I think this is a horrible idea. We have been way too much of a revolving door with our second tier players. We have invested in players, only to throw them out later for other players who we do the same too. Ridenton and Rufer now have a little bit of experience and could be called upon if they were required. I don't see who we would bring in for Ridenton and Rufer who could contribute as much as they do.
Too much of a revolving door? Relative to? Pretty much every other club who isn't afraid to drop decent, but not-quite-there second-tier players? It's like we are afraid to let them go as they aren't Aussies, so it's unlikely they are going to get a professional gig in another A-league club.
The idea is that we have a large pool of talent to pull from, but for some reason we cannot get the same level of quality Australian clubs do even though they are all fighting over a smaller pool of players. So you've got your core squad of 15 or so, great - but if the next 8 have been around for 2 years and still aren't getting consistent game time, why keep them around? I have no problem investing in player after player and discarding most, if the team unearths a few gems that do more than just contribute. We should be looking for more than mediocrity here; the next Rojas...
Who are we missing out on? Which players in the Stirling Sports Premiership should given 'nix contracts? Zero names leap out at me. If you have a core squad of 15 then one injury can mean you will be fielding an 18 year old in a crucial position. You keep those guys around because when you lose 5-6 players in an international window, you want someone with experience.
The problem with always looking for the next gem is they are few and far between. When you get a gem like Rojas, Smeltz or Burns they don't tend to stick around for long.
Our problem is that we aren't in the market for Aussie talent. Decent Australians don't seem to come here (Burns, Durante exceptions). Would any of our current Australians get A-league deals elsewhere? We also hardly ever bring New Zealanders back from Europe. Our options are 5 foreigners, state league Aussies and the best local players we can get. You seem to be wanting us to get rid of Ridenton/Rufer for players of Rogerson's quality when Rogerson isn't getting a look in himself.
Your last paragraph sums up the problem that my suggestion was trying to address. You are 100% correct. We aren't in the market for Aussie talent, we don't have great Aussies, there's not enough NZ talent to bring back from Europe and our options are limited. Given the lack of options and the fact we seem to be perennially stuck in the bottom half of the table maybe the team needs to be more ruthless with the talent pool they have available outside of the core squad. Between nine Aussie teams they seem to find enough gems (or at the very least A-League starting quality) from within Australia, but for the last few years we've found none in the whole of NZ?
And basically yes, I'm suggesting giving Ridenton/Rufer a go, but if they aren't up to it, moving them on for players like Rogerson. And if he's not up to it, moving him on as well. There may not be many gems, but they are out there. It's like the old strikers adage, you're not going to score unless you have a shot. With a small bench you need players who might be able to change a game, and while Ridenton and Rufer may be solid squad players they aren't game changes. Watson maybe, but he should be starting. Boyd had the ability, surely there are more like him out there.
I don't think the Aussie teams do find that much quality, they seem to just recycle the same old journeymen. In fact I know Australians are really worried about the lack of quality coming through and put that down to a change in the way the youth system and academy systems were setup a few years ago.
If you recall we signed more NPL players this season than the rest of the teams combined so they aren't actively hunting for talent they seem to be holding on to their promising fringe players as we do.