there a wrong Windy?
Well I'm not sure but now I see that the Hille has rated him a B and McGrath a C+. So why did we even bother with Shiel?l 6 months time he'll?l be an A+ :D

User avatar
Windy_Hill
Champion of Essendon
Posts: 11632
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 10:23 pm

Re: How Does Our Midfield Rate with Shiel

Post by Windy_Hill » Wed Oct 10, 2018 5:36 pm

Rover99 wrote:
Wed Oct 10, 2018 1:54 pm
Windy_Hill wrote:
Wed Oct 10, 2018 8:33 am
Rover99 wrote:
Tue Oct 09, 2018 8:15 pm
Gimps wrote:
Tue Oct 09, 2018 7:28 pm
Langford as good as McGrath... Jesus.
Double wow. Is that the right Windy?? #-o
Is there a wrong Windy?
Well I'm not sure but now I see that the Hille has rated him a B and McGrath a C+. So why did we even bother with Shiel?l 6 months time he'll?l be an A+ :D

Yeah so basically the “wrong” Windy is in agreement with me. Don’t underestimate Kyle. I was not sold on him (see my post Kyle Languid). But I think his development has been very exciting. Will probably not go beyond a B but on this season’s form did as much if or more than McGrath.k

User avatar
Windy Hille
High Draft Pick
Posts: 702
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 7:49 pm

Re: How Does Our Midfield Rate with Shiel

Post by Windy Hille » Wed Oct 10, 2018 10:32 pm

Rover99 wrote:
Wed Oct 10, 2018 1:54 pm
Windy_Hill wrote:
Wed Oct 10, 2018 8:33 am
Rover99 wrote:
Tue Oct 09, 2018 8:15 pm
Gimps wrote:
Tue Oct 09, 2018 7:28 pm
Langford as good as McGrath... Jesus.
Double wow. Is that the right Windy?? #-o
Is there a wrong Windy?
Well I'm not sure but now I see that the Hille has rated him a B and McGrath a C+. So why did we even bother with Shiel?l 6 months time he'll?l be an A+ :D
Credit where it’s due. Langers was pumping more inside 50’s than any other player in the league over the month of July. His midfield work improved dramatically this season. Should have won the most Improved award ahead of Myers who was his usual inconsistent self.

User avatar
Gimps
Champion of Essendon
Posts: 7809
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 12:11 pm
Location: Bumfuck Idaho

Re: How Does Our Midfield Rate with Shiel

Post by Gimps » Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:05 am

Windy Hille wrote:
Wed Oct 10, 2018 10:32 pm
Rover99 wrote:
Wed Oct 10, 2018 1:54 pm
Windy_Hill wrote:
Wed Oct 10, 2018 8:33 am
Rover99 wrote:
Tue Oct 09, 2018 8:15 pm
Gimps wrote:
Tue Oct 09, 2018 7:28 pm
Langford as good as McGrath... Jesus.
Double wow. Is that the right Windy?? #-o
Is there a wrong Windy?
Well I'm not sure but now I see that the Hille has rated him a B and McGrath a C+. So why did we even bother with Shiel?l 6 months time he'll?l be an A+ :D
Credit where it’s due. Langers was pumping more inside 50’s than any other player in the league over the month of July. His midfield work improved dramatically this season. Should have won the most Improved award ahead of Myers who was his usual inconsistent self.
Nice to see you’re still deluded.

nudder12
Regular Senior Player
Posts: 1616
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 11:47 pm

Re: How Does Our Midfield Rate with Shiel

Post by nudder12 » Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:47 pm

I'm becoming disinclined to worry about "ratings" of players, with a few rare exceptions.
These days players don't need to be A+ or B or whatever to be effective.
As Jack Dyer used to describe them - "good ordinary footballers" - who do their role, are mostly what is required.
For example, I don't consider many Richmond or Collingwood mids to be great, but they act out their role for the team, and look where it got them.
Champion team Vs Team of champions, and all that......

User avatar
Windy_Hill
Champion of Essendon
Posts: 11632
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 10:23 pm

Re: How Does Our Midfield Rate with Shiel

Post by Windy_Hill » Thu Oct 11, 2018 6:57 pm

nudder12 wrote:
Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:47 pm
I'm becoming disinclined to worry about "ratings" of players, with a few rare exceptions.
These days players don't need to be A+ or B or whatever to be effective.
As Jack Dyer used to describe them - "good ordinary footballers" - who do their role, are mostly what is required.
For example, I don't consider many Richmond or Collingwood mids to be great, but they act out their role for the team, and look where it got them.
Champion team Vs Team of champions, and all that......
Yep and the good ordinary footballers are rated a C to B

As for Richmond, bit rough on Dusty to say they dont have any great mids

User avatar
Windy Hille
High Draft Pick
Posts: 702
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 7:49 pm

Re: How Does Our Midfield Rate with Shiel

Post by Windy Hille » Thu Oct 11, 2018 8:47 pm

Gimps wrote:
Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:05 am
Windy Hille wrote:
Wed Oct 10, 2018 10:32 pm
Rover99 wrote:
Wed Oct 10, 2018 1:54 pm
Windy_Hill wrote:
Wed Oct 10, 2018 8:33 am
Rover99 wrote:
Tue Oct 09, 2018 8:15 pm


Double wow. Is that the right Windy?? #-o
Is there a wrong Windy?
Well I'm not sure but now I see that the Hille has rated him a B and McGrath a C+. So why did we even bother with Shiel?l 6 months time he'll?l be an A+ :D
Credit where it’s due. Langers was pumping more inside 50’s than any other player in the league over the month of July. His midfield work improved dramatically this season. Should have won the most Improved award ahead of Myers who was his usual inconsistent self.
Nice to see you’re still deluded.
Ah yes, I remember you saying the same thing when I said McKenna will be a player :lol:

My “delusions” v your predictions

Fair to say I’m winning

nudder12
Regular Senior Player
Posts: 1616
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 11:47 pm

Re: How Does Our Midfield Rate with Shiel

Post by nudder12 » Sat Oct 13, 2018 1:11 am

Windy_Hill wrote:
Thu Oct 11, 2018 6:57 pm
nudder12 wrote:
Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:47 pm
I'm becoming disinclined to worry about "ratings" of players, with a few rare exceptions.
These days players don't need to be A+ or B or whatever to be effective.
As Jack Dyer used to describe them - "good ordinary footballers" - who do their role, are mostly what is required.
For example, I don't consider many Richmond or Collingwood mids to be great, but they act out their role for the team, and look where it got them.
Champion team Vs Team of champions, and all that......
Yep and the good ordinary footballers are rated a C to B

As for Richmond, bit rough on Dusty to say they dont have any great mids
Read it again, I think you missed a "m" - I said not Many great mids :)

User avatar
Windy_Hill
Champion of Essendon
Posts: 11632
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 10:23 pm

Re: How Does Our Midfield Rate with Shiel

Post by Windy_Hill » Sun Oct 14, 2018 6:48 pm

nudder12 wrote:
Sat Oct 13, 2018 1:11 am
Windy_Hill wrote:
Thu Oct 11, 2018 6:57 pm
nudder12 wrote:
Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:47 pm
I'm becoming disinclined to worry about "ratings" of players, with a few rare exceptions.
These days players don't need to be A+ or B or whatever to be effective.
As Jack Dyer used to describe them - "good ordinary footballers" - who do their role, are mostly what is required.
For example, I don't consider many Richmond or Collingwood mids to be great, but they act out their role for the team, and look where it got them.
Champion team Vs Team of champions, and all that......
Yep and the good ordinary footballers are rated a C to B

As for Richmond, bit rough on Dusty to say they dont have any great mids
Read it again, I think you missed a "m" - I said not Many great mids :)

Yep fair enough

User avatar
Windy Hille
High Draft Pick
Posts: 702
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 7:49 pm

Re: How Does Our Midfield Rate with Shiel

Post by Windy Hille » Wed Oct 31, 2018 9:36 am

It seems there’s a lot of hype surrounding us for next season. I’m not comfortable with that. SEN creating a ladder of most hyped clubs for 2019. We’re sitting on top according to them due to recruiting, sponsorship announcements, and glitzy articles.

Expectation will be high. And I think we struggle to live up to these things when it’s expected.

User avatar
Windy_Hill
Champion of Essendon
Posts: 11632
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 10:23 pm

Re: How Does Our Midfield Rate with Shiel

Post by Windy_Hill » Wed Oct 31, 2018 6:14 pm

We are a click bait club for the media. Perhaps the biggest of them all. While we may come in around fourth or fifth in the membership stakes, it is quite likely we still retain the label of “most supported” club in the country. Our following in Perth and Queensland in particular is by far and away the biggest of all the Victorian clubs. Additionally we are also a club that other supporters, notably Hawthorn and Carlton, love to hate. They are still harping on about the needle culture at Windy Hill.

So,.......is it any surprise that we are heavily featured in off season fluff pieces. After all, does anyone care whether North Melbourne are training the house down or Geelong is set to crack x number of Members? Nope. Essendon is a big club with a huge following that generates clicks more than any other.


Some of you may recall a recent Roy Morgan research study that had Sydney as the most followed club in the land with the Bombers second. This is a flawed study as clearly the sample base in Sydney, whether they follow football or not, will likely just state the Swans as their team. They recorded almost twice the number of followers than Essendon in second place! This seems wrong when you consider the number of empty seats in their 40,000 seat stadium.

http://www.sydneyswans.com.au/news/2017 ... -supported

nudder12
Regular Senior Player
Posts: 1616
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 11:47 pm

Re: How Does Our Midfield Rate with Shiel

Post by nudder12 » Fri Nov 02, 2018 7:09 pm

Windy_Hill wrote:
Wed Oct 31, 2018 6:14 pm
We are a click bait club for the media. Perhaps the biggest of them all. While we may come in around fourth or fifth in the membership stakes, it is quite likely we still retain the label of “most supported” club in the country. Our following in Perth and Queensland in particular is by far and away the biggest of all the Victorian clubs. Additionally we are also a club that other supporters, notably Hawthorn and Carlton, love to hate. They are still harping on about the needle culture at Windy Hill.

So,.......is it any surprise that we are heavily featured in off season fluff pieces. After all, does anyone care whether North Melbourne are training the house down or Geelong is set to crack x number of Members? Nope. Essendon is a big club with a huge following that generates clicks more than any other.


Some of you may recall a recent Roy Morgan research study that had Sydney as the most followed club in the land with the Bombers second. This is a flawed study as clearly the sample base in Sydney, whether they follow football or not, will likely just state the Swans as their team. They recorded almost twice the number of followers than Essendon in second place! This seems wrong when you consider the number of empty seats in their 40,000 seat stadium.

http://www.sydneyswans.com.au/news/2017 ... -supported
I'd be pretty sure the Poll data is flawed. There's no explanation of how "most supported" was calculated.
It could be possible though, if you also consider old South Melbourne fans (which explains why SCG seats are empty), and that a lot of people (anecdotally) simply like or have a soft spot for the Swans. Many of these people aren't members at all and barely even follow AFL, but they might have been included in the survey.
Disclaimer - the methodology of the Poll might be on Roy Morgan's website, but I can't be stuffed to have a look. Care factor = zero :)

Post Reply