AFL Fullback

[St Ick]

Remember we took Wilkes to potentially play that role. He couldn't at AFL level, no point continually topping up if they dont think they're up to it.

I would have liked to take a risk but its obvious they don't think anyone can step up to the level required straight away. Risky tactic, but no point getting a player who will come good after a couple of preseasons if we get one next year in Brown or Frawley.

[plugger66]

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 ?

Essedon beat us with pace but I did think it had anything to do with forward pressure. They also beat us 2009 when we had the best forward pressure in the AFL. Yes some forwards wont make it and some are developing but we lost a lot of backmen this year and hardly recruited any. We seemed to be fascinated with forwards. We hardly got any mids either and we are still well short in that area. But at least we will have a lot of forwards and we will look pretty when we get it in there.

[gringo]

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 ?

Essedon beat us with pace but I did think it had anything to do with forward pressure. They also beat us 2009 when we had the best forward pressure in the AFL. Yes some forwards wont make it and some are developing but we lost a lot of backmen this year and hardly recruited any. We seemed to be fascinated with forwards. We hardly got any mids either and we are still well short in that area. But at least we will have a lot of forwards and we will look pretty when we get it in there.

The grant thomas era seemed like all forwards and lyon era all backs. We seem to be rebalancing heavily. Hopefully we are doing a collingwood with lots of small forward able to play on ball roles too.

[Con Gorozidis]

Lets just put Fisher there.
He lacks a little height but he is built like a tank and smart and strong.

[AnythingsPossibleSaints]

The grant thomas era seemed like all forwards and lyon era all backs. We seem to be rebalancing heavily. Hopefully we are doing a collingwood with lots of small forward able to play on ball roles too.

We actually have about 16 or so on our lists who were drafted as "forwards" (not even including the likes of Fisher and Gwilt, who played forward at times when they first arrived at the club), but I don't necessarily mind that, because if someone has the ability to play forward successfully, then they are likely to have the skills and ability necessary to be able to play in the backline as well, as Siposs showed in the last couple of games this year.

He's probably never played down back in his life prior to a few games in the VFL there this year, yet after just a handful there he was able to play a couple of terrific games across HB in the seniors for us in his first two attempts. Shenton was another who made the move from the forward line to the backline in the VFL and by all accounts made a very good fist of it, performing better there than he had up forward, by all accounts.

Lets be honest here, in the juniors, where almost everyone on an AFL list starts, those with the most talent and ability GENERALLY get played in either the midfield, or the forward line. If someone has the ability to be successful up forward, then they are likely to be played there. Now that doesn't mean that they couldn't play down back just as successfully, it's just that very few are played down back if they are good enough to play forward, I would suggest (although there are of course exceptions).

When you think of it, many of our better options for the backline in recent history started up forward.

I seem to recall Fraser Gehrig going from playing wing, or forward flank/pocket at WC, and then being recruited by us to play specifically at FB and coming in and coming 3rd in our B&F in his first year, at FB, hardly losing a contest all year. (If I had to choose anyone from our past 20 years to play FB for us next year it would be him, I reckon.)

Shane Wakelin is another one recruited to play forward and who mainly played forward with us, until eventually tried down at full-back to good effect, then bafflingly delisted by us, only to go on to play in a GF or two with Collingwood at FB.

Pretty sure Spud originally played on the wing, but ended up going quite alright at FB.

From memory Zac Dawson originally played mostly up forward, or in the ruck, in the U18's and then got switched down to FB at Hawthorn, as they already had Buddy, Roughy and Mitch Thorp vying for their key forward positions, but needed more defensive options.

From memory Sam Fisher mainly played forward when he got him, but has gone alright down back.

Similar deal with Jimmy Gwilt. Started on the wing, then went to a forward flank, until eventually switched down back to great effect.

And they're just examples who have played for us in recent years. Aussie Jones, Leon Davis, Brent Guerra are some more examples off the top of my head who were moved from the forward line (or in Aussie's case forward/wing) to the backline, very successfully. There is talk that Geelong will try Motlot and Varcoe there next year, to help them beat the press with speed.

Scotty Watters is all about versatility, something he made clear this year when he didn't play Siposs in the seniors much until he proved that he could play in more than one area of the ground and I expect that many of the "forwards" that we have drafted in the past couple of years are going to be tried down back as well and that those who perform well there will probably end up playing a lot of footy there, due to the forward line being bursting with options. Some of them will probably also find their way into the midfield, giving us more options there as well.

As for FB, as I kept on saying at the time, I thought letting Zac walk out the door was a big mistake, but I do think we'll be better able to cover for it next year than we were this year, as we hopefully won't have anyone like Gwilt missing for several rounds like he was at the start of this year, or Fisher missing for several rounds like he was at times this year, or Blake needing to be taken from the backline to play in the ruck, because we didn't have any other viable alternatives there.

If any of those things do happen next year though, we'll hopefully have Blake in reserve in the VFL, as well as the fall-back options of 195cm Tom Lee, who has played plenty down back for Claremont, plus a fitter, stronger and more confident Beau Wikes, or maybe even someone like Rhys Stanley, who some are suggesting the club are looking to try there.

As others have said, if we manage to tighten up our midfield pressure (to the point it was at in our mid season games against Carlton and Sydney, for instance) then that will also help considerably.

[evo]

In those games against Essendon we were thrashed in the ruck as well. They had first use of the ball most of the time. Hopefully that problem has been addressed now.

[Quixote]

Lets just put Fisher there.
He lacks a little height but he is built like a tank and smart and strong.

It will be Fisher I've got no doubts about that.

[kos]

Imo Wilkes will be given first crack at full back next year. He has had a year to adjust to the pace of afl, he has shed the extra kg he was carrying early last year a will be specifically trained for the position.
Even though he looked lost there last season he has the attributes to play the position.

[Dr Spaceman]

Imo Wilkes will be given first crack at full back next year. He has had a year to adjust to the pace of afl, he has shed the extra kg he was carrying early last year a will be specifically trained for the position.
Even though he looked lost there last season he has the attributes to play the position.

Agree. We're all a bit quick to categorise some blokes with comments such as "Wilkes must never play in Defence again".

But:

• We don't have a Full Back.
• Wilkes has played as a Full Back.
• Wilkes probably has little future as a forward given our recent recruiting.

Maybe 2013 will prove once and for all that Beau is not the answer down back. But unlike some supporters, I don't think the club or the player will have totally given up on the idea.

And we would certainly benefit as a club if he could make a go of it.

[saintspremiers]

Stanley is being groomed as FB, in a very attacking mode ala Fletcher from Essendon.

I have this info from a very good source.

I'm not sure if its a sensible plan though. Time will tell.

As for Wilkes, under Sammy's guidance, the club is very excited with his likely prospects for 2013.

[plugger66]

What the hell is wrong with Tom Simpkin at FB?

[saint6709]

Stanley is being groomed as FB, in a very attacking mode ala Fletcher from Essendon.

I have this info from a very good source.

I'm not sure if its a sensible plan though. Time will tell.

As for Wilkes, under Sammy's guidance, the club is very excited with his likely prospects for 2013.

Did not like the sound of this on first thought - But Stanley only kicked 11 goals from 12 games last year and tended to be MIA quite a bit - maybe at full back he will be forced to into the play - which might be good for him - and if he's not forced into the play - it will mean the FF is not going near the ball - also not a bad thing..so then we have Roo, Lee and dare I say it Kosi v Wilkes for the other big forward - I thought kosi was toast but maybe he can have a miraculous turn around - he looks like he is running well from the images in Colarado ( which admittedly are stills!)
What is the word on Wilkes under Sammy?? fierce forward pressure or some such ???

[AnythingsPossibleSaints]

Stanley is being groomed as FB, in a very attacking mode ala Fletcher from Essendon.

Yep, certainly hearing that from a few places now. The idea is growing on me, especially if he doesn't try to get into too many wrestles and instead uses his height/reach/leap to advantage, as Fletcher does so well. He doesn't tend to kick many goals, so he is probably the one we could most afford to lose out of that forward line out of himself, Roo, Wilkes, Kosi and Lee.

If he does end up playing down back, the question will be, is there still room there for all of Fisher, Gwilt, Simpkin, Gilbert and Dempster with him, all of whom are at least 188cm tall. If all of those 6 played back there, that is the back 6 already, before you even get to the likes of Geary, or perhaps Siposs or Roberton, so it will be very interesting to see how we line up.

As for Wilkes, under Sammy's guidance, the club is very excited with his likely prospects for 2013.

Very glad to hear that. I think we erred quite badly not playing him more this year, especially once it became apparent that Kosi was on Struggle Street, after his good start to the year.

[Scoop]

Stanley is being groomed as FB, in a very attacking mode ala Fletcher from Essendon.

I have this info from a very good source.

I'm not sure if its a sensible plan though. Time will tell.

As for Wilkes, under Sammy's guidance, the club is very excited with his likely prospects for 2013.

Obviously a very good source....

[SainterK]

Oh really?

I mused about this at the end of 2010, but shelfed the notion as I thought they would of tried it by now.

Always thought he could be in the Dustin Fletcher mould....

[Con Gorozidis]

im a sceptic and think the likely option is we play a 7 man backline this year of
gwilt fisher simpkin
dempster gilbert geary siposs

but lets imagine we can turn rhys into a tall defender. unbelievable. just unbelievable. it could work. sheesh. we could have stanley and lee as bookends for the next decade.
2013 spine of stanley fisher hayes roo lee wouldnt be bad...
then a 2015 spine of stanley ferguson ross lee wilkes wouldnt be bad either.

[SuperDuper]

What the hell is wrong with Tom Simpkin at FB?

nothing really... it is not strictly a full back we lack.. it is the extra tall guy when team stretch us by having a tall forward line
e.g. eagles with their spare ruckman down forward...
Geelong with pods, Hawkins and Vardy
Pies with Lynch, Cloke

it is when they have more than one really big guy, we were in strife this year.. so it is more the tall back pocket who picks up the 2nd ruck type forward where we need a tall.. we saw it cost us last season.

Certainly interesting to try Stanley.... it is his work on the ground and especially his lateral movement which may be questionable.. but his punching and closing speed will certainly be exceptional

[AnythingsPossibleSaints]

Yep, this year it was generally the "monsters" that gave us awful trouble down back, because we only had 188-193cm options to play on them and they were simply too short, generally.

That is only going to get worse in coming years, especially with less/few teams have a "resting ruckman" on the bench any more, instead most spending time up forward and with most/all teams having someone around the 200cm mark up forward, going forward, like Kurt Tippett (202cm), Joe Daniher (201cm), Mitch Clark (200cm), Tom Hawkins (197cm) Nathan Vardy (198cm), Witts (209cm), Grundy (202cm), Hampson (201cm), Kruezer (200cm), Rhys Stanley (202cm), Paddy Ryder (197cm), Drew Petrie and Lachie Hansen (both 197cm), Ayce Cordy (203cm), Ty Vickery (200cm), Todd Elton (197cm), Jono Patton (197cm), Mike Pyke (201cm), Tom Lynch (Gold Coast version- 199cm), Charlie Dixon (202cm), John Butcher (197cm), Mason Shaw (198cm), Nic Nat/Dean Cox (201cm/203cm), etc.

Before long, probably every team will need someone who is at least 197cm tall in their backline, to be able to play on them, or they are likely to struggle in that area, as we did frequently this year. This would be part of the reason we didn't "reach" for Clurey in the draft this year, I expect, because at that 192/3cm height, he would have probably just given us more of what we already have a fair bit of at the moment, in Fisher, Simpkin, Gwilt, Gilbert and Ferguson.

[Con Gorozidis]

If we want to experiment with Stanley down back - give it a shot. We have nothing to lose by trying.
Some people prefer to play down back when they can see the play in front of them. who knows that might suit him.
and with roo/wilkes/lee we are ok for tall fwds this year and with hickey we are ok for rucks.
so a 1 year experiment wont hurt us.
if it doesnt work - send him back fwd the next year or when roo retires.

[AnythingsPossibleSaints]

Yep agree, not much to lose and potentially a lot to gain. Even if he plays back there and it doesn't work, the experience there could be invaluable to him, especially if he gets to learn some tricks from the likes of Tippett, Cox, Natanui, Petrie, etc, which he can then employ himself once he gets back into the forward line.

[stinger]

how tall is simpkin....could he be played at fullback.....i believe he will develop into a fine defender for us...tough as nails....

[AnythingsPossibleSaints]

Simpkin has a lot going for him and is, as you said, tough as nails, as well as strong overhead and he also defends and kicks well, but is listed at only 191cm and is also relatively lightly built and not freakishly athletic, so those things will probably mean that he is going to struggle with those 197cm+ "monsters" that I mentioned earlier. Dean Cox threw Tom around like a rag doll when we played WC earlier in the year, for instance, as he is just that much taller and stronger than him. Very soon every team will have someone (maybe even two) who is 197cm+ in their forward line, so Tom will probably be much better suited to the 2nd and 3rd options, just as Gwilt, Fisher, Gilbert and Ferguson pretty much are.

It's pretty telling (and possibly a bit insulting) that Watters keeps on saying in the media that we basically don't have a "genuine key defender" on our whole list. Unless he's just saying it for motivational purposes, it means he doesn't consider Tom to be one at this stage and possibly never will.

[Con Gorozidis]

I notice Hartigan got rookied

14. Adelaide - Kyle Hartigan (Werribee Tigers)

But after watching the Foxtel cup final I dont think he is up to it. But who knows.

[saint6709]

I am on board the 'Stanley down back train' - hopefully he will get more chances to run fast and straight from the backline as well - also I cant see another option for us this year to fill the spot we've all been talking about so much - big guy in the backline

[plugger66]

I notice Hartigan got rookied

14. Adelaide - Kyle Hartigan (Werribee Tigers)

But after watching the Foxtel cup final I dont think he is up to it. But who knows.

I thought you wanted him?