The Goodes and the bad of the 1997 Draft

[Chow-Chicker]

Originally posted by laughingnome
I think we're all forgetting that it was only under Roos' tuteledge that Goodes became a bona-fide star. Who's to say he would have gotten anywhere near that with another club? Eade is thought to be one of the better thinkers of the coaches and he could never really pin him into a game plan, so what makes people think anyone else could? If Wallace had taken the reins and not Roos then Goodes might well have become just an "average" player after a good start where he won the rising star.

If Wallace was our coach he'd have Goodes deep in the forward line and he'd have our backmen kick sideways and backwards and playing keepings off for half a game. In other words, Goodes would hardly touch the footy.

[anne]

And if Eade had stayed I don't think Goodes would have blossomed. In fact he may even have left.

[Jeffers1984]

Originally posted by anne
And if Eade had stayed I don't think Goodes would have blossomed. In fact he may even have left.

Yep. Goodes said in 2002 that he was so disillusioned that if it wasn't for Roosy, he most likely would of seeked a trade.

[Boodnutz]

Re: Re: The Goodes and the bad of the 1997 Draft

Originally posted by Bloody Hell
I'm starting to develop a real annoyance with Australian journos.

This is terribly written.

Pick___ went to _____. They picked _____, ______, _______. Goodes is better than these players.

Pick___ went to _____. They picked _____, ______, _______. Goodes is better than these players.

Pick___ went to _____. They picked _____, ______, _______. Goodes is better than these players.

et al.

All this journalist is saying is how can a player who dominated the U/18 grand final be passed over 42 times before being picked. That's a fair enough point to make. What's a sports journalist supposed to do in October, just sit and read the form guide?

[Chow-Chicker]

Re: Re: Re: The Goodes and the bad of the 1997 Draft

Originally posted by Boodnutz
All this journalist is saying is how can a player who dominated the U/18 grand final be passed over 42 times before being picked. That's a fair enough point to make. What's a sports journalist supposed to do in October, just sit and read the form guide?

It's just knit picking bull@@@@. So what? Why not go through the 1990 draft and figure out how James Hird was passed up 78 times before being accepted? Now imagine how many clubs would have fared with him in their team.......

[DeadlyAkkuret]

Bolton at pick 4, Goodes at pick 43, could be the difference between just the win in 2000 and a run of premierships from 1999 to today for the Bombers.

This made me chuckle, does he really think the Bombers would have won flags in either of the last 3-4 years with Goodes in the side?

[dimelb]

Originally posted by DeadlyAkkuret
This made me chuckle, does he really think the Bombers would have won flags in either of the last 3-4 years with Goodes in the side?

Classic barroom argument. Short answer, no way. They wouldn't have got over the Lions or Port.
However ... take out their weakest (say Cupido for example) and put in Goodes and that would be a quite formidable team - good down the spine and a reasonable midfield. Still, not premiership material.

[Chow-Chicker]

Originally posted by dimelb
Classic barroom argument. Short answer, no way. They wouldn't have got over the Lions or Port.
However ... take out their weakest (say Cupido for example) and put in Goodes and that would be a quite formidable team - good down the spine and a reasonable midfield. Still, not premiership material.

I think the period that is being discussed is 1999-2001. They lost by a point in '99 in the PF to Carlton, won 2000 in a cake walk, and lost 2001 after leading by 3 goals at half time. Still, I don't think Goodes was good enough at that stage to make that much of a difference.

[DeadlyAkkuret]

Originally posted by Chow-Chicker
I think the period that is being discussed is 1999-2001. They lost by a point in '99 in the PF to Carlton, won 2000 in a cake walk, and lost 2001 after leading by 3 goals at half time. Still, I don't think Goodes was good enough at that stage to make that much of a difference.

He said 99' to today, doesn't that suggest he thinks they could still be a premiership chance now?

[Bloody Hell]

Re: Re: Re: The Goodes and the bad of the 1997 Draft

Originally posted by Boodnutz
All this journalist is saying is how can a player who dominated the U/18 grand final be passed over 42 times before being picked. That's a fair enough point to make. What's a sports journalist supposed to do in October, just sit and read the form guide?

It's not what he's writing about. It's how it's written.