Blood some kids for crying out loud

[James]

Our next four after this week are all at the Dome against lesser opposition. We may or may not drop them, but for all intents and purposes we'll still have 9+ wins going into Geelong and will be fairly comfortable in the top 2.

I don't particularily agree with the frenzy about dropping half the side when we don't absolutely obliterate a side, but just because we're winning week in week out, doesn't mean there's no room to improve. Epspecially when quality like Hudghton and Maguire are sitting out, and feisty kids like Eddy, Armitage, Lynch and Steven are playing well at Sandy.

Blooding younger players into a side that's playing good football and winning is a great experience for them and a nice step in developing them. Lynch for one would be a great inclusion as the third tall - when we're up against a side with an actual backline it will be important to have more than two options.

It's admittedly tough to think of anyone that doesn't have a place in the current team, surely there must be room to keeping youth development rolling. If we don't we'll be running into a dead end without anyone to pick up the slack once Hayes/Hudghton/Milne/Baker drop off.

Geary/Eddy/Armitage look like a very promising trio in years to come, though.

[plugger66]

Our next four after this week are all at the Dome against lesser opposition. We may or may not drop them, but for all intents and purposes we'll still have 9+ wins going into Geelong and will be fairly comfortable in the top 2.

I don't particularily agree with the frenzy about dropping half the side when we don't absolutely obliterate a side, but just because we're winning week in week out, doesn't mean there's no room to improve. Epspecially when quality like Hudghton and Maguire are sitting out, and feisty kids like Eddy, Armitage, Lynch and Steven are playing well at Sandy.

Blooding younger players into a side that's playing good football and winning is a great experience for them and a nice step in developing them. Lynch for one would be a great inclusion as the third tall - when we're up against a side with an actual backline it will be important to have more than two options.

It's admittedly tough to think of anyone that doesn't have a place in the current team, surely there must be room to keeping youth development rolling. If we don't we'll be running into a dead end without anyone to pick up the slack once Hayes/Hudghton/Milne/Baker drop off.

Geary/Eddy/Armitage look like a very promising trio in years to come, though.

If you blood someone then another comes out. As you started this post tell us who is out and who replaces them because there isnt to many players out of form at the moment.

[James]

That is indeed the predicament.

Gwilt is the only one I can really think of that isn't earning his place in the side. Had a shocker on the weekend, maybe it's time to go.

[saint vince]

Good post I rekon.

I think we should put all the kids in. Put all our older blkes in for an surgry they need and look to get some good kids in the draft and then build for next year. This year is clearly a write off and we may as well blood some youngsters for the future.

FFS this forum is clearly living in the twilightzone.

You blood some kids when you are looking to re build not when you are on top of the ladder.

Lets just pick the best 22 each and every week and see if we can win a flag.

[James]

Yeah, because it's all about right now.

I'm not saying drop half our team, but just put the space in there for some younger kids as the 21st/22nd men and such.

If we play this current team for 22 for a few years, yes, we'll be alright for that few years. But then what? Our older players drop off. Our core gets stiff. And who have we got to bring in? A bunch of 21/22 year olds that have never played games, never been developed and never experienced AFL football? It's a recipe for disaster.

It's not rebuilding. It's evolving.

[#1GILL]

Also Hawthorn(although a lot younger than us) managed to blood a couple of youngsters in their premiship season. Rioli turned out the be a gem and would be in their top 5 this year. If you have the young talent(which we do) i think you should test them at the highest level...Especially if you are playing lower ranked sides...Melbourne, North, Ect

[saint vince]

Yeah, because it's all about right now.

I'm not saying drop half our team, but just put the space in there for some younger kids as the 21st/22nd men and such.

If we play this current team for 22 for a few years, yes, we'll be alright for that few years. But then what? Our older players drop off. Our core gets stiff. And who have we got to bring in? A bunch of 21/22 year olds that have never played games, never been developed and never experienced AFL football? It's a recipe for disaster.

It's not rebuilding. It's evolving.

You have convinced me. I agree we should continually evolve but never actually play our best side that way we can always be competitive but never succeed. Our young players will get there go when they are in our best 22 or there are injuries.

You are clearly just looking to stir people up so I will leave it at that.

[James]

[James]

Answer me with your opinion - if we dropped any two of Gwilt, Clarke, Baker and Schneider to bring in any two of Lynch, Steven, Heyne and Armitage, would our overall team output be considerably decreased?

I wouldn't think significantly. I reckon they'd be keen to prove themselves at AFL level. If we're relying on that first four I named to win games, we're not going anywhere. And are we going anywhere? It seems so. Have a think about that.

[saint66au]

Our next four after this week are all at the Dome against lesser opposition.

There we go...complacency...right there

Best available 22 every week

[borderbarry]

I would have thought the player in the greatest jepardy of getting dropped after the Brisbane game would have been Bakes.

[James]

Our next four after this week are all at the Dome against lesser opposition.

There we go...complacency...right there

Best available 22 every week

Complacency is deciding that the named squad against Brisbane is our best 22.

It probably isn't. But there's only one way to find out.

[Launcestonsaint]

Ever heard of a phrase, "If in aint broke, don't fix it"?
We're 9-0.

[saint66au]

Our next four after this week are all at the Dome against lesser opposition.

There we go...complacency...right there

Best available 22 every week

Complacency is deciding that the named squad against Brisbane is our best 22.

It probably isn't. But there's only one way to find out.

No..but calling teams "lesser opposition" or intimating it by resting players is just asking for trouble

[python]

generally speaking, 'blooding some kids' is a term preferred by the coaching panel to be used over the term being used by the media and fans- tanking.

Yes we should consider bringing some kids in, but only if their form is too good to say no to. You brought up Lynch, Steven, Heyne and Armitage. What have they done to break into a side which is undefeated nearing the half way point of a season? Played one decent game in the reserves? Not good enough to compete with the seniors level of play this year. String a couple of dominant games together, and then we'll see

Melbourne arent even rushing their young guys (watts etc), so why should a team with finals seemingly locked up do it?

[James]

Our next four after this week are all at the Dome against lesser opposition.

There we go...complacency...right there

Best available 22 every week

Complacency is deciding that the named squad against Brisbane is our best 22.

It probably isn't. But there's only one way to find out.

No..but calling teams "lesser opposition" or intimating it by resting players is just asking for trouble

I know what you mean, but that wasn't really what I was suggesting.

Look at Geary for example. He's getting a good go. He's only 19 and he's showing great form. What if we threw in Armitage and he did the same things? Surely you'd want to keep him in the side.

[Mr Magic]

Our next four after this week are all at the Dome against lesser opposition.

There we go...complacency...right there

Best available 22 every week

Complacency is deciding that the named squad against Brisbane is our best 22.

It probably isn't. But there's only one way to find out.

No..but calling teams "lesser opposition" or intimating it by resting players is just asking for trouble

I know what you mean, but that wasn't really what I was suggesting.

Look at Geary for example. He's getting a good go. He's only 19 and he's showing great form. What if we threw in Armitage and he did the same things? Surely you'd want to keep him in the side.

So who is Armitage going to replace?

And how do you feel about all the calls in other threads for Max to replace Zac immediately? An old for a new.

Isn't it more logical to pick the best players for the roles they are expected to play, immaterial of age?

The only factors that should come in to the decision are
form
fitness
ability to follow the coaches instructions and team rules.

Whether they are young or old should have no bearing.

[Goose is king]

I have heard the phrase "if it aint broke dont fix it".

Its such a stupid phrase.

If you become stagnant and dont try to improve then you are just waiting for it to break and hoping you achieve what you seek before it does.

Its the same in business, sport and life.

I prefer "you can't dictate the footprints in the sand of time whilst sitting on your arse"

[clarky449]

NO!.... pick the best team

[James]

On the Maxy/Dawson dilemma, I personally believe there's room in our backline for both of them to have a role.

Yes, there are older players in better form playing better football, but if it would pay dividends in a few years, why the hell not?

Grant Thomas ran our 2004 list into the ground. It was a mess at the end of 2006. Lyon took two years to repair it. Was Thomas blooding any new youth at the time?

[Launcestonsaint]

Yes, there are older players in better form playing better football, but if it would pay dividends in a few years, why the hell not?

Not doing this might pay dividends this year.

[St Fidelius]

Stupid thread IMO...

You play your best 22 and NOT BLOOD any players, unless you are rebuilding.

As for your GT comment, In 2004 GT "blooded" Sam Fisher who played 7 matches in his first year, but was due to form and injuries

[hAyES]

So who comes out of the side when pretty much everyone is having the best year of their careers? You don't flirt with form.

[JacksonsGirl]

I'm sure once someone loses form and someone else is performing well for Sandy then a change will be made. then that person will gain experience in a successful environment without too much disruption to the list.

imagine the outcry if the club dropped a few players to "bleed" youngsters and lost to Melb or something.

[Mr Magic]

Grant Thomas ran our 2004 list into the ground. It was a mess at the end of 2006. Lyon took two years to repair it. Was Thomas blooding any new youth at the time?

We have a totally revamped fitness and conditioning regime at the Club these days.
So far their results give me great confidence that they know what they are doing and I trust them to manage the situation.

IMHO, your call to play youth for the 'development benefits' risks the current performance/ethos of the team if they are selected in front of older players who are playing well, just because they are young and need development.