Rookie upgrade via Carlisle ban

[Trixilver]

So who should we upgrade for the year?

If Holmes has a big preseason and/or one of Hickey, Longer struggles I wouldn't mind seeing him have a few games.

http://www.saints.com.au/news/2016-01-1 ... -challenge

[Goose is king]

Set up a poll

[saintspremiers]

Can't believe our website still refers to it as a supplements saga. It's a friggin drug scandal. Players are guilty and are drug cheats. Wake up media!

[Con Gorozidis]

I lean towards O'Kearney. Not sure why and it is based on nothing whatsoever. Just the 'vibe'.

[Bluthy]

Need to wait to see if one of them puts his hand up in the preseason games ala Sinclair.

[Wrote for Luck]

I think the club has done the right thing to decide to wait until the pre season games - personally I would like Saunders to be given AFL air time this year, as a now or never.

[Saints43]

It's great that Essendon get to pick from the whole nation of uncontracted senior players to fill their list... And we get to upgrade a player that we've already decided isn't good enough for our senior list.

We're the team that did the wrong thing, yeah?

[BigMart]

O Kearney

Will do a Templeton, Sinclair.... From what I understand he's impressed already.

Why Holmes we have two ruckmen... Unless one gets injured, why would he be promoted. If he gets a game ahead of either... We really did waste selections 12 and 24

Saunders is a back up at best.

[bergholt]

It's great that Essendon get to pick from the whole nation of uncontracted senior players to fill their list... And we get to upgrade a player that we've already decided isn't good enough for our senior list.

Are you really jealous? They get to choose from players who have proven they're not good enough for AFL, and they have no hold on them after the season is over. And they're guaranteed to finish on the bottom. I wouldn't be sooking too much if I was you.

[saintspremiers]

It's great that Essendon get to pick from the whole nation of uncontracted senior players to fill their list... And we get to upgrade a player that we've already decided isn't good enough for our senior list.

We're the team that did the wrong thing, yeah?

Finnis should fire up and ask the AFL this point

[Saints43]

It's great that Essendon get to pick from the whole nation of uncontracted senior players to fill their list... And we get to upgrade a player that we've already decided isn't good enough for our senior list.

Are you really jealous? They get to choose from players who have proven they're not good enough for AFL, and they have no hold on them after the season is over. And they're guaranteed to finish on the bottom. I wouldn't be sooking too much if I was you.

Do you think that we should have a restriction as to how we fill our list and the team that caused our issue - the cheats - don't? It's no wonder we constantly get turned over by the governing body....

[Con Gorozidis]

O Kearney

Will do a Templeton, Sinclair.... From what I understand he's impressed already.

Why Holmes we have two ruckmen... Unless one gets injured, why would he be promoted. If he gets a game ahead of either... We really did waste selections 12 and 24

Saunders is a back up at best.

Pierce must be due for a debut this year as well? If he doesnt debut this year at some stage he might be in strife.

[CQ SAINT]

I really like the look of Coughlan. I think he is the obvious choice. Give the kid a go. O'kearney for the same reason but more suited to replace a mid. Would love to see these two blooded early.

[ripplug66]

It's great that Essendon get to pick from the whole nation of uncontracted senior players to fill their list... And we get to upgrade a player that we've already decided isn't good enough for our senior list.

Are you really jealous? They get to choose from players who have proven they're not good enough for AFL, and they have no hold on them after the season is over. And they're guaranteed to finish on the bottom. I wouldn't be sooking too much if I was you.

Do you think that we should have a restriction as to how we fill our list and the team that caused our issue - the cheats - don't? It's no wonder we constantly get turned over by the governing body....

I cant see why you and SP are whinging. Is it because Essendon are getting some rejects? You realise they are still 2 players short. And lets get this straight. They don't get the pick of uncontracted players throughout Australia. The players have to have been on an AFL list within 2 years or play in Essendon reserves. That means that they will mostly delisted or retired players. Maybe our club have used their brains and realised if we whinged and got to pick another player all we would doing is wasting 70K and just getting a sandy player.

Is there one player you really want because the names ive heard that Essendon may get is a genuine waste of 70K. Different for Essendon because they are missing 7 out of their top 8 players and need older more experienced big bodied players to even lose by a big amount. Without them they would be stuffed at quarter time. I know its Essendons fault but as ive said we can whinge all we like but for the money the media rights are worth Essendon still have to be slightly competitive.

[Saints43]

[ cant see why you and SP are whinging. Is it because Essendon are getting some rejects?

It's because they have access to a greater range of players than we have, even though they are the cause of the problem. As I've already stated.

I don't care whether we would exercise the option to pick up an uncontracted player or not. That's not the point. The point is that we don't have the option and they do.

Do you think they - the drug cheats responsible for the issue - should have more (even if they are not necessarily much better) options than us?

[kosifantutti]

You can't cover the loss of 12 players with 5 rookies.

[The OtherThommo]

I'd wouldn't go for a kid in his 1st year. If they progress quicker than expected, there'll be opportunities for games as rookies, anyway. Even 1st year players on the main list are thought to have done well if they play a few games in their 1st year. Richo was recently commenting on the main list 1st year players in a similar vein, with conservative expectations.

This is Payne's 2nd year, is it not? He seemed to get some reasonable mentions last year, IIRC, as showing promise. A 2nd, and full, pre-season behind him now, too.

Plus, he's a key position type, no, a la Carlisle, with some signs of flexibility of end he can operate at?

[borderbarry]

T.O.T., if Payne were promoted, would he get a game, and where would you play him at this stage?

[saintspremiers]

According to the poll, looks like our new Irishman gets the gig!

[The OtherThommo]

T.O.T., if Payne were promoted, would he get a game, and where would you play him at this stage?

Barring injuries to others of his taller type, and rapid development himself, I don't think he would get a game, Baz.

But, it's a like for like preference acknowledging Carlisle's absence, given how the list is structured, and the fact he's less 'new' than the 1st years (albeit larger, so probably requiring of more time than the smaller types).

And, a couple of associates, who know more about the development of listed younguns than I do, particularly how they've performed early doors, are quite hopeful Payne does have a future. Some of that mail also comes from my associates' connections to the fringes of the football operation, particularly the development operations.

The earlier reference to his 'flexibility' comes from him having played both back and forward, and apparently looking and going OK at either/both.

[BigMart]

Payne is a mile off

[SaintPav]

I hope its Okearney as we need good mids.

[samuraisaint]

Saunders for mine. Last year wasn't great, but think he'll have a good season this year.

[Zed]

I hope its Okearney as we need good mids.

If he can play as many senior games as Sinclair did (or more) I will be absolutely ecstatic

[WinnersOnly]

Ken Hinkley has a point with WHY should the clubs that didnt cause the problem be worse off than Essendope. After their concessions they will have 43 players, Port will have 41 & Saints 42. We should have the option bring someone in straight to the senior list be able to top up our rookie list (after the upgrade).

Makes sense the AFL need to chnage that rule!