"Coaching To Win" VS "Playing For The Future"

[PassIt2Carrots]

We know if he is good enough.  Frankly, he has a good kick and size going for him and it pretty much ends there.

He isn't up to it.  What you see is what you get.  Another player who we gave a game to, sat him on Travis Cloke when he was the best forward in the competition and that's all she wrote.

he might come good, but he probably won't.

But my point still remains, we should know by now. I certainly don't, others may beg to differ.

Regarding Ellard, Walker, Armfield and co, we are on a slippery slope.  they could be part of our next flag, but it depends on the rest of the squad. speaking of which, if we lose Judd, Carrazzo, Simpson to retirement these three become important stop gaps for us.

I disagree, thee blokes are doing nothing for our culture and nothing for our future. The only bloke that even looks like he really busts his guts is Army but he needs to be just a fraction off and he's not very good.

I get the idea.  Play email early find out if they are good enough, but sometimes it's counter productive. They get drafted which means they have some ability but it's harnessing and using it.  I don't think it's a coincidence that the bottom sides who consistently get high draft picks, end up with unfulfilled talent and often it's because they are expected to perform too much too soon..Cripps is one who gas had very few senior games over two years and is blossoming for it. Had he not broken his leg last year, he might not have employed a running coach and come back in ripping condition.  Sometimes it's better that they earn it.

They appreciate it more, and then perform accordingly. 

But in this case, when you look at who is playing instead of them, it's really a no brainer who should play.