Whose head needs to be sacrificed???

[bulldogtragic]

We need action.

Those under scrutiny,

Head Coach
Skills Coach
Assistants
Fitness
Senior players
Others??

Blood needs to be spilled to move forward. So whose head????

[AndrewP6]

Start with McCartney.

[jeemak]

We need action.

Those under scrutiny,

Head Coach
Skills Coach
Assistants
Fitness
Senior players
Others??

Blood needs to be spilled to move forward. So whose head????


Start with McCartney.

I can understand you're a little disappointed, but this is a bit over the top.

[AndrewP6]

I can understand you're a little disappointed, but this is a bit over the top.

I thought he was the wrong appointment from day one, and the last few weeks have only underlined my belief. We're going backwards fast.

[The Underdog]

I can understand you're a little disappointed, but this is a bit over the top.

*!*!*!*!ing predictable though

[bulldogtragic]

I can understand you're a little disappointed, but this is a bit over the top.
Disappointed doesn't begin. If I had this kind of output in a corporate environment I'd be dismissed, or I would resign in embarrassment.

[GVGjr]

Disappointed doesn't begin. If I had this kind of output in a corporate environment I'd be dismissed, or I would resign in embarrassment.

Emotion is a great thing especially on the spur of the moment but we need to make considered decisions not emotional ones.

I hope the club doesn't serve up a sacrificial head just to appease the frustrated supporter base.

[Remi Moses]

Would one of you more savvy users whack up a panic button.

[jeemak]

I thought he was the wrong appointment from day one, and the last few weeks have only underlined my belief. We're going backwards fast.

That wasn't an issue you had with him though was it?

I'm not sold on the coach, but the diabolical list situation isn't his fault. Even you'd have to admit that Andrew.

[Remi Moses]

Disappointed doesn't begin. If I had this kind of output in a corporate environment I'd be dismissed, or I would resign in embarrassment.

So next year if we're struggling you'd replace another coach?

[jeemak]

Disappointed doesn't begin. If I had this kind of output in a corporate environment I'd be dismissed, or I would resign in embarrassment.

Depends on the resources you had at your disposal.

Our coach is having to complete sophisticated CAD work on an Amstrad right now.

[jeemak]

Richmond has a history of 30 years of sacrificing lambs. Funny thing is, they were a very successful club before they started doing that.

[AndrewP6]

That wasn't an issue you had with him though was it?

I'm not sold on the coach, but the diabolical list situation isn't his fault. Even you'd have to admit that Andrew.

Yeah I never thought he was a good appointment. The list is one thing, the lack of structure, selections, overemphasis on certain skills to the neglect of others is more what I see and can't fathom.

[jeemak]

Yeah I never thought he was a good appointment. The list is one thing, the lack of structure, selections, overemphasis on certain skills to the neglect of others is more what I see and can't fathom.

Fair enough. As I've said previously, I'm not sold on him either. But sacking people after backing in their long term plan isn't the way to manage an organisation.

[bulldogtragic]

So next year if we're struggling you'd replace another coach?
No. But I would expect some development, some faint sign of life, a morsel of hope. Not 18/19 losses. You can't expect to oversee such a shambolic result and have key factors going backwards. I would not expect to stay on if I were coach if I couldn't crack double digit winning percentages.

[Remi Moses]

Disappointed doesn't begin. If I had this kind of output in a corporate environment I'd be dismissed, or I would resign in embarrassment.

So you're going back on this statement, if the next coach is failing?

[bulldogtragic]

Fair enough. As I've said previously, I'm not sold on him either. But sacking people after backing in their long term plan isn't the way to manage an organisation.
The beauty is we're a broad church. We all have different paths we would like the club to follow, but at the heart of everyone posting here, is the love of the club and wanting to see success.

[Remi Moses]

One think we all agree on.
Not a massive understatement to say tonight is a dark night for the club

[bulldogtragic]

One think we all agree on.
Not a massive understatement to say tonight is a dark night for the club
Yep. I want the players to lay like men demonically possessed net week. It should hurt and mbarass them. See what next week has in store.

[soupman]

Blood needs to be spilled to move forward. So whose head????

I know it's soon after the match but settle.

We were crap, pathetic, deplorable, shithouse, uninspiring and dare I say it Melbourne like at times, but we have shown signs we are going in the right direction throughout the season, and spilling blood after a poor performance against a Gold Coast side that really should beat us isn't going to help this club.

[bulldogtragic]

I would like a review of the skills coaches and recruiters before seasons end.

That is, are we not assisting the players technically, or are we recruiting dud kicks. Either way, we need to know by years end.

[boydogs]

We need action.

Those under scrutiny,

Head Coach
Skills Coach
Assistants
Fitness
Senior players
Others??

Blood needs to be spilled to move forward. So whose head????

Our senior players were leading the way tonight. Minson, Cooney, Griffen, Murphy were our best 4.

Our team is young, and their development has been focused on one area of the game. The coach has already acknowledged it's time to focus on other areas, I don't see a need to make a change.

[Yankee Hotel Foxtrot]

Fair enough. As I've said previously, I'm not sold on him either. But sacking people after backing in their long term plan isn't the way to manage an organisation.

Precisely. If the club are sold on McCartney's plan, then they must see it through. I was not overjoyed with the decision to boot Eade for Macca, but having done so and presumably believing in his long tem vision it would be unjustifiable to then sack him before giving him a solid chance. It would benefit no-one to get skittish now and make a sacrificial lamb of him just to placate a few unhappy supporters.

[SonofScray]

I'm not shattered that we got beaten by Gold Coast, it was going to happen eventually and they've got other wins on the board this year so I haven't had that epic meltdown I might have had last year in this scenario.

HOWEVER!

The mantra is geared towards seeing things fall into place when the scenario is like it was tonight, where age, experience and maturity etc all is fairly even. We saw the same fade out, the same skills errors, the same shambolic tactics that kill us against the better sides.

I was expecting us to crack in, be stronger for longer, Mac essentially set that expectation up for us all. What was delivered was nowhere near it. We were actually worse performed than other weeks. Morale must be about at rock bottom by now. Mine is.

I don't want heads to roll but I do want a change in the way we respond.

[Mantis]

Precisely. If the club are sold on McCartney's plan, then they must see it through. I was not overjoyed with the decision to boot Eade for Macca, but having done so and presumably believing in his long tem vision it would be unjustifiable to then sack him before giving him a solid chance. It would benefit no-one to get skittish now and make a sacrificial lamb of him just to placate a few unhappy supporters.

Just a few.

I would think 90% of our supporters & members would be pretty pissed off with our performances over the past 20 games.

[AndrewP6]

Precisely. If the club are sold on McCartney's plan, then they must see it through. I was not overjoyed with the decision to boot Eade for Macca, but having done so and presumably believing in his long tem vision it would be unjustifiable to then sack him before giving him a solid chance. It would benefit no-one to get skittish now and make a sacrificial lamb of him just to placate a few unhappy supporters.

There's more than just a few.

[Yankee Hotel Foxtrot]

Just a few.

I would think 90% of our supporters & members would be pretty pissed off with our performances over the past 20 games.

And I'm one of them. I hate to see us play so poorly. It makes me sick. But I remember how god awful Hawthorn were a couple of years into Clarkson's tenure as well.
I'm not saying McCartney is the second coming, but calls to sack him now are over the top. It would be Richmond-esque to rip the rug out now.

Presumably, given the list decisions that have been made to date, the club see his vision as taking a few years to come to fruition. If this is the case, and they are sold on a long term process, then to judge him before he has the benefit of seeing this process start to take root, then it would be the sign of a failed board, not a failed coach.

[Mantis]

Presumably, given the list decisions that have been made to date, the club see his vision as taking a few years to come to fruition. If this is the case, and they are sold on a long term process, then to judge him before he has the benefit of seeing this process start to take root, then it would be the sign of a failed board, not a failed coach.

In a recent interview B-Mac said we are another 2 to 5 years away from being where we need to be... I hope we are all in it for the long haul. :eek:

But we can't continue to be inept as we have over the past 20 games in the 2nd half of this season.. young team or not.

[craigsahibee]

At least we have a list of good citizens.

[The Pie Man]

This'll sound harsh - this IS another Rhode era, and I don't mind. We got Cooney et all following poor years under Peter then got someone in who could coach the group well.

It's not calculated on our part, but it's how I'm choosing to view it. More high end talent in for someone else to take them forward at some point.

(Insert best coach in the league) couldn't get our 2013 group near the finals, so that's my re-framed silver lining. Just hoping we don't end up like Melbourne...

[Ghost Dog]

No disrespect to the Captain, but the side does seem more balanced when he is out.
Sorry Matt. You've been an absolute warrior for us, and respect you greatly. All good things...

[Sedat]

Richmond has a history of 30 years of sacrificing lambs.
Didn't we do exactly that in 2011?

[GVGjr]

Didn't we do exactly that in 2011?

No, it was time not a sacrifice.

[Sedat]

No, it was time not a sacrifice.
Disagree. We understandably went to the well for 3 years and had already started the rebuild early in 2011. It was a panicky decision to change coaches in 2011, just as it would be panicky to do it right now.

[GVGjr]

Disagree. We understandably went to the well for 3 years and had already started the rebuild early in 2011. It was a panicky decision to change coaches in 2011, just as it would be panicky to do it right now.

We will have to agree to disagree on this. I think he came up very short in his sales pitch and things weren't working. He wanted an answer early and things didn't fall his way.
Great coach but we are where we are because of a number of poor list management decisions.

[Yankee Hotel Foxtrot]

Disagree. We understandably went to the well for 3 years and had already started the rebuild early in 2011. It was a panicky decision to change coaches in 2011, just as it would be panicky to do it right now.

This is pretty much my thoughts as well. That is not to say I'm satisfied with everything that is unfolding right now. But if Macca has been given the mandate by the board to undertake a long term rebuild then it would be foolish of the board to not see it through. At least to a point where his strategy can be effectively evaluated. I would argue that with the state of the list as it was when he took over, right now is nowhere near time enough for balanced evaluation to be undertaken.

[The Underdog]

This'll sound harsh - this IS another Rhode era, and I don't mind. We got Cooney et all following poor years under Peter then got someone in who could coach the group well.

It's not calculated on our part, but it's how I'm choosing to view it. More high end talent in for someone else to take them forward at some point.

(Insert best coach in the league) couldn't get our 2013 group near the finals, so that's my re-framed silver lining. Just hoping we don't end up like Melbourne...

Our list needs quality. Top 3 draft picks are the easiest way to do that.

[G-Mo77]

So people's heads have to roll now for people to be happy?

Nail the draft in the off season and work from there. We've been here before. We'll get back.

[PedroArvy]

Our list needs quality. Top 3 draft picks are the easiest way to do that.

You reckon? The success of drafts picks is pretty low. I am not knocking top level draft picks but its pretty dicey as to whether the players you choose will go anywhere.

I am intrigued as to why we didn't run out the game. The commentators kept saying we tired. This seems weird. Did we run far more than the opposition? Or are we lacking in fitness? if so, how can that be? These guys are pro footballers and I can't imagine fitness regimes between clubs being that different. This issue seems to be a consistent problem.

[LostDoggy]

Disagree. We understandably went to the well for 3 years and had already started the rebuild early in 2011. It was a panicky decision to change coaches in 2011, just as it would be panicky to do it right now.

No what was panicky and short sighted were the following:

1 - The retention of players way past their use by dates in a misguided attempt by Eade to keep his numbers up and his job (see Hahn, Eagleton, Johnson)
2 - We saw the panicky recruitment of speed (Akermanis, Djerkurra and Sherman) at the expense of list development
3 - We saw repeated spin from Eade that we weren't that 'bad' and absolute neglect in list management

It was past time for change when Eade was let go.

McCartney needs to be given a chance to rebuild our trainwreck of a list, with the following rider, if little improvement shown by years end, then a review needs to occur (personally I have seen individual improvement in many players and think its not as bad as some think)

If we are talking change then I would be starting with the two worst offenders for our biggest problem, spread and ball use. Those two players are Boyd and Cross (for spread add Gia). Having the club's two onfield leaders being our worst offenders must make it very difficult to implement change. I am looking forward to a changing of the guard this year and possibly Boyd losing the captaincy first and then his place in the team. That will be a sign that our culture is changing for the better.

And by the way no disrespect to Boyd and Cross, two more courageous players and servants a club will not find. But the game has passed them by - rapidly.

[Ghost Dog]

Let's judge apples and not oranges. The kids that BMAC has presided over have been a success already.
Stringer, MacRae, Clay smith. All doing good things.
Compare these with Grant, Howard, and others selected outside of BMAC's tenure.
One has to also factor we are rebuilding our off field team as well. This takes time. You need a stellar off-field team in order to get the chocolates. Doesn't happen overnight.
Getting rid of Fantasia was the first step.

[PedroArvy]

2 - We saw the panicky recruitment of speed (Akermanis, Djerkurra and Sherman) at the expense of list development

Why isn't recruiting quick players addressing list development? If you decide you need speed then getting fast players addresses that doesn't it? Not saying I agree with these player choices but was wondering what you meant here.

[AndrewP6]

No what was panicky and short sighted were the following:


2 - We saw the panicky recruitment of speed (Akermanis, Djerkurra and Sherman) at the expense of list development


Huh? The lack of speed was an issue, players were drafted to address it. They didn't work out; that's not poor list management. And I'd argue Aker was good for us for a long while.

[Dancin' Douggy]

No what was panicky and short sighted were the following:

1 - The retention of players way past their use by dates in a misguided attempt by Eade to keep his numbers up and his job (see Hahn, Eagleton, Johnson)
2 - We saw the panicky recruitment of speed (Akermanis, Djerkurra and Sherman) at the expense of list development
3 - We saw repeated spin from Eade that we weren't that 'bad' and absolute neglect in list management

It was past time for change when Eade was let go.

McCartney needs to be given a chance to rebuild our trainwreck of a list, with the following rider, if little improvement shown by years end, then a review needs to occur (personally I have seen individual improvement in many players and think its not as bad as some think)

If we are talking change then I would be starting with the two worst offenders for our biggest problem, spread and ball use. Those two players are Boyd and Cross (for spread add Gia). Having the club's two onfield leaders being our worst offenders must make it very difficult to implement change. I am looking forward to a changing of the guard this year and possibly Boyd losing the captaincy first and then his place in the team. That will be a sign that our culture is changing for the better.

And by the way no disrespect to Boyd and Cross, two more courageous players and servants a club will not find. But the game has passed them by - rapidly.

Great Post. Well done.

[Dancin' Douggy]

Why isn't recruiting quick players addressing list development? If you decide you need speed then getting fast players addresses that doesn't it? Not saying I agree with these player choices but was wondering what you meant here.

PANICKY recruitment. Sherman was fast, but so is a chicken with it's head removed.

[always right]

Huh? The lack of speed was an issue, players were drafted to address it. They didn't work out; that's not poor list management. And I'd argue Aker was good for us for a long while.

And of course they were recruited under Eade's reign.....and we can't criticise him can we?

[bornadog]

PANICKY recruitment. Sherman was fast, but so is a chicken with it's head removed.

He played some good games at Brisbane and was right up there in the B&F. Its easy to slag off recruitment with hindsight :rolleyes:

[AndrewP6]

And of course they were recruited under Eade's reign.....and we can't criticise him can we?

If you like, but as I said, Aker was good for a long while. The others didn't work, every club has similar stories.

[Mantis]

1 - The retention of players way past their use by dates in a misguided attempt by Eade to keep his numbers up and his job (see Hahn, Eagleton, Johnson)


The other 2 should have been moved on earlier, but in the PF of 2009 Johnson was pretty much our best player... He had injury concerns all thru the pre-season of his final year ( re: golf cart incident), but to say he was past his use by date as of 2009 is just plain wrong.

[Dancin' Douggy]

Come on bornadog. Sherman was useless for us. Professional recruiters need to be held accountable for their decisions don't they? We payed a pretty high price for Sherman, it wasn't chicken feed.

[Greystache]

He played some good games at Brisbane and was right up there in the B&F. Its easy to slag off recruitment with hindsight :rolleyes:

He was right up there in the best and fairest was he? He finished 2nd in his second season and didn't feature anywhere near the top again as far as I was aware.

[Dancin' Douggy]

If you like, but as I said, Aker was good for a long while. The others didn't work, every club has similar stories.

Aker was great for us no doubt. If he had have retired when he originally planned to it would have been a feel good story for us and him. But he did kind of fall in our lap too.

[GVGjr]

So people's heads have to roll now for people to be happy?

Nail the draft in the off season and work from there. We've been here before. We'll get back.

Agreed. The right attitude.

[GVGjr]

He played some good games at Brisbane and was right up there in the B&F. Its easy to slag off recruitment with hindsight :rolleyes:

Not when it was also said at the time. Poor decision then and a costly one now.

[Dancin' Douggy]

For me the number 1 villain is Scott Clayton. Can we re hire him just to lynch him?
That's the head I would most like to see roll.

And while we're at it, shouldn't he be swimming from St. Kilda to Williamstown round about now?

[bornadog]

Come on bornadog. Sherman was useless for us. Professional recruiters need to be held accountable for their decisions don't they? We payed a pretty high price for Sherman, it wasn't chicken feed.

Did I comment on his games for us? I was talking about the decision to recruit him. That's what the above discussion was on.

[Dancin' Douggy]

And I'm judging 'experts' on high salaries who make those decisions.

[Dancin' Douggy]

Did I comment on his games for us? I was talking about the decision to recruit him. That's what the above discussion was on.

If you read my post I'm talking about the price we paid for him as well.
A first round compensation pick. Unforgivable negligence in my opinion.

[Greystache]

If you like, but as I said, Aker was good for a long while. The others didn't work, every club has similar stories.

People seem to remember it that way but he actually only played a season and a half of good footy in his 4 years at the club and never in a final. His 2007 season was shit, his second half of 2008 nearly saw him dropped despite his first half being outstanding, and in 2010 he could barely even keep up at VFL level. That's without factoring all his off field stuff. Why we gave him another year in 2010 (along with Eagleton and Hahn) when he'd been a finals failure was baffling.

When recruited terribly and developed poorly under Eade which meant we had to keep senior players on longer than we should and bring in top up players at the expense of strategic list management just to keep a decent team on the park. We're playing for it now.

[PedroArvy]

We do have a big gap in the 23-27 year age bracket, I suppose that was Eade's legacy. Instead of moving players on, and we are talking experienced players, he kept them on and topped up with older guys. Perhaps as a club we don't have the guts to let a Johno go, perhaps even risk him going to another club for a few years, and replace him with youth. You could have such a policy i.e. you are over 29, we will trade you for high draft picks no matter who you are. Stuff loyalty, we want a killer team. Or at least you should not let a team get so old age heavy.

[G-Mo77]

He played some good games at Brisbane and was right up there in the B&F. Its easy to slag off recruitment with hindsight :rolleyes:

It is as a fan but people are employed to manage the list so it doesn't turn it into a basket case like we have now. I had no problem with getting Sherman personally or any of the other aging players at the time. I was all in for a flag. However managing a list requires future thought which didn't happen. Looking back those that were suppose to manage our list failed us. They were short sited and we're paying for it now.

[Sedat]

Not when it was also said at the time. Poor decision then and a costly one now.
Shit decision to get him, and a real howler by Rocket. He was the right 'type' that we needed from a pace and line-breaking perspective but his decision-making was slightly below rubbish for most of his 10 year career. The Harbrow compo pick pissed down the drain.

[Greystache]

Shit decision to get him, and a real howler by Rocket. He was the right 'type' that we needed from a pace and line-breaking perspective but his decision-making was slightly below rubbish for most of his 10 year career. The Harbrow compo pick pissed down the drain.

The frustrating thing was that he hadn't improved in his previous 4 years, he was on the outer at Brisbane and*!it seemed*!we were the only onone's that didn't realise. As you said, right skill set wrong player.

[LostDoggy]

Not sure its a head to be sacrified. Billys Blind Donkey will tell you the comp has us sussed.
1. Allow us to win the hard ball and overwork ourselves
2. Apply pressure to the 16 or so players each week that will then panic and hospital pass to a team mate - yes Boyd and yes Wallis I'm talking to you both + others..
3. Intercept, outrun outpace and goal.

We need at least 1 tall foward outside of stringer that doesn't run under the ball 50 percent of the time or have butterfingers
1 or 2 mids with pace and a great kick (well done Macrae would you like a 10 year deal please)
1 tall back with a good kick

I suspect the next 2 years we will be last or second last and if we don't get bonus draft picks it could be upto 4.

Think we need to remember collingwood, hawthorn and others all went through this to get the pendulbury, roughead, buddy franchise players they built their teams around.

Gee it hurts though and our best players are massively overpaid for what we are getting.

[Sedat]

The frustrating thing was that he hadn't improved in his previous 4 years, he was on the outer at Brisbane and*!it seemed*!we were the only onone's that didn't realise. As you said, right skill set wrong player.
Those doyens of recycled players, Sydney, were right into him and were prepared to part with pick 22 from memory. Luckily for us Sherman chose the Dogs as his preferred destination :rolleyes:

[Remi Moses]

Shit decision to get him, and a real howler by Rocket. He was the right 'type' that we needed from a pace and line-breaking perspective but his decision-making was slightly below rubbish for most of his 10 year career. The Harbrow compo pick pissed down the drain.

Right idea. Complete one way type though Sherman.

[FrediKanoute]

In a recent interview B-Mac said we are another 2 to 5 years away from being where we need to be... I hope we are all in it for the long haul. :eek:

But we can't continue to be inept as we have over the past 20 games in the 2nd half of this season.. young team or not.

I agree. Serving up results like we have had for the last 20 games just cant and wont wash. We have to be better and Macca has to change his ways to ensure that this is the case.

[LostDoggy]

Why is tonight a dark night ? Why, when you're beaten by a team full of first and second round drafts picks who've played 30 -50 games, have the best player of the last decade, and your teams full of players who're past their best, young players from lower in the draft and less experience, and minimal players in the right age and experience bracket?

[Ghost Dog]

Don't really like the title in this thread. in terms of the heads rolling thing.
There are many good solid players who are ending their careers. It's not as though they suddenly gave up on us. Their bodies are wearing out. It may be time for them to move on shortly, but it's not that time yet.

[bornadog]

Those doyens of recycled players, Sydney, were right into him and were prepared to part with pick 22 from memory. Luckily for us Sherman chose the Dogs as his preferred destination :rolleyes:

Yeah he was so bad at the time Sydney wanted to recruit him.

Its easy for people to twist history when a player doesn't work out. Yep we pissed the Harbrow pick down the drain, but at the time the club thought it was the right move.

[Ghost Dog]

I agree. Serving up results like we have had for the last 20 games just cant and wont wash. We have to be better and Macca has to change his ways to ensure that this is the case.

I don't accept development as the case for Will Minson and Guido to be missing gettable shots from straight in front.
Our young guys showed up our senior players tonight. very sad.

[PedroArvy]

Why is tonight a dark night ? Why, when you're beaten by a team full of first and second round drafts picks who've played 30 -50 games, have the best player of the last decade, and your teams full of players who're past their best, young players from lower in the draft and less experience, and minimal players in the right age and experience bracket?

*Gold* post. Very insightful. It's difficult to argue with this level of logical clarity.

[w3design]

We do have a big gap in the 23-27 year age bracket, I suppose that was Eade's legacy. Instead of moving players on, and we are talking experienced players, he kept them on and topped up with older guys. Perhaps as a club we don't have the guts to let a Johno go, perhaps even risk him going to another club for a few years, and replace him with youth. You could have such a policy i.e. you are over 29, we will trade you for high draft picks no matter who you are. Stuff loyalty, we want a killer team. Or at least you should not let a team get so old age heavy.

That's your preferred plan? We get rid of everyone over 29 and replace them with kids???
Good luck making a success of that.

So you chop off the head, and expect the arms and legs to take up the slack huh ?

I can think of only one club that has tried that philosophy in recent years. Some call them
Melbourne. I will not be so impolite to repeat what most call them.:cool::eek:

[Greystache]

Its easy for people to twist history when a player doesn't work out. Yep we pissed the Harbrow pick down the drain, but at the time the club thought it was the right move.

And they were wrong and it's costing us now. We seem so happy to criticise some decisions as a complete failure in their duties to the club, but happily write others off as seeming like a good idea at the time that didn't work out.

Many supporters questioned the Sherman selection at the time.

[PedroArvy]

That's your preferred plan? We get rid of everyone over 29 and replace them with kids???

Not everyone over 29, but I suggest limiting the number of players at the older end of the spectrum. I understand a team of kids wouldn't work either. Why is that a bad thing? Isn't that what list management is all about, creating a team that won't collapse because of a poor distribution of players of all ages?

[boydogs]

I am intrigued as to why we didn't run out the game. The commentators kept saying we tired. This seems weird. Did we run far more than the opposition? Or are we lacking in fitness? if so, how can that be? These guys are pro footballers and I can't imagine fitness regimes between clubs being that different. This issue seems to be a consistent problem.

We're basically ball chasing - swarming around the ball to win possession, then having no-one to kick to and no-one to defend. We're running ourselves ragged going from contest to contest then trying to provide an option or run down an opponent.

BMac's contested ball focus has unbalanced our approach, it's a particularly difficult game plan for kids to execute as it requires a high degree of fitness. However he has acknowledged that and he is now moving on to other aspects of the game.

[Ghost Dog]

*Gold* post. Very insightful. It's difficult to argue with this level of logical clarity.

Disagree. We butchered the ball in front of goal and around the ground, failing to put score board pressure on them. We missed passes while under no pressure and messed up scoring chains with an errant handballs. We gave away careless frees. We turned the ball over.
I don't let our boys off the hook that easily, blaming the draft etc. We were poor.

[Mantis]

We're basically ball chasing - swarming around the ball to win possession, then having no-one to kick to and no-one to defend. We're running ourselves ragged going from contest to contest then trying to provide an option or run down an opponent.

BMac's contested ball focus has unbalanced our approach, it's a particularly difficult game plan for kids to execute as it requires a high degree of fitness. However he has acknowledged that and he is now moving on to other aspects of the game.

Isn't that nice.

When do think we will get to see a change of game style implemented?

[bornadog]

Disagree. We butchered the ball in front of goal and around the ground, failing to put score board pressure on them. We missed passes while under no pressure and messed up scoring chains with an errant handballs. We gave away careless frees. We turned the ball over.
I don't let our boys off the hook that easily, blaming the draft etc. We were poor.

Agree^^^, we had the ball 63 more times than they did and we just did excatly what you said, completely blew it.

[DOG GOD]

Lets be honest. The game plan sucks. The fact that every player on the ground has to go hunting the ball all at once is idiotic. No wonder we can't run games out. We are exhausted by this stupidity by half way thru the 3rd.

FFS utilise the guys you have. Let libba, smith, wallis and the like hunt the ball, get it out to our runners in griff and coon and spread, run and carry giving players like McCrae the avenue for which he was drafted. Jones is not a FF's a-hole. Get him up the ground and give him a n.roo dvd to show what he needs to do.

In 4 years we have gone from the most exciting team in the afl to watch, to a dour rabble with no foreseen gameplay except to win the contested ball. It takes more than one aspect to be successful.

Draft 2013 to look fwd to and we better not get slow, poor kicking plodders...no matter if they are "good young men from good homes".

[bornadog]

Lets be honest. The game plan sucks. The fact that every player on the ground has to go hunting the ball all at once is idiotic. No wonder we can't run games out. We are exhausted by this stupidity by half way thru the 3rd..

I have heard Macca talk about the game as contest by contest, maybe this is the issue, they are all in there at once.

[DOG GOD]

I have heard Macca talk about the game as contest by contest, maybe this is the issue, they are all in there at once.

Yep I agree bornadog. This mindset is not allowing us to have players outside of the contest. If we do win the ball it deems we have runners on the outside to get it out to, and if we don't win the ball, then the opposition have free reign to run amok.

[G-Mo77]

I have heard Macca talk about the game as contest by contest, maybe this is the issue, they are all in there at once.

They are. It's plain as day when you get there on game day and watch it live. Our structure around the packs is awful. When we're not jumping all in for the ball our spacing is horrible and we're in another contest.

[Mofra]

Why is tonight a dark night ? Why, when you're beaten by a team full of first and second round drafts picks who've played 30 -50 games, have the best player of the last decade, and your teams full of players who're past their best, young players from lower in the draft and less experience, and minimal players in the right age and experience bracket?
... and are on the same number of wins as West Coast an North Melbourne who both beat us in recent weeks.

[josie]

Why is tonight a dark night ? Why, when you're beaten by a team full of first and second round drafts picks who've played 30 -50 games, have the best player of the last decade, and your teams full of players who're past their best, young players from lower in the draft and less experience, and minimal players in the right age and experience bracket?

Well said MRM. I think BMac does need to focus more on just winning the contested ball, and he says he is donig just that of recent times and let's just see if there is improvement. I like what we've recruited, there's some hard decisions to be made on some of our older players at end of year and we should be putting game time into all potential up & comers for rest of year, whislt still having experienced players around them (let's not do a Melb).

Gilbee is a skills coach - pity he is not full time. This is another area we need to focus on.

I still think our games this year, except the one in WA (although there were glimpses we looked 6 steps behind West Coast) & the Tigers one (I think most if not all of that game was woeful) , are better than the last three quarters of last year so I think we are slowly improving.

Bottom line is we need some high draft picks with leg speed & skill & courage, and we need to give opportunity to Hrovat, Pruddent, Roberts and Talia etc. A fit Williams will help too. And let's hope Grant gets an opp soon & that he grabs it well.

One small step at a time....GO DOGS !!

[SonofScray]

... and are on the same number of wins as West Coast an North Melbourne who both beat us in recent weeks.

At some point in time, even GWS will roll us. It may or may not be this year, but eventually it will happen. I'm not going to slash my wrists over it just because they are the new teams and have to date been easy beats.

Things change in footy. We're experiencing it right now, we went so close but have fallen in a heap and have to dig ourselves out. We've been here before, it isn't fun but things will get better, then worse, then better again, then worse again.

We can deal with whatever happens. It is harder this time around because we all hung our hat on the idea that we were in the premiership window cycle and the dismal Rohde era would eventuate in our long awaited flag on the back of high draft picks etc.

[LostDoggy]

There's something wrong with Boyd, I've never seen him look so unfit, he has looked like a one legged cooney these last 3 weeks. Needs to be rested or put under the knife.

[DragzLS1]

We just lost interest. As mentioned boyd looks a little underdone :s

Need to respond next week with a win otherwise we will be in trouble.

[BornInDroopSt'54]

The beauty is we're a broad church. We all have different paths we would like the club to follow, but at the heart of everyone posting here, is the love of the club and wanting to see success.

Yes and there are self appointed town criers calling for heads despite knowing that the team is rebuilding from a poor base with major structural problems. Others can reconcile to the fact that the franchise teams are going past us of course, with all the resources put into them. The town criers are weak hearted and self centred members of the broad church.
We will show benefit from the restructure and from building a culture of contested football. Have patience and faith, two things that make humans great in the face of adversity, instead of going off like an alarm bell and calling for blood like an uncivilised discontent.

[Ghost Dog]

At some point in time, even GWS will roll us. It may or may not be this year, but eventually it will happen. I'm not going to slash my wrists over it just because they are the new teams and have to date been easy beats.

Things change in footy. We're experiencing it right now, we went so close but have fallen in a heap and have to dig ourselves out. We've been here before, it isn't fun but things will get better, then worse, then better again, then worse again.

We can deal with whatever happens. It is harder this time around because we all hung our hat on the idea that we were in the premiership window cycle and the dismal Rohde era would eventuate in our long awaited flag on the back of high draft picks etc.

I prefer to take it one game at a time. Not dream of windows or future visions of glory.
Yesterday, we were ordinary. Far from terrible, but lots of room for improvement without rolling heads.

[bulldogtragic]

Yes and there are self appointed town criers calling for heads despite knowing that the team is rebuilding from a poor base with major structural problems. Others can reconcile to the fact that the franchise teams are going past us of course, with all the resources put into them. The town criers are weak hearted and self centred members of the broad church.
We will show benefit from the restructure and from building a culture of contested football. Have patience and faith, two things that make humans great in the face of adversity, instead of going off like an alarm bell and calling for blood like an uncivilised discontent.
We disagree. So be it. Name calling is a little low. But to each their own.

[BornInDroopSt'54]

We disagree. So be it. Name calling is a little low. But to each their own.

I may be wrong but I am concerned that WOOF is read by people at the club including the players. Given that we have a young group and Bmac and others are attempting to establish a sustainable culture, this can be undermined by supporters calling for their heads, its certainly not going to help.
Our job as supporters is to support. Question, yes, but calling for "blood" and "heads' etc as you have seems to suggest revenge for your bad feelings rather than a sincere attempt at discourse on the way forward.

[Ghost Dog]

Well, start an alternative counter thread. Always good to start a shamelessly positive thread when everyone is hurling their TV remotes. Call me a masochist :)

[bulldogtragic]

Well, start an alternative counter thread. Always good to start a shamelessly positive thread when everyone is hurling their TV remotes. Call me a masochist :)
Great idea GD. :)

[Greystache]

I may be wrong but I am concerned that WOOF is read by people at the club including the players. Given that we have a young group and Bmac and others are attempting to establish a sustainable culture, this can be undermined by supporters calling for their heads, its certainly not going to help.
Our job as supporters is to support. Question, yes, but calling for "blood" and "heads' etc as you have seems to suggest revenge for your bad feelings rather than a sincere attempt at discourse on the way forward.

I understand what you're saying BIDst and it's an honourable thought but that's not really the role or responsibility of WOOF. This is a forum for supporters and we should be able to discuss whatever we feel is a pressing issue at the time. I'll considered or overly emotional responses will be discouraged, just as repetitive or constantly negative posting, but that doesn't mean everyone has to be positive all the time.

[BornInDroopSt'54]

I understand what you're saying BIDst and it's an honourable thought but that's not really the role or responsibility of WOOF. This is a forum for supporters and we should be able to discuss whatever we feel is a pressing issue at the time. I'll considered or overly emotional responses will be discouraged, just as repetitive or constantly negative posting, but that doesn't mean everyone has to be positive all the time.

Fair enough.

[boydogs]

Isn't that nice.

When do think we will get to see a change of game style implemented?

I think we'll see tweaks in the remainder of this season, but it will take another preseason to do it properly.

[Ghost Dog]

Far out. If we need another preseason to slot those easy kicks from dead in front then I'll need a home brew kit to get through another season. Back to basics. So many of the GCsuns players were getting their arms free in tackles to dish it off. tThat's a basic technique. There's a lot we are doing well, and if we just fixed the basics, we would be drawing even or better with some of the lower to mid level teams.

For some reason I feel more pessimistic now than at any other time in recent history.
I understand the opposition sometimes makes things not go your way. But we play in such a predictable manner.

As I was watching the game, I was eating a parma and chips. We would have the ball, and I could safely look at what was happening and think " oh we are stuffing around with it, going to turn it over" look down, have a few bites, look up and the opposition would have it.
This started to happen with such predictable timing, I lost my appetite!

[AndrewP6]

Far out. If we need another preseason to slot those easy kicks from dead in front then I'll need a home brew kit to get through another season. Back to basics. So many of the suns players were getting their arms free in tackles to dish it off. that's a basic technique.

Spot on. It shouldn't take 18 months to teach "See ball, get ball".

[LostDoggy]

I'd hate to see what this forum would be saying if we went for Melbourne. Macca is 100% the right person to do this, and although i get it's a win loss game it's embarrassing the amount of negativity this forum holds . People on here are talking like we were supposed to win the flag this year. Whose head should be sacrificed?! Spare me. I respect the care and want for the club to be successful but if you have a look at what Macca started with, what he said he was going to do and how he is going to do it, he is on track His drafts have been absolutely nailed. He hasn't wavered, he knows what he is doing and he's going to get this team where it needs to be so start supporting.

[AndrewP6]

. People on here are talking like we were supposed to win the flag this year.

I'm pretty sure no one predicted that.


His drafts have been absolutely nailed. He hasn't wavered, he knows what he is doing and he's going to get this team where it needs to be so start supporting.

The draft picks have been good, certainly. The rest is up for debate.

[jeemak]

I'd hate to see what this forum would be saying if we went for Melbourne. Macca is 100% the right person to do this, and although i get it's a win loss game it's embarrassing the amount of negativity this forum holds . People on here are talking like we were supposed to win the flag this year. Whose head should be sacrificed?! Spare me. I respect the care and want for the club to be successful but if you have a look at what Macca started with, what he said he was going to do and how he is going to do it, he is on track His drafts have been absolutely nailed. He hasn't wavered, he knows what he is doing and he's going to get this team where it needs to be so start supporting.

For the most part I agree, though there's definitely scope for concern around some of the MC decision making and some of the match day tactics we've seen in recent times.

With respect to the MC decision making process, it's hard to be critical because you don't know their objectives on a week by week basis looking from the outside in. As for the match day tactics, in some cases we've been completely embarrassing with our lack of organisation at the point whereby the ball is won at the contest, and our coverage over the ground. This week our kick-out strategy in the first half was nothing short of club football seconds material.

Whether the latter is a management issue, or an execution issue I don't know (there's potential for it to be a leadership personnel issue as well). But, it's bloody concerning watching our footballers play without any thought on a weekly basis.

[Remi Moses]

Why is tonight a dark night ? Why, when you're beaten by a team full of first and second round drafts picks who've played 30 -50 games, have the best player of the last decade, and your teams full of players who're past their best, young players from lower in the draft and less experience, and minimal players in the right age and experience bracket?

Great post . Just hope the MC bite the bullet on a few players though.

[Sedat]

I'd hate to see what this forum would be saying if we went for Melbourne. Macca is 100% the right person to do this, and although i get it's a win loss game it's embarrassing the amount of negativity this forum holds . People on here are talking like we were supposed to win the flag this year. Whose head should be sacrificed?! Spare me. I respect the care and want for the club to be successful but if you have a look at what Macca started with, what he said he was going to do and how he is going to do it, he is on track His drafts have been absolutely nailed. He hasn't wavered, he knows what he is doing and he's going to get this team where it needs to be so start supporting.
Hysterical overreaction post, just as the calls to sack BMac are hysterical the other way. Just about every poster on woof was expecting a rebuild, and the associated pain that comes along with it, from early 2011 (when the rebuild actually commenced). The only person I know who didn't think we needed a rebuild was our previous president, who absurdly thought a 'refresh' was all that was needed. I don't think you'd have a single poster who was critical of BMac and his coaching group after we started the season so encouragingly early last season, but we have since embarked on a complete and utter period of non-competitiveness the likes of which I haven't seen in 35 years of supporting the club. I therefore think it is healthy to ask questions about our future direction, the game style we have adopted (especially in comparison to the trends being adopted by other clubs that are almost a bipolar opposite to us) and player development. All this should be reviewed forensically at the end of the season and not now, but it would be folly to just let things take their course whilst we continue to be uncompetitive every week on the field.

We have enough top-end talent on the list to be far more competitive than what we've shown in the last 20 weeks, so there's a clear disconnect between the coaching message and the onfield actions of the players. As for player development, ask yourself which players on our list have improved from 2011 to now (not counting the players who debuted from 2011 onwards because there is no basis to compare previous output). Something is amiss, which is not to say it won't all start to click very soon. Losing comfortably to an expansion club is worrying enough in isolation, but the resigned attitude of expecting this is far more worrying.

[MrMahatma]

Hysterical overreaction post, just as the calls to sack BMac are hysterical the other way. Just about every poster on woof was expecting a rebuild, and the associated pain that comes along with it, from early 2011 (when the rebuild actually commenced). The only person I know who didn't think we needed a rebuild was our previous president, who absurdly thought a 'refresh' was all that was needed. I don't think you'd have a single poster who was critical of BMac and his coaching group after we started the season so encouragingly early last season, but we have since embarked on a complete and utter period of non-competitiveness the likes of which I haven't seen in 35 years of supporting the club. I therefore think it is healthy to ask questions about our future direction, the game style we have adopted (especially in comparison to the trends being adopted by other clubs that are almost a bipolar opposite to us) and player development. All this should be reviewed forensically at the end of the season and not now, but it would be folly to just let things take their course whilst we continue to be uncompetitive every week on the field.

We have enough top-end talent on the list to be far more competitive than what we've shown in the last 20 weeks, so there's a clear disconnect between the coaching message and the onfield actions of the players. As for player development, ask yourself which players on our list have improved from 2011 to now (not counting the players who debuted from 2011 onwards because there is no basis to compare previous output). Something is amiss, which is not to say it won't all start to click very soon. Losing comfortably to an expansion club is worrying enough in isolation, but the resigned attitude of expecting this is far more worrying.
I'm not happy with the results, but we were competitive vs Freo, Cats, Roos, Suns for fair chunks of the games.

[soupman]

As for player development, ask yourself which players on our list have improved from 2011 to now (not counting the players who debuted from 2011 onwards because there is no basis to compare previous output).

Excluding the old guys: Murphy, Cross, Boyd, Gianisiracusa, Morris

Those that continue to be best 22 and may or may not have improved:
Dahlhaus (has continued to develop), Griffen, Cooney, Liberatore (has made massive leaps forward), Minson (has continued to improve), Picken (has struggled with the inclusion of Lower)

Those that have improved to be regular best 22 players:
Wallis (has stagnated though), Jones (showed signs earlier but has made big steps forward), Roughead (has been very promising in defence), JJ (has developed massively these past two seasons),

Those that have shown signs under either McCartney or Rocket but yet to be best 22:
Tutt (shown glimpses), Addison (best category for him, has looked equally solid at times under either coach), Cordy (looked slightly better this year but still struggling)

Players that weren't best 22 under Rocket and still aren't and don't look like they will be:
Veszpremi (never looked up to it), Howard (did have a couple of good games last year though, but mostly looked inept), Markovic (was never going to be more than stop gap though),

Of those that have shown they have the ability to perform pre McCartney but haven't come along Grant (Rocket was struggling with him though), Higgins (see Grant), Wood (still yet to take the next step), Williams (see Wood),

List excludes players recruited under McCartney including: Stringer, Macrae, Smith, Roberts, Pearce, Hrovat, Stevens, Hunter, Prudden, Dickson, Young, Talia, Lower, Greenwood, Redpath, Goodes, Campbell, Jong, Austin

Looking at that the surviving players from Rocket's tenure have been about a 50-50 strike rate, with none of them getting worse but half improving (as expected considering the stage of their career) and half continuing to stagnate due injury (Williams, Wood), attitude (Grant) or lack of ability (Markovic).

The promising part of this is that nearly all of our recruits underneath McCartney have looked more promising than their equilavents of previous years, so you could argue that while we as a club have seen results suffer, it would appear that we have brought in more quality talent than was on the list prior. Whether this is the recruiting team improving, or McCartneys influence I don't know, but from all reports almost all of those kids would seem to have sufficient talent to make it.

[Topdog]

Why are Rocket and McCartney being judged on the results of the recruiters. We have seen a clear shift to footballers rather than athletes by our recruiting department.

[Sedat]

Excluding the old guys: Murphy, Cross, Boyd, Gianisiracusa, Morris.
Why exclude them? Guys like Jude Bolton have improved significantly in their twilight years. No reason for Murph to go backwards or stagnate (he has done, albeit from an elite level). Ditto Cross and Boyd if they are deployed in more appropriate roles - both have certainly gone backwards - significantly so in Boyd's case.


Those that continue to be best 22 and may or may not have improved:
Dahlhaus (has continued to develop), Griffen, Cooney, Liberatore (has made massive leaps forward), Minson (has continued to improve), Picken (has struggled with the inclusion of Lower).

Those that have improved to be regular best 22 players:
Wallis (has stagnated though), Jones (showed signs earlier but has made big steps forward), Roughead (has been very promising in defence), JJ (has developed massively these past two seasons).
I did ask to not count those players who debuted post-2011 as there is no basis for comparison - Dahl, Libba, Wallis and JJ all started post 2011 and as a minimum you'd expect significant improvement from your youngest players.

Coons has improved through being injury-free. Minson certainly has, now that he's assumed the #1 ruck mantle. I can't mount a case for any others you've listed as improving - Griff hasn't (similar to Murph, coming from an elite level and he's still our best player) and Picken has definitely regressed. Jones was top 5 for contested marks in 2011 - the argument that he's improved can be made but I wouldn't say significantly. Ditto Roughead - he's certainly added a defensive string to his bow which is a credit to the coach.


Those that have shown signs under either McCartney or Rocket but yet to be best 22:
Tutt (shown glimpses), Addison (best category for him, has looked equally solid at times under either coach), Cordy (looked slightly better this year but still struggling)

Players that weren't best 22 under Rocket and still aren't and don't look like they will be:
Veszpremi (never looked up to it), Howard (did have a couple of good games last year though, but mostly looked inept), Markovic (was never going to be more than stop gap though).
Fair assessments.


Of those that have shown they have the ability to perform pre McCartney but haven't come along Grant (Rocket was struggling with him though), Higgins (see Grant), Wood (still yet to take the next step), Williams (see Wood)
Again, fair assessments.


Looking at that the surviving players from Rocket's tenure have been about a 50-50 strike rate, with none of them getting worse but half improving (as expected considering the stage of their career) and half continuing to stagnate due injury (Williams, Wood), attitude (Grant) or lack of ability (Markovic).
I think we should have expected a better level of overall improvement in individual players, considering we went for a coach with such a strong pedigree in developing players.


The promising part of this is that nearly all of our recruits underneath McCartney have looked more promising than their equilavents of previous years, so you could argue that while we as a club have seen results suffer, it would appear that we have brought in more quality talent than was on the list prior. Whether this is the recruiting team improving, or McCartneys influence I don't know, but from all reports almost all of those kids would seem to have sufficient talent to make it.
I agree with this. We look to have recruited better from 2010-2012 than we did previously. Mind you, we should have expected nothing less compared to our recruiting record pre 2010.

[Bulldog Joe]

We need to understand that we have a very inexperienced list.

We do see stats on average games played etc, but that is misleading.

From our full list of 44 players there are 22 who had not played a senior AFL game at the start of 2011
and 16 who had not debuted before McCartney was appointed.

Gold Coast only have 12 on the list who had not debuted before the start of 2012.

As has been pointed out in other threads, we are sadly lacking in the 50-150 game range and we have also been missing a high proportion of those 50+ gamers due to injury (Higgins, Williams, Wood etc)

[bornadog]

We need to understand that we have a very inexperienced list.

We do see stats on average games played etc, but that is misleading.

From our full list of 44 players there are 22 who had not played a senior AFL game at the start of 2011
and 16 who had not debuted before McCartney was appointed.

Gold Coast only have 12 on the list who had not debuted before the start of 2012.

As has been pointed out in other threads, we are sadly lacking in the 50-150 game range and we have also been missing a high proportion of those 50+ gamers due to injury (Higgins, Williams, Wood etc)

Gold Coast had 17 players with less than 50 games and their average age was 22yrs 9 mths, and average games 53.5. We had an average of 83.8 games and age of 25yrs.

There is something clearly wrong.

[LostDoggy]

Gold Coast had 17 players with less than 50 games and their average age was 22yrs 9 mths, and average games 53.5. We had an average of 83.8 games and age of 25yrs.

There is something clearly wrong.

The middle age bracket is what's wrong. Young players without the base to run out games for 4 qtrs and older players with fitness on the decline, distorting the median.

[bornadog]

The middle age bracket is what's wrong. Young players without the base to run out games for 4 qtrs and older players with fitness on the decline, distorting the median.

How does that compare with GC - they had 1 with 50 to 100, 1 with 100 to 150 and 3 over 150 and 17 under 50 to our 13

[Mofra]

Excluding the old guys: Murphy, Cross, Boyd, Gianisiracusa, Morris

Those that continue to be best 22 and may or may not have improved:
Dahlhaus (has continued to develop), Griffen, Cooney, Liberatore (has made massive leaps forward), Minson (has continued to improve), Picken (has struggled with the inclusion of Lower)

Those that have improved to be regular best 22 players:
Wallis (has stagnated though), Jones (showed signs earlier but has made big steps forward), Roughead (has been very promising in defence), JJ (has developed massively these past two seasons),

Those that have shown signs under either McCartney or Rocket but yet to be best 22:
Tutt (shown glimpses), Addison (best category for him, has looked equally solid at times under either coach), Cordy (looked slightly better this year but still struggling)

Players that weren't best 22 under Rocket and still aren't and don't look like they will be:
Veszpremi (never looked up to it), Howard (did have a couple of good games last year though, but mostly looked inept), Markovic (was never going to be more than stop gap though),

Of those that have shown they have the ability to perform pre McCartney but haven't come along Grant (Rocket was struggling with him though), Higgins (see Grant), Wood (still yet to take the next step), Williams (see Wood),

List excludes players recruited under McCartney including: Stringer, Macrae, Smith, Roberts, Pearce, Hrovat, Stevens, Hunter, Prudden, Dickson, Young, Talia, Lower, Greenwood, Redpath, Goodes, Campbell, Jong, Austin

Looking at that the surviving players from Rocket's tenure have been about a 50-50 strike rate, with none of them getting worse but half improving (as expected considering the stage of their career) and half continuing to stagnate due injury (Williams, Wood), attitude (Grant) or lack of ability (Markovic).

The promising part of this is that nearly all of our recruits underneath McCartney have looked more promising than their equilavents of previous years, so you could argue that while we as a club have seen results suffer, it would appear that we have brought in more quality talent than was on the list prior. Whether this is the recruiting team improving, or McCartneys influence I don't know, but from all reports almost all of those kids would seem to have sufficient talent to make it.
Good summary.

B-Mac does have the ability to develop talent, the issue is whether he has the ability to develop a playing style that will take us forward. For mine he's still in the teaching phase, trying to adopt phase 2 of the plan (learning to run & spread). He deserves more time.

[Mofra]

Gold Coast had 17 players with less than 50 games and their average age was 22yrs 9 mths, and average games 53.5. We had an average of 83.8 games and age of 25yrs.

There is something clearly wrong.
Averages are useless without mentioning the mean age and games played as a few senior players can scew results.

[The Pie Man]

Gold Coast had 17 players with less than 50 games and their average age was 22yrs 9 mths, and average games 53.5. We had an average of 83.8 games and age of 25yrs.

There is something clearly wrong.

There's something up no doubt, but when considering our average age, I automatically think of Boyd & Cross - who while still racking up over 20 touches each a game, aren't having the impact they once were (I was staggered to see both of them in our best in the papers on the weekend.....really....)

Replace those two with ....Hrovat & Prudden (for example) and the both averages come down signifigantly.

Age as well - Goodes (29) and Lower bulk up the age dept with little experience to show for it (mature bodies at least)

[bornadog]

Averages are useless without mentioning the mean age and games played as a few senior players can scew results.


There's something up no doubt, but when considering our average age, I automatically think of Boyd & Cross - who while still racking up over 20 touches each a game, aren't having the impact they once were (I was staggered to see both of them in our best in the papers on the weekend.....really....)

Replace those two with ....Hrovat & Prudden (for example) and the both averages come down signifigantly.

Age as well - Goodes (29) and Lower bulk up the age dept with little experience to show for it (mature bodies at least)

Either way, GC is way under experienced and younger than we are.

[Bulldog Joe]

How does that compare with GC - they had 1 with 50 to 100, 1 with 100 to 150 and 3 over 150 and 17 under 50 to our 13

They have a large group who have played between about 35 and 50 and mostly together.

We had 4 with 10 games or less.

[soupman]

Why exclude them? Guys like Jude Bolton have improved significantly in their twilight years. No reason for Murph to go backwards or stagnate (he has done, albeit from an elite level). Ditto Cross and Boyd if they are deployed in more appropriate roles - both have certainly gone backwards - significantly so in Boyd's case.


I excluded them because guys like Jude Bolton are by far the exception. Most of the players in this group have been asked to play different roles and I would argue there is little a coach can do to improve their output when they are sorely lacking support around them to improve and many are starting to face injuries for the first time in their careers. Certainly it would be harsh to expect Gia to improve when his body is declining as it is, and Boyd has pretty much never ever been injured before.


I did ask to not count those players who debuted post-2011 as there is no basis for comparison - Dahl, Libba, Wallis and JJ all started post 2011 and as a minimum you'd expect significant improvement from your youngest players.


TBF all those players debuted in 2011 with the exception of JJ, who was on the list 2011 so none of them are really post 2011 players, they were all at the club under Rocket which is really what the question is asking. You could make a pretty strong case that JJ has improved immeasurably since 2011 when he was largely a Willy reserves player to one of our two most promising defenders.



Coons has improved through being injury-free. Minson certainly has, now that he's assumed the #1 ruck mantle. I can't mount a case for any others you've listed as improving - Griff hasn't (similar to Murph, coming from an elite level and he's still our best player) and Picken has definitely regressed. Jones was top 5 for contested marks in 2011 - the argument that he's improved can be made but I wouldn't say significantly. Ditto Roughead - he's certainly added a defensive string to his bow which is a credit to the coach.


I said may or may not have improved because its unfair to put guys like Griffen in the stagnated group because that isn't what he's done. Picken was fine last year and has only really played 3-4 bad games under McCartney and that is arguably because he is being asked to play a different role. Jones has improved to be best 22, and while he was top 5 ion contested marks he is now the focal point of our entire forwardline and has performed well and performed poorly. He is influencing matches more though and his disposal has improved, so I would argue that he is now convincingly in our best 22 instead of someone who played for development purposes as he did in 2011.

Roughead has also improved significantly. He is no longer being hidden in a pocket and as a second ruck but excelling in an important position where he has shown he has a future. He is another that like Jones is still up and down but undoubtably in our best 22 and a good contributor instead of an occasional one.



I think we should have expected a better level of overall improvement in individual players, considering we went for a coach with such a strong pedigree in developing players.


Tbf looking through the list of players he was left with there weren't that many that could realistically be improved. Those that have the ability to be AFL players are now showing it with the exception of Grant, Higgins, Wood, Williams with three of them having continually suffered injuries and the other not seeming to meet the coaches halfway, while Howard, Tutt, Veszpremi and Markovic are at least earning the right to be in the mix but you get the feeling they will mostly be cut at the end of the year.

All the other guys have been cleared out, which might seem like a decision any coach would have made but don't forget players like Mulligan and Hooper were kept on our list far too long as players that were never going to cut it, while many still hold out hope for the above mentioned players.



I agree with this. We look to have recruited better from 2010-2012 than we did previously. Mind you, we should have expected nothing less compared to our recruiting record pre 2010.

With this I'm curious to see how much McCartney and co. has impacted this, or whether our recruiting team has matured and changed to fix this or whether it's a combination of each or either of those and luck.

[LostDoggy]

Let's judge apples and not oranges. The kids that BMAC has presided over have been a success already.
Stringer, MacRae, Clay smith. All doing good things.
Compare these with Grant, Howard, and others selected outside of BMAC's tenure.
One has to also factor we are rebuilding our off field team as well. This takes time. You need a stellar off-field team in order to get the chocolates. Doesn't happen overnight.
Getting rid of Fantasia was the first step.

Post of the year.

[Remi Moses]

Either way, GC is way under experienced and younger than we are.

It all goes back to the crap recruiting of 06 and 07.
List management ( not retaining Ward Harbrow has hurt big)
You can't compare our kids to theirs as they've been handed so many picks.

[always right]

I excluded them because guys like Jude Bolton are by far the exception. Most of the players in this group have been asked to play different roles and I would argue there is little a coach can do to improve their output when they are sorely lacking support around them to improve and many are starting to face injuries for the first time in their careers. Certainly it would be harsh to expect Gia to improve when his body is declining as it is, and Boyd has pretty much never ever been injured before.



TBF all those players debuted in 2011 with the exception of JJ, who was on the list 2011 so none of them are really post 2011 players, they were all at the club under Rocket which is really what the question is asking. You could make a pretty strong case that JJ has improved immeasurably since 2011 when he was largely a Willy reserves player to one of our two most promising defenders.



I said may or may not have improved because its unfair to put guys like Griffen in the stagnated group because that isn't what he's done. Picken was fine last year and has only really played 3-4 bad games under McCartney and that is arguably because he is being asked to play a different role. Jones has improved to be best 22, and while he was top 5 ion contested marks he is now the focal point of our entire forwardline and has performed well and performed poorly. He is influencing matches more though and his disposal has improved, so I would argue that he is now convincingly in our best 22 instead of someone who played for development purposes as he did in 2011.

Roughead has also improved significantly. He is no longer being hidden in a pocket and as a second ruck but excelling in an important position where he has shown he has a future. He is another that like Jones is still up and down but undoubtably in our best 22 and a good contributor instead of an occasional one.



Tbf looking through the list of players he was left with there weren't that many that could realistically be improved. Those that have the ability to be AFL players are now showing it with the exception of Grant, Higgins, Wood, Williams with three of them having continually suffered injuries and the other not seeming to meet the coaches halfway, while Howard, Tutt, Veszpremi and Markovic are at least earning the right to be in the mix but you get the feeling they will mostly be cut at the end of the year.

All the other guys have been cleared out, which might seem like a decision any coach would have made but don't forget players like Mulligan and Hooper were kept on our list far too long as players that were never going to cut it, while many still hold out hope for the above mentioned players.



With this I'm curious to see how much McCartney and co. has impacted this, or whether our recruiting team has matured and changed to fix this or whether it's a combination of each or either of those and luck.

Nailed it.

[Webby]

Whose head should roll??

Distasteful question, but as it's been raised, I assume this is a call for coaching staff heads...?

I'm not sure how many capable players aged between 23 & 30 we seem to think the Dogs have? Players in this age group were generally drafted in the 2001-2008 national drafts... With a handful of exceptions, we simply do not have the cattle in that age group at present! Perhaps it's our recruiting staff in the 2001-2008 years that should be copping heat? Hello Scott Clayton!! He and his over-inflated reputation left year's ago.... And we're left with the mess.

Clayton pulled off a phenomenal 1999 draft effort.. It was a brilliant, 9.5 out of ten performance. Unfortunately for us, it was a Georgiadis-esque debut! That crop formed the nucleus of the 2008-2010 prelim efforts... However, since then, our drafting and development has been deplorable. Barely a year that's surpassed a 5/10 mark for drafting! Please consider our year-on-year drafting efforts in contrast to the benchmark - Geelong in those years:

2001: Sam Power, Kieran McGuinness, Brent Colbert, Brian Lake (5/10 effort)
(in same draft, Geelong took Bartel, Kelly, Stevie J and Ablett jnr under F/S)

2002: Tim Walsh, Will Minson, Cameron Faulkner, Brad Murphy, Scott Bassett, Cameron Wight (3/10 effort) (Geelong took Mackie and Lonergan)

2003: Cooney (1), Farren Ray (4), Peter Street, Isaac Thomson (3/10 effort. Cooney was unmissable and we blew pick 4) (Geelong had a rare stinker, too)

2004: Ryan Griffen (3), Tom Williams (6), Jesse Wells, Damien McCormack, Stephen Tiller (3/10 effort. Although Griff is a star, we passed on one L Franklin to get him and Williams' body simply hasn't coped) (Geelong traded heavily for Ottens and also nabbed Ablett jnr, jnr)

2005: Higgins, Addison, Baird and an old Montgomery (2/10 effort) (Geelong took Varcoe with their first and Stokes with their last pick)

2006: Everitt, McDougall, Akermanis, Stack, Hill, Lynch, O'Shea (2/10 effort) (Geelong took J Sellwood and also got Hawkins on F/S)

2007: Grant (5), Ward , Reid, Wood, Boumann, O'Keefe (5/10 effort) (Geelong took Harry Taylor with their first pick, which, due to their flag, was the latest first pick at 17..)

2008: Cordy, Roughead, Jones (5/10 effort) (Geelong took Steve Motlop and Taylor Hunt)

Then came the Sherman trade, which I won't even mention....

Point is, we don't have a decent CHF, CHB or FF... Certainly no one who's 26 and at the peak of their career. We also sadly lack mature outside mids with good foot skills... Our captain, who I admire, unfortunately butchers the ball. As fate has it, our older bodies are generally slight (ie. Gia, Murphy and Cross) meaning developing players lack the protection that, say, a Billie Smedts receives from a glut of big, older bodies at Geelong. Many on this site would know that L Jones regressed in 2012. That happened to coincide with Hall's retirement an Jones moving from taking number 2 defenders to number1 defenders... I don't think Tom Hawkins took any better than a number 3 defender during his first four years of AFL footy..! Our prime-aged players include three dodgy bodies in Williams, Higgins and Cooney. Sacking a coach or coaches will not effect our list.. It's going to take several years, people... Buckle up!

[GVGjr]

Nice post Webby.

[LostDoggy]

It's going to take several years, people... Buckle up!

I already am buckled up. But I was looking around the 2-3 year mark, surely several is a bit of an overreaction?
Dogs have some kids that can play, and I'm confident when they get to the 50-100 games we'll be ok. Especially if they keep selecting prospects like Jake and Macrae. I can see this working.

P.S good to see you back Web. Go sox!

[Ghost Dog]

Nice post Webby.

These are reasonable points, logical and so on.
But the fact remains. Players in our side are under performing.
Boyd is lacklustre. Gia dropping easy marks and missing easier goals.
Picken, a guy who has been great for us over the years is dropping away.
Those players who are up and about when the club is in right shape seem to be missing something.
This is what concerns us at the moment. Not what may or may not happen in several years time.
FWIW I think Griffen has also been a bit overrated. He can shrug a tackle well, but blazes away like Boyd at times.

We lack confidence - not taking the game on for long patches of games. Some is ok, like 1Qtr V suns. But we look very hesitant - and not just young players.

[bornadog]

.. It's going to take several years, people... Buckle up!

All past history and in hindsight we are all experts. However, consider that we were aiming for a Grand final in 2008, 2009 and 2010 so we made some short term decisions.

What I do say and as I said in another thread, if (a big IF) we took the current team that played on the weekend, added in there Harbrow, Ward, Hill and Ray, plus an uninjured Williams, Wood and Higgins, I don't believe we would be having this discussion and we would certainly be more competitive. I do take your point on a CHB/CHF, but the recruitment of Jones, Roughead and Cordy was meant to address this. From past recruiting we did develop a two time all Australian Fullback, and if it wasn't for injuries and pretty good CHB.

Of course all this points to bad list management, not a total write off of recruitment that many bang on about.

[w3design]

Look I think B Mac will be good for us longer term. I am not so sure re some of the support staff he has around him though.
Many of the match committee decisions, and positioning of some players is down right bewildering.

The back line group seem to play as a [ developing] unit. Not certain the same can be said for either the midfield or forward groups... despite sterling efforts by individuals at times, these areas rarely seem to function as units.

I get the concept of where B Mac wants to take the side, and applaud that, but while we need to develop that game style ultimately, I wonder if for the first few years while getting games into kids, might it not be better to play the game that suits the cattle at their stage of development, rather than trying to make stud bulls out of immature calves? Excuse the analogy... I am a farmer after all.

I realise we have had significant problems with injuries to key players, and that limits MC options, but as I said some selection, and positioning of some players mystifies me totally. Why are we playing to our own players weaknesses, rather than their strengths? Surely it is better to make the best you can of what you have skill and talent wise, rather than trying to make guys what they aren't.
That is not to say we don't try to get them better, merely you don't try to make an apple out of an orange to use another posters analogy. Using Roughy's strengths to make a key defender of him makes sense. Trying to make a running winger out of Crossy clearly does not.

[G-Mo77]

Whose head should roll??

Distasteful question, but as it's been raised, I assume this is a call for coaching staff heads...?

.......

You don't post here enough Webby.

Excellent post!

[MrMahatma]

All past history and in hindsight we are all experts. However, consider that we were aiming for a Grand final in 2008, 2009 and 2010 so we made some short term decisions.

What I do say and as I said in another thread, if (a big IF) we took the current team that played on the weekend, added in there Harbrow, Ward, Hill and Ray, plus an uninjured Williams, Wood and Higgins, I don't believe we would be having this discussion and we would certainly be more competitive. I do take your point on a CHB/CHF, but the recruitment of Jones, Roughead and Cordy was meant to address this. From past recruiting we did develop a two time all Australian Fullback, and if it wasn't for injuries and pretty good CHB.

Of course all this points to bad list management, not a total write off of recruitment that many bang on about.
Easily forgotten.

Throw a fit Williams, Higgins, Wood, Dickson in the team and we have a bit more structure and ability.

[boydogs]

It was a brilliant, 9.5 out of ten performance. Unfortunately for us, it was a Georgiadis-esque debut!

Didn't Scott Clayton get poached by GC to set up their team from scratch? I find it hard to believe that was on the back of just one good draft over 10 years ago.

[lemmon]

Didn't Scott Clayton get poached by GC to set up their team from scratch? I find it hard to believe that was on the back of just one good draft over 10 years ago.

Perhaps he has some role in negotiations as he did with us? It was always his strong suit and the GC/GWS era may be defined by decisions they make on the trade and contract fronts.

And with that many top end draft choices they could've got a bloke watching Youtube clips and reading mock drafts to make the choices for them, shooting fish in a barrel.

[Maddog37]

Didn't he build the Brisbane threepeat list too?

[bornadog]

Didn't he build the Brisbane threepeat list too?

YES he did

[MrMahatma]

Didn't he build the Brisbane threepeat list too?
I recall he had a large number of concession picks during that period also. Brown was f/s and they traded in other KPPs, Mal Michael and Lynch.

I personally think Clayton is incredibly overrated.

[Webby]

Didn't he build the Brisbane threepeat list too?

I always find the suggestion that Brisbane's 3-peat team was built by Clayton's guile and genius quite amusing!!

Brisbane and Fitzroy had an unprecedented number of top ten draft picks between them from 1991 to 1998... Add exclusivity to the state of Qld for a decade on top of that (which netted certain top 3 picks, Voss and Akermanis) and the Brisbane list was a Monty to be superb. That list was built by Ross Oakley & co. Not Clayton. If Ray Charles or Stevie Wonder had the sheer volume of concessions and top 5 picks that Bris/Lions had, even they'd put together a champion list!

1991 AFL Draft: pick 1, Fitzroy. Pick 2, Brisbane.
1992: pick 2 & pick 4: Brisbane. The Bears also received M Voss under Qld zone exclusivity.
1993: Picks 2, 6, 7, 9 & 12 between Bris and Fitz.. Bris also received AFL concession to take A Lynch on a record smashing contract in a pick trade.
1994: Qld exclusive zone selection, J Akermanis
1995: Fitzroy, picks 2 & 4

Clubs then merged 5 years worth of development squads... Were strong enough to reject Blakey, Pike and Primus... Also received large cap concessions.. Then:
1996: BL pick 3
1997: BL picks 5 & 10... The one clever pick was Black - i'll grant that.

Bris then managed to finish last.... Received pick 1 for their trouble...

1998: BL pick 1

M Voss: 1991 Qld concession pick
N Lappin pick 2, 1993
C Johnson pick 7, 1993
C Scott pick 12, 1993
A Lynch - AFL backed super contract, 1993
J Leppitsch pick 4, 1992
J Akermanis - 1994 Qld concession pick
L Power pick 5, 1997

All players drafted between 1991 and 1998 were aged between 23 and 30 in 2003.... Five years earlier they'd finished last with a glut of very talented U/23s.

[boydogs]

Isn't that nice.

When do think we will get to see a change of game style implemented?


I think we'll see tweaks in the remainder of this season, but it will take another preseason to do it properly.

Mantis I was just thinking, did you notice us trying to play on more this week? I think this was BMac's first steps into trying to get us used to running to space to provide an option, as opposed to simply waiting for the ball carrier to kick it to the next contest.

[The Doctor]

I always find the suggestion that Brisbane's 3-peat team was built by Clayton's guile and genius quite amusing!!

Brisbane and Fitzroy had an unprecedented number of top ten draft picks between them from 1991 to 1998... Add exclusivity to the state of Qld for a decade on top of that (which netted certain top 3 picks, Voss and Akermanis) and the Brisbane list was a Monty to be superb. That list was built by Ross Oakley & co. Not Clayton. If Ray Charles or Stevie Wonder had the sheer volume of concessions and top 5 picks that Bris/Lions had, even they'd put together a champion list!

1991 AFL Draft: pick 1, Fitzroy. Pick 2, Brisbane.
1992: pick 2 & pick 4: Brisbane. The Bears also received M Voss under Qld zone exclusivity.
1993: Picks 2, 6, 7, 9 & 12 between Bris and Fitz.. Bris also received AFL concession to take A Lynch on a record smashing contract in a pick trade.
1994: Qld exclusive zone selection, J Akermanis
1995: Fitzroy, picks 2 & 4

Clubs then merged 5 years worth of development squads... Were strong enough to reject Blakey, Pike and Primus... Also received large cap concessions.. Then:
1996: BL pick 3
1997: BL picks 5 & 10... The one clever pick was Black - i'll grant that.

Bris then managed to finish last.... Received pick 1 for their trouble...

1998: BL pick 1

M Voss: 1991 Qld concession pick
N Lappin pick 2, 1993
C Johnson pick 7, 1993
C Scott pick 12, 1993
A Lynch - AFL backed super contract, 1993
J Leppitsch pick 4, 1992
J Akermanis - 1994 Qld concession pick
L Power pick 5, 1997

All players drafted between 1991 and 1998 were aged between 23 and 30 in 2003.... Five years earlier they'd finished last with a glut of very talented U/23s.

superb post Webby.

Just to add to your 1997 scenario concerning Black. As I recall the dogs gave up the pick the Lions ultimately used, via the swans, on Black to secure our present day CEO Simon Garlick.

[BulldogBelle]

No what was panicky and short sighted were the following:

1 - The retention of players way past their use by dates in a misguided attempt by Eade to keep his numbers up and his job (see Hahn, Eagleton, Johnson)
2 - We saw the panicky recruitment of speed (Akermanis, Djerkurra and Sherman) at the expense of list development
3 - We saw repeated spin from Eade that we weren't that 'bad' and absolute neglect in list management

It was past time for change when Eade was let go.

McCartney needs to be given a chance to rebuild our trainwreck of a list, with the following rider, if little improvement shown by years end, then a review needs to occur (personally I have seen individual improvement in many players and think its not as bad as some think)

If we are talking change then I would be starting with the two worst offenders for our biggest problem, spread and ball use. Those two players are Boyd and Cross (for spread add Gia). Having the club's two onfield leaders being our worst offenders must make it very difficult to implement change. I am looking forward to a changing of the guard this year and possibly Boyd losing the captaincy first and then his place in the team. That will be a sign that our culture is changing for the better.

And by the way no disrespect to Boyd and Cross, two more courageous players and servants a club will not find. But the game has passed them by - rapidly.

Good post. We should have a debate on what we think should be happening with Boyd and Cross.

The biggest problem with the Eade years was failure to quickly turn over obviously dud players and the timely retirement of over-the-hillites. The list cloggers. They stayed on the list far too long. Some have already been mentioned by RWB above but there were plenty of others (eg Addison, Stack, Hooper, Milligan, Callan, Moles, Lynch, McDougall, Faulkner, Panos) . The opportunity cost of this lack of foresight by Eade and his cronies has cost us dearly to this day.

[Remi Moses]

Great Contribution ^^

[Remi Moses]

I always find the suggestion that Brisbane's 3-peat team was built by Clayton's guile and genius quite amusing!!

Brisbane and Fitzroy had an unprecedented number of top ten draft picks between them from 1991 to 1998... Add exclusivity to the state of Qld for a decade on top of that (which netted certain top 3 picks, Voss and Akermanis) and the Brisbane list was a Monty to be superb. That list was built by Ross Oakley & co. Not Clayton. If Ray Charles or Stevie Wonder had the sheer volume of concessions and top 5 picks that Bris/Lions had, even they'd put together a champion list!

1991 AFL Draft: pick 1, Fitzroy. Pick 2, Brisbane.
1992: pick 2 & pick 4: Brisbane. The Bears also received M Voss under Qld zone exclusivity.
1993: Picks 2, 6, 7, 9 & 12 between Bris and Fitz.. Bris also received AFL concession to take A Lynch on a record smashing contract in a pick trade.
1994: Qld exclusive zone selection, J Akermanis
1995: Fitzroy, picks 2 & 4

Clubs then merged 5 years worth of development squads... Were strong enough to reject Blakey, Pike and Primus... Also received large cap concessions.. Then:
1996: BL pick 3
1997: BL picks 5 & 10... The one clever pick was Black - i'll grant that.

Bris then managed to finish last.... Received pick 1 for their trouble...

1998: BL pick 1

M Voss: 1991 Qld concession pick
N Lappin pick 2, 1993
C Johnson pick 7, 1993
C Scott pick 12, 1993
A Lynch - AFL backed super contract, 1993
J Leppitsch pick 4, 1992
J Akermanis - 1994 Qld concession pick
L Power pick 5, 1997

All players drafted between 1991 and 1998 were aged between 23 and 30 in 2003.... Five years earlier they'd finished last with a glut of very talented U/23s.
Amen!The recruiting "Guru " is grossly overrated

[Maddog37]

Great post Webby. Very informative.

He still made the picks though and did not just win one premiership but three. Obviously this is where the Clayton love comes from and it will no doubt continue if GC are a success even though they were given the world in draft picks and concessions like the Bears were.

He certainly has the gift of putting himself in the right job at the right time!

[Prince Imperial]

I always find the suggestion that Brisbane's 3-peat team was built by Clayton's guile and genius quite amusing!!

Brisbane and Fitzroy had an unprecedented number of top ten draft picks between them from 1991 to 1998... Add exclusivity to the state of Qld for a decade on top of that (which netted certain top 3 picks, Voss and Akermanis) and the Brisbane list was a Monty to be superb. That list was built by Ross Oakley & co. Not Clayton. If Ray Charles or Stevie Wonder had the sheer volume of concessions and top 5 picks that Bris/Lions had, even they'd put together a champion list!

1991 AFL Draft: pick 1, Fitzroy. Pick 2, Brisbane.
1992: pick 2 & pick 4: Brisbane. The Bears also received M Voss under Qld zone exclusivity.
1993: Picks 2, 6, 7, 9 & 12 between Bris and Fitz.. Bris also received AFL concession to take A Lynch on a record smashing contract in a pick trade.
1994: Qld exclusive zone selection, J Akermanis
1995: Fitzroy, picks 2 & 4

Clubs then merged 5 years worth of development squads... Were strong enough to reject Blakey, Pike and Primus... Also received large cap concessions.. Then:
1996: BL pick 3
1997: BL picks 5 & 10... The one clever pick was Black - i'll grant that.

Bris then managed to finish last.... Received pick 1 for their trouble...

1998: BL pick 1

M Voss: 1991 Qld concession pick
N Lappin pick 2, 1993
C Johnson pick 7, 1993
C Scott pick 12, 1993
A Lynch - AFL backed super contract, 1993
J Leppitsch pick 4, 1992
J Akermanis - 1994 Qld concession pick
L Power pick 5, 1997

All players drafted between 1991 and 1998 were aged between 23 and 30 in 2003.... Five years earlier they'd finished last with a glut of very talented U/23s.

The more than handy Darryl White (268 games), Robert Copeland (143 games) and Clark Keating (139 games) were also Qld/NT zone selections. To be fair to Clayton he did draft Craig Bolton at pick 33 (who of course later ended up at the Swans) and Bradshaw at pick 56.

[KT31]

The more than handy Darryl White (268 games), Robert Copeland (143 games) and Clark Keating (139 games) were also Qld/NT zone selections. To be fair to Clayton he did draft Craig Bolton at pick 33 (who of course later ended up at the Swans) and Bradshaw at pick 56.

Shoot a rifle in the air enough you will eventually bring down a bird.

[Greystache]

The more than handy Darryl White (268 games), Robert Copeland (143 games) and Clark Keating (139 games) were also Qld/NT zone selections. To be fair to Clayton he did draft Craig Bolton at pick 33 (who of course later ended up at the Swans) and Bradshaw at pick 56.

Justin Leppitsch is his big scalp according to the man himself... At pick #4 mind you.

[bulldogtragic]

At the risk of opening up old wounds here we go.

This thread was premature, but it was in response to how we lost against GCS. We still might win this one, but things are not heading in the right direction.

I don't see a problem in applying to blowtorch, sometime it's what is needed.

[F'scary]

At the risk of opening up old wounds here we go.

This thread was premature, but it was in response to how we lost against GCS. We still might win this one, but things are not heading in the right direction.

I don't see a problem in applying to blowtorch, sometime it's what is needed.

Jones X
Cooney X
Boyd X
Cordy X
Dickson X
Dahlhaus X
Lower X
Macca X

but you could keep going and going on tonight's form.

This is the most disgraceful effort ever. :mad: (Until we play GWS next week :eek:).

[bulldogtragic]

When this happened to Matty Primus, he knew what he had to do.

[bulldogtragic]

BMac is not a strong match day coach. That much is true. Either support him and get him a senior assistant to fix this, or move him on. Status quo is not working.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

Either support him and get him a senior assistant to fix this, or move him on. Status quo is not working.

This is what needs to happen.

The coaching panel cannot stay as it is currently heading into another season.

[AndrewP6]

People said for a long while that Melbourne's players under Neeld weren't playing 'for the coach'. I contend our lot aren't playing for the coach either. In professional wrestling parlance, he should be 'future endeavoured'. Perhaps at season's end as a professional courtesy, but we simply can't continue as we are. Extend the broom to the assistant coaches too.

[GVGjr]

People said for a long while that Melbourne's players under Neeld weren't playing 'for the coach'. I contend our lot aren't playing for the coach either. In professional wrestling parlance, he should be 'future endeavoured'. Perhaps at season's end as a professional courtesy, but we simply can't continue as we are. Extend the broom to the assistant coaches too.

I'll challenge that notion. I don't believe it's an issue for the players not wanting to perform for the club or the coach but we are simply a mile behind where we need to be and there is a combination of reasons why.

I'm sure there needs to be changes to the coaching group much like there needs to be changes to the playing group.

[bulldogtragic]

I'll challenge that notion. I don't believe it's an issue for the players not wanting to perform for the club or the coach but we are simply a mile behind where we need to be and there is a combination of reasons why.

I'm sure there needs to be changes to the coaching group much like there needs to be changes to the playing group.
C'mon, name names GVGjr :)

[AndrewP6]

I'll challenge that notion. I don't believe it's an issue for the players not wanting to perform for the club or the coach but we are simply a mile behind where we need to be and there is a combination of reasons why.

I'm sure there needs to be changes to the coaching group much like there needs to be changes to the playing group.

Maybe it's not their desire to perform, but I just don't think the messages are getting through - that or the messages are the wrong ones.

[GVGjr]

Maybe it's not their desire to perform, but I just don't think the messages are getting through - that or the messages are the wrong ones.

That's very different to what you initially implied. Messages not getting through to the players is one thing a lot of players struggle with but to suggest the players weren't playing for the coach much like what was happening with Neeld is clearly incorrect.
I think he has the vast majority of the playing groups respect.

There is a huge gap between how he wants the players to perform and how they are executing those instructions and he certainly needs to get that sorted as soon as he can.

[AndrewP6]

That's very different to what you initially implied. Messages not getting through to the players is one thing a lot of players struggle with but to suggest the players weren't playing for the coach much like what was happening with Neeld is clearly incorrect.
I think he has the vast majority of the playing groups respect.

There is a huge gap between how he wants the players to perform and how they are executing those instructions and he certainly needs to get that sorted as soon as he can.
I'm still not convinced they are playing for him, but we can agree to disagree. Regardless, one thing that is clear to me is that whatever he's doing (and I do have difficulty pinpointing what it is he's trying to do) isn't working.

[Remi Moses]

I'm still not convinced they are playing for him, but we can agree to disagree. Regardless, one thing that is clear to me is that whatever he's doing (and I do have difficulty pinpointing what it is he's trying to do) isn't working.

Out of interest where did you think the club would finish this year?
The players are playing for the coach,no doubt.
What worries me is our game plan or lack of it!
The Grand Canyon like hole in our list doesn't help either.

[Doc26]

I've heard little to suggest that the playing group isn't fully behind Brendan, what does trouble me more is whether our leaders and senior players are actually now coachable given how they have been taught over a long period, and what is now ingrained in them. Thank heaven for Ryan who is our glimmering beacon of hope on the leadership front and one player our kids can grow from..

[AndrewP6]

Out of interest where did you think the club would finish this year?
The players are playing for the coach,no doubt.
What worries me is our game plan or lack of it!
The Grand Canyon like hole in our list doesn't help either.

I think I said about 14-15. It's the manner of the losses that concerns me. Yes, we have holes in the list, but we also have a lot of senior players that have frequently let us down.

[AndrewP6]

What worries me is our game plan or lack of it!


That comes back to the coach too.

[GVGjr]

I think I said about 14-15. It's the manner of the losses that concerns me. Yes, we have holes in the list, but we also have a lot of senior players that have frequently let us down.

Which ones? Boyd and Cooney? Surely not Giansiracusa and Murphy?

I think we are fielding a young playing list and struggle to find 'lots of under performing senior players'.

[DragzLS1]

I could only see 6 senior players that were in the starting 22 3 years ago. . Under macca griffen has grown soo much as a footballer that he is at an elite status.. boyd cooney are dropping off the pace and cross cant even get into the team! Its a young playing list and melbourne were more desperate tonight under a new coach... give it time and it will all come together as we saw in the final qtr.. did I mention griffen is elite! We are soo lucky to have him and if only cooney was the same :( even the pies lost tonight so dont panic, times are changing ;)

[LostDoggy]

We had plenty of passengers with Clay smith, Dahl, Jones and the like tonight.
Macca also got out coached pretty hard.

We have no structure at our kick ins, and they use the 50 year old huddle to get the ball out of defence.
Laughable.

[AndrewP6]

Which ones? Boyd and Cooney? Surely not Giansiracusa and Murphy?

I think we are fielding a young playing list and struggle to find 'lots of under performing senior players'.

Fair call, "a lot" was probably incorrect. Not Gia, I think the sub role has suited him of late. The other three yes. At times, all have shown what we need, I just think when the chips are down, we are left wanting. At times like that, we need someone to stand up (or several to stand up), and we don't get it.

[Topdog]

I'm still not convinced they are playing for him, but we can agree to disagree. Regardless, one thing that is clear to me is that whatever he's doing (and I do have difficulty pinpointing what it is he's trying to do) isn't working.

It was said of Melbourne because they played soft and didnt go for the ball.

I think our players like the coach, I just think he isnt up to it for match day coaching.

[Remi Moses]

I think I said about 14-15. It's the manner of the losses that concerns me. Yes, we have holes in the list, but we also have a lot of senior players that have frequently let us down.

I take your point but you have to concede we do have a s*** load of kids playing and a senior group and bugger all in between . I counted 14 tonight, footballers aren't comfortable in their own skin until they've played between 70 to 100 games. The senior players like Cooney Murphy Boyd let us down majorly . I'm still undecided on McCartney, but do agree some semblance of game style is hard to see ATM. I would have like to have seen a senior assistant appointed from the start as we have an inexperienced coaching staff.
McCartney will get a fair amount of rope as we're in a rebuilding mode, but if we don't start showing something in 12 months the blow torch will be applied.
I thought we'd have done well to win 5 games this season.
Most pundits had us in their bottom 3

[Remi Moses]

It was said of Melbourne because they played soft and didnt go for the ball.

I think our players like the coach, I just think he isnt up to it for match day coaching.

Agree with that.
Dees played with passion enthusiasm tonight, and that's something they never displayed under Neeld.

[FrediKanoute]

I thought we'd have done well to win 5 games this season.
Most pundits had us in their bottom 3

We are still on course to win 5 and we will finish bottom 3. Key is working out how best to use the picks that we get. I would be inclined though to put everyone, bar the draft picks from 2012 on the possible trade list to see what we can get.

We are where we are because of our list management and drafting. We have a massive gap and whilst its really disappointing that we lost tonight, in a season such as this it hardly matters. If anything it makes the AFL's justification for giving Melbourne a priority pick laughable.

For what its worth, we stay the course for the remainder of 2013. We trade/draft well in the off season and we give consideration to putting alongside McCarthy in the coaches box a tactician. Whether Macca gets a contract extension post 2014 depends on improvement next year. To me the bar has to be set at 10 games as a minimum, but I'd live with less if the performances were of a nature that indicated improvement.

[Remi Moses]

We are still on course to win 5 and we will finish bottom 3. Key is working out how best to use the picks that we get. I would be inclined though to put everyone, bar the draft picks from 2012 on the possible trade list to see what we can get.

We are where we are because of our list management and drafting. We have a massive gap and whilst its really disappointing that we lost tonight, in a season such as this it hardly matters. If anything it makes the AFL's justification for giving Melbourne a priority pick laughable.

For what its worth, we stay the course for the remainder of 2013. We trade/draft well in the off season and we give consideration to putting alongside McCarthy in the coaches box a tactician. Whether Macca gets a contract extension post 2014 depends on improvement next year. To me the bar has to be set at 10 games as a minimum, but I'd live with less if the performances were of a nature that indicated improvement.

Spot on Fred. Even if we won 8 games and were competitive in a lot of games.Hardwick in his 4th year, has a senior assistant .

[LostDoggy]

We are still on course to win 5 and we will finish bottom 3. Key is working out how best to use the picks that we get. I would be inclined though to put everyone, bar the draft picks from 2012 on the possible trade list to see what we can get.

We are where we are because of our list management and drafting. We have a massive gap and whilst its really disappointing that we lost tonight, in a season such as this it hardly matters. If anything it makes the AFL's justification for giving Melbourne a priority pick laughable.

For what its worth, we stay the course for the remainder of 2013. We trade/draft well in the off season and we give consideration to putting alongside McCarthy in the coaches box a tactician. Whether Macca gets a contract extension post 2014 depends on improvement next year. To me the bar has to be set at 10 games as a minimum, but I'd live with less if the performances were of a nature that indicated improvement.

Love it Fredi. Agree wholeheartedly with every view and how they interrelate.

[lemmon]

Agree wholeheartedly that its the cattle. Put Callan Ward into our midfield and look how much better it would be, a fit Adam Cooney and we take another step, a fit Higgins and Williams, all those draft picks we wasted who should be at our core. A well functioning club would have similarly aged guys around Griff and Minson. From the 22 who ran out last night we had 2 guys at the peak of their powers, a bunch of kids and a handful of older guys who are past it and a mix of guys not up to it...this is what rebuilding is

[GVGjr]

Fair call, "a lot" was probably incorrect. Not Gia, I think the sub role has suited him of late. The other three yes. At times, all have shown what we need, I just think when the chips are down, we are left wanting. At times like that, we need someone to stand up (or several to stand up), and we don't get it.

Boyd was out for many games early in the season and Cooney has missed games as well. Giansiracusa has been more than solid and Murphy has been Murphy. We can bang on about Boyd but he is making the same errors as he has for the last 5 years and it now stands our more because we don't have as many experienced guys around him.

The cliche some supporters use when a side is under performing is to drop the older guys and play the youth but we have pretty much played the younger guys from early in the season.

[bulldogtragic]

Thought I would get some stats on Mark Neeld to see what the threshold is:

35 games, 27 losses a a rate of just 22%
2012 average losing margin just shy of 10 goals a game
Significant embarrassing losses
Players being played out of position and performing poorly
Highly questionable list development
Outcoached match days week in, week out
Unable to show any tactical nouse on match ups
And the list continues.....


Sorry, sorry, sorry. I mistakenly looked up BMacs record. This is his record.

[azabob]

BT,
With list development what players under BMACS watch of recruitment haven't done enough?
Who do you think should replace BMAC?

[GVGjr]

Thought I would get some stats on Mark Neeld to see what the threshold is:

35 games, 27 losses a a rate of just 22%
2012 average losing margin just shy of 10 goals a game
Significant embarrassing losses
Players being played out of position and performing poorly
Highly questionable list development
Outcoached match days week in, week out
Unable to show any tactical nouse on match ups
And the list continues.....


Sorry, sorry, sorry. I mistakenly looked up BMacs record. This is his record.

Can you expand your reasoning or examples behind the highlight comments?

[Go_Dogs]

I actually think our development is moving in the right direction. Young players don't instantly become good players overnight, or over a few seasons. There are a few exceptions to the rule, but the reality is most players start hitting their straps from age 23 and don't reach their peak until age 26. I can see improvement in many of our young players, but they struggle for consistency and all have areas they need to improve to make them well rounded players capable of changing the context of the game or even playing a meaningful role week to week.

I'm as disappointed as anyone with our loss on the weekend, but we can't throw everything out of the window based on a bad loss, just as we can't think we've turned the corner after a solid win. The game is becoming increasingly fickle and I think we need to stay the course for the duration of Macca's contract.

[bulldogtragic]

BT,
With list development what players under BMACS watch of recruitment haven't done enough?
Who do you think should replace BMAC?
Despite the overtone, I'm not necessarily saying sack him, I've come back from the edge. What I'm trying to elude to is an untried first time coach with a poor circumstance was sacked, and BMac needs to be judged with the same standards. Being a good bloke from a successful club mean jack. I've posted probably ten times recently, back him with a senior assistant or sack him sooner rather than later.

[F'scary]

Thought I would get some stats on Mark Neeld to see what the threshold is:

35 games, 27 losses a a rate of just 22%
2012 average losing margin just shy of 10 goals a game
Significant embarrassing losses
Players being played out of position and performing poorly
Highly questionable list development
Outcoached match days week in, week out
Unable to show any tactical nouse on match ups
And the list continues.....


Sorry, sorry, sorry. I mistakenly looked up BMacs record. This is his record.

You got me. I read each line saying, ah yes, what a terrible record - not surprising really that they didn't persist with him.

And then I got to the punchline. :eek:

But on a second read: "Highly questionable list development" can't be nailed to Macca.

So only 6 out of 7 listed epic fails fooled me. :eek:

[F'scary]

To Macca's credit he is astute enough so far not be be lured into public displays of team castigation (a trap Neeld fell straight into and badly at that in the press conference after his first loss).

The idea of a game day tactical specialist coach (e.g., Eade seems to have that role at the Collingwood Creampies) really appeals to me after the latest debacle. But what does that say about the guys in the coaches box with him now?

[bulldogtragic]

Can you expand your reasoning or examples behind the highlight comments?
Sure.

List development: In nearly two years, we should have seen more development from Wallis and Jones in particular. You can forgive the entry to Jones, but he has been very disappointing. Under these guys, Cordy breaks my heart. Senior guys and top picks Grant and Vez have gone backwards since his arrival. Other top picks like Howard and Tutt have not developed to standard either. Dahl is exciting, yet his year to date has not been great. Picken has gone from top 5 B&F to back up player. He has been played out of position to the point he couldn't work to his strengths. Cooney has also been suffering too.

No doubt some have improved, I'm not saying he can't develop at all, I'm saying for all the wraps on him, and that he's an AFL coach, more should be expected.

Out coached on match days/match up inabilities: By any objective measure, and for all his strengths and attributes, his ability to coach on match days is poor. He seems unwilling in some circumstances to adapt to what other coaches do tactically. He continues to play senior players out of position, so much so Cooney looks a shadow of himself and Picken has been pushed around until dropped. On Saturday his match ups in defence were leaving a bit to be desired. The midfield match ups killed us to. He has an inability to manage the subs. We have had one decent forward for the year, and his best tactical thoughts were to deny him game time for three quarters for nearly a month. Who he starts and sub off also is questionable. He also persists with players like Marko who are obviously good blokes and train hard, but offer nothing at AFL level.


As per my other post, I'm actually not out for his head. Merely pointing out that his legacy to date is closer to Neeld than Malthouse. Harsh yes. but He should be judged objectively and defecncies be acknowledged as much a his alleged strengths. If he is to succeed he needs a more experienced coaches box, he needs a Senior assistant to work through his weaknesses. We all have weaknesses, so lets not pretend they not exist, let's acknowledge them and develop him and in turn the team. I think he is on a trajedectory of under achieving but may be able to turn it around with assistance. So back him in with assistance or sack him.

[Bulldog4life]

Sure.

List development: In nearly two years, we should have seen more development from Wallis and Jones in particular. You can forgive the entry to Jones, but he has been very disappointing. Under these guys, Cordy breaks my heart. Senior guys and top picks Grant and Vez have gone backwards since his arrival. Other top picks like Howard and Tutt have not developed to standard either. Dahl is exciting, yet his year to date has not been great. Picken has gone from top 5 B&F to back up player. He has been played out of position to the point he couldn't work to his strengths. Cooney has also been suffering too.

No doubt some have improved, I'm not saying he can't develop at all, I'm saying for all the wraps on him, and that he's an AFL coach, more should be expected.

Out coached on match days/match up inabilities: By any objective measure, and for all his strengths and attributes, his ability to coach on match days is poor. He seems unwilling in some circumstances to adapt to what other coaches do tactically. He continues to play senior players out of position, so much so Cooney looks a shadow of himself and Picken has been pushed around until dropped. On Saturday his match ups in defence were leaving a bit to be desired. The midfield match ups killed us to. He has an inability to manage the subs. We have had one decent forward for the year, and his best tactical thoughts were to deny him game time for three quarters for nearly a month. Who he starts and sub off also is questionable. He also persists with players like Marko who are obviously good blokes and train hard, but offer nothing at AFL level.


As per my other post, I'm actually not out for his head. Merely pointing out that his legacy to date is closer to Neeld than Malthouse. Harsh yes. but He should be judged objectively and defecncies be acknowledged as much a his alleged strengths. If he is to succeed he needs a more experienced coaches box, he needs a Senior assistant to work through his weaknesses. We all have weaknesses, so lets not pretend they not exist, let's acknowledge them and develop him and in turn the team. I think he is on a trajedectory of under achieving but may be able to turn it around with assistance. So back him in with assistance or sack him.

Who would you suggest to replace him BT?

[bulldogtragic]

You got me. I read each line saying, ah yes, what a terrible record - not surprising really that they didn't persist with him.

And then I got to the punchline. :eek:

But on a second read: "Highly questionable list development" can't be nailed to Macca.

So only 6 out of 7 listed epic fails fooled me. :eek:
Yep. Nothing personal with BMac, I quite like him. But if Neeld is judged on these types of things, it's only fair to apply the same standards. Being a bette bloke than Neeld isn't a reason not to ask questions.

[bulldogtragic]

Who would you suggest to replace him BT?
I've got no agenda, or person who I would parachute in. Grant, King or Smith is not a strong band of assistants though. Perhaps King to babysit and search the land at years end.

I would have thought first preference would be to support him if he is doing the rest of his job well.

[Bulldog4life]

I've got no agenda, or person who I would parachute in. Grant, King or Smith is not a strong band of assistants though. Perhaps King to babysit and search the land at years end.

I would have thought first preference would be to support him if he is doing the rest of his job well.

I agree. I thought you might have had someone in mind. The way I look at it is why sack him if the Club has no one in mind to replace him. A very bad move in my opinion. I would like him to have his 3 years or at least another 12 mths.

[Nuggety Back Pocket]

Sure.

List development: In nearly two years, we should have seen more development from Wallis and Jones in particular. You can forgive the entry to Jones, but he has been very disappointing. Under these guys, Cordy breaks my heart. Senior guys and top picks Grant and Vez have gone backwards since his arrival. Other top picks like Howard and Tutt have not developed to standard either. Dahl is exciting, yet his year to date has not been great. Picken has gone from top 5 B&F to back up player. He has been played out of position to the point he couldn't work to his strengths. Cooney has also been suffering too.

No doubt some have improved, I'm not saying he can't develop at all, I'm saying for all the wraps on him, and that he's an AFL coach, more should be expected.

Out coached on match days/match up inabilities: By any objective measure, and for all his strengths and attributes, his ability to coach on match days is poor. He seems unwilling in some circumstances to adapt to what other coaches do tactically. He continues to play senior players out of position, so much so Cooney looks a shadow of himself and Picken has been pushed around until dropped. On Saturday his match ups in defence were leaving a bit to be desired. The midfield match ups killed us to. He has an inability to manage the subs. We have had one decent forward for the year, and his best tactical thoughts were to deny him game time for three quarters for nearly a month. Who he starts and sub off also is questionable. He also persists with players like Marko who are obviously good blokes and train hard, but offer nothing at AFL level.


As per my other post, I'm actually not out for his head. Merely pointing out that his legacy to date is closer to Neeld than Malthouse. Harsh yes. but He should be judged objectively and defecncies be acknowledged as much a his alleged strengths. If he is to succeed he needs a more experienced coaches box, he needs a Senior assistant to work through his weaknesses. We all have weaknesses, so lets not pretend they not exist, let's acknowledge them and develop him and in turn the team. I think he is on a trajedectory of under achieving but may be able to turn it around with assistance. So back him in with assistance or sack him.

I think your comment regarding an experienced assistant coach has merit. There is a lot of inexperience with BMcC's MC, with only Monty being retained prior to his arrival. We have probably over rated both Wallis who lacks pace and kicking skills and expected too much of Jones as our most likely best key forward whose inconsistent marking although better this year plus his questionable goal kicking makes him still a work in progress. We badly need a Franklin Cloke Hawkins type as a key quality forward.
I think BMcC has inherited a very poor list hence our ladder position. It came home to roost I. Saturday night against Melbourne just how far off the pace we are at the moment.

[F'scary]

Can someone who knows more about soccer outline the 2 coach system that, if I've got my facts correct enough, most clubs in the top leagues employ? I think there is one who is longer term strategic/development and the other is something more like the match day & lead-up preparation coach. Maybe some of our discussion is supporting a system like the EPL coaching set up? If what I say is right, what was, e.g., Man U's setup - there was Ferguson at the top of the pecking order, of course, but what more precisely was his role and who else did they have in terms of roles?

[Ghost Dog]

There have been many coaches who were on the right track, but because they didn't win games, got the arse.
Wins are confidence, the rungs in your ladder. There's direction, and speed. You need to keep getting wins, or you stall, and fall back down a rung or two.

If my two bit philosophy makes any sense at all.

[F'scary]

There have been many coaches who were on the right track, but because they didn't win games, got the arse.
Wins are confidence, the rungs in your ladder. There's direction, and speed. You need to keep getting wins, or you stall, and fall back down a rung or two.

If my two bit philosophy makes any sense at all.

Makes perfect sense. That's why the latest loss really hurt.

[GVGjr]

There have been many coaches who were on the right track, but because they didn't win games, got the arse.
Wins are confidence, the rungs in your ladder. There's direction, and speed. You need to keep getting wins, or you stall, and fall back down a rung or two.

If my two bit philosophy makes any sense at all.

True enough, it can be a tough gig

[Go_Dogs]

List development: In nearly two years, we should have seen more development from Wallis and Jones in particular. You can forgive the entry to Jones, but he has been very disappointing. Under these guys, Cordy breaks my heart. Senior guys and top picks Grant and Vez have gone backwards since his arrival. Other top picks like Howard and Tutt have not developed to standard either. Dahl is exciting, yet his year to date has not been great.

Wallis hasn't quite performed as one would hope this year, but he had a breakout season last year after many were questioning him after his 2011 season. I think he'll be fine soon enough as his fitness builds to elite levels.

Jones has been disappointing this year, but he has one of the toughest gigs in AFL footy. The reality is, he's probably not quite going to get there and be an elite level key forward and although he has suffered a bit with poor delivery he is still making a few of the same errors he has for a few years. I know there is a bit of speculation about whether he should continue in the League side at the moment but my feel is he should go back to VFL level and really get some form and confidence up clunking a few grabs for a few weeks. I'd still be interested to see how he would go in defence but that may be something that gets looked at over the off-season rather than something we experiment with right now.

On the senior players, Griffen and Minson have certainly improved. Murph has been Murph, Gia has adapted well to his new role and seems reinvigorated.

As GVGjr mentioned, Boydy is still much the same player he has been over the past 5 years but without as much quality and experience around him, his weaknesses have been more obvious and exaggerated. Morris has been OK but is slowly coming to the end of his career and is coming back from significant injury. Most would acknowledge there have been question marks on Crossy for a few years and again, his time is coming to an end. Cooney has struggled with his injury concerns and has been forced to try and adapt to another role. Almost everyone in SA questioned/bagged Ayers when he moved McLeod to the backline, but by the end of his career everyone realised it had been an astute move. I'd like to see Adam spend time forward but I also recall him spending a lot of time as a defender at West Adelaide before he was drafted, it's not like it's a role he hasn't played before. He does seem down on form and confidence at the moment which is a shame as he looked set for a great year early in the piece.

I can't be critical regarding Grant and Vez either because I'm not convinced either would have made significant improvements in our current squad under any other coach. Vez seems to still have issues getting his tank up whilst Grant seems to have other issues regarding his application and desire to stay in the game which is holding him back.

Howard and Tutt were questionable selections at the time and I think most astute observers of junior football wouldn't be overly surprised with where their careers sit at present following them being drafted a lot earlier than many would have thought. Dahlhaus hasn't had a great season, but he gets more attention now than he has previously and like Griff earlier in his career, he's got to learn how to deal with the attention and get fitter and stronger so he can outwork his opponents. It'll come in time but let's not forget he's just a third year player who we are incredibly reliant on.

Roughead, Liberatore, JJ, Talia and Smith have all become better players, but are still young, inexperienced and at times inconsistent. Our new recruits have been thrown in the deep end but all are holding up OK and have shown a LOT more than I had anticipated at the time they were drafted. Koby Stevens has shown more in his time with us than he did at the Eagles and is every chance to continue to improve with more games and more time adapting to his new teammates. Tom Young is in much the same category too.

[LostDoggy]

Imagine Liam Jones with a decent tank and decent delivery.
He could still be anything.

[Dry Rot]

Imagine Liam Jones with a decent tank and decent delivery.
He could still be anything.

Disagree. IMO Jones has little or no forwards instincts. Watch him vs Stringer.

[bulldogtragic]

Don't over think the following, just read it and give your gut feeling on whether this person would be ok as assistance and seniority in the box:

2012/3 St Kilda FC Assistant Coach (midfield)
2011 Port Adelaide FC Part time Consultant
2010 Port Adelaide FC Director of coaching
2003-2009 North Melbourne FC senior coach
finalist 2005, 2007 prelim finalist, 2008 finalist
2000 Collingwood FC Assistant Coach (Defence)
2001 Collingwood FC Senior Assistant Coach (Forwards/ opposition analysis)
2002 Collingwood FC Senior Assistant Coach (Forwards/ opposition analysis)
Grand finalist
1999 Weston Creek FC Senior Coach (ACT) AFL Development officer
Preliminary finalist
1998 North Melbourne FC Development Coach
Grand Finalist

[Remi Moses]

Disagree. IMO Jones has little or no forwards instincts. Watch him vs Stringer.

Jones needs to get a tank and get better second efforts.
The guy gets the best defender he has played 50 games, and gets Crap delivery.
Constantly has 3 players hanging off him as well.
He needs assistance urgently

[boydogs]

Don't over think the following, just read it and give your gut feeling on whether this person would be ok as assistance and seniority in the box:

Not a bad idea, funny that he is 6 years younger though

[Mantis]

Wallis hasn't quite performed as one would hope this year, but he had a breakout season last year after many were questioning him after his 2011 season. I think he'll be fine soon enough as his fitness builds to elite levels.

What makes you so sure?

His lack of hurt factor is a massive concern.



Jones has been disappointing this year, but he has one of the toughest gigs in AFL footy. The reality is, he's probably not quite going to get there and be an elite level key forward and although he has suffered a bit with poor delivery he is still making a few of the same errors he has for a few years. I know there is a bit of speculation about whether he should continue in the League side at the moment but my feel is he should go back to VFL level and really get some form and confidence up clunking a few grabs for a few weeks. I'd still be interested to see how he would go in defence but that may be something that gets looked at over the off-season rather than something we experiment with right now.

Jones has been inconsistent this year, but has certainly shown some good signs. He desperately needs help and isn't getting much from the likes of Cordy or Stringer, whose work-rates for any number of reasons is completely sub-standard.

In saying that Liam either isn't getting much help or doesn't listen to his coaches because he still struggles to understand the flow of the game.

[SlimPickens]

Don't over think the following, just read it and give your gut feeling on whether this person would be ok as assistance and seniority in the box:

2012/3 St Kilda FC Assistant Coach (midfield)
2011 Port Adelaide FC Part time Consultant
2010 Port Adelaide FC Director of coaching
2003-2009 North Melbourne FC senior coach
finalist 2005, 2007 prelim finalist, 2008 finalist
2000 Collingwood FC Assistant Coach (Defence)
2001 Collingwood FC Senior Assistant Coach (Forwards/ opposition analysis)
2002 Collingwood FC Senior Assistant Coach (Forwards/ opposition analysis)
Grand finalist
1999 Weston Creek FC Senior Coach (ACT) AFL Development officer
Preliminary finalist
1998 North Melbourne FC Development Coach
Grand Finalist

Yeah Dean Laidley has done outstanding work at St Kilda and Port Adelaide :rolleyes:. Don't understand what you're getting at?

[1eyedog]

Wallis hasn't quite performed as one would hope this year, but he had a breakout season last year after many were questioning him after his 2011 season. I think he'll be fine soon enough as his fitness builds to elite levels

Why do you think this? What do you see as his strengths that will make him stand out from his contemporaries? I see nothing but a slow trier. Libba does a better job in the middle, Smith and Stevens too. How many of these guys can we sustain?


Imagine Liam Jones with a decent tank and decent delivery.
He could still be anything.

He lacks forward nous big time. He is our Jarrad Waite without the ability. I'm lost on Jones he's showtime and that's about it. He will never ne a consistent forward IMO because he has not grasped the basic concepts. It's not about delivery and hardest jobs, it;s about where he psoitions himself and when he leads (i.e. reading the play) that are my biggest concerns.


Disagree. IMO Jones has little or no forwards instincts. Watch him vs Stringer.

This.


Don't over think the following, just read it and give your gut feeling on whether this person would be ok as assistance and seniority in the box:

2012/3 St Kilda FC Assistant Coach (midfield)
2011 Port Adelaide FC Part time Consultant
2010 Port Adelaide FC Director of coaching
2003-2009 North Melbourne FC senior coach
finalist 2005, 2007 prelim finalist, 2008 finalist
2000 Collingwood FC Assistant Coach (Defence)
2001 Collingwood FC Senior Assistant Coach (Forwards/ opposition analysis)
2002 Collingwood FC Senior Assistant Coach (Forwards/ opposition analysis)
Grand finalist
1999 Weston Creek FC Senior Coach (ACT) AFL Development officer
Preliminary finalist
1998 North Melbourne FC Development Coach
Grand Finalist

Yes many on this board were arguiong hard for laidley when we gave Macca the gig. I was one of them.


Jones needs to get a tank and get better second efforts.
The guy gets the best defender he has played 50 games, and gets Crap delivery.
Constantly has 3 players hanging off him as well.
He needs assistance urgently

Well then why the hell didn't we go after Gumby or Setanta O'Ailphin harder then? Someone to take some pressure off him.

[bornadog]

Why do you think this? What do you see as his strengths that will make him stand out from his contemporaries? I see nothing but a slow trier. Libba does a better job in the middle, Smith and Stevens too. How many of these guys can we sustain?

I agree with this, so what do we do? Can we reinvent him as a HBF like his old man? Wallis is able to get alot of the ball, its just what he does with it next. I would like to see him tried in a different role as we have plenty like him.



He lacks forward nous big time. He is our Jarrad Waite without the ability. I'm lost on Jones he's showtime and that's about it. He will never ne a consistent forward IMO because he has not grasped the basic concepts. It's not about delivery and hardest jobs, it;s about where he psoitions himself and when he leads (i.e. reading the play) that are my biggest concerns.

Not many forwards come good at the age of 22 and with only 50 games under their belt eg Hawkins at Geelong. We have to give him a little more time. He has a good mentor, a great attitude and a good pair of hands, average 4 marks a game.

[1eyedog]

Not many forwards come good at the age of 22 and with only 50 games under their belt eg Hawkins at Geelong. We have to give him a little more time. He has a good mentor, a great attitude and a good pair of hands, average 4 marks a game.

I understand that. He may prove me wrong and I hope that game time, better delivery and support in the forward line help him keep his shape because at the moment he is all over the place. The only thing that gives me any hope is how good he was when Hall was down there to take the best key back. This gets me back to my last point, why didn't we foresee this as being a huge obstacle for Jones' development and bring someone in for 2 years to assist?

[1eyedog]

I agree with this, so what do we do? Can we reinvent him as a HBF like his old man? Wallis is able to get alot of the ball, its just what he does with it next. I would like to see him tried in a different role as we have plenty like him.

Apologies for the double quote it was an accident.

We can do nothing more than persist IMO and hope that his smarts and nous eventually overcome his lack of pace and that this can provide something to the team. The game sure has changed a lot since Greg Williams type but if he can learn to work within his limitations and develop his disposal efficiency he may perform a similar role with us as Watson does with Essendon in terms of smart ball feeder and leader. Jobe isn't fast and he was terrible by foot in his first three years at the club.

Wally's lack of pace in the back half would be a concern for me, I think he'd get found out down there. The problem with Wally is that there just doesn't seem to be anywhere we can hide him in the senior team to keep playing him. If we didn't have Libba, Stevens, Boyd and Smith I would play him in the middle every week, but he is being edged out of that position every week even as part of the midfield rotations.

What is he like overhead? He's smart enough to play FP potentially but once again there is no hiding his lack of pace.

[always right]

Unfortunately Wallis needed to be playing in the same era as Terry Wallace who was a similar player....lack of pace, below average disposal but a ball magnet and tough as nails. It's always worried me that Wallis just doesn't have any tricks to his game. He has quick hands but his handballs tend to be more about extracting him from difficult situations rather than setting up attacking moves.
I know its premature but I fear he is destined to become a good ordinary footballer....nothing more. It's a shame he's not a left footer...you can see how it assists someone like Priddis who is not dissimilar to Wallis.

Sorry for taking the thread off track.

[jeemak]

Unfortunately Wallis needed to be playing in the same era as Terry Wallace who was a similar player....lack of pace, below average disposal but a ball magnet and tough as nails. It's always worried me that Wallis just doesn't have any tricks to his game. He has quick hands but his handballs tend to be more about extracting him from difficult situations rather than setting up attacking moves.
I know its premature but I fear he is destined to become a good ordinary footballer....nothing more. It's a shame he's not a left footer...you can see how it assists someone like Priddis who is not dissimilar to Wallis.

Sorry for taking the thread off track.

Once Wallis is 24-25 years of age, and becomes as fit and strong as a bull after 6-7 preseasons I think he'll demonstrate his value as an accumulator and solid ball user.

It wasn't until Jobe Watson took a significant step up in fitness and strength that his tendency towards being a good ordinary footballer turned into a tendency towards being an elite one. I can't think of many outstanding traits Jobe brought to the table prior to becoming as fit as he is now. Today he's an extremely rounded midfielder who's learned to kick the football after years of working on his defficiencies.

Mitch just needs to work harder than the average footballer to make it. Hopefully he already knows that.

[Greystache]

Once Wallis is 24-25 years of age, and becomes as fit and strong as a bull after 6-7 preseasons I think he'll demonstrate his value as an accumulator and solid ball user.

It wasn't until Jobe Watson took a significant step up in fitness and strength that his tendency towards being a good ordinary footballer turned into a tendency towards being an elite one. I can't think of many outstanding traits Jobe brought to the table prior to becoming as fit as he is now. Today he's an extremely rounded midfielder who's learned to kick the football after years of working on his defficiencies.

Mitch just needs to work harder than the average footballer to make it. Hopefully he already knows that.

I saw quite a bit of Watson before he really took off, he always had the ability to win the ball in congestion and get it out to a team mate in a better position, he just didn't have the tank to get to enough contests or to impose himself physically. He was basically a less fit version of Libba.

I don't see much of Watson in Wallis. Mitch is going to have to be a hardcore grafter with minimal hurt factor at AFL level to be a good player. Despite many people calling last year a break out, the concerns have been there since he was drafted. I really hope he can find something that helps him kick on because he has a lot to offer off the field.

[1eyedog]

I saw quite a bit of Watson before he really took off, he always had the ability to win the ball in congestion and get it out to a team mate in a better position, he just didn't have the tank to get to enough contests or to impose himself physically. He was basically a less fit version of Libba.

I don't see much of Watson in Wallis. Mitch is going to have to be a hardcore grafter with minimal hurt factor at AFL level to be a good player. Despite many people calling last year a break out, the concerns have been there since he was drafted. I really hope he can find something that helps him kick on because he has a lot to offer off the field.

What set him apart as a junior? Why was he highly touted - surely not just an accumulator. Did he show a high level of footy smarts as a junior?

[Greystache]

What set him apart as a junior? Why was he highly touted - surely not just an accumulator. Did he show a high level of footy smarts as a junior?

He was an accumulator, most kids don't have the ability/smarts to find huge amounts of possession. Being smart as a junior is enough to put you in the elite group, but at AFL level nearly every player was the smart junior, so you need to have more than that to be effective, whether that be pace, skills, physicality, or endurance. If you aren't elite in any of those areas it can be tough.

[always right]

Wallis is not dissimilar to Cross in that he didn't start his career bleesed with any amazing attributes apart from endurance in Crossy's case. The good news is Cross managed to forge a pretty impressive career by working on his deficiencies and gaining a reputation for his courage and commitment. Wallis can look to him for inspiration.

[jeemak]

So we're saying that Wallis doesn't have the capacity to learn to use the ball more effectively or be more creative with the football, though we readily accept that Watson was able to become a much more effective and creative ball user by foot as his career progressed?

[always right]

So we're saying that Wallis doesn't have the capacity to learn to use the ball more effectively or be more creative with the football, though we readily accept that Watson was able to become a much more effective and creative ball user by foot as his career progressed?

Nope...I don't think anyone is saying that. I hope he can achieve that level of improvement but there are no guarantees. Not suggesting he won't make it or we should discard him but he has a lot of development in front of him to become the footballer we want him to be.

[Scorlibo]

Wallis is not dissimilar to Cross in that he didn't start his career bleesed with any amazing attributes apart from endurance in Crossy's case. The good news is Cross managed to forge a pretty impressive career by working on his deficiencies and gaining a reputation for his courage and commitment. Wallis can look to him for inspiration.

Very good comparison, they're both great characters with an impressive fitness base. Like Crossy, Wallis doesn't have a 'weapon' in his game. Also like Crossy though, Wally makes very good snap decisions, has neat disposal and rarely gets beaten 1 v 1. Never underestimate the power of being a smart player. He'll make it, but he won't be a world beater. It was always clear that Libba had a lot more talent and would have gone much higher in the draft.


So we're saying that Wallis doesn't have the capacity to learn to use the ball more effectively or be more creative with the football, though we readily accept that Watson was able to become a much more effective and creative ball user by foot as his career progressed?

Watson's ball use isn't what sets him apart, jeemak. It's his ability to bust through tackles, through packs. Wallis will never be able to do that and generally isn't very similar to Watson in playing style, which is why people are hesitant to make that comparison. But yes, of course Mitch can become more creative with the ball.

[Maddog37]

Personally I think Mitch just needs to work on his speed and endurance which takes a few preseasons. He needs to be the sort of player that kills teams in red time.

[always right]

Personally I think Mitch just needs to work on his speed and endurance which takes a few preseasons. He needs to be the sort of player that kills teams in red time.

It's worth noting that Libba appears to have really worked on this part of his game. I had serious concerns about his lack of pace as he laboured crab-like across the field in his first couple of years. Is it just me who has noticed that he has become considerably quicker this year....certainly no speedster but he has shown reasonable closing speed when chasing blokes.

[jeemak]

Very good comparison, they're both great characters with an impressive fitness base. Like Crossy, Wallis doesn't have a 'weapon' in his game. Also like Crossy though, Wally makes very good snap decisions, has neat disposal and rarely gets beaten 1 v 1. Never underestimate the power of being a smart player. He'll make it, but he won't be a world beater. It was always clear that Libba had a lot more talent and would have gone much higher in the draft.



Watson's ball use isn't what sets him apart, jeemak. It's his ability to bust through tackles, through packs. Wallis will never be able to do that and generally isn't very similar to Watson in playing style, which is why people are hesitant to make that comparison. But yes, of course Mitch can become more creative with the ball.

Without improvements to how he uses the ball, coupled with his increased strength and fitness (that I referred to in an earlier post) Watson wouldn't be the elite player he is today. If you wish to think his prominence is only due to his tackle and pack breaking ability, then that's entirely up to you.

I don't actually recall comparing Wallis and Watson in style though. Rather, I just pointed out that Watson turned into the player he is through hard work over a number of years.

The thread is getting well off topic.

[Go_Dogs]

Very good comparison, they're both great characters with an impressive fitness base. Like Crossy, Wallis doesn't have a 'weapon' in his game. Also like Crossy though, Wally makes very good snap decisions, has neat disposal and rarely gets beaten 1 v 1. Never underestimate the power of being a smart player. He'll make it, but he won't be a world beater. It was always clear that Libba had a lot more talent and would have gone much higher in the draft.

Agreed. He's a smart player, he works hard and has defensive ability. He's not going to be a damaging user, but he can be effective. Once he's one of the best runners going around the AFL (I'm confident with his work rate and dedication he can get there) he's going to be a pretty good accumulator who can also ensure his direct opponent doesn't get much space.

For all the talk about his hands not being the best in close as far as releasing to players in better spots, I think he has shown that ability at times. He's no Westy or Libba in that area, but he can be better than average and eventually be pretty good.

I like the comment about snap decisions too.

Once we have a better plan to move the ball I expect Mitch will be a player who always creates an option and is able to then move the ball forward 30-40m effectively.

[LostDoggy]

Disagree. IMO Jones has little or no forwards instincts. Watch him vs Stringer.

You do have a point there with him compared to Stringer.
Both are a long way off with their endurance, but Stringer is pretty far ahead in his forward craft.
I do have a few worries with Jones, 3-4 seasons in and still is far off with his endurance and forward positioning.

[Remi Moses]

Unfortunately Wallis needed to be playing in the same era as Terry Wallace who was a similar player....lack of pace, below average disposal but a ball magnet and tough as nails. It's always worried me that Wallis just doesn't have any tricks to his game. He has quick hands but his handballs tend to be more about extracting him from difficult situations rather than setting up attacking moves.
I know its premature but I fear he is destined to become a good ordinary footballer....nothing more. It's a shame he's not a left footer...you can see how it assists someone like Priddis who is not dissimilar to Wallis.

Sorry for taking the thread off track.

Short changing Priddis . Wallis will be fine, just a tad longer than Libba.

[The Underdog]

Imagine Liam Jones with a decent tank and decent delivery.
He could still be anything.

I tend to agree with Stan Alves (pretty sure it was Alves, could be wrong), that Jones is a 2nd or 3rd forward. He has great hands and would benefit from a lesser defender. I don't think he's an elite player but he can certainly be very good and with more development in Stringer and hopefully another high end tall forward option in a couple of years we'll see this. He's been up and down but he's a 50 game tall forward on a shit team, he's clearly still developing.

[F'scary]

In my opinion, the extended discussion about Wallis has not taken the thread off track because the discussion has been generated by suggestions that Wallis should be dropped for a bad game against the Dees and even that he is a disappointment this season to the extent his place in the side or even the club should be questioned. For me, he has played some excellent games in his short career but is having form problems. A stint in the magoos may be warranted.

[anfo27]

Wallis will be fine, people just need to be patient. When he was drafted most posters were talking him up & how he was a better prospect than libba. Then after the first year everyone jumped off him because he didn't show enough. Second year everyone jumps on again after a good year & now everyone wants to jump off again!
Mitch will be fine. I'm confident because he has the mentality of a true professional & will leave no stone unturned to get the best out of himself. Thats the biggest thing for any prospect, how hard are you willing to work to make it?

[boydogs]

This gets me back to my last point, why didn't we foresee this as being a huge obstacle for Jones' development and bring someone in for 2 years to assist?

We did & got Barry Hall, then it was a case of not wanting to hold his development back & giving him the number 1 mantle. If we got Barry Hall mach II, people would be asking why we recruited another senior forward to warm Jones' seat and hold him back.


It was always clear that Libba had a lot more talent and would have gone much higher in the draft.

Not according to the Father/Son bids

[Ghost Dog]

He was an accumulator, most kids don't have the ability/smarts to find huge amounts of possession. Being smart as a junior is enough to put you in the elite group, but at AFL level nearly every player was the smart junior, so you need to have more than that to be effective, whether that be pace, skills, physicality, or endurance. If you aren't elite in any of those areas it can be tough.

Again. Kicking not damaging enough. Needs to work hard on that.

[FrediKanoute]

Don't over think the following, just read it and give your gut feeling on whether this person would be ok as assistance and seniority in the box:

2012/3 St Kilda FC Assistant Coach (midfield)
2011 Port Adelaide FC Part time Consultant
2010 Port Adelaide FC Director of coaching
2003-2009 North Melbourne FC senior coach
finalist 2005, 2007 prelim finalist, 2008 finalist
2000 Collingwood FC Assistant Coach (Defence)
2001 Collingwood FC Senior Assistant Coach (Forwards/ opposition analysis)
2002 Collingwood FC Senior Assistant Coach (Forwards/ opposition analysis)
Grand finalist
1999 Weston Creek FC Senior Coach (ACT) AFL Development officer
Preliminary finalist
1998 North Melbourne FC Development Coach
Grand Finalist

Dean LAidley.....pass. He is neither innovative not a great tactician. His time at North was riddled with winnable games that they failed to win because he didn't know how to get them across the line. For mine - Gary Ayers or Brett Rattan are much better options.

[Scorlibo]

Not according to the Father/Son bids

If we're going by the bids, then no one wanted Libba beyond Sydney at pick 40. From my understanding, the order of picks was decided by the club, and that order is probably more reflective of the two guys as people rather than players.

[boydogs]

If we're going by the bids, then no one wanted Libba beyond Sydney at pick 40. From my understanding, the order of picks was decided by the club, and that order is probably more reflective of the two guys as people rather than players.

Father/Son process is club nominates player, other clubs bid, nominating club picks player with next available pick or lets them go. Port bid 16 for Wallis and Sydney bid 21 for Liberatore. The process wasn't as serious as it could have been given it was just about making us use our first two picks to get them (22 & 40), but Wallis had a higher bid

[soupman]

Father/Son process is club nominates player, other clubs bid, nominating club picks player with next available pick or lets them go. Port bid 16 for Wallis and Sydney bid 21 for Liberatore. The process wasn't as serious as it could have been given it was just about making us use our first two picks to get them (22 & 40), but Wallis had a higher bid

Doesn't really count though.

Wallis went first, so they made us use our first pick on him. Libba went second, so they bidded the last pick before our second rounder to make us use it so that we had to. They all knew there was no chance we were going to pass on either, so they just bid late. If you look at the father son process almost every bid for a player that club is guaranteed to pick up comes in the preceding two picks. Just look at Ayce.

[comrade]

Being smart as a junior is enough to put you in the elite group, but at AFL level nearly every player was the smart junior

Unless you're an athletic Bulldogs first rounder circa 2006 - 2009.

[Ozza]

Doesn't really count though.

Wallis went first, so they made us use our first pick on him. Libba went second, so they bidded the last pick before our second rounder to make us use it so that we had to. They all knew there was no chance we were going to pass on either, so they just bid late. If you look at the father son process almost every bid for a player that club is guaranteed to pick up comes in the preceding two picks. Just look at Ayce.

Regardless of Ayce's ability/lack of - St.Kilda would have been happy to get him. Their recruiters had a high opinion of him.

[bulldogtragic]

Regardless of Ayce's ability/lack of - St.Kilda would have been happy to get him. Their recruiters had a high opinion of him.
I wonder if they still do? If so, pick 4 should just get the job done.

[soupman]

Regardless of Ayce's ability/lack of - St.Kilda would have been happy to get him. Their recruiters had a high opinion of him.

Yeah I know about that, but if IIRC Adelaide were also interested and had a higher pick. It just seems that father/sons are almost always bidded on with the preceding pick to which they are taken. There is no way Liberatore would have been drafted at 40 in the open draft.

[Mantis]

Regardless of Ayce's ability/lack of - St.Kilda would have been happy to get him. Their recruiters had a high opinion of him.

AIS head coach at the time Allen McConnell had Ayce as a top 3 pick in that draft.

[GVGjr]

AIS head coach at the time Allen McConnell had Ayce as a top 3 pick in that draft.

I never understood why he was rated that highly. Always looked likely to get injured and to be a very slow developer physically.

[bornadog]

I never understood why he was rated that highly. Always looked likely to get injured and to be a very slow developer physically.

and this is why we shouldn't give away the farm for Boyd.

[GVGjr]

and this is why we shouldn't give away the farm for Boyd.

I get that some of the bigger boys are slow to develop but I don't think Boyd had the same issues physically that Cordy was faced with.

I wouldn't push things too hard just to get Boyd but he is a tempting prospect. We need to be active just not stupid.

[Greystache]

Unless you're an athletic Bulldogs first rounder circa 2006 - 2009.

I actually almost added that disclaimer myself :p

[Greystache]

and this is why we shouldn't give away the farm for Boyd.

I don't see any similarities between Boyd and Cordy other than they are both tall males that play football.

Boyd is a big bodied key position player that has dominated under age footy like few before him. He is a strong mark, good kick, leads well and dominates physically. As a player he is a known quantity.

Cordy was a skinny project proposition that had injury problems, had shown only glimpses of talent, and was as much a tall mobile utility as a genuine key position player. What he might become was as much of the appeal about him as was what he had actually done. He was the epitome of an unknown quantity.

[bulldogtragic]

I don't see any similarities between Boyd and Cordy other than they are both tall males that play football.

Boyd is a big bodied key position player that has dominated under age footy like few before him. He is a strong mark, good kick, leads well and dominates physically. As a player he is a known quantity.

Cordy was a skinny project proposition that had injury problems, had shown only glimpses of talent, and was as much a tall mobile utility as a genuine key position player. What he might become was as much of the appeal about him as was what he had actually done. He was the epitome of an unknown quantity.
Exactly. This reasoning suggests that Laurie Angwin was a tall first rounder and burgled team mates houses. So Boyd could break into team mates houses, so we shouldn't do this..... Boyd and Cordy shouldn't be used in the same sentence....

[bornadog]

I don't see any similarities between Boyd and Cordy other than they are both tall males that play football.

Boyd is a big bodied key position player that has dominated under age footy like few before him. He is a strong mark, good kick, leads well and dominates physically. As a player he is a known quantity.

Cordy was a skinny project proposition that had injury problems, had shown only glimpses of talent, and was as much a tall mobile utility as a genuine key position player. What he might become was as much of the appeal about him as was what he had actually done. He was the epitome of an unknown quantity.

I am not comparing the two players. What I am saying is any player taken in the draft (especially talls) is a risk, so why give away current good players to get them.

[Greystache]

I am not comparing the two players. What I am saying is any player taken in the draft (especially talls) is a risk, so why give away current good players to get them.

What I am saying is there's risk and then there's risk.

A player like Cordy is an unacceptable risk. A player like Boyd who has dominated at underage level (not just been good but dominated), is predictable from a physical development prospective, and is the type of player you can build a club around might well be an acceptable risk.

In the end I'm sure we won't take a risk, we'll play safe as always, and hope some project tall we draft in the midrange will surprise and become a star key position player. It won't work but it'll keep our supporters, who are terrified of taking a risk that doesn't see us guaranteed to finish at least mid ladder in the future, happy.

Heaven forbid we take a risk to try to be anything other than middle of the road.

[bulldogtragic]

What I am saying is there's risk and then there's risk.

A player like Cordy is an unacceptable risk. A player like Boyd who has dominated at underage level (not just been good but dominated), is predictable from a physical development prospective, and is the type of player you can build a club around might well be an acceptable risk.

In the end I'm sure we won't take a risk, we'll play safe as always, and hope some project tall we draft in the midrange will surprise and become a star key position player. It won't work but it'll keep our supporters, who are terrified of taking a risk that doesn't see us guaranteed to finish at lesst mid ladder in the futute, happy.

Heaven forbid we take a risk to try to be anything other than middle of the road.
Don't be so negative GS. I'm sure Gumby will send the memberships through the roof and put bums on seats. Really, What would the number 1 pick who is arguably one of the finest junior KPF of this era do for a struggling club looking for hope?

I'm with the masses, lets keep on doing what we've been doing for decades. I don't care, I love Tassies Tamar Valley wines, if I can do the wineries on Saturday and catch us on Sunday, sounds good....

[Nuggety Back Pocket]

I am not comparing the two players. What I am saying is any player taken in the draft (especially talls) is a risk, so why give away current good players to get them.

Franklin and Roughead at Hawthorn were not too much of a risk. We have been unlucky with Cordy when you consider the quality of Cloke and Hawkins at Collingwood and Geelong respectively who were both taken under the father/ son rule as key big forwards.

[1eyedog]

What I am saying is there's risk and then there's risk.

A player like Cordy is an unacceptable risk. A player like Boyd who has dominated at underage level (not just been good but dominated), is predictable from a physical development prospective, and is the type of player you can build a club around might well be an acceptable risk.

In the end I'm sure we won't take a risk, we'll play safe as always, and hope some project tall we draft in the midrange will surprise and become a star key position player. It won't work but it'll keep our supporters, who are terrified of taking a risk that doesn't see us guaranteed to finish at least mid ladder in the future, happy.

Heaven forbid we take a risk to try to be anything other than middle of the road.

Yep if push came to shove I would be happy to throw anything other than Griffen to get the Boyd deal done.

[G-Mo77]

What I am saying is there's risk and then there's risk.

A player like Cordy is an unacceptable risk. A player like Boyd who has dominated at underage level (not just been good but dominated), is predictable from a physical development prospective, and is the type of player you can build a club around might well be an acceptable risk.

In the end I'm sure we won't take a risk, we'll play safe as always, and hope some project tall we draft in the midrange will surprise and become a star key position player. It won't work but it'll keep our supporters, who are terrified of taking a risk that doesn't see us guaranteed to finish at least mid ladder in the future, happy.

Heaven forbid we take a risk to try to be anything other than middle of the road.

We're not going to get the #1 pick which will get us Boyd so we're going to have to leapfrog a place or maybe more. GWS aren't going to just give us the pick because we want him so bad we're going to have to pay for it and heavily. That makes it a bit more risky than a decision made on draft day.

[SlimPickens]

What I am saying is there's risk and then there's risk.

A player like Cordy is an unacceptable risk. A player like Boyd who has dominated at underage level (not just been good but dominated), is predictable from a physical development prospective, and is the type of player you can build a club around might well be an acceptable risk.

In the end I'm sure we won't take a risk, we'll play safe as always, and hope some project tall we draft in the midrange will surprise and become a star key position player. It won't work but it'll keep our supporters, who are terrified of taking a risk that doesn't see us guaranteed to finish at least mid ladder in the future, happy.

Heaven forbid we take a risk to try to be anything other than middle of the road.

Great summation Grey. Our currency at the trade table is pretty low, there is no way I'd trade Griffen, unfortunately that leaves Minson as our only "valuable" trade bait. I can understand why people don't like this but to me we need to be aggressive and bring some excitement back to our footy club. A number 1 pick would certainly do that.

[always right]

Great summation Grey. Our currency at the trade table is pretty low, there is no way I'd trade Griffen, unfortunately that leaves Minson as our only "valuable" trade bait. I can understand why people don't like this but to me we need to be aggressive and bring some excitement back to our footy club. A number 1 pick would certainly do that.

Fair enough but if we go down this track, no-one should ever criticise a player who wants to go to another club in the future. Personally I think you need to be very careful about which players you use as pawns to get what you want. The club runs the risk of losing a big chunk of its soul if they get this wrong.

[Maddog37]

After hearing JMac today I felt we would take best mid and if we get Boyd it will be a bonus.

[Ghost Dog]

Fair enough but if we go down this track, no-one should ever criticise a player who wants to go to another club in the future. Personally I think you need to be very careful about which players you use as pawns to get what you want. The club runs the risk of losing a big chunk of its soul if they get this wrong.

Yes and no. How loyal do players feel to clubs these days? It's a business.

[boydogs]

After hearing JMac today I felt we would take best mid and if we get Boyd it will be a bonus.

What made you think that? Garlick came out pretty hard saying we will be active, I thought BMac said it's too early to talk about it but only poured cold water on trading Griff

[Maddog37]

Jason McCartney was on Fox during the junior games and said we had purposely built a list of hard inside mids and it was important to now add some skill and pace on the outside. Not verbatim.

[azabob]

Jason McCartney was on Fox during the junior games and said we had purposely built a list of hard inside mids and it was important to now add some skill and pace on the outside. Not verbatim.

Thanks for that Maddog, I assumed they had a list strategy, but great to hear it from an officials mouth.

[LostDoggy]

Jason McCartney was on Fox during the junior games and said we had purposely built a list of hard inside mids and it was important to now add some skill and pace on the outside. Not verbatim.

Yep. Whether it was standard answers or not, got the distinct impression it was Boyd if available at our pick or a Scharenberg/Sheed bigger body midfielder with outside run.

[bornadog]

Yes and no. How loyal do players feel to clubs these days? It's a business.

I think players feel more loyalty to mates at the club, so in a way it is club loyalty. If the club looks after them, and they have lots of mates they will generally stick together. Griff said this much in one of the articles, where Rocket looked after him when his dad died and he felt he would like to stick with the club.

The good thing about a young team is they will generally stick together, as the players will socialise together, play and train together.