Mark Allen (SEN) Predicition

[Dogs 24/7]

Mark Allen was on SEN earlier and has predicted that the Dogs will finish last this year.
Whilst Allen is mainly a golf commentator does anyone else think this is a possibility ?
Where do you see us finishing?

[GVGjr]

I heard it as well and don't rate the bloke. top 8 is all I'm prepared to say at the moment but there is a few teams that will finish below us.

[hujsh]

I have heard one of the blokes on the run home (he was filling in) say we would come last but people are all just put off by our finish. We didn't beat Port, Geelong, Hawthorn and Collingwood by accident

People also tipped Adelaide to finish last in 2005 and they won the minor premiership

[The Bulldogs Bite]

People who don't particularly have an educated view of football would seek to justify us finishing last, but that's only on the back of the last six weeks. We were hardly a football team, there's no doubt about it, however the general media in who actually know what their talking about should be able to see through that downfall. For the ill-informed, it's probably quite easy for them to label us as early wooden spooners for 2008.

However, I think it's fairly clear we'll be an improved side. I think we'll field a side that will finish around 5th-8th. Hudson & Welsh are really good replacements for Power & McMahon. Darcy out of the side balances the list better, too. Aker is back to his usual playing weight and should perform a lot better. Murphy & Hahn will be far better players too. Then when you consider a fit Cross & Griffen, an improving Cooney/Ray/Higgins/Everitt etc. - and a mentally tougher, physically stronger & more determined side - we should be a good side.

A lot would have to go wrong for us to finish last. Injuries & bickering between Eade & co. would have to reach all time highs. The club itself should perform better, and be a far more driven force than what we saw last year. I hope though, that we can continue to improve as each year rolls on. We can't afford to have a few OK seasons and then drop right down the ladder. We need to continually be improving, continually playing finals, giving ourselves every opportunity to play on the big stage.

[Dry Rot]

Last? Big call and we'd need to cop some bad crap a la injuries, coaching problems etc as Bulldogs Bite said.

Of the other bottom 4 teams, I'd expect a better showing from the Dees. The Tigers may well now be a force with the enforcer McMahon ;) or still be a rabble. IMHO it will take more than Judd to really improve the Blues.

The next 4 are interesting, aside from the Dons. I'd expect both Freo and the Lions to be better teams, and the Saints seem to be taking their perceived window seriously (I'm not, but they will be better).

T o finish 5-8 we'd need to do better than most of these teams. And to make the 8, we'd need to displace one of the top 8 teams from this year.

The Crows or Swans are the obvious first targets, with aging lists and who knows about the Roos? And I'd be surprised if most of the Cats, Port, Hawks, Pies and Eagles aren't up there again.

Yes, I'd expect us to be a better team, but so will many others.

[LostDoggy]

I agree that last is a bit much.

In my opinion 2007 was as bad a season as I've seen (and that includes the Rhode years).
Certainly, the last part of the season has perhaps given me a tilted view of things, and certainly would mislead many less informed commentators!!!

I can't see us being worse.

[BulldogBelle]

Who cares what Mark Allen thinks - he is basing things on our last 7 soul destroying weeks of season 2007.

We always play our best with our backs against the wall - I would rather go in as the Underdog than the mass adulation we had to go into season 2007 with.

Prediction: somwhere in between 4-8th position.

[hujsh]

We got screwed by the fact that no Vic team looked good so everyone, in the media, built us up as the great white hope.

Eventually the club will have to deal with expectation. We can't always be the underdog even though it is a slightly appealing place to be in.

[LostDoggy]

I dont think Mark knows what he is talking about - we would have to have a really bad run of injuries to finish in the bottom 3. Richmond / Essendon / Melbourne look more likely to take those owners.

Trading out Power and McMahon was a great move. Hudson will have a big impact by giving us first use of the ball and having a regular full forward (Welsh) will help us no end, in providing an alternative to to Johnno. Williams / Everitt / Wight will all be much better down back and Cooney / Griffen / Cross will all hopefully have a more injury free run at it.

Top 4 should be the goal and we shouldnt be prepared to accept anything less than a top 8 finish.

[Mantis]

Eventually the club will have to deal with expectation. We can't always be the underdog even though it is a slightly appealing place to be in.


After just over 200 posts I finally agree with something you posted. Well done.

Unlike BB I agree that we have to find a way to perform under expectation. Our culture has always been that of the underdog, the scrapper or fighter which isn't good enough in my eyes. We need to show more resolve when we are expected to perform and can't continue to use the same old excuses.

I agree we had some very valid reasons why we underperformed last year, but this wont always be the case.

[GVGjr]

.

I agree we had some very valid reasons why we underperformed last year, but this wont always be the case.

What are the main reasons you believe we underperformed last season?

[Topdog]

I'd be prepared to give him odds of 10-1 that the Dogs will come last.

[The Underdog]

As has been pointed out, Mark Allen is a golf commentator and an also a SEN annoucer which puts him slightly above Paris Hilton and Britney Spears as football experts. Much as many tipped us to be top 2 last year many will tip us for bottom 2 this year. Fortunately the game is played on the field over 22 rounds, so none of it means a damn thing.
As PE said "Don't believe the hype"

[aker39]

As much as I enjoy listening to Mark Allen on a Saturday morning on SEN and on Wednesday nights with Finey, I don't think we should be losing any sleep over the fact that he tipped us to win the wooden spoon.

Mark Allen is the same person, that earlier this year, when interviewing Brent Harvey, called him Shannon Grant.

Mark has as much knowledge of AFL, as any other foolish Collingwood supporter.

[LostDoggy]

Big call!! He wasnt much chop as a golfer, spent to much time infront of the mirror and partying. He was the second most arrogant golfer on tour, the first being Michael Clayton

[Mantis]

What are the main reasons you believe we underperformed last season?

Briefly:

1. Interrupted pre-season for too many quality players.ie Murphy, Hahn, Cooney, etc..

2. Injuries to quality players at the same time .ie. Griffen, Cross, Gilbee, West, etc..

3. Darcy and Grant both had key roles to play and unfortunately there bodies couldn't stand up.

4. No depth in list - Our 2, 3 and 4 year players did not come on as hoped. We would have hoped that Minson, Addison, McCormack and Baird would play regular senior footy, but due to injuries and poor form they didn't. When the injuries hit we were forced to play kids as these players weren't in good form.

There are more, but I think these were the key reasons.

[Bulldog Revolution]

I dont expect us to finish last, but can completely understand why a commentator has predicted it. We've had an off season that has been full of turmoil, there's pressure on the coaching staff, and we still haven't found a key position forward capable of contributing in 2008. Plus there are question marks over our fitness, game plan, and ability to play consistently tough enough footy.

That said I would be extremely disappointed if we did not perform better than Richmond, Essendon, Melbourne and Carlton. But interestingly those teams all have far more potent key position forwards than us.

And I really hope we can be better than Adelaide, Sydney, Fremantle, Collingwood and North.

[GVGjr]

Briefly:

1. Interrupted pre-season for too many quality players.ie Murphy, Hahn, Cooney, etc..

2. Injuries to quality players at the same time .ie. Griffen, Cross, Gilbee, West, etc..

3. Darcy and Grant both had key roles to play and unfortunately there bodies couldn't stand up.

4. No depth in list - Our 2, 3 and 4 year players did not come on as hoped. We would have hoped that Minson, Addison, McCormack and Baird would play regular senior footy, but due to injuries and poor form they didn't. When the injuries hit we were forced to play kids as these players weren't in good form.

There are more, but I think these were the key reasons.

Whilst I agree with your reasonings it's interesting that Eade underestimated the reason I highlighted above. He was very bullish of our chances leading into the season.

None of the above however, explain the thumpings we endured.

[LostDoggy]

I think the main reason why we underperformed was the lack of defensive pressure and accountability throughout the whole side. Partly due to game plan (run n stun) and players lack of commitment. The biggest difference in 08 will be a new game plan, healthy players ie Hahn , Murphy will be a bonus

[Mantis]

Whilst I agree with your reasonings it's interesting that Eade underestimated the reason I highlighted above. He was very bullish of our chances leading into the season.

None of the above however, explain the thumpings we endured.

Eade has stated that a lack of fitness caused the problems late in the year. The fitness base just wasn't great enough in the players and with the injuries encountered along the way the players were out on there feet.

Personally I reckon it's a pretty poor reason as the guys in charge of running the running football department should be professional enough to know what is required to prepare the players properly. The fitness staff got it wrong and I would think be on there last chance. Our players simply have to get better at running games out. Our game plan revolves around running, if our players can't run as well in the last qtr as they do in the first qtr we are stuffed.

We don't have the personnel yet to change our game style so for the next couple of years our game plan will not change greatly. Therefore we must get fitter.

[GVGjr]

Eade has stated that a lack of fitness caused the problems late in the year. The fitness base just wasn't great enough in the players and with the injuries encountered along the way the players were out on there feet.

Personally I reckon it's a pretty poor reason as the guys in charge of running the running football department should be professional enough to know what is required to prepare the players properly. The fitness staff got it wrong and I would think be on there last chance. Our players simply have to get better at running games out. Our game plan revolves around running, if our players can't run as well in the last qtr as they do in the first qtr we are stuffed.

We don't have the personnel yet to change our game style so for the next couple of years our game plan will not change greatly. Therefore we must get fitter.

Everything that I read said that with so many guys coming back from knee injuries would impact the team but with Eade talking up our chances it appeard to be well in hand.
I suppose its a tricky one, you can either talk up our chances or play them down but with our fickle membership numbers it must be tempting to look at the positives.

I don't buy that it was a lack of fitness that cost us. I think the combination of fitness and game plan that we couldn't execute properly had their part to play but there must have been a bit more to it than just that.

No excuses this year because with the early start and only minor injury setbacks (in comparison to last year anyway) we should be right to get off to a solid start and then maintain it through.

[GVGjr]

I think the main reason why we underperformed was the lack of defensive pressure and accountability throughout the whole side. Partly due to game plan (run n stun) and players lack of commitment. The biggest difference in 08 will be a new game plan, healthy players ie Hahn , Murphy will be a bonus

Agreed. Defensive pressure is an area that we need to improve on and the healthy players coming back will mean that we can assess the performance without having too many excuses.

[Sockeye Salmon]

Eade has stated that a lack of fitness caused the problems late in the year. The fitness base just wasn't great enough in the players and with the injuries encountered along the way the players were out on there feet.

Personally I reckon it's a pretty poor reason as the guys in charge of running the running football department should be professional enough to know what is required to prepare the players properly. The fitness staff got it wrong and I would think be on there last chance. Our players simply have to get better at running games out. Our game plan revolves around running, if our players can't run as well in the last qtr as they do in the first qtr we are stuffed.

We don't have the personnel yet to change our game style so for the next couple of years our game plan will not change greatly. Therefore we must get fitter.

Lawrence Falloon wasn't there last pre-season.

[Mantis]

Lawrence Falloon wasn't there last pre-season.

Cameron Falloon's brother??

I am pretty sure he was.

[Sockeye Salmon]

Cameron Falloon's brother??

I am pretty sure he was.

Whoops. That Lawrence bloke was the guy who got the bullet. My bad.

[LostDoggy]

Last? Big call and we'd need to cop some bad crap a la injuries, coaching problems etc as Bulldogs Bite said.

Of the other bottom 4 teams, I'd expect a better showing from the Dees. The Tigers may well now be a force with the enforcer McMahon ;) or still be a rabble. IMHO it will take more than Judd to really improve the Blues.

The next 4 are interesting, aside from the Dons. I'd expect both Freo and the Lions to be better teams, and the Saints seem to be taking their perceived window seriously (I'm not, but they will be better).

T o finish 5-8 we'd need to do better than most of these teams. And to make the 8, we'd need to displace one of the top 8 teams from this year.

The Crows or Swans are the obvious first targets, with aging lists and who knows about the Roos? And I'd be surprised if most of the Cats, Port, Hawks, Pies and Eagles aren't up there again.

Yes, I'd expect us to be a better team, but so will many others.


I agree that the lions will be real contenders but im interested on your thoughts about freo. I think they are the most overrated team in the AFL by a mile. One gun player, Pavlich. Then the talent takes a turn for the worse. Their best midfielder, Bell, is only half commited. They traded away a top 10 draft pick in a super draft for a flanker who failed to deliver. I cant see much improvement in them. Bottom 4 finish is my prediction for them.

On the subject i dont think we will finish last, but god help us if we do. I think Bulldogs Bite has summed it up perfectly. Took the words out of my mouth, just a more educated version.

[LostDoggy]

Hi all, my first two cents ever on this forum...

Media personalities have a terrible track record when it comes to predictions, but they tend to talk themselves into believing their own judgement. Several supposed 'experts' -- no names, but suffice to say that they of self-important opinion pieces -- tipped Geelong, Port and North to finish in the bottom eight last year, not to mention tipping us to finish top four (top in several cases). It's no surprise, though, seeing as most of our media 'experts' are largely made up of former 'star' players, retired or sacked former coaches deemed no longer good enough to cut it in the system, and assorted 'boys' club' hanger-ons and token 'tough' female journalists who feel like they have to be nasty to be taken seriously; no disrespect, but hardly an insightful bunch who make simplistic assessments that anyone can: A team wins five of their last six games, they will finish top four next year. A team loses seven games badly, they'll finish last. Experts confidently declare their grand finalists after good form over the first four rounds (Sydney and West Coast were gimmes again this year, supposedly). Their tips are fun, silly, no-brainers, and generally, dead wrong.

---

On the last seven games, my personal opinion is that it was largely the aftershock of the Geelong drubbing (magnified by the huge loss to West Coast the next week). Up to that point we were even talking of matching the Cats (after our win earlier in the year) but the mental shock of that game destroyed all momentum, and it was all uphill from that point. Every other factor already mentioned on this thread (fitness, injuries, lack of pre-seasons etc) are absolutely relevant, but their effects tend to become magnified when morale and mental states are shot (just as their effects are minimised when a team is on a winning run). Momentum from a huge win or loss seems to be pivotal in such a theoretically even playing field. Our great 2006 essentially was set up by our huge win first up against Richmond (just as I believe Geelong's premiership was last year by their 120+ point win against Richmond in round 5/6 -- they were just average until that win).

Confidence seems to be a magical thing.

[GVGjr]

Well done Lantern, great first up effort.

[hujsh]

Yeah we have to remember that the media's job is to get ratings and sell newspapers, not to make accurate predictions and report the facts. It's better to have a columnist with 'personality' who people know already like Carey if they want to make money

[LostDoggy]

Hi all, my first two cents ever on this forum...

Media personalities have a terrible track record when it comes to predictions, but they tend to talk themselves into believing their own judgement. Several supposed 'experts' -- no names, but suffice to say that they of self-important opinion pieces -- tipped Geelong, Port and North to finish in the bottom eight last year, not to mention tipping us to finish top four (top in several cases). It's no surprise, though, seeing as most of our media 'experts' are largely made up of former 'star' players, retired or sacked former coaches deemed no longer good enough to cut it in the system, and assorted 'boys' club' hanger-ons and token 'tough' female journalists who feel like they have to be nasty to be taken seriously; no disrespect, but hardly an insightful bunch who make simplistic assessments that anyone can: A team wins five of their last six games, they will finish top four next year. A team loses seven games badly, they'll finish last. Experts confidently declare their grand finalists after good form over the first four rounds (Sydney and West Coast were gimmes again this year, supposedly). Their tips are fun, silly, no-brainers, and generally, dead wrong.

---

On the last seven games, my personal opinion is that it was largely the aftershock of the Geelong drubbing (magnified by the huge loss to West Coast the next week). Up to that point we were even talking of matching the Cats (after our win earlier in the year) but the mental shock of that game destroyed all momentum, and it was all uphill from that point. Every other factor already mentioned on this thread (fitness, injuries, lack of pre-seasons etc) are absolutely relevant, but their effects tend to become magnified when morale and mental states are shot (just as their effects are minimised when a team is on a winning run). Momentum from a huge win or loss seems to be pivotal in such a theoretically even playing field. Our great 2006 essentially was set up by our huge win first up against Richmond (just as I believe Geelong's premiership was last year by their 120+ point win against Richmond in round 5/6 -- they were just average until that win).

Confidence seems to be a magical thing.


Thumping a weak side hardly sets up a season. I believe Geelongs gutsy away win against Adelaide was more pivotal. Self belief comes from playing well against good sides , not shooting 66 in pro-ams (mark allen style).

[LostDoggy]

Thanks GVGjr, appreciate the kudos.

I do have a fond memory of a media prediction though, and I wonder if anyone else remembers it. It was about halfway through 1997 and we were flying, and on the Footy Show members of the panel were asked to predict the final finishing order of the ladder. They had to do so on a magnetic board and each team's name and logo was on a long magnetic strip and guys came up and moved the strips up and down and gave their reasons for doing so. When it was Sammy Newman's turn (I know, I know), he stepped up and took the Dogs' strip (which was already up the top, we were leading the league at the time and all the so-called 'experts' had done the easy, obvious thing and left us up the top), and put it right near the top of the board, and pushed the other strips way down so that there was a huge gap from us to the second team, and he said something like 'this is how far they are ahead of the competition this year'. We were truly magical at times that year, much like Geelong this year, except that the Cats managed to eke out their tight Prelim.

Now I want to talk about long droughts ending ala Geelong and the Red Sox, but methinks that's a topic for another thread. Cheerio!

[LostDoggy]

Thumping a weak side hardly sets up a season. I believe Geelongs gutsy away win against Adelaide was more pivotal. Self belief comes from playing well against good sides , not shooting 66 in pro-ams (mark allen style).


Absolutely no argument there -- to go all the way Geelong had to overcome plenty of good sides and the best teams find a way to win when they are playing badly etc... my point was more about this strange phenomenon we call momentum, and how a side can win three or four on the trot on the back of confidence after a huge win. Of course this confidence won't help you against a far superior side (or a bad match-up), which is why any momentum we've had over the last few years have generally been halted anytime we play Sydney or West Coast or the Crows over at AAMI.

I think in Geelong's case it has always been more mental than physical (although there is no doubt the longer pre-season helped their fitness and skill levels); we have all been talking about their list for the last few years as one of the strongest going around but they've struggled to cope with the expectations and struggled against teams that were stronger mentally (Sydney et al). There was no actual reason list or skill-wise that they weren't stepping up to the plate and at least making finals, and I think that in a club with a long-standing and entrenched culture of fear and underperformance a blow-out like the thrashing they handed out to the Tigers after a few middling weeks changed the complexion of their approach completely. They certainly didn't look anywhere the same team after that win (which was the starting point of their long unbeaten run). No question them beating West Coast and Adelaide were far more important in the context of the entire season, but one wonders -- if we accept the hypothesis that their problems were largely mental -- whether they would have developed the momentum and confidence to do that had they not kick-started their season in Round 5.

[Dry Rot]

I agree that the lions will be real contenders but im interested on your thoughts about freo. I think they are the most overrated team in the AFL by a mile. One gun player, Pavlich. Then the talent takes a turn for the worse. Their best midfielder, Bell, is only half commited. They traded away a top 10 draft pick in a super draft for a flanker who failed to deliver. I cant see much improvement in them. Bottom 4 finish is my prediction for them.



Fair question.

I don't have Foxtel so I haven't seen a lot of them. But they do strike as being a better team potentially than where they finished last year.

An illusion? Am I overrating the effect of the new coach? I don't know.

What I do know is that for us finish even 5-8 we have to not only displace a 2007 top 8 side, but do better than the Lions, Saints, Freo, Dees (it's an even year) and maybe even Carlton.*




*The more I think about them, the less confident I am in predicting any thing more than a bottom 4 finish. What a shame. ;)

[LostDoggy]

Absolutely no argument there -- to go all the way Geelong had to overcome plenty of good sides and the best teams find a way to win when they are playing badly etc... my point was more about this strange phenomenon we call momentum, and how a side can win three or four on the trot on the back of confidence after a huge win. Of course this confidence won't help you against a far superior side (or a bad match-up), which is why any momentum we've had over the last few years have generally been halted anytime we play Sydney or West Coast or the Crows over at AAMI.

I think in Geelong's case it has always been more mental than physical (although there is no doubt the longer pre-season helped their fitness and skill levels); we have all been talking about their list for the last few years as one of the strongest going around but they've struggled to cope with the expectations and struggled against teams that were stronger mentally (Sydney et al). There was no actual reason list or skill-wise that they weren't stepping up to the plate and at least making finals, and I think that in a club with a long-standing and entrenched culture of fear and underperformance a blow-out like the thrashing they handed out to the Tigers after a few middling weeks changed the complexion of their approach completely. They certainly didn't look anywhere the same team after that win (which was the starting point of their long unbeaten run). No question them beating West Coast and Adelaide were far more important in the context of the entire season, but one wonders -- if we accept the hypothesis that their problems were largely mental -- whether they would have developed the momentum and confidence to do that had they not kick-started their season in Round 5.


Agreed. I believe the whole 'mental' aspect to sport is overrated. Why did Geelong play better in 07? Not because of there mental strength, it was there game plan that changed. Which allowed them to win games, thus helping confidence levels. Why are West Coast always contenders? Because they play tough, contested footy which allows them to win a majority of games. The opposite to the Bulldogs who many people say are mentally soft. Why does Tiger Woods win so many majors? Mental? No, because he is a better player than everyone else. Why does Robert Allenby have a faultless play off record? Because he is the best ball striker in the world.

[Sedat]

Fair question.

I don't have Foxtel so I haven't seen a lot of them. But they do strike as being a better team potentially than where they finished last year.

An illusion? Am I overrating the effect of the new coach? I don't know.
Freo are one of those sides that always look better on paper than their actual output. For mine, they are too one-paced in the midfield and are a little brittle defensively. They have a good emerging ruck division with Sandilands and Warnock, and some obvious genuine quality up forward, but lack the explosive burst players in the midfield and down back to propel them forward and run the lines.

They have enough quality to win as many as they lose but I'm not sure their stellar 2nd half in 2006 wasn't just an aberration, and they are a perennial middle of the road squad with obvious deficiencies who will always be sorted out by the top sides.

[mjp]

Agreed. I believe the whole 'mental' aspect to sport is overrated.

Wow.

I have never disagreed with anything more than I disagree with that statement.

As to your examples, just taking the last one, it is Allenby's ability to execute under pressure, not his ball-striking alone, that makes him so hard to beat in a play-off situation. From a footy perspective, it was Geelongs ability to play consistently that elevated them - every side has talent. Put West Coast in the same boat - no Judd, no Kerr...they still performed very strongly in the finals. And had Cousins not been injured...It is because the group refuses to accept anything other than 100% commitment to every contest.

Our players do not.

If we play like we did in the last 2 months of the year, Allen will be right. (Though I have already said I think we will be just fine.)

[LostDoggy]

Wow.

I have never disagreed with anything more than I disagree with that statement.

As to your examples, just taking the last one, pressit is Allenby's ability to execute under ure, not his ball-striking alone, that makes him so hard to beat in a play-off situation. From a footy perspective, it was Geelongs ability to play consistently that elevated them - every side has talent. Put West Coast in the same boat - no Judd, no Kerr...they still performed very strongly in the finals. And had Cousins not been injured...It is because the group refuses to accept anything other than 100% commitment to every contest.

Our players do not.

If we play like we did in the last 2 months of the year, Allen will be right. (Though I have already said I think we will be just fine.)

Easy to be mentally tough when you hit most fairways and hit the most greens in reg on tour. I dont believe Geelong where mentally weak or lacked confidence in 05 or 06, they just were not good enough.

[GVGjr]

Easy to be mentally tough when you hit most fairways and hit the most greens in reg on tour. I dont believe Geelong where mentally weak or lacked confidence in 05 or 06, they just were not good enough.

The Cats just got better in every area but especially the mental toughness to believe that they could win the close ones

[LostDoggy]

The Cats just got better in every area but especially the mental toughness to believe that they could win the close ones

They definitely improved in every area.
Was it mental toughness that won the close ones or were they just a superior team? They didnt have that many close ones last year, they lost one against Port Power.

[LostDoggy]

Very juicy little mini-thread about with lots of opinions over degrees and absolutes. I think we're all right, really. Jerry, your points are great, and no doubt absolutely valid: a great mental attitude will not make up for poor skill or execution or game-plans. I think some of us take the view that the ingredients of success are a nebulous melting pot of elusive elements, some obvious, like the aforementioned skill and execution and game-plans, and other, perhaps slightly less obvious elements, like character and mental strength and psychology. I do think that perhaps we do use terms like 'choking' or mental weakness as an excuse to cover up for other deficiencies, but I think most high-performance teams will now agree that the psychological aspect of sport is a hugely crucial aspect, thus the existence of the full-time psychologist on many international level teams these days. Even as far back as the '70s guys like Ashe and Connors and Mcenroe in tennis were talking about the mental aspect of tennis -- Brad Gilbert (former top 5 player, former coach of Agassi, author of "Winning Ugly") even went so far as to say -- not sure that I entirely agree, mind you -- that tennis is 20% physical, 80% mental. (Tennis and golf seem to be the sports most open to psychological examination, perhaps because the patterns of both those sports are relatively repetitive and it's darn hard to get the mind creative yet quiet enough to get the human body to do the same thing over and over again to the degree of precision required.)

A poor team that never wins can hardly use 'mental toughness' as an excuse -- the last few sorry Fitzroy years were not a 'mental' issue, for example -- but a Phil Mickelson that used to finish second over and and over again (and not always to Tiger either) certainly needs to look at that side of his game (he has, and he seems to have overcome it). In this day and age of uber-professionalism where every performer is an elite full-time performer (every player who gets into the AFL system has to be talented), it would be negligent to overlook every aspect that would give a team an edge. Teams in the AFL, while coming along in leaps and bounds in areas like physical recovery etc in the last few years is still developing in many of these areas, which is actually a real opportunity for those clubs who are able to establish these facilities before others do to gain a real advantage.

In golf, players' careers have been ended by the yips. These are brilliant technicians who can hole a hundred putts in a row in practice, or have even won majors in their past, but the moment the brain refuses to cooperate entirely with the body there is a huge problem.

There is no doubt that in our case, the game-plan has to be addressed, and there are glaring holes in the team that everyone is aware of, and to all appearances, Rocket and the team are doing their darnedest to fix these. However, while a flawed game-plan and injured personnel can explain six losses in seven weeks, it can and does not explain six 50-plus point drubbings in seven weeks, especially the last two to the Hawks, which we beat earlier in the year, and North.

A loss is a sign of deficiency, but repeated blow-outs with no real prior warning throughout the season is a sign of mental capitulation (which has a way of spiraling out of control and affecting communication, clarity of thought, skill execution, perceived energy levels so that one "feels" more tired than one naturally is, and magnifying all perceived negatives). Also, there is some support for the notion that the strange thing about 'mental' issues is that sometimes they don't even have to be real. Perception can be more important than reality in this situation. A team that believes it is struggling can tend to struggle. And mental issues affect more than just game day. It also affects practice, so that game-plans and systems end up not being implemented properly on game day.

All in all, success seems to require a volatile, enigmatic cocktail that when one gets right can really set up a club for generations. Perhaps the Dogs should have a good hard look at the Cricket Australia system for creating a culture and legacy of enduring competitiveness and success (although I do think that Smorgs and Rocket are on the right track).

[Sockeye Salmon]

Lleyton Hewitt has a dodgy serve, reasonable ground strokes but no weapon except an incedible will to win and simply refuses to give up. His record is something like 50-2 in 5 setters (I just made that stat up, but I know it's real good).

It's all mental.

[LostDoggy]

Lleyton Hewitt has a dodgy serve, reasonable ground strokes but no weapon but an incedible will to win and simply refuses to give up. His record is something like 50-2 in 5 setters (I just made that stat up, but I know it's real good).

It's all mental.

Good one.

Isn't it weird that Lleyton's incredible record in five-setters is attributed to his mental strength, but his inability to beat middle-tier players in the past few years also attributed to a mental weakness (ie. an overly defensive mindset where he goes into his shell when leading that he can't seem to get over). It seems that his steel has become renown when he is the underdog or is in tight situations, but he struggles with a fear of losing when playing players he used to beat. Is he still a Top 5 player being held back by a psychological hurdle that first surfaced when struggling with fitness issues from a few years back? Newk seems to think so.

[Dry Rot]

I'm of the tough mental attitude counts school.

Talent wise, was the '97 Dogs that much better than the 2006 Dogs?

Or just mentally tougher?

[Bulldog Revolution]

Good one.

Isn't it weird that Lleyton's incredible record in five-setters is attributed to his mental strength, but his inability to beat middle-tier players in the past few years also attributed to a mental weakness (ie. an overly defensive mindset where he goes into his shell when leading that he can't seem to get over). It seems that his steel has become renown when he is the underdog or is in tight situations, but he struggles with a fear of losing when playing players he used to beat. Is he still a Top 5 player being held back by a psychological hurdle that first surfaced when struggling with fitness issues from a few years back? Newk seems to think so.

I think talent wise Hewitt is nowhere near the top 5 but has got where he has through conditioning and mental toughness. However as his game plan has become less effective, against a deeper field of power hitters, Newk and Rochey seem to be trying to re-program him to play differently.

[Bulldog Revolution]

I'm of the tough mental attitude counts school.



Likewise

Tony Liberatore was perhaps one of our finest recent examples of mental toughness - he wanted it more and was prepared to out-work and out-concentrate his opponents, including DR lovechild PKelly

[LostDoggy]

Lleyton Hewitt has a dodgy serve, reasonable ground strokes but no weapon except an incedible will to win and simply refuses to give up. His record is something like 50-2 in 5 setters (I just made that stat up, but I know it's real good).

It's all mental.

So why has he lost the last 10 matches to Federer? Lleyton had a mental breakdown?

[hujsh]

Without mental strength would Johnathan Brown have slotted that winning goal from outside 50 this year?

[LostDoggy]

Without mental strength would Johnathan Brown have slotted that winning goal from outside 50 this year?

Helps when you can kick it 55metres! Daniel Cross wouldnt of kicked it, does that make him mentally soft?

[Dogs 24/7]

Good one.

Isn't it weird that Lleyton's incredible record in five-setters is attributed to his mental strength, but his inability to beat middle-tier players in the past few years also attributed to a mental weakness (ie. an overly defensive mindset where he goes into his shell when leading that he can't seem to get over). It seems that his steel has become renown when he is the underdog or is in tight situations, but he struggles with a fear of losing when playing players he used to beat. Is he still a Top 5 player being held back by a psychological hurdle that first surfaced when struggling with fitness issues from a few years back? Newk seems to think so.

Lleyton has a few flaws in his game that he hasnt been able to overcome. Years back when he was a higher ranked player it was his mental toughness than gave him the edge. As the standard of the tour improved though Hewitt simply didn't keep pace and has become a less than elite player. I will watch how he performs this year becuase he has changed his style to hopefully take another step forward.

[Mofra]

Mark Allen is wrong for the following reasons:

a. We will have a full pre-season (and in some cases an extended pre-season) into most of our list. Last year this didn't happen.

b. North who were tipped for the spoon last year had a similar pre-season last year. Early time off to some of their players mirrors guys like Higgo having a shoulder clean-up.

c. We had no functional ruck division last year, and Higgins was often our only HF avenue to goal. Murphy & Hahn were carrying the dreaded "two year injury" ie coming off ACLs, so this is there first year year back at full capacity. Hudson is a top 10 ruckman.

d. Our hope for another defensive tall is now fulfilled, as Williams, Everitt, McDougall & Wight can play CHB depending on match ups. Stretching us in our backline will no longer work.

e. Last year we missed Robbisn being the 2nd banana to Johnson. Welsh can play the role in 08.

f. Eade can concentrate on coaching, rather than the off-field politics of empire building that seems to occur at every major AFL club.

g. We always defy prediction.

[hujsh]

Helps when you can kick it 55metres! Daniel Cross wouldnt of kicked it, does that make him mentally soft?

Are you serious? The point is that he kicked a difficult goal at the crunch moment of the match. I used him as an example because of the moment. He was capable and he delivered.

You aren't necessarily soft if you miss but it is hard to fluke what he did.

[LostDoggy]

Are you serious? The point is that he kicked a difficult goal at the crunch moment of the match. I used him as an example because of the moment. He was capable and he delivered.

You aren't necessarily soft if you miss but it is hard to fluke what he did.

My point was that Browns beautiful kicking action and thumping right boot was just as important , if not more important than 'mental strength'. Which i believe is overrated

[Mantis]

Mark Allen is wrong for the following reasons:

a. We will have a full pre-season (and in some cases an extended pre-season) into most of our list. Last year this didn't happen.

b. North who were tipped for the spoon last year had a similar pre-season last year. Early time off to some of their players mirrors guys like Higgo having a shoulder clean-up.

c. We had no functional ruck division last year, and Higgins was often our only HF avenue to goal. Murphy & Hahn were carrying the dreaded "two year injury" ie coming off ACLs, so this is there first year year back at full capacity. Hudson is a top 10 ruckman.

d. Our hope for another defensive tall is now fulfilled, as Williams, Everitt, McDougall & Wight can play CHB depending on match ups. Stretching us in our backline will no longer work.

e. Last year we missed Robbisn being the 2nd banana to Johnson. Welsh can play the role in 08.

f. Eade can concentrate on coaching, rather than the off-field politics of empire building that seems to occur at every major AFL club.

g. We always defy prediction.

All very valid points. Agree importantly that our preparation will be alot better for this coming season.

I think we need a couple of things to go for right for us this year. We need to gain some confidence early in the season through some good performances. We are a momentum team who can get on a bit of a role with confidence.

And we need some luck with injuries. We have been given no favours from the 'injury gods' over the past 2 seasons and are for a change of fortune.

[Bulldog1954]

Mental strength is a massive massive part of the game. Its not just the mental strength required to perform at the big moments, i.e kicking a goal after the siren but also the mental strength required to push yourself that little bit further. They are both very different things. Someone like Brendan Fevola has the mental strength and confidence to kick the important goal, however he doesn't have the mental strength to keep his effort at 100% for 10% of a game.

Anyone who has played footy, or any sport for that matter knows at times your body feels like it needs to stop and rest, overcoming this requires mental toughness. I suspect we have to may players who don't have the mental strength to push themselves to the maximum, we need more guys like Crossy who don't let themselves slip when things are going poorly and continuously push themselves

[hujsh]

My point was that Browns beautiful kicking action and thumping right boot was just as important , if not more important than 'mental strength'. Which i believe is overrated

OK. That's your opinion.

Who thinks Rawlings was was weak mentally or was he just a bad kick?
He missed a shot from about 6m out against Melbourne in 2005 (barely missed going out on the full)

[Bulldog Revolution]

All very valid points. Agree importantly that our preparation will be alot better for this coming season.

I think we need a couple of things to go for right for us this year. We need to gain some confidence early in the season through some good performances. We are a momentum team who can get on a bit of a role with confidence.

And we need some luck with injuries. We have been given no favours from the 'injury gods' over the past 2 seasons and are for a change of fortune.

Good post Mofra - and I hope both you and Mantis are right

This is an optimistic take on our prospects - but I think it is realisitc, we need some luck and we need to get rolling and get our confidence up.

Although I think injuries were not that a big enough issue in 2008 to explain our woeful performances - I believe whatever injuries we had highlighted other problems with the way our footy set up has been managed.

[Mantis]

Although I think injuries were not that a big enough issue in 2008 to explain our woeful performances - I believe whatever injuries we had highlighted other problems with the way our footy set up has been managed.

You're not a fortune teller are you??

[Bulldog Revolution]

You're not a fortune teller are you??

I hope not, just confused with what year it actually is now, and was previously

[Sockeye Salmon]

So why has he lost the last 10 matches to Federer? Lleyton had a mental breakdown?

Because Federer is one of the all-time greats (and isn't exactly mentally weak himself).

Mental strength can't do it all, the point is though, it helps.

[Dry Rot]

Who thinks Rawlings was was weak mentally or was he just a bad kick?
He missed a shot from about 6m out against Melbourne in 2005 (barely missed going out on the full)

Good question. IIRC he didn't have a good kicking style.

[LostDoggy]

Helps when you can kick it 55metres! Daniel Cross wouldnt of kicked it, does that make him mentally soft?

I think some posters have already replied quite well to this one. Perhaps we are saying that mental strength will not really help one go much beyond one's natural gifts (every player in the AFL system is a gifted/naturally talented athlete/footballer to some degree), ie. it won't necessarily make you run any faster than you are naturally able to,

but lack of mental strength can certainly make one underachieve, ie. not do the things that one is normally able to do (even without the fatigue factor) when placed in a pressure situation.

I've already given the example previously of golfers with the yips, who are still brilliant in practice, but just cannot replicate it under the pressure of competition.

In footy, a perfect example of where pressure and the ability mentally to handle pressure is, as some have already pointed out, goalkicking. Most elite footballers have incredible kicking skills and will hardly miss in practice (despite fatigue) but 70% is a good conversion rate in competitive conditions.

Perhaps comparing Browny and Crossy isn't quite accurate as they have different skill-sets. Maybe a better comparison would be (in no particular order) guys like Browny, Anthony Rocca, Richo, Fev, Pavlich, Gehrig, Q. Lynch. I would say their long kicking skills are empirically similar ie. their natural kicking action and ability allows them to kick over 50 metres consistently, but in kicking a winning goal after the siren I think most of us would be able to come up with a sliding scale of who we would prefer kicking for us if our lives depended on it, even though each and every one of these players kicks close to 95% in practice.

I'm sure we all remember a few years ago when Chris Grant was going through the 'yips' himself, and it was the strangest thing, because he was kicking straight as straight could be from everywhere in practice, but come game day he would think too much about his routine and just lose the run up. Eventually he had to almost recreate his entire goalkicking routine and repeat the new routine ad nauseam just to reprogram his body to carry out a skill that he had obviously mastered in the past. That's why to there are some players who are so much better at shooting on the run than they are from a set-shot. Coaches use the phrase "too much time to think about it" when the player is no longer just using their natural instinct and their mind interferes with the process and their body 'tries' too hard.

(It's a strange phenomenon where your conscious mind actually tries to control the process and tenses the wrong muscles. This is because an action like kicking a football or serving a tennis ball is actually an incredibly complex action that requires and involves a multitude of interlinked parts in our bodies to function in sync. When we practice this to a great degree our subconscious minds develop a pattern or a 'groove' that records this complex sequence, so that when we instinctively say 'kick' or 'serve', our trained bodies actually know how to do it without overwhelming conscious control. But the conscious mind tends to want to interfere and 'control' the process, but cannot usually deal with such a great number of simultaneous commands, and tends to muck up the result as a consequence. This is usually why you find that the most 'instinctive' or naturally gifted athletes like strikers in soccer also tend to be the most 'single-minded' and don't always make the best coaches because they aren't really able to consciously explain what they do.)

Then, of course, there are so many different types of 'mental' strengths -- the ability to go beyond fatigue, the ability to improve oneself by training intelligently and hard, the ability to think their way through a game, the ability to 'read the play' consistently etc -- as other posters have already pointed out. :)

[LostDog]

Hey listen to this, was speaking to the great foward hope last night JADE RAWLINGS last night as i am a Devonport lad, he said that the Dogs will kick ass this year he said that Farren Ray will blow up this year as he has been doing some training with him, said Gea's knee was ok and mentioned Plough wants Ryan Williams at Coburg even asked myself to come and have a crack, I played a lot of footy with Brady but was more a basketballer at the time I had to make a decision of which sport to play.
Lets hope Jade is a better predictor than player

[LostDog]

whoops last night 2wice too much big footy viewing sorry guys

[hujsh]

Hey listen to this, was speaking to the great foward hope last night JADE RAWLINGS last night as i am a Devonport lad, he said that the Dogs will kick ass this year he said that Farren Ray will blow up this year as he has been doing some training with him, said Gea's knee was ok and mentioned Plough wants Ryan Williams at Coburg even asked myself to come and have a crack, I played a lot of footy with Brady but was more a basketballer at the time I had to make a decision of which sport to play.
Lets hope Jade is a better predictor than player

I think every bulldog fan would love to see Ray explode. There have been doubters (i may have been one, i don't remember) and i would love to see him show that he is a top 4 pick

[LostDoggy]

I think every bulldog fan would love to see Ray explode. There have been doubters (i may have been one, i don't remember) and i would love to see him show that he is a top 4 pick
He is the type of player that if we can find another gear with him he could really make a huge difference to our team. His marking was quite good last year and if he can improve on his skills them look out.

[Bulldog Revolution]

He is the type of player that if we can find another gear with him he could really make a huge difference to our team. His marking was quite good last year and if he can improve on his skills them look out.

Agreed - a lot of our supporters dont think he can play but these supporters didn't think Cross, Gilbee etc were good enough and only as recently as last year didn't think Matt Boyd was in our best 22.

Ray could still develop into an elite AFL footballer