Just because English was BOG doesn't mean...

[mjp]

...that our ruck "problems" are solved.

Nor does the fact that he got smashed by Grundy mean that they are insurmountable.

Just because Weightman did a couple of flashy things it doesn't mean we have 'found' a small forward. Nor does it mean we haven't. Etc. Etc.

We still have a list of largely 'unproven' players. Watching two of 'Team Bailey' (Smith and Williams) this year, you would have to think they could almost be added to the group of 'proven' AFL players in our side. I think Liber is close to 're-claiming' that status as well post injury. The likes of Bruce, English, Dale...well, one (or two) swallows don't make a summer.

Watching the game last night I am continually struck by how LITTLE experience so many of our players have in dealing with challenging games of footy...we just aren't in close games these days. We are either 'on' or 'not on' and the results seem to be one way or another. If we can get 'just a few more' players up to that consistent level of performance where they have 'experienced enough' such that whether they are in form or not, feeling 'confident' or not, having a 'good day' or not, their level of performance/impact on the game only varies by 10-15% then we have the makings of a really strong, balanced team.

My love for Crozier is well known - but he is just a good player. He probably isn't an AA-calibre player...but he has literally seen it all and seemingly knows what to do to either minimise the damage/maximise the benefit in any given situation. We just need to get him a few more mates. Things are building - they really are. Games like the Carlton one are still going to happen - hell, think of Richmond in the 2018 prelim - but hopefully games like the Giants prelim or Collingwood R#1 are starting to move into the rear view mirror.

[SonofScray]

It's a good reflection. I am full of belief about the talent that exists across the bulk of most squads we put out. Our best is good enough, on its day. I'm not sure how many "days" we have in us though. It's a real roller coaster still. I'm riding it, warts and all.

[bornadog]

People may not like hearing that we are young and inexperienced, but that is the reality of where we are at. There is nothing like experience in a team to give you consistency. Even Keath hasn't played 50 games yet, but he does have a mature head.

Last night:




Keath, Alex
37


Lipinski, Patrick
37


English, Timothy
36


Smith, Bailey
30


Young, Lachie R
7


Vandermeer, Laitham
6


West, Rhylee
6


Weightman, Cody
1




On top of the above players, this year we have played West (6), Butler (2), Cavarra (1).

I think the future is bright, but we need to stick with these guys (if we think they are ok) and get some experience into them and then who knows how far we can go.

[boydogs]

If English keeps clunking them in the F50 he could be a second ruck and we could benefit from his height & athleticism without being torched at the source

[Remi Moses]

Regardless of what people think on here or whatever
Afl footballers don’t find their consistency until at least 70 games
Some are quicker than others
Ruckman don’t come good as rule until at least mid to late 20’s ( nearly all)
English is an exceptionally talented young player but he’s going to have his growing pains
Let’s enjoy his progress

[Remi Moses]

If English keeps clunking them in the F50 he could be a second ruck and we could benefit from his height & athleticism without being torched at the source

Torched at the source is opposition clearances
Peter street used to get a thousand hit outs
I’ll leave it there

[Bulldog Joe]

English is certainly developing and last night he produced probably his best "Rucking" performance.

He is probably a long way off being dominant in hitouts, but he was remarkably better in getting advantage from the hitouts he did get.

His ability as a tall midfielder is what sets him apart and he needs to not lose that ability, while he improves his ruck craft. This may mean a compromise in strength/bulk vs agility.

I would like us to have a better option on ground to cover his spells, but he will now be making opposition coaches think about how to counter his strengths.

Bailey Williams seems to have consolidated his position, while Bailey Smith has surely established himself as a quality player.

We do need 2 or 3 players like Vandermeer, Weightman and West to take the step. It would also help a lot if someone like Bailey Dale could bring their worst much closer to the best they have shown.

[azabob]

People may not like hearing that we are young and inexperienced, but that is the reality of where we are at. There is nothing like experience in a team to give you consistency.

On top of the above players, this year we have played West (6), Butler (2), Cavarra (1).

I think the future is bright, but we need to stick with these guys (if we think they are ok) and get some experience into them and then who knows how far we can go.


Regardless of what people think on here or whatever
Afl footballers don’t find their consistency until at least 70 games


Yes we are young, but as we all know it is self inflicted with our list management strategy. I really wish the club would stop talking about it like we had no control over it.

We seem intent on churning and burning once our players hit the 70 game mark.

Just because we are young does not guarantee anything.

[comrade]

What are some options for ruck coverage when English has a spell? Because Cordy isn’t the answer.

I think Lewis Young could be a puzzle piece. Play at CHB, with Cordy as a third tall, and when English goes off, send Young into the ruck and roll Cordy over to the second tall forward for a brief stint?

Not sure where that would leave Wood.

[azabob]

What are some options for ruck coverage when English has a spell? Because Cordy isn’t the answer.

Its a big problem. If we make it to finals we need to have sorted it out.

Trengrove is the answer but clearly not in our plans due to his lack of mobility.

[angelopetraglia]

English had a game last night that was rarefied air for a ruckman. It doesn't mean he can do it every week or against ever opponent but it is a type of game few ruckman can actually play. 22 touches, 6 clearances, 4 contested marks and a few brilliant ruck taps in a game with 20% less time than normal is just freakish.

He is only 22. Gawn is 28. What was Gawn doing at 22? Averaged 10 possessions per game. Averaged 14 HO per game. Last Season Gawn averaged 18 possessions per game and 40 HO.

Tim this year has averaged 17 possessions per game (shortened game time so 17 = 20) and only 15 HO per game.

[angelopetraglia]

Dean Cox. Progression to stardom.

Age & Average Disposals & Marks

20 = 8 & 2
21 = 10 & 4
22 = 11 & 4
23 = 14 & 5
24 = 16 & 7
25 = 18 & 7
26 = 19 & 6
27 = 22 & 6
28 = 22 & 6

English

19 = 7 & 1
20 = 13 & 5
21 = 13 & 4
22 = 17 & 6 (shortened game time so = 20 & 7)

[GVGjr]

People may not like hearing that we are young and inexperienced, but that is the reality of where we are at. There is nothing like experience in a team to give you consistency. Even Keath hasn't played 50 games yet, but he does have a mature head.


People actually love to hear that in a side that is rebuilding but our passive list management and top up approach indicates we haven't acknowledged a rebuild is place even if it has been happening by stealth.
We have an experienced list, we just aren't playing some of them. So if you use the old adage that if you are good enough you are old enough then an inexperienced team that is put on the park isn't the excuse it's often used as.

As an example, last year some people were saying we had enough KP players and ruck man but then at the end of the season applauded the club for getting two experienced KP players from other clubs. Most views on list management and the teams we put on the ground are very adaptable. We will probably chase another KP player at the end of the season.

I agree with the opening post, we do need to find some additional support for English and putting another player or two like Crozier into our best 22 would certainly help. At least we now clearly know that English is capable of better football.

Lloyd might help us if he can regain a bit of touch from last year, Suckling certainly helped us last night and I remain confident that Duryea will top off our back half if we can get him right.

It's the stop/start nature of our player development that is hard to understand for me and it's perhaps the reason why we can keep saying we have a young and inexperienced list.

We put development games into the likes of Will Hayes last year before he was really ready and this year he had been unsighted.
We put games into Lachie Young as a defender last season and before last night I don't think he had even made the emergency list except for his late call up last week.
We appear to have lost some faith in Lewis Young after setting him up last year for a bigger role this year and the development of Greene and Lynch has been stymied after some promising signs in previous years...I get that injuries has played a part in it as well
On top of that we lost faith in Rhyley West after one poor showing and who knows where we are with Roarke Smith

It's like we start something but never quite stay the course, losing faith but never really addressing things at the end of the season.
There are a lot of players on our list who have had senior football experience but someone has then hit the pause button.

We know are best is pretty good, we just need to know if we can close the gap on the bad performances just a bit

We are still right in this and a genuine chance to go far when it counts and to me it's not an age or experience reason

[Bulldog4life]

Richmond won a grand final with Grigg as it's second ruck. It is not a huge problem for us.

[Topdog]

English

18 = 7 & 1
19 = 13 & 5
20 = 13 & 4
21 = 17 & 6
Timmy is 22, nearly 23. Doesn't diminish your point in any way. He is progressing fantastically.

[Topdog]

I'd add Schache to your post GVG, last week was not the conditions or game for him and he performed poorly, likely to not be seen again for some time now

[angelopetraglia]

Timmy is 22, nearly 23. Doesn't diminish your point in any way. He is progressing fantastically.

Thank you. Will update for accuracy.

[Bulldog Joe]

GvGjr highlights one of our issues.

We play youth and then if they haven't become matchwinners, we let them stagnate.

We have the following players who have looked like becoming regulars not selected this week

Tory Dickson 113 games
Billy Gowers 31 games
Toby McLean 83 games
Josh Schache 56 games
Lewis Young 15 games

That ignores all the 1st and 2nd year players and those missing through injury.

We tend to give most a chance and only Callum Porter has been on our list for more than 2 years without a game.

[bornadog]

Yes we are young, but as we all know it is self inflicted with our list management strategy.

So you think when players get to a certain age, we get rid of them? We lost Murphy, Keithy Boyd, Morris in the past two years who all had lot of experience and would change the average games played. That is not a strategy, it happened.


We seem intent on churning and burning once our players hit the 70 game mark.

I can't agree with this. We got rid of trouble makers like Stringer, Dahl. Clay Smith through injury and Tom Boyd through mental health issues. Who else did we churn and burn?


Just because we are young does not guarantee anything.

Not sure what you mean by this statement.

[bornadog]

We have an experienced list, we just aren't playing some of them.

Trengove and Dickson are the only players that could come in. Duryea is injured as is Jong but the rest of the players over 100 games are playing. I don't think we do have an experienced list. We only have 5 players over 150. and none over 200.


It's the stop/start nature of our player development that is hard to understand for me and it's perhaps the reason why we can keep saying we have a young and inexperienced list.

We put development games into the likes of Will Hayes last year before he was really ready and this year he had been unsighted.
We put games into Lachie Young as a defender last season and before last night I don't think he had even made the emergency list except for his late call up last week.

We appear to have lost some faith in Lewis Young after setting him up last year for a bigger role this year and the development of Greene and Lynch has been stymied after some promising signs in previous years...I get that injuries has played a part in it as well
On top of that we lost faith in Rhyley West after one poor showing and who knows where we are with Roarke Smith

It's like we start something but never quite stay the course, losing faith but never really addressing things at the end of the season.
There are a lot of players on our list who have had senior football experience but someone has then hit the pause button.

I don't agree with any of this. Players have come in all due to the heavy injury toll we have endured over the last few seasons. Bevo likes to reward players that do well at VFL level and they get their opportunity. Greene and Lynch have had injury problems and have not captured any form. This season it is hard due to no VFL and players that have trained well and played well in the scratch matches get an opportunity. I don't believe anyone has lost faith in West. He has plenty of time to develop, same with Lewis Young.

I think we have tried to address the inexperience by bringing in Crozier, Trengove, Duryea, Lloyd, and Suckling back in 2016.

I think people read too much into the selections as we don't know what is going on in the background, but it is fun to try and pick who will be in on a week to week basis.

[azabob]

So you think when players get to a certain age, we get rid of them? We lost Murphy, Keithy Boyd, Morris in the past two years who all had lot of experience and would change the average games played. That is not a strategy, it happened.



I can't agree with this. We got rid of trouble makers like Stringer, Dahl. Clay Smith through injury and Tom Boyd through mental health issues. Who else did we churn and burn?



Not sure what you mean by this statement.

It isn't as though we didn't know Murphy, MBoyd, Morris and Picken would retire - we should have had a strategy in place to replace those players.

My churn and burn comment is my frustration at our continual pointing to our youth and how eventually we will be more experienced and results will come - but year on year we get younger and younger!

My point is just because we are young doesn't guarantee winning the ultimate prize.

[ledge]

Western bulldogs “MO”win games that give your supporters hope and lose the games of consolidation or importance, that’s been the same since the 70s. Except 2016.

[Remi Moses]

It isn't as though we didn't know Murphy, MBoyd, Morris and Picken would retire - we should have had a strategy in place to replace those players.

My churn and burn comment is my frustration at our continual pointing to our youth and how eventually we will be more experienced and results will come - but year on year we get younger and younger!

My point is just because we are young doesn't guarantee winning the ultimate prize.

Nobody said it guarantees anything . They lost a fair bit of experience after the flag
Yes, they retired and were replaced with younger player’s . We’ve been through the reasons why some of the players left .
Could anybody envisage Tom Boyd , Picken, Clay Smith and their issues ?

[westdog54]

https://www.facebook.com/510082722500876/posts/1682484218594048/

Just enjoy it.

[Grantysghost]

Some things are odd though, and seem very hard to explain from a long term strategy.
Trengove plays a large stretch of games last season when we are really surging in the second half.
English is crook, he takes his spot in the ruck for Giants game, Lewis Young takes the tall defender role. From there Young is preferred? Trengove has never played again.
Now Young has apparently come back out of shape and is persona non grata. I guess for me when I see that I wonder what the plan is. Maybe its genius I don't know. Dickson is another that seems to have his papers stamped. Guess it happens at all clubs but certainly interesting enough to question from what we see as supporters, although it is certainly clear many of our recent list changes are forced (Picken, Smith, Boyd).
Edit: Keath recruitment I guess indicates the fact we weren't happy with Trengove maybe longer term and has allowed us some freedom with Young (forward earlier now out).

[GVGjr]

I'd add Schache to your post GVG, last week was not the conditions or game for him and he performed poorly, likely to not be seen again for some time now

Thats a good point, Schache is a player we specifically targeted and traded for and yet in the first two years with us he played the exact same number of games with us as he did in his first 2 seasons and Brisbane. Now he's played just 2 games this year.

[GVGjr]

What are some options for ruck coverage when English has a spell? Because Cordy isn’t the answer.

I think Lewis Young could be a puzzle piece. Play at CHB, with Cordy as a third tall, and when English goes off, send Young into the ruck and roll Cordy over to the second tall forward for a brief stint?

Not sure where that would leave Wood.

I like the suggestion but it's doubtful it will happen, Young's best chance might be to fill a spot in the forward line until Naughton comes back

[GVGjr]

It isn't as though we didn't know Murphy, MBoyd, Morris and Picken would retire - we should have had a strategy in place to replace those players.

My churn and burn comment is my frustration at our continual pointing to our youth and how eventually we will be more experienced and results will come - but year on year we get younger and younger!

My point is just because we are young doesn't guarantee winning the ultimate prize.

Spot on, the easy option is to point out the players that have retired as creating an 'experience' gap but we discussed it here on WOOF that the club didn't appear to be doing a lot about replacing them. I've never been a fan of using injuries or highlighting how young our 22 are on match day.

[1eyedog]

Spot on, the easy option is to point out the players that have retired as creating an 'experience' gap but we discussed it here on WOOF that the club didn't appear to be doing a lot about replacing them. I've never been a fan of using injuries or highlighting how young our 22 are on match day.

Murphy -Suckling (HB)
Boyd - Crozier (BP)
Picken - (as a forward Lloyd?)
Morris - Keath (Key back)

We've brought some guys in.

[azabob]

Murphy -Suckling (HB)
Boyd - Crozier (BP)
Picken - (as a forward Lloyd?)
Morris - Keath (Key back)

We've brought some guys in.

Suckling came to club when Murphy was still playing.

We were not an old list in 2015 and 2016 either so adding those replacement players kept the status quo and didn’t increase our age profile.

[1eyedog]

Suckling came to club when Murphy was still playing.

We were not an old list in 2015 and 2016 either so adding those replacement players kept the status quo and didn’t increase our age profile.

But we knew Bob was at the end yeah.

[GVGjr]

Murphy -Suckling (HB)
Boyd - Crozier (BP)
Picken - (as a forward Lloyd?)
Morris - Keath (Key back)

We've brought some guys in.

And you can add Duryea and Bruce to the list but then ask yourself why is the playing list selected on match day getting so much younger creating the 'inexperience' excuse that gets trotted out all too frequently?

If we look at it a bit deeper did Keath actually replace Morris or was his trade more about the fact that we let Hamling, Adams and Roughead walk in previous years while Roberts and Morris retired and we hadn't developed others to replace them?
When we brought in Crozier we initially tried him as a forward before he eventually settled in as a defender

[bornadog]

Suckling came to club when Murphy was still playing.

We were not an old list in 2015 and 2016 either so adding those replacement players kept the status quo and didn’t increase our age profile.

The thing is, there is no conspiracy to be the youngest team. Essendon were younger than us last night. We have been one of the youngest due to unforeseen circumstances, mainly brought about by injuries and retirements. In 2017 second half and a lot of 2018 we had an average of 10 players on the injury list, and most of those were the more experienced players.

If you look at the list now, we have a good profile in the 50 to 100 and 100 to 150 bracket which makes us well balanced. An elder statesmen would be good in the 200 plus bracket, but that will come.

We also have a very good blend of young players which is great - so not sure the issues?

[Stefcep]

It doesn't mean we have solved out KPF problem. Two of Bruce, Naughton and Schache are going to have to kick 6 between them if we are to go top 4 and deep.

[Grantysghost]

The thing is, there is no conspiracy to be the youngest team. Essendon were younger than us last night. We have been one of the youngest due to unforeseen circumstances, mainly brought about by injuries and retirements. In 2017 second half and a lot of 2018 we had an average of 10 players on the injury list, and most of those were the more experienced players.

If you look at the list now, we have a good profile in the 50 to 100 and 100 to 150 bracket which makes us well balanced. An elder statesmen would be good in the 200 plus bracket, but that will come.

We also have a very good blend of young players which is great - so not sure the issues?

I think when we get beaten it appears we don’t have the balance right as we do seem to go meekly into the night at times, the GWS final maybe sparked some of this thought. Maybe it doesn’t matter at all. Possibly the age profiles of teams are skewed by old teams like the Cats ? Be interesting to see an analysis of age profile v success.

[bornadog]

I think when we get beaten it appears we don’t have the balance right as we do seem to go meekly into the night at times, the GWS final maybe sparked some of this thought. Maybe it doesn’t matter at all. Possibly the age profiles of teams are skewed by old teams like the Cats ? Be interesting to see an analysis of age profile v success.

I remember Terry Wallace a few years ago doing an analysis on team profiles and what was the ideal age mix. I will try and find it.

One thing with Bevo, he doesn't care what your age is, he backs his players in to do the job as long as they have form. By form, I mean they have followed the coaches instructions and played the way they should have. That may not be necessarily getting 20 disposals, but may mean negating a player or playing a defensive role rather than an attacking one. These are things we are not privy to.

[Yankee Hotel Foxtrot]

...that our ruck "problems" are solved.

Nor does the fact that he got smashed by Grundy mean that they are insurmountable.

Just because Weightman did a couple of flashy things it doesn't mean we have 'found' a small forward. Nor does it mean we haven't. Etc. Etc.

We still have a list of largely 'unproven' players. Watching two of 'Team Bailey' (Smith and Williams) this year, you would have to think they could almost be added to the group of 'proven' AFL players in our side. I think Liber is close to 're-claiming' that status as well post injury. The likes of Bruce, English, Dale...well, one (or two) swallows don't make a summer.

Watching the game last night I am continually struck by how LITTLE experience so many of our players have in dealing with challenging games of footy...we just aren't in close games these days. We are either 'on' or 'not on' and the results seem to be one way or another. If we can get 'just a few more' players up to that consistent level of performance where they have 'experienced enough' such that whether they are in form or not, feeling 'confident' or not, having a 'good day' or not, their level of performance/impact on the game only varies by 10-15% then we have the makings of a really strong, balanced team.

My love for Crozier is well known - but he is just a good player. He probably isn't an AA-calibre player...but he has literally seen it all and seemingly knows what to do to either minimise the damage/maximise the benefit in any given situation. We just need to get him a few more mates. Things are building - they really are. Games like the Carlton one are still going to happen - hell, think of Richmond in the 2018 prelim - but hopefully games like the Giants prelim or Collingwood R#1 are starting to move into the rear view mirror.

You've started some awesome threads this season Mike. Nice stuff.

[Remi Moses]

Why do our supporters run with “we let Hamling go”
He stated for the record he wanted to go back to WA and yet we still run with it !
Adams chose to leave ! Hamling had a sick parent if I recall

[Remi Moses]

You've started some awesome threads this season Mike. Nice stuff.

Agree with that
We are a bit all duck or no dinner currently
We need an ugly win

[bornadog]

Why do our supporters run with “we let Hamling go”
He stated for the record he wanted to go back to WA and yet we still run with it !
Adams chose to leave ! Hamling had a sick parent if I recall

Adams continually injured, didn't get along with other players so it was a no brainer.

[jeemak]

The thing is, there is no conspiracy to be the youngest team. Essendon were younger than us last night. We have been one of the youngest due to unforeseen circumstances, mainly brought about by injuries and retirements. In 2017 second half and a lot of 2018 we had an average of 10 players on the injury list, and most of those were the more experienced players.

If you look at the list now, we have a good profile in the 50 to 100 and 100 to 150 bracket which makes us well balanced. An elder statesmen would be good in the 200 plus bracket, but that will come.

We also have a very good blend of young players which is great - so not sure the issues?

People expect a lot, they want things to be perfect all the time.

Teams will make some bad decisions with list management, they'll make some good ones. Injuries will impact performance, so will variable levels of player development.

Just because haven't added more experience, doesn't mean we haven't tried (because it's been reported/ stated we have). Recruiting players who are good and don't cost too much isn't easy. If you can't afford to or won't pay what players want you'll need a bloody compelling story to get them to your club and even after winning a flag we didn't really have one, for whatever reason.

So if you can't trade in the players you want what do you do? Trade in players you don't, or develop your own and see who can make it (which is what we seem to be doing)?

Looking at it in a block of five years I don't think our list management has been fantastic, but I don't think it's been bad and our results in some ways reflect this with three out of five seasons under Bevo as finalists and one of those as premiers. If we make the top four to six again this year which should be what we're aspiring to as a minimum, then you'd say it's been better than worse.

[hujsh]

I like the suggestion but it's doubtful it will happen, Young's best chance might be to fill a spot in the forward line until Naughton comes back

I don't understand this. Young pushed Trengove out of the key defensive post last year and was quite good. Now he's not up to playing on the second tall forward and can only find a spot for himself as a forward?

Personally I see a lot of validity in Comrade's suggestion and the option of having either Cordy or Young back or forward seems right up Bevo's alley with his flexibility mantra.

I suppose you're right we're unlikely to see it though (unless that unlikeliness makes it more likely because the MC loves to pull rabbits out of the selection hat)

[soupman]

It's the stop/start nature of our player development that is hard to understand for me and it's perhaps the reason why we can keep saying we have a young and inexperienced list.

We put development games into the likes of Will Hayes last year before he was really ready and this year he had been unsighted.
We put games into Lachie Young as a defender last season and before last night I don't think he had even made the emergency list except for his late call up last week.
We appear to have lost some faith in Lewis Young after setting him up last year for a bigger role this year and the development of Greene and Lynch has been stymied after some promising signs in previous years...I get that injuries has played a part in it as well
On top of that we lost faith in Rhyley West after one poor showing and who knows where we are with Roarke Smith

It's like we start something but never quite stay the course, losing faith but never really addressing things at the end of the season.
There are a lot of players on our list who have had senior football experience but someone has then hit the pause button.


Great post, particularly this bit which is in line with my big query about the way we use our list.

I am sick of hearing about how we are such a young inexperienced side, because yes it is of our own making.

It is through a few things:
1. Our young guys are very good. Bont, Macrae, Dunkley, Daniel, Hunter have been the core of our side basically since they debuted and are all very young to be the senior group. Consider most sides core would probably involve 6 guys that are virtually all older than anyone in our group, eg. Collingwood is probably Pendlebury, Sidebottom, Howe, De Goey, Grundy, Treloar and maybe two of them fit in our age group.
2. We tend to be reluctant to embrace players in their 3rd-5th years, unless they have really proven themselves as quality AFL players. We have so many guys who fit in this category atm and for the last few years. These guys are almost always stuck on the fringes, often bafflingly so.
3. If the older guys aren't killing it, we don't like them. Trengove is a good example, Dickson as well. We would much rather pick a young guy who is probably going to give us a mediocre performance but might show glimpses of a really good player, than just picking a solid good older bloke. This is a little inconsistent, as guys like Suckling kind of disprove it, but he is just about the only one, I mean Trengove last year is the perfect example. A guy who is good without being great, has been a solid part of the side for ages, dropped at a crucial stage for a guy who is a gamble.
4. We have this obsession with playing guys surprisingly early, and to be fair generally get good output from them. This is also a big thing because of the above two points, we need to replace those guys we aren't playing with guys that don't fit that category. Those are the younguns. Beveridge loves the debut card, and loves giving responsiblity to players who shouldn't be expected to live up to it. He clearly really believes in young guys ability to outperform expectations, but as a result he is almost desperate to keep proving everyone wrong again and again.

So the thing that really frustrates me is that we are so desperate to pump games into the really young kids, and then go cold on them. Every draft we have picked a random young guy to give more than expected games to, then fail to see progress the next year. And often when they do get their next chance it is in a completely different role to the one they looked promising in, and rarely are they better for it. It must be baffling to be an 18 year old draftee to the Bulldogs, feel like you are killing it, the coaches really believe in you, play you super early with promising results, contract extension by round 10, you miss one or two games with an injury and due to load management but play most games, supporters annoint you as a future star, everything is great. Come back do a good preseason, get told that you'll be pushing for a spot at half back, WOOF has you in most peoples best 22s, then you spend the vast majority of the year struggling to get a game, finally get picked but are played in a position you've never played before, get immediately dropped, spend a few more weeks working on your weaknesses, then get a call up because a senior player is injured/suspended, play one or two games with ok form, get dropped as soon as that guy comes back into the side, then see out the year in the reserves.

In 2015 it was Webb, plays heaps of games, then is struggling for a spot as an inside mid for eternity. In 2016 it was Williams, who was promising and in and out of the side for a while, but never really felt in favour from 2018 till now. In 2017 it was Lipinski and Young. Both given games and performed promisingly, then by 2019 they both were finding it impossible to be selected, before late season form saw them perform well. Now they both feel out of favour again. 2018 sort of had one in Gowers, who was infuriatingly goodbad, and since then has been shithouse. I am happy to exclude that one from this argument though. 2019 saw Lachie Young and Will Hayes given lots of games, the former didn't look like getting a game till this week, the latter seems as much in the selection frame as Tory Dickson. Now in 2020 we have Butler, who I like the idea of, but is going to get 10ish games this year then in all probability be struggling to get a look in for the next 3 years.

To be clear I am fine with us giving games to young guys, and wouldn't want to not play guys like Weightman who have high ceilings because they were at the back of the queue. But outside of that we too regularly play young guys ahead of 2-5 year players for no reason.

Some recent Examples:
Lachie Young given games ahead of Bailey Williams as that medium defender last year.
Butler given games ahead of Lachie Young as that medium defender this year.
Lachie Young given gametime as a hard running wingman ahead of Hayes/Smith this year. (More a weird role thing, we shoehorn games into him there when surely he is the perfect next in line for the Crozier/Wood/Williams tallish rebounding defender role, while the guys we have been developing in that role, with both featuring there in pre-season, are no where to be seen).
Ryan Gardner given games ahead of Lewis Young this year.
Lewis Young given gametime as a forward ahead of Schache in round 1, again a weird role thing.

So to bring it back to the statement "We have an exceptionally young side not through bad luck but through probably accidental design".

We have this tendency to not give our 2nd-5th year players the best chance to succeed. We frequently make it much harder for them to earn selection after their first year doing so, when they seem to just have to turn up with a positive attitude to get minimum 2 games, often placing them behind newer players on the priority list, sometimes regardless of the role required.

This means we always have about four 18-19 year olds with sub 10 games to their names, while we have a bunch of guys stuck on 20-30 games in their early 20s who can't seem to make progress.

This, coupled with the core of our playing group being stupidly young, is why we have such a young and inexperienced side every single week, and is also why we never seem to make progress on either of those metrics.

[jeemak]

Appreciate the effort Soup but I think you're over simplifying it. Or the opposite, I'm not sure!

We're playing Williams and Dale now, we've pumped games into Cordy and he's a regular fixture. Both McLean and Lipinski are regular fixtures after getting games when maybe they shouldn't have.

Daniel and Dunkely have had games consistently and are now elite players.

We put games into Naughton and English. We're persisting with Richards and Smith picks himself.

Our core of experience is Bont, Jacko, Hunter, Wallis, JJ, Suckling, Duryea, Libba, Jong, Lloyd, Wood, Trengove, Dickson and Crozier.

So that's twelve of fourteen senior players who probably pick themselves outside of injury and form issues. Four who get games based on sheer talent, because let's face it, they're extremely talented. Another two who have been relied upon and are elite, and another five that have been given consistent opportunities.

We're up to 25 players who are either senior core who have been given ample opportunity or pick themselves due to sublime talent, experience and output. And we've also recruited Bruce and Keath to bolster the list and they're first team selections without bothering to think about it.

Sure, Schache and Young could be playing tall for us. Others could be getting more or more consistent opportunities but they need to deserve those opportunities. Can you say hand on heart they do? I can't, because it's too hard to tell without seeing them at the lower level, especially now given there isn't one.

So given there's 25-27 players on the list who have claims to be playing regularly, and actually do when there's injury and form issues, how many more should be regular players? It's a finite season, you can only pick 22 players.

As BAD has suggested, a lot of our guys over the years have gotten games due to our at times horrendous injury list. Playing players and then shelving them is part and parcel of a club that faces these issues. If they're good enough their time will come. If they're not, it won't and they'll move on. We don't owe them games, and I think it's great that we actually give them a chance in the first place when a spot opens up.

[Go_Dogs]

If English can replicate that level of efficiency/effectiveness around the contest moving forward, it goes a long way to solving our midfield problem. If we solve that problem, I’m not too fussed about the ruck problem.

Fast becoming our most important player is the big chilli bush.

[Bulldog4life]

Trengove and Dickson are the only players that could come in. Duryea is injured as is Jong but the rest of the players over 100 games are playing. I don't think we do have an experienced list. We only have 5 players over 150. and none over 200.



I don't agree with any of this. Players have come in all due to the heavy injury toll we have endured over the last few seasons. Bevo likes to reward players that do well at VFL level and they get their opportunity. Greene and Lynch have had injury problems and have not captured any form. This season it is hard due to no VFL and players that have trained well and played well in the scratch matches get an opportunity. I don't believe anyone has lost faith in West. He has plenty of time to develop, same with Lewis Young.

I think we have tried to address the inexperience by bringing in Crozier, Trengove, Duryea, Lloyd, and Suckling back in 2016.

I think people read too much into the selections as we don't know what is going on in the background, but it is fun to try and pick who will be in on a week to week basis.

Agree entirely with this.

[Remi Moses]

I’m not sure how you can make any assumptions on selections this year when there are no lower tier games
Scratch matches and players playing for both sides is hardly group 1 type form guide
Soup makes some salient points, but I’m not sure in 2020 it’s that easy to select a team

[Remi Moses]

The thing is, there is no conspiracy to be the youngest team. Essendon were younger than us last night. We have been one of the youngest due to unforeseen circumstances, mainly brought about by injuries and retirements. In 2017 second half and a lot of 2018 we had an average of 10 players on the injury list, and most of those were the more experienced players.

If you look at the list now, we have a good profile in the 50 to 100 and 100 to 150 bracket which makes us well balanced. An elder statesmen would be good in the 200 plus bracket, but that will come.

We also have a very good blend of young players which is great - so not sure the issues?

Imagine if we were norf

[bornadog]

I really would like to know what is happening with Trengove, as he is the one guy that can play multiple KP and also ruck. He would be an ideal second ruck for Tim. Hopefully we don't burn Tim out, but I guess playing 16 minutes less game time this year helps him.

[soupman]

So given there's 25-27 players on the list who have claims to be playing regularly, and actually do when there's injury and form issues, how many more should be regular players? It's a finite season, you can only pick 22 players.


I'm not trying to say these guys should be regular players, I'm happy for them not to be. The thing I'm trying to point out is that we are great at kickstarting players development by giving them games early, but when the opportunity arises to play them in subsequent seasons we often look to the next guy instead of contueing on with the same guy.

Take Lipinski last year for example. Had had promising seasons, been given a fair few games early. Last year a spot opened up for a hard running link player, Lipinski is that guy, and had had great form in the VFL, but we ignored him repetitively to pump games into Hayes. Hayes struggled for the most part, but started to look like a serviceable player at the end of the season. This year we have had a huge hole on the wing in Hunters absence for a hard running linkman winger, Hayes hasn't looked like getting picked while we bring in guys like Butler and Vandermeer (who have shown good sings don't get me wrong) and an out of position Lachie Young and are reluctant to back in Hayes again.

It seems for a lot for those fringe types, we are keen as to give them as many chances as possible and instill confidence in them the first time round, but the second time round they keep getting the cold shoulder and find themselves competing for our attention, unless they've already proven themselves as definitely best 22.

That's the frustration, not with the guys who have already shown themselves to be best 22 already, like English, Smith, Daniel etc. More that when we need to fill out the last 2-3 spots in the side with fringe guys, we always have one or two guys from the previous draft pushed into that spot, and then the next year those same one or two guys can't buy a game while the next new kids get their share.

[bornadog]

I'm not trying to say these guys should be regular players, I'm happy for them not to be. The thing I'm trying to point out is that we are great at kickstarting players development by giving them games early, but when the opportunity arises to play them in subsequent seasons we often look to the next guy instead of contueing on with the same guy.

Take Lipinski last year for example. Had had promising seasons, been given a fair few games early. Last year a spot opened up for a hard running link player, Lipinski is that guy, and had had great form in the VFL, but we ignored him repetitively to pump games into Hayes. Hayes struggled for the most part, but started to look like a serviceable player at the end of the season. This year we have had a huge hole on the wing in Hunters absence for a hard running linkman winger, Hayes hasn't looked like getting picked while we bring in guys like Butler and Vandermeer (who have shown good sings don't get me wrong) and an out of position Lachie Young and are reluctant to back in Hayes again.

It seems for a lot for those fringe types, we are keen as to give them as many chances as possible and instill confidence in them the first time round, but the second time round they keep getting the cold shoulder and find themselves competing for our attention, unless they've already proven themselves as definitely best 22.

That's the frustration, not with the guys who have already shown themselves to be best 22 already, like English, Smith, Daniel etc. More that when we need to fill out the last 2-3 spots in the side with fringe guys, we always have one or two guys from the previous draft pushed into that spot, and then the next year those same one or two guys can't buy a game while the next new kids get their share.

What you are describing is what happens at every club. You play well you get a game, you don't play well, you are dropped. You are reading too much into it.

On specific players that you have mentioned:

Lipiniski - At the start of the 2019 season, Lippa had a discussion with Bevo on what role he could play. Bevo asked him be an inside mid. He played well at VFL level then came into the side round 10 and played every game for the year (except 12, could have been injured, I haven't checked).

Hayes - Hasn't exactly set the world on fire. Played in rounds 5 to 9, then was dropped. Found form in the VFL and came back in round 21 and played the year out including finals. As for this year, obviously he is not in form.

Webb - He just wasn't good enough for AFL level, and if he was he would be playing for us or another club.

Butler - he has been designated as one of the players in the future as a replacement for either Wood or Crozier.

Vandermeer - earned his spot with good performances in the scratch matches

Reward for effort.

[The Underdog]

I really would like to know what is happening with Trengove, as he is the one guy that can play multiple KP and also ruck. He would be an ideal second ruck for Tim. Hopefully we don't burn Tim out, but I guess playing 16 minutes less game time this year helps him.

Is it as simple as he’s pretty slow and not a very good kick? I’m not sure we’d play him in the forward half. Admittedly these things were true when we recruited him and gave him a 4 year contract.
I agree that Tim is going to need some sort of chop out. It may as simple as giving him a couple of games off and giving Sweet a shot, but we certainly don’t seem keen on playing overly tall.

[ratsmac]

Maybe Bevo just wants to play with his new toys!

[Mofra]

Butler - he has been designated as one of the players in the future as a replacement for either Wood or Crozier.
Now that's a real worry.

He has nowhere near the aerial impact of Wood or Crozier, and when drafted we made noise about developing him as a wingman and he only played back in his u18 year due to the strength of his teammates. We've abandoned all that already?

[comrade]

Now that's a real worry.

He has nowhere near the aerial impact of Wood or Crozier, and when drafted we made noise about developing him as a wingman and he only played back in his u18 year due to the strength of his teammates. We've abandoned all that already?

In the latest scratch match review, Gia mentioned Butler played on the wing:


“I thought Louis Butler was good, there would have been a bit of disappointment after missing out on AFL selection. We exposed him to a bit of wing time and he looked quite comfortable there,” he said.

[bornadog]

Now that's a real worry.

He has nowhere near the aerial impact of Wood or Crozier, and when drafted we made noise about developing him as a wingman and he only played back in his u18 year due to the strength of his teammates. We've abandoned all that already?

Just a guess because he replaced them in his two matches.

[Axe Man]

Is it as simple as he’s pretty slow and not a very good kick? I’m not sure we’d play him in the forward half. Admittedly these things were true when we recruited him and gave him a 4 year contract.
I agree that Tim is going to need some sort of chop out. It may as simple as giving him a couple of games off and giving Sweet a shot, but we certainly don’t seem keen on playing overly tall.

I keep seeing this repeated on here. Trengove got a 3 year contract, 2018 - 2020.

[The Underdog]

I keep seeing this repeated on here. Trengove got a 3 year contract, 2018 - 2020.

Right you are. For some reason I thought he was there in 2017. Sure looks like there won’t be a 4th

[Raw Toast]

Thanks for the thread MJP,

I agree that we're building to something, and also that we need to get more consistent efforts across a greater number of players.

I've said it a few times, but I still hope that we're on a similar path to the Hawks of 2007, and the Bombers of 1993. Both won very young, then struggled for awhile before more slowly building to a period of sustained dominance largely around the core of young players who first took them to the flag.

(Now of course we'd prefer to be the Hawks who capitalised on their sustained dominance, rather than the Bombers who brought a bit more schadenfreude than champagne.)

I get that lots of people have less patience than I do, but from a historical point of view, I just think these kind of progressions clearly take time (not that there's any guarantee that we'll actually get there of course).