Up to 6(!) Picks in the National Draft.

Oh When the Saints · Wed 19 Sep 2007 3:16pm

We won't have six picks in the draft ... it will peter out by about the 60's, so unless we trade for picks, IMO we will only draft four players.

st_Trav_ofWA · Wed 19 Sep 2007 3:22pm

Shaggy wrote:Forget the 5 years rubbish given his injuries.

He has come good the past season â€¦ 8 bests in 17 matches is not something to belittle.

He has not destroyed the opposition as I thought he would this year but if you see him he is still just a kid.

I believe he is wakening up to himself as a footballer. Now would be the most stupid time to get rid of him.

ok fine lets for get hes been at the saints for 5 years lets look at the games he has played in the afl
on decent game against a decimated lions team in the last game of the year and the rest substandard bench rotations games where he showed no passion no drive and no determination to keep his name in the senior team

Shaggy wrote: He has come good the past season â€¦ 8 bests in 17 matches is not something to belittle.
.

in the VFL i never said he was a bad VFL play just not a good afl player shouldnt the fact we were lacking in the ruck department give you an indication that if he was AFL quallity he would of got a game ?? why is it easier to believe the coach doesnt like him then hes not up to it ?

Dan Warna wrote:2007 was the year hamish macintosh came good after 4 years of SFA, macintosh was in the magoos for 4 years and didn't have injuries., he is 6 months younger than brooks.

diferance being when Hamish had his opertunity he didnt lack enthusiasm brooks cant say the same

Dan Warna · Post: # 459638Post **Dan Warna** » Wed 19 Sep 2007 3:30pm

st_Trav_ofWA wrote: diferance being when Hamish had his opertunity he didnt lack enthusiasm brooks cant say the same

has Brooks been given a game in the ruck for the seniors in the saints in 07?

certainly not 1/2 the opportunities carbon rod rix and witches hat clarke have been given

busso mick · Post: # 459641Post **busso mick** » Wed 19 Sep 2007 3:35pm

TwoTowers wrote:Not a chance Brooks will be delisted. He has been terrific this year. His real benefit to us in future will be as a forward who can help out in the ruck. Gehrig, Kozi, Roo and team balance meant he paid his dues in the reserves. He will be given his first real opportunity in the seniors next season.

Brooks has got talent no doubt, but his attitude is what holds him back. Players with less talent than him have made it in the AFL, his laconic approach is his biggest handicap. If Rix had his talent then we will have found our man. Maybe a trip to the local dog pound for an injection of mongrel is what is required. If he does get the chop then he has only got himself to blame.

To the top · Post: # 459653Post **To the top** » Wed 19 Sep 2007 3:46pm

Where does this perception re attitude come from?

IF his attitude was poor, I very much doubt his name would consistently be in the best at Casey.

He will get his chance, and he has the ability to make the most of it.

plugger66 · Post: # 459695Post **plugger66** » Wed 19 Sep 2007 4:33pm

They are not going to promote 4 rookies. Not sure who they will but it will be 2 at the most. I still think there is one or two more to go. They would be Brooks and maybe Ferg as stated 3 weeks ago.

St DAC · Post: # 459732Post **St DAC** » Wed 19 Sep 2007 5:11pm

Is it confirmed that Sweeney is gone?

borderbarry · Wed 19 Sep 2007 5:56pm

I believe Sweeney and Raymond have both been dropped from the list. If we cannot have 6 rookies and anyone on the veteran list, what happened this year with Harvs and Max, and the 6 rookies?
I dont know if Attard is too old to be retained as a rookie, but Jones certainly is.

Mr Magic · Post: # 459799Post **Mr Magic** » Wed 19 Sep 2007 6:02pm

borderbarry wrote:I believe Sweeney and Raymond have both been dropped from the list. If we cannot have 6 rookies and anyone on the veteran list, what happened this year with Harvs and Max, and the 6 rookies?
I dont know if Attard is too old to be retained as a rookie, but Jones certainly is.

I don't think we had anyone on the veterans list this year

plugger66 · Post: # 459810Post **plugger66** » Wed 19 Sep 2007 6:22pm

St DAC wrote:Is it confirmed that Sweeney is gone?

Sweeney and Raymond are definately NOT confirmed.

saintbrat · Post: # 459840Post **saintbrat** » Wed 19 Sep 2007 7:06pm

Mr Magic wrote:
borderbarry wrote:I believe Sweeney and Raymond have both been dropped from the list. If we cannot have 6 rookies and anyone on the veteran list, what happened this year with Harvs and Max, and the 6 rookies?
I dont know if Attard is too old to be retained as a rookie, but Jones certainly is.
I don't think we had anyone on the veterans list this year

veterans can be
a)- inside the list- withint the main list of 38 - as Max and Harves were this year
b) - outside the list- and included in the 6 next players- ie 2 veterans and 4 rookies
list total 44

you can have more than 2 veterans and from reading may be up to 4 ?

vacuous space · Wed 19 Sep 2007 10:54pm

Dan Warna wrote:has Brooks been given a game in the ruck for the seniors in the saints in 07?

Brooks played some ruck in all of his last three AFL games. He's got the athletic ability to contest the centre bounces, but lacks the strength to compete at around the ground stoppages. Rix might not be a match-winning ruckman, but at least he's not going to get pushed around like Brooks.

borderbarry · Sat 22 Sep 2007 11:52pm

Apparently C.Jones cant be retained as a rookie because of his age. I dont think he is worth promoting. Howard with a full pre season behind him will be able to fill the role required of Jones this year.