Who gets delisted?

[Desipura]

Re: Who gets delisted?

I found that one strange. I heard the manager speak like a politician trying to explain how Essendon was the only club Caddy prepared to deal with.
I find it hard to believe. Would like to hear from Clayton.
If he is as good as they say he could be, I would have offer our ward compo and 17(or a player).

We tried to negotiate for Caddy in the final hours however they would not let us.

[westdog54]

Re: Who gets delisted?

I'd think we'd upgrade Panos too. To me that means Stack or Addison will go as well.

Do you think Mulligan would be in the gun before either of Stack or Addison?

[soupman]

Re: Who gets delisted?

Do you think Mulligan would be in the gun before either of Stack or Addison?

I think the vast majority will argue that he should be, but as he is a impressively athletic (and yes, unimpressively hopeless) tall player we may believe that he is worth giving another chance to ahead of the other two.

[Greystache]

Re: Who gets delisted?

Do you think Mulligan would be in the gun before either of Stack or Addison?

In terms of ability he should be, I just think we might keep him one more year as cover for Lake/Morris/Williams who have injury concerns. Unless the recruiters have a state league player in mind we think we can get.

[Mantis]

Re: Who gets delisted?

In terms of ability he should be, I just think we might keep him one more year as cover for Lake/Morris/Williams who have injury concerns. Unless the recruiters have a state league player in mind we think we can get.

Would moving Barlow onto the main list instead of renewing Mulligan be an option?

Over the last few games Barlow played a key role in defence and wasn't horrible... well not Mulligan horrible anyway. In Barlow's favour is that he can also fill-in in other roles when/ if required.

[Greystache]

Re: Who gets delisted?

Would moving Barlow onto the main list instead of renewing Mulligan be an option?

Over the last few games Barlow played a key role in defence and wasn't horrible... well not Mulligan horrible anyway. In Barlow's favour is that he can also fill-in in other roles when/ if required.

Not for me. It's easy to be seduced by Barlow's height, but he possess no physical presence at all. I was standing next to him in the huddle at a Williamstown final and felt that I could take him on physically. Mulligan is horrible, but I think he's the marginally less horrible of the two options. Barlow remaining on the rookie list still offers that injury cover anyway i suppose.

[ledge]

Re: Who gets delisted?

Barlow was a good get and their are worse on our list, he has done more in one season as a rookie than some who have been on our list longer, we know he can compete at AFL level so I would be keeping him on.

[LostDoggy]

Re: Who gets delisted?

We tried to negotiate for Caddy in the final hours however they would not let us.

If you look at how Melbourne snagged Clark despite his first preference being Freo players' minds are always there to be changed. The kid wanted to come home, Essendon wouldn't budge -- if we really wanted him we could have made it happen. If we were good enough.

Would probably have run out of time though.

[Mantis]

Re: Who gets delisted?

Not for me. It's easy to be seduced by Barlow's height, but he possess no physical presence at all. I was standing next to him in the huddle at a Williamstown final and felt that I could take him on physically. Mulligan is horrible, but I think he's the marginally less horrible of the two options. Barlow remaining on the rookie list still offers that injury cover anyway i suppose.

Good for you.

Barlow isn't a crash & bash type, but he competes when he has to and is a far more talented player than Mulligan who looks out of place at VFL level.

[always right]

Re: Who gets delisted?

Not for me. It's easy to be seduced by Barlow's height, but he possess no physical presence at all. I was standing next to him in the huddle at a Williamstown final and felt that I could take him on physically. Mulligan is horrible, but I think he's the marginally less horrible of the two options. Barlow remaining on the rookie list still offers that injury cover anyway i suppose.

What a bizarre statement.

I think neither Barlow or Mulligan have a future with us, although if you had to choose one then Barlow has shown marginally more ability. You're talking about a choice between two duds though.

[Greystache]

Re: Who gets delisted?

Good for you.

Barlow isn't a crash & bash type, but he competes when he has to and is a far more talented player than Mulligan who looks out of place at VFL level.

I'm not big enough to be an AFL kpf, so good luck to him.

Again, he has no physical presence at all. Talent aside (which he has a limited amount of) he'd get rag dolled.

[Greystache]

Re: Who gets delisted?

What a bizarre statement.

I think neither Barlow or Mulligan have a future with us, although if you had to choose one then Barlow has shown marginally more ability. You're talking about a choice between two duds though.

Great post as usual.

[Mofra]

Re: Who gets delisted?

Would moving Barlow onto the main list instead of renewing Mulligan be an option?

I might be one of the few here that say yes.

Mulligan is behind Lake, Williams, Markovic & Morris as a tall backman, assumign Barlow plays elsewhere most of teh tiem and we don't draft someone or take a mature rookie that is ready to go.

Barlow pinch hits there, is the only bloke on our list with a bigger tank than Cross, played with a broken finger for most of the year and actually runs hard to get to contests - never mind the fact that he's much more versatile.

I don't even think a comparison between the two is fair - Barlow is so far ahead of Mulligan is pretty much every aspect of the game it isn't funny.

[BulldogBelle]

Re: Who gets delisted?

Its pretty doubtful that Mulligan will ever develop average foot skills, or show any attacking flair, his decision making is poor (even at VFL level), and makes some stupid defensive mistakes at times - and its pretty doubtful these traits will ever improve

He is only on the list for his physical size and probably good attitude- he has had 2 years already, and not shown anything when given the opportunities

He isnt going to make it

Lets find a decent key position player in the draft to replace him with

He is not an AFL footballer, just doesnt have the football smarts for it. Lets stop trying to develop athletes into footballers.

[1eyedog]

Re: Who gets delisted?

Great post as usual.

Not an overly becoming reply from a mod, always right makes good points at times, regardless of how annoying his username is.
I get the meaning in your post, but Barlow is not a physical one on one player who thrives on contested situations. Just because he's tall doesn't mean he needs to be physical. He is hopeless in the air for his height and really is probably 3-4 inches too tall for the way he plays, the best we can hope for him in the air is to be an effective defensive third man up.

He's a tall Sam Power who also needs to work on his fitness.

He is versatile enough to fill a gap where required but he is not a long-term viable option IMHO.

He has more tricks in his bag than Mulligan though that's for sure.