TalkingCarlton :: View topic - number of young players used over last two years

Davies is indefinitely injured, time to promote a rookie

At the game today I was talking to a few supporters and we all agree.

We aren't going to make the finals - fact.

So what do we gain by NOT playing Blackwell, Russell, Setanta and Bryan?

And what about elevating a rookie while we have LTIs?

You would HAVE to think we are much better off going into next year with those kids having more senior games and senior game time (if Pagan actualy plays them after picking them).

It could not be any worse than what we have been doing.

Davies is indefinitely injured, time to promote a rookie

against our so callled youth policy, i heard a daming statistic about our application of this strategy.

over the last two years number of first gamers carlton has played = 7. Is that a good number or otherwise?

reality check CFC. Brisbane has played 14 in the same period. Sure they may have more experienced players to cover the young fellas, regardless they haven't been travelling as they would have liked.....and a comparison of 14 to 7 is to severe not to question and compare.

I understand that we are in the bottom half when it comes to first gamers played across the 16 teams.

I'd would very much appreciate any validation from Jarusa if possible e.g numbers for all clubs.

Nonetheless it begs the questions:
1. does it reflect the quality of our draft choices (and choosing capabilities)? i.e not much return from Russell or Hartlett in 2 years - regardless of circumstances (injury or otherwise) they are not playing.
2. club is not fair dinkum about its intent to adopt the youth policy.

I must say i was staggered with the statistical comparison and raises a number of concerns. The most concerning for me is the quality of the development program we have or do not have.

it doesn't start and end having the best draft choioces....it is how you develop them that counts.

Pagan has been involved in developing young players for 20 years or more, having previously coached at Under 19's and Reserves. I think he might know what he's doing.

Yep i heard that too London Daming Stat

Out of the recycles who have at least done something

Prender - Been okay done something
Wiggo - Done something
TEague - Useless - Should be Russell
Sporn - Usesless - Should be Kennedy
Longmuir - Injured but forget - Should be Blackwell
Magrath - Borderline wasnt a good game give to another kid maybe Santanta or another Kid
Livo - Dunno possibly not one to perservere with
French - Maybe time to give to Bryan if he isnt winning the hitouts and is lacking mobility then dosnt hurt to give Bryan and Maclasren a shared role

Author:	london blue [ Sun Jun 04, 2006 3:32 pm ]
Post subject:	number of young players used over last two years
against our so callled youth policy, i heard a daming statistic about our application of this strategy. over the last two years number of first gamers carlton has played = 7. Is that a good number or otherwise? reality check CFC. Brisbane has played 14 in the same period. Sure they may have more experienced players to cover the young fellas, regardless they haven't been travelling as they would have liked.....and a comparison of 14 to 7 is to severe not to question and compare. I understand that we are in the bottom half when it comes to first gamers played across the 16 teams. I'd would very much appreciate any validation from Jarusa if possible e.g numbers for all clubs. Nonetheless it begs the questions: 1. does it reflect the quality of our draft choices (and choosing capabilities)? i.e not much return from Russell or Hartlett in 2 years - regardless of circumstances (injury or otherwise) they are not playing. 2. club is not fair dinkum about its intent to adopt the youth policy. I must say i was staggered with the statistical comparison and raises a number of concerns. The most concerning for me is the quality of the development program we have or do not have. it doesn't start and end having the best draft choioces....it is how you develop them that counts.

Author:	Wolfe [ Sun Jun 04, 2006 4:58 pm ]
Post subject:
Yep i heard that too London Daming Stat Out of the recycles who have at least done something Prender - Been okay done something Wiggo - Done something TEague - Useless - Should be Russell Sporn - Usesless - Should be Kennedy Longmuir - Injured but forget - Should be Blackwell Magrath - Borderline wasnt a good game give to another kid maybe Santanta or another Kid Livo - Dunno possibly not one to perservere with French - Maybe time to give to Bryan if he isnt winning the hitouts and is lacking mobility then dosnt hurt to give Bryan and Maclasren a shared role Theres 7 changes i would like changed and now just play the kids that statistic is daming and players like Russell / Kennedy / Blackwell should play for the rest of the year ... with options like Sanatanta, Edwards, Bryan, Bower and Hartlet when fit others to look at in second half of the Year Raso / Flint if he gets promoted for LTI Teague / Sporn Forget let em play in the Bullants Reserves so the other kids play Seniors or bullants

Author:	Navy Blue Horse [ Sun Jun 04, 2006 5:17 pm ]
Post subject:
Davies is indefinitely injured, time to promote a rookie

Author:	motts [ Sun Jun 04, 2006 5:22 pm ]
Post subject:
At the game today I was talking to a few supporters and we all agree. We aren't going to make the finals - fact. So what do we gain by NOT playing Blackwell, Russell, Setanta and Bryan? And what about elevating a rookie while we have LTIs? You would HAVE to think we are much better off going into next year with those kids having more senior games and senior game time (if Pagan actualy plays them after picking them). It could not be any worse than what we have been doing.

Author:	blu944 [ Sun Jun 04, 2006 7:13 pm ]
Post subject:
I have no problem with the amount of players we have debuted; brisbane are a different side to us with a different list, they took kids in past drafts we took Saddington, Chambers and Longmuir. We only have Hartlett, Edwards, Bower and Raso left to debut - form and injury has prevented their selection. My problem is token youth selection. Commentators on lastnight's Bris vs. Pies game were talking about the advantage that Bris had with pies down to a 3 man bench, how their midfield rotation would be severly impacted. Everytime we select a kid the coaching staff sit them on the pine for the entire day, how does that influence our midfield rotation?! oh, do we have a midfield rotation?

TalkingCarlton http://talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/

number of young players used over last two years http://talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=10685	Page 1 of 1

Author:	BlueWorld [ Sun Jun 04, 2006 8:07 pm ]
Post subject:
Navy Blue Horse wrote: Davies is indefinitely injured, time to promote a rookie Pagan said he'd like to promote Flint but we can't. So there must be more to this.

Author:	Elwood Blues1 [ Sun Jun 04, 2006 8:42 pm ]
Post subject:
motts wrote: At the game today I was talking to a few supporters and we all agree. We aren't going to make the finals - fact. So what do we gain by NOT playing Blackwell, Russell, Setanta and Bryan? And what about elevating a rookie while we have LTIs? You would HAVE to think we are much better off going into next year with those kids having more senior games and senior game time (if Pagan actualy plays them after picking them). It could not be any worse than what we have been doing. Agree with all of that ....Its amazing how the bulk of supporters can see it but the footy dept are still trying to eek out wins and limit the damage and protect their reputations...does it take a half yearly review to see what has been obvious to so many...? Give the supporters a clear direction...

Author:	4thchicken [ Sun Jun 04, 2006 9:31 pm ]
Post subject:
just a comment - think I heard the same comments on 3AW - though one thing that stood out was it wasnt just brisbane that had played 14 new players - there were 3-4 other clubs that had done so as well.

Author:	Sydney Blue [ Sun Jun 04, 2006 9:45 pm ]
Post subject:
I found this interesting from a side if they hadn't decided they were going to catch the early flight home would have belted us by 100 But more pleasing for the Power hierarchy than its ability to keep in touch with the lower rungs of the top eight would have been the prominent showings by many of its up-and-coming youngsters. There were 10 players with 50 games experience or less in the Power 22 today.

Author:	Effes [ Sun Jun 04, 2006 10:04 pm ]
Post subject:
Debutants in last 2 years Adelaide - Knights, Van Berlo, Vince, Maric, Porplyzia, Brisbane - Attard, Merrett, Moody, Wood, Selwood, Drummond, Sherman, Patfull, Harding, Hooper, Clark, Mills, Stiller, Roe, Carlton - O'hAilpin, Russell, Betts, Bryan, Murphy, Kennedy, Blackwell Collingwood - Rusling, Iacobucci, Cloke, O'Brien, Egan, Fanning, Davies, H Shaw, Pendlebury, Thomas, Essendon* - Cartledge, Johns, Slattery, Monfries, Nash, Lovett, Dempsey, Ryder Fremantle - Campbell, Johnson, Peake, Crowley, Mundy, Warren, Duffield, Geelong - Blake, Egan, Lonergan, Ablett, Prismall, Stokes, Hawthorn - Murphy, Taylor, Dawson, Thurgood, Young, Roughead, Boyle, Miller, Franklin, Lewis, Birchall, McGlynn, Kangaroos - Trotter, McIntosh, LeCras, Perkins, Smith, Swallow, Perry, Gibson, Schwarze, Melbourne - Johnson, Warnock, Bartram, Dunn, Bate Port Adelaide - Deluca, Thomson, Eckerman, Pearce, Ezard, Richmond - Pattison, Roach, Meyer, Thursfield, Foley, Tambling, Deledio, McGuane, Oakley-Nicholls, Hughes, White, Polo, St Kilda - Gwilt, Gilbert, Sydney - Malceski, Moore, Dempster, Vogels, West Coast - Morton, Graham, Graham, LeCras, Rosa, Hurn, Priddis, Western Bulldogs - Wight, Walsh, Morris, Griffen, Higgins

Author:	TruBlueBrad [ Sun Jun 04, 2006 10:17 pm ]
Post subject:
Navy Blue Horse wrote: Davies is indefinitely injured, time to promote a rookie Indefinitely could be 2 weeks, 4 weeks, 8 weeks, 3 months. You'd have a hard time convincing any player to go on the LTI list and not be able to play for 8 weeks with that uncertainty. Used to happen in the NBA when they had injury lists and teams would try to get players to go on it to promote someone else. A few had trouble enticing veteran players to make way and their injury list was 5 days, not 8 weeks.

Author:	ryan2000 [ Mon Jun 05, 2006 9:12 am ]
Post subject:
Overheard somebody at the bullants game the other day saying they couldn't see Davies playing this season. Perhaps a rookie promotion might come about.

Author:	Jarusa [ Mon Jun 05, 2006 9:21 am ]
Post subject:	Re: number of young players used over last two years
london blue wrote: against our so callled youth policy, i heard a daming statistic about our application of this strategy. over the last two years number of first gamers carlton has played = 7. Is that a good number or otherwise? reality check CFC. Brisbane has played 14 in the same period. Sure they may have more experienced players to cover the young fellas, regardless they haven't been travelling as they would have liked.....and a comparison of 14 to 7 is to severe not to question and compare. I understand that we are in the bottom half when it comes to first gamers played across the 16 teams. I'd would very much appreciate any validation from Jarusa if possible e.g numbers for all clubs. Nonetheless it begs the questions: 1. does it reflect the quality of our draft choices (and choosing capabilities)? i.e not much return from Russell or Hartlett in 2 years - regardless of circumstances (injury or otherwise) they are not playing. 2. club is not fair dinkum about its intent to adopt the youth policy. I must say i was staggered with the statistical comparison and raises a number of concerns. The most concerning for me is the quality of the development program we have or do not have. it doesn't start and end having the best draft choioces....it is how you develop them that counts. This thread touched on some of the issues you raise as well. I thought it was interesting in the 10 questions with Simon Wiggins interview on the CFC website that he thought he was played in too many senior games in his first year and that held back his development.

Author:	BlueWorld [ Mon Jun 05, 2006 10:40 am ]
Post subject:
Pagan has been involved in developing young players for 20 years or more, having previously coached at Under 19's and Reserves. I think he might know what he's doing.

Page 1 of 1	All times are UTC + 10 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	Crusader [ Mon Jun 05, 2006 1:03 pm ]
Post subject:
BlueWorld wrote: Pagan has been involved in developing young players for 20 years or more, having previously coached at Under 19's and Reserves. I think he might know what he's doing. I think 20 years ago (or even 6) he might have. Pretty poor excuse from Wiggins. He might be a nice bloke and a good worker, but if you don't learn from experience and observation (i.e. playing games), how do you learn? Clearly you can't learn a thing from Pago's assistants/advisors.

Author:	Blue Vain [ Mon Jun 05, 2006 1:09 pm ]
Post subject:
BlueWorld wrote: Pagan has been involved in developing young players for 20 years or more, having previously coached at Under 19's and Reserves. I think he might know what he's doing. So was Slug Jordan.

Author:	GWS [ Mon Jun 05, 2006 1:22 pm ]
Post subject:
Wolfe wrote: Yep i heard that too London Daming Stat Out of the recycles who have at least done something Prender - Been okay done something Wiggo - Done something TEague - Useless - Should be Russell Sporn - Usesless - Should be Kennedy Longmuir - Injured but forget - Should be Blackwell Magrath - Borderline wasnt a good game give to another kid maybe Santanta or another Kid Livo - Dunno possibly not one to perservere with French - Maybe time to give to Bryan if he isnt winning the hitouts and is lacking mobility then dosnt hurt to give Bryan and Maclasren a shared role Not one of the changes suggested above would lead to us having any more players debut. I'm not arguing for one policy over another. In reality I'd like to see some flexibility in policy. Some guys are ready, some aren't. In addition - are Brisbane playing that many kids because Matthews wants to or because there's no-one left? They only had 25 fit players to chose a side of 22 from last week. There are a number of reasons that Pagan's current coaching methods of late need to be questioned but I don't think playing every kid on the list just so your stats compare with other sides is one of them. PS: How is Prenda a "recycle"?

Author:	Wolfe [ Mon Jun 05, 2006 7:18 pm ]
Post subject:
Fair Point GWS ... Yes Prender and Livo are not recyles more have been on the list for a long time with out really cementing a plce on the list So should have reworded that Players i was suggesting who we could look at second half od the year where Edwards / Raso / baston only if Ready And Bower and Hartlett when fit after returning from Injury So possibly a few more new faces to look at in the second half of the year . Also with regards to Russell / Kennedy and Blackers to have more game time and play more games rather than 30 minutes and in and out after a couple of weeks

Author:	amazonstud [ Mon Jun 05, 2006 9:25 pm ]
Post subject:
The average is about 7 players over two years. If Bower Hartlett Raso and Edwards make their debuts later this year then I think that we stack up very well against the other sides. Unfortunately Bower and Hartlett have been injured and both Raso and Edwards need to build up their bodies other wise I'm sure that at least two of them would have made their debut by now.