Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board

Tannin wrote:I don't think Young is much of a defender, Melliot. His spot is on the wing, where his one-on-one weakness is less likely to be exposed, where his pace and mobility is useful, and where his precision disposal is a powerful offensive weapon.

Fasolo, on the other hand, started as just a makeshift defender but is learning visibly week by week and rapidly getting to grips with his new role. His spot is in defence now.

Are we talking about Clinton Young here? He's got an absolute cannon of a left foot. And like most cannon's, you've got no idea where it's going most of the time. The one thing he's good for is that he's an "80 metre player", who can run 20 and then kick it 60. But precise, he is not.

Tannin wrote:Blair puts in one good game every three weeks, on average. It's a bit harsh to drop him, but look at it this way: what can Blair bring to our game, on a good day, that Adams doesn't do too, and do just as well? Ans: nothing much. And what does Adams bring that Blair can't provide? About 10 more possessions every match. Simply, with Adams in and Blair out, we would be a one-goal-better side, and that's a difference well worth having.

I was at the scoobs for the first half and Adams didn't look like a senior footballer. He must have torn it up in the second half. Bucks loves Blair's defensive acts and discipline so its hard to see him losing his spot. Having said that there is no doubt that Adams has more upside but my is that he needs to show this consistently before he pushes Blair out. I think that Dwyer is more of a chance as, at this stage, his finishing skills are better than both Blair and Adams.

Kosh wrote:

Tannin wrote:Blair puts in one good game every three weeks, on average. It's a bit harsh to drop him, but look at it this way: what can Blair bring to our game, on a good day, that Adams doesn't do too, and do just as well? Ans: nothing much. And what does Adams bring that Blair can't provide? About 10 more possessions every match. Simply, with Adams in and Blair out, we would be a one-goal-better side, and that's a difference well worth having.

I was at the scoobs for the first half and Adams didn't look like a senior footballer. He must have torn it up in the second half. Bucks loves Blair's defensive acts and discipline so its hard to see him losing his spot. Having said that there is no doubt that Adams has more upside but my is that he needs to show this consistently before he pushes Blair out. I think that Dwyer is more of a chance as, at this stage, his finishing skills are better than both Blair and Adams.

coburg is rebuilding after their alignment with richmond ceased at the end of last season. they have an extremely young squad. i am surprised, maybe i shouldn't be, how people can make assertions based on only seeing a set of numbers rather than the game itself.

i'd be trying to get dwyer into the team.

Blair, young, Langdon, goldsack, Josh Thomas, Keefe, frost, Grundy, even Maxy all need to keep their form up. A lot of pressure. Great.

^^Yep. And they know it. Goldsack started to show some form against the Roos. His effort though was absolutely top notch, even more so than usual.

Not so much for Grundy though. He's almost a lock in the team with Hudson the only possible replacement (won't see him very often). Witts so far hasn't shown enough to play first ruck for a full game (only 5 hit outs against the Roos). Grundy's been poor around the ground (too easily beaten in marking contests) but is holding his own in the ruck which is his primary role. Ideally we'd have a stronger bodied ruck to give Grundy a spell (Hudson is the man, but will he really be able to give us enough over 4 quarters?).

Anyone that wants Blair dropped, actually go to a game and watch the little man. Football is not all about numbers. (or the 5mtr square patch of turf you get for most of a TV coverage).

King Monkey wrote:Anyone that wants Blair dropped, actually go to a game and watch the little man. Football is not all about numbers. (or the 5mtr square patch of turf you get for most of a TV coverage).

Spot on!

Blair is very harshly assessed by many on this site.

At this stage of their careers, Blair >> Adams; especially if it's a big game.

Blair can't be dropped, his pressure and dedication are (partly) what created such a good first half last week. When Adams can do that as well as clearances, in and under stuff, then Blair is dropped, but not now.

I don't think they'll make any changes this week except maybe Witts out for Dwyer - I don't think BellChambers will play and we don't need 2 ruckmen against Paddy. I'd love to see them bring in another tall forward (Lynch, even Brown and play Keefe up forward) but I think they'll go small until Reid is back.

- Ben

melliot wrote: Although, Tannin, I don't fully agree on Faz. I think defensively he will get exposed against the best teams. ATM he is filling the role and offensively doing it well. I'd suggest Sinclair and Williams will take back those positions.

Disagree, melliot. I do not think Williams or Sinclair will replace Fas because neither of them has elite disposal, and that's what has been missing for our back half. Unless (until?) Broom or Berg come through, Fas is the man down there, IMO.

For the same reason, I believe we can only play a maximum of 2 of Toovey, Williams or Sinclair in the back line.

roar wrote:

melliot wrote: Although, Tannin, I don't fully agree on Faz. I think defensively he will get exposed against the best teams. ATM he is filling the role and offensively doing it well. I'd suggest Sinclair and Williams will take back those positions.

Disagree, melliot. I do not think Williams or Sinclair will replace Fas because neither of them has elite disposal, and that's what has been missing for our back half. Unless (until?) Broom or Berg come through, Fas is the man down there, IMO.

For the same reason, I believe we can only play a maximum of 2 of Toovey, Williams or Sinclair in the back line.

disagree with regards to needing elite disposal. both sinclair and williams know how to get the hard ball. and irrespective of how precise their kick is they manage to gain territory by moving the ball forward. you have to trust that we have the right numbers at the fall of the ball and win the contest if one eventuates. i'd see fas being moved forward once we get our back half in order again.

roar wrote:

melliot wrote: Although, Tannin, I don't fully agree on Faz. I think defensively he will get exposed against the best teams. ATM he is filling the role and offensively doing it well. I'd suggest Sinclair and Williams will take back those positions.

Disagree, melliot. I do not think Williams or Sinclair will replace Fas because neither of them has elite disposal, and that's what has been missing for our back half. Unless (until?) Broom or Berg come through, Fas is the man down there, IMO.

For the same reason, I believe we can only play a maximum of 2 of Toovey, Williams or Sinclair in the back line.

This.

Tooves and Marley the shutdown negators. Leaves 2 spots for rebounding runners with elite disposal (in a 7 man backline), plus maybe a Reid as the +1 providing devastating rebound via foot. A KPD who can use it well in Keeffe would be nice as well.

Of course, long-term, ideally Fasolo graduates up into the midfield full-time after a year or two at half back to teach him that elusive defensive game...

Excuse me! How did this thread get so off topic. I believe that Dave started it about Adams' terrible attitude in the VFL

Cuthbert Collingwood wrote:Excuse me! How did this thread get so off topic. I believe that Dave started it about Adams' terrible attitude in the VFL

and this is why you are no longer the coach. you clearly have no idea.

shut this thread down! and while you're at it turn off JW's account!

Was BOG today, imo. Would have to be 1st in line for a call up, you'd think. Work rate and attack on the footy was fantastatic. A class above and way too good for VFL.