AFL Fullback

[CURLY]

All this talk and a lot of whinging about StKilda not having or recruiting a big bodied fullback yet how many are there in the AFL? Yes I ackowledge alot of teams have talls that play down back but lets be honets other than a select few none are fantastic footballers. Most clubs in fact basically all clubs are relying on a well structured and cohesive back six with the ability to switch from role to role as they come up. Im more than happy to back a well drilled cohesive back six that provide attack and can swing onto a dangerous opponent of most sizes than the one dimensional backline where a bloke is rendered useless unless the opponent is a lumbering forward.

[philtee]

I'm with you Curly. A cohesive back 6 and defensive pressure all over the ground are
worth more than a single heavyweight fullback. Be nice to have such a player, but there
aren't too many blokes who are 190cm and 105kg with enough smarts and a lightning 10metre
sprint. If you do find one, they're the next Buddy, and they're playing forward.

[Con Gorozidis]

I agree.
We all know we would like a tall fb. Many on here predicted this would be an issue when Zac left (others were quick to bag Zac).
But can I ask two simple questions to those crticising the club.
Who and How?

Name me one quality tall defender who is un-contracted and available?
Just one.

[saintjake]

How many players currently playing the role as a FB were actually drafated as a FB?

[joffaboy]

Even good fullbacks will get a bag kicked on them occasionally.

Saw it happen to Max, our last true FB, Zac, got flogged a couple of times.

Even Scarlett got flogged when his other defenders didn't give him a chop out.

What you require in our situation is the backline to be working as a team when it comes down.

But before that, we need the midfield doing its job, winning possession, AND putting extreme pressure on when not in possession.

This allows the backline more time so a monster FF cant isolate a smaller FB and the others can provide spoiling capability.

The other glaring weakness, the ruck, has, to an extent, been addressed. This weakness in 2012 exacerbated the problems in some games when Tommy Simpkin was exposed on FF monsters like Cox, or Petrie because we were second to the ball at stoppages.

So in essence, tighten up the mids, pressure in the middle of the ground and we take the pressure off the backline in 2013.

[paddy]

good thread...

It is nice to hear another side of the story.

Wonder what the height/weights are of other teams FB, or KPD...

and how far off the mark we are

[jimmy_slats]

to be honest im glad we didnt knee jerk and sign just any one for the hell of it seeing as we are a very good chance to get a proper premium full back in next years trade period.

[saint6709]

I agree.
We all know we would like a tall fb. Many on here predicted this would be an issue when Zac left (others were quick to bag Zac).
But can I ask two simple questions to those crticising the club.
Who and How?

Name me one quality tall defender who is un-contracted and available?
Just one.

I like the highlights reel of jesse wells

[dragit]

The guy who left the hole at FB came as a rookie that no-one else wanted, in my opinion it would certainly be worth the risk to trial at least one, probably 2 full backs… best case scenario we unearth a 'free' gem, worst case is that they get de-listed in a year or two just like CJ, Kosi, Blake, Wilkes will.

At our development stage, a FB playing very good footy at state level is worth the risk.

[Saintersss]

All this talk and a lot of whinging about StKilda not having or recruiting a big bodied fullback yet how many are there in the AFL? Yes I ackowledge alot of teams have talls that play down back but lets be honets other than a select few none are fantastic footballers. Most clubs in fact basically all clubs are relying on a well structured and cohesive back six with the ability to switch from role to role as they come up. Im more than happy to back a well drilled cohesive back six that provide attack and can swing onto a dangerous opponent of most sizes than the one dimensional backline where a bloke is rendered useless unless the opponent is a lumbering forward.

The fact is we tried this tactic this year, and guess what? ...it didn't work. All we heard throughout the year was that we would acquire a FB and ruckman at the end of the season. We got one, not the other.

Also what is the harm in giving one spot up on a Hartigan or some other young player playing the FB role in the state league. Someone that could potentially fill that role. Geelong did it perfectly (albeit he was old, not young) with Podsiadly. They had a weakness in the FF position, so they picked up a star state league who filled the role. Barlow another player that many people called a dud state league player who came in and played well. The fact is just because they weren't drafted at 18 doesn't mean they are not any good. Seriously, I've loved Blake's contribution to the club, but I'd rather give one of these state league FB's a go, rather than giving Blake another year (which role is he exactly going to fill in 2013?). If this player we draft is no good, hey, we can delist him, just like we delist the majority of players we draft, no harm done. We can still go after a FB in the 2013 trade/draft period.

I mean when you also think about, Mitch Brown has effectively been a state league player his entire career, although he has been on an AFL list, he has played predominantly in the WAFL. And there have definitely been better performing key defenders in other state leagues than Brown. Yet, we were willing to give up Pick 25, 26 and Cripps for him, and we can't just give up one spot for one of these state league players.

And I could name 30+ better FB's than anyone on the St kilda list.

[hungry for a premiership]

Even good fullbacks will get a bag kicked on them occasionally.

Yep, even the full-back-of-the-century SOS had 12 goals kicked on him by Plugger - yet plugger wasn't full-forward of the century

[CURLY]

All this talk and a lot of whinging about StKilda not having or recruiting a big bodied fullback yet how many are there in the AFL? Yes I ackowledge alot of teams have talls that play down back but lets be honets other than a select few none are fantastic footballers. Most clubs in fact basically all clubs are relying on a well structured and cohesive back six with the ability to switch from role to role as they come up. Im more than happy to back a well drilled cohesive back six that provide attack and can swing onto a dangerous opponent of most sizes than the one dimensional backline where a bloke is rendered useless unless the opponent is a lumbering forward.

And I could name 30+ better FB's than anyone on the St kilda list.

I bet you can't name more than a handful.

[BigMart]

Clutching at straws

Rutten, Merritt/Maguire, Henderson/Jamison, Brown, Hooker/Fletcher, McPharlin/Dawson, Lonergan, Lake, Thompspn, Frawley, Carlisle, Rance, Grundy/Richards, Glass

StK and Dogs have no viable option for power fwds

[saintbrat]

could an american full back be an option
http://blog.denverbroncos.com/denverbro ... da-saints/









may not be any good without his protective gear though.

[CURLY]

Clutching at straws

Rutten, Merritt/Maguire, Henderson/Jamison, Brown, Hooker/Fletcher, McPharlin/Dawson, Lonergan, Lake, Thompspn, Frawley, Carlisle, Rance, Grundy/Richards, Glass

StK and Dogs have no viable option for power fwds

Sam Fisher is a very good option on the power forwards. Its just that he's so good acroos half back that he isnt plonked at Full back. Blake also has played on key forwards like Cloke and has had just as much success as half that list.

[maverick]

Clutching at straws

Rutten, Merritt/Maguire, Henderson/Jamison, Brown, Hooker/Fletcher, McPharlin/Dawson, Lonergan, Lake, Thompspn, Frawley, Carlisle, Rance, Grundy/Richards, Glass

StK and Dogs have no viable option for power fwds

Fisher has just about all of them covered, or is as good.
Milne has hooker covered.
I don't know why we worry so much we need a fisher/bj replacement.

[happy feet]

I'm going to get murdered on here for this comment, but here goes......

Kosi has played good footbal in his early days in the backline, and many have suggested he has to re-invent himself to CHB in order to survive. The main problem I see with this is that at least Kosi is a good accurate kick for goal - so why send him to CHB? Who still has some pace left, is good in the air, can read a game and has bucketloads of courage, and inspirational leader, but is not an accurate kick for goal? Yes, if you are reading my mind, Roo to CHB, Sam fisher to FB. Is this what the club is thinking with the forwardline recruits this year? Only time will tell.

[plugger66]

I'm going to get murdered on here for this comment, but here goes......

Kosi has played good footbal in his early days in the backline, and many have suggested he has to re-invent himself to CHB in order to survive. The main problem I see with this is that at least Kosi is a good accurate kick for goal - so why send him to CHB? Who still has some pace left, is good in the air, can read a game and has bucketloads of courage, and inspirational leader, but is not an accurate kick for goal? Yes, if you are reading my mind, Roo to CHB, Sam fisher to FB. Is this what the club is thinking with the forwardline recruits this year? Only time will tell.

No the club isnt thinking putting their 5 time B&F winner at CHF to to CHB. Kosi is a very good kick for goal. Pity he doesnt kick for goal enough. Would rather Rooy miss a few goals but at least get the footy.

[happy feet]

Can I ask a question P66 - what is with the copying of previous posts into yours? Personally I find it annoying and mostly I ignore it, but where I am is a wet day and I am a bit bored. Most people are able to read a thread. The 5 times b&f winner, well those days are in the past - the question is what does the future hold - only time will tell.

[plugger66]

Can I ask a question P66 - what is with the copying of previous posts into yours? Personally I find it annoying and mostly I ignore it, but where I am is a wet day and I am a bit bored. Most people are able to read a thread. The 5 times b&f winner, well those days are in the past - the question is what does the future hold - only time will tell.

Yep those days are over but until injured this year he was in our best 5 players IMO. He had kicked the most goals as well. He has never played CHB and being 30 years old it may be a struggle for him anyway. As much as we have recruited forwards I doubt any of them are going to get close to 50 goals this year and also provide the run he does. I would suggest if we are looking for a backman we use one of the newer younger guys in that position and not someone who we know will give at least 50 goals for the year.

[samoht]

Let's accentuate the positives, and forget this obsession with the FB position.
1. Our back line should be more settled next year (Gwilt came back from injury and Fisher missed quite a few games this year - plus Simpkin will only develop further).

2. Let's not also forget our forward line and the potential of having 3 or 4 tall, mobile strong marking goal kicking targets (no longer relying solely on Roo marking everything)...and small speedsters/goal sneaks. Our F50 pressure was non existent under RL.We have become a much better team up forward, under Watters, even when Roo and Stanley was missing.
The best defense is attack - keeping the ball in the forward line and kicking more goals than our opposition.
I'm confident we will be doing that next year.

3.Our recruiters recruited what we needed - speed, skill, tall. mobile forwards and some potential young midfielders.
There will be a lot more effective chase and pressure all over the ground, which will also help our very competent back line - we were once a very slow team, which was loaded with talent, but we were also too slow to beat lowly Essendon.

[plugger66]

Let's accentuate the positives, and forget this obsession with the FB position.
1. Our back line should be more settled next year (Gwilt came back from injury and Fisher missed quite a few games this year - plus Simpkin will only develop further).

2. Let's not also forget our forward line and the potential of having 3 or 4 tall, mobile strong marking goal kicking targets (no longer relying solely on Roo marking everything)...and small speedsters/goal sneaks. Our F50 pressure was non existent under RL.We are a much better team up forward, under Watters.
The best defense is attack - keeping the ball in the forward line and kicking more goals than our opposition.
I'm confident we will be doing that next year.

3.Our recruiters recruited what we needed - speed, skill, tall. mobile forwards and some potential young midfielders.
There will be a lot more effective chase and pressure all over the ground, which will also help our very competent back line - we were once a very slow team.

I must havent dreamt that in 2009 we changed footy with our forward pressure. Obviously you need to kick more than the opposition to win but GF teams usually have the best or close to the best defence. Im sure we will look good next year but we need to be able to the stop the opposition scoring so heavily.

[samoht]

plugger -
You need speedy players to apply effective, defensive pressure all over the ground (that includes our forwards) - if we just rely on a FB to save the day, it means we are failing all over the ground and are too slow all over the ground and also not skillful enough to hit targets.

[plugger66]

plugger -
You need speedy players to apply effective, defensive pressure all over the ground (that includes our forwards) - if we just rely on a FB to save the day, it means we are failing all over the ground and are too slow all over the ground and also not skillfull enough to hit targets.

I am not disagreeing with that but I think you are rewriting history saying our forwards had no defensive pressure. Also there is more to pressure than just being fast and there is also more to footy than just being an attacking team. We seem to have about 12 forwards on our books. Still have no idea why we need so many.

[samoht]

plugger -
In 2010 we applied very little forward 50 pressure. There were a couple of games in which we didn't lay a single F50 tackle...and many in which there were less than 5.
Lowly Essendon showed up our star studded team (for pace) time and time again.
Re' the 12 forwards - a few may be seen as versatile players, some of the 12 you refer to may be developing players? and only some may make it at the end ?