Queen's Birthday

[Dee Zephyr 17,409]

Did I miss something? Worst midfield in the comp?

 

[old55 21,250]

5 minutes ago, rjay said:

...and be one down.

Not a good plan 'Fifty'.

Yeah but that one is OMac equivalent

[rjay 23,887]

6 minutes ago, Fifty-5 said:

Yeah but that one is OMac equivalent

Predictable response.

...but chances are we go in without OMac this week as Pies are not overly tall and his form has been poor.  Then we have Salem coming in for him.

Do you then take Spencer instead of Salem or is there another who would be a liability like Spencer if he doesn't work out?

[loges 6,019]

3 hours ago, america de cali said:

If the game is close and Collingwood play with the same intensity and desire as against Freo in the last quarter despite a bench full of cripples we won't win. It was a long time ago when we finished off a hard fought game like that and prevailed.  If we win in a canter, hard questions will still not be answered.

So if we win well it means nothing and if its close we can't win ?

[old55 21,250]

19 minutes ago, rjay said:

Predictable response.

...but chances are we go in without OMac this week as Pies are not overly tall and his form has been poor.  Then we have Salem coming in for him.

Do you then take Spencer instead of Salem or is there another who would be a liability like Spencer if he doesn't work out?

We've been playing only 5 talls total - TMac, OMac, Frost, Pedersen, Watts - which is already light on, I don't think we can go in with less - are you really suggesting we go in with only 4 talls?  What if one of them gets injured?

So it's not Salem for OMac.  It's Salem for Wagner or Bugg.

[deespicable me 1,427]

I'm pretty confident with this game. I actually think we'll win easy. I was worried about both Hawthorn and North because they had talls to worry us. Especially North with Brown and Waite. Collingwood will have to kill us in the midfield to win and while they may get the better of us at times I think if we plan well to limit Pendelbury, Treloar and Adams we should win easily. I think they probably should play Cox to try and stretch our defence but he is no Roughead or Brown. Dees with ease.

[Lord Travis 10,158]

39 minutes ago, Demon77 said:

Did I miss something? Worst midfield in the comp?

 

At the start of 2017, Champion Data rated Collingwood the #1 midfield in the league, and Melbourne the worst in the league at #18. When they released that there was obviously much discussion and argument, but Dees as worst in the league was seen by most as definitely wrong. Still, the clubs and AFL use Champion Data for their official statistics so its' reliable. Would've to know how they came up with those rankings and determined us as the worst below some obvious battling teams when we had the All Australian ruckman and guys like Viney, Jones and Vince all in top form at the time.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/more-news/collingwoods-midfield-ranked-the-best-in-the-afl-for-2017-demons-the-worst/news-story/0454702aa6527ac5461a7cabca9192bf

Just another incentive for us to smash the Pies!

[jnrmac 18,943]

44 minutes ago, Demon77 said:

Did I miss something? Worst midfield in the comp?

 

Pre-season Champion Data ranked the midfields. Pies came in 1st and Dees 18th. It was laughable at the time and Monday afternoon around 6pm we'll see why.

[TeamPlayedFine39 8,154]

I really wanna see Trengove play in the seniors, even just one more time.  

You could call it 'wanting to get closure' on a very dark and challenging time for the club.  If he plays and stinks it up, great, I'll never mention him again and he can happily play out his 20s with his mates in a quiet suburban league.  But part of me yearns for that promise and potential that we saw in those early years to be fulfilled.

[DubDee 20,527]

I don't get the concern about our 'bad MCG form'. I dont believe you can have bad form at a ground while having better form at other grounds during the same period.  We just played badly at home a few times.  what are we now, etihad specialists?

no excuses Dees, get it done

[Dee Zephyr 17,409]

23 minutes ago, Lord Travis said:

At the start of 2017, Champion Data rated Collingwood the #1 midfield in the league, and Melbourne the worst in the league at #18. When they released that there was obviously much discussion and argument, but Dees as worst in the league was seen by most as definitely wrong. Still, the clubs and AFL use Champion Data for their official statistics so its' reliable. Would've to know how they came up with those rankings and determined us as the worst below some obvious battling teams when we had the All Australian ruckman and guys like Viney, Jones and Vince all in top form at the time.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/more-news/collingwoods-midfield-ranked-the-best-in-the-afl-for-2017-demons-the-worst/news-story/0454702aa6527ac5461a7cabca9192bf

Just another incentive for us to smash the Pies!

 

22 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

Pre-season Champion Data ranked the midfields. Pies came in 1st and Dees 18th. It was laughable at the time and Monday afternoon around 6pm we'll see why.

Thanks guys.

[Gator 16,891]

I don't take much notice of the MCG hoodoo.  If we couldn't play the ground we wouldn't have strong quarters.

V Carlton 6 goals in the 4th

V Freo 7 goals in the 2nd and 6 goals in the last

V Hawthorn 7 goals in the third

V North 6 goals in the second

If our game style was no good at the ground we wouldn't be having dominant quarters.  Our issues have been as much about missing personnel and a young team learning a new game-plan. 

[John Crow Batty 8,248]

2 hours ago, loges said:

So if we win well it means nothing and if its close we can't win ?

Since 2015 we have won a total of 22 games with an average winning margin of just under 32 points. In that time we have only won 2 and lost 9 games under 15 points.  

We beat a very wasteful GWS by 2 points in round one 2016 and GC by the same where we did everything to lose and got lucky they fluffed the last kick of the game. 

By form we have far less than 20% chance of winning a close game and when we win it will be more likely by 5 or more goals. 14/22 wins were by 5 or more goals. 6/8 wins were between 22 and 29 points.

If close we rely more on the other sides greater incompetance rather than our efforts. We are a better side this season and in contention but inability to close out the mentally tough games is keeping us in the middle of the pack. 

 

Edited June 5, 2017 by america de cali

[Dwight Schrute 16,749]

I was thinking to myself before, if jake spencer were fit, would be pick him considering pedos form??

[leehow 285]

41 minutes ago, Abe said:

I was thinking to myself before, if jake spencer were fit, would be pick him considering pedos form??

Definitely. Pedo has been very handy around the ground, but has been smashed in the ruck. Also means we can push T-Mac (not a forward) back to replace O-Mac (done ok in my opinion, but only need two talls and Frost much better). Also means we always have a tall (Watts or Pedo) in the forward line. 

[Wiseblood 24,636]

1 hour ago, Abe said:

I was thinking to myself before, if jake spencer were fit, would be pick him considering pedos form??

While Spencer doesn't excite me, he can at least give us something in the ruck duels and he straightens us up.  Pedersen can play the majority of the game forward, which takes the pressure off Watts, Hannan and Petracca, while T Mac straightens us up down back and takes the pressure off his brother.  Because of that I'd bring Spencer in if he's fit.

[Pates 9,536]

The Richmond game was probably the best we've played at the G. We were the better team for 3 quarters and succumbed to the tolls of our two injuries and that it was a hard fought game the whole night. (Taking nothing away from Richmond and also recognising we need to find a way to win those)

I understand a lot of the sentiments here that with injuries and pressure, the Pies will probably be the "backs to the wall" team and that can be very dangerous. We can't afford a slow start, not like the first half against GC. 

But I also feel our players seem to rise for bigger occasions. They certainly did when faced with a loud hostile crowd in Adelaide. 

If Spencer is physically ready (not underdone, ready) then he comes in. Chances are he won't give us a whole lot around the ground but he will give us something competitive in the ruck department. Salem obviously comes in, who comes out? Wagner, Melksham? Both played quite well vs GC. 

Big game, always want to see Watts have a day out against the Pies. 

[Whispering_Jack 27,959]

I hope we're not taking any comfort from the stories about Collingwood's injuries. We've been down that road a few times before and it's rarely panned out the way we would have hoped.

It's 22 v 22 and a must win.

[binman 37,923]

9 hours ago, DubDee said:

emotional big game, whoever goes in harder for longer will win imo

Agree. Which is another reason i am confident of a win. As i said before the suns game we will beat any team who can't match or exceed our intensity. North did and won. I knew Suns couldn't and we on. I don't think the Pies will be able, partly because of the reasons i set out before but also because i don't think they can match us in that department for a whole game.

I also reckon that unlike North that don't really have the scoring power to hurt us in the periods when they have the momentum. 

[DSP 1,488]

No Elliot is huge. Plus potentially 3 others out in thir best 22 is even better.

Long break AND its a big game for MFC, with the Rev and MND.

Really hope we turn up. Nothing better than seeing the filth getting reamed at the G.

 

Go Dee's!

[Skuit 9,165]

7 hours ago, ProDee said:

During the game a team's arousal levels are already set for the day and the groove of the match won't usually be shifted (unless your number one ruck goes down before half time).

 

You've been using this term a bit lately and as a concept I think it could hold the key to explaining our statistical anomalies this season - particularly with regard to the Inverted U Hypothesis. Arousal and 'flow' are linked to anxiety (in the broader sense of the term) and the nature of the challenge at hand relative to levels of skill. We have a high-risk (and so high demands on skill execution), high energy game-plan in place (with a young but talented team on the field). As such, our optimal arousal for peak performance could be seen as being set further around the figurative horseshoe, with a greater build-up in reaching a flow-state and a smaller window before tipping beyond. AFL also has one one of the longest run-times for a sport of its type, which compounds the issue of trying to operate in a narrower band of effective arousal.

Some will argue this is just another way of saying we need to maintain intensity or be more 'switched on', but I think it's a little more complex than that. And Goody keeps urging the team to 'get back to its brand' when we're down, but we may not have the capacity to do so yet from an 'arousal' perspective when peak-arousal is set at a higher and less forgiving point. Super-elite athletes such as Roger Federer seem to have the ability manage their arousal states and achieve flow at a lower rate of intensity (or earlier along the horse-shoe and then within a wider band), but we're a team of kids. As we develop, peak arousal will gravitate back to the centre, yet we will still be playing the same high risk, high energy game-plan. Goodwin has set a high bar, and the pay-off will come.

Fans want to believe in psych issues such as mental fragility and hubris but this is an elite sports environment (and we're also not privy to internal biodata and how the team might be being managed). I half-joked previously that Macca should take the last two minutes of pre-game and half-time address, but this could be well off the mark.

[In Harmes Way 7,492]

In: Spencer, Salem

Out: OMac, Bugg

Looking forward to this one, should be a cracker.

[Gator 16,891]

16 minutes ago, Skuit said:

You've been using this term a bit lately and as a concept I think it could hold the key to explaining our statistical anomalies this season - particularly with regard to the Inverted U Hypothesis. Arousal and 'flow' are linked to anxiety (in the broader sense of the term) and the nature of the challenge at hand relative to levels of skill. We have a high-risk (and so high demands on skill execution), high energy game-plan in place (with a young but talented team on the field). As such, our optimal arousal for peak performance could be seen as being set further around the figurative horseshoe, with a greater build-up in reaching a flow-state and a smaller window before tipping beyond. AFL also has one one of the longest run-times for a sport of its type, which compounds the issue of trying to operate in a narrower band of effective arousal..

OK

[dees189227 10,752]

Well its only taken 1 day and I have heard media people say we treat this as our GF. Can I ask when and why that started? I think Beamer said it a few years ago about treating like our GF but I know its usually our biggest crowd but our Gf dont think so. 

Also what Taylor said is correct. Lyndon hasnt been in a successful team, he didnt play finals with us or win a flag but Taylor have you looked at the ladder and seen where you are sitting. You are below us. also you havent played in a successful team yet. 

The pies injuries have helped but gee Melbourne need to be on there game from the opening bounce. The boys cant walk in just expecting to win. 

[Engorged Onion 9,255]

13 minutes ago, Skuit said:

You've been using this term a bit lately and as a concept I think it could hold the key to explaining our statistical anomalies this season - particularly with regard to the Inverted U Hypothesis. Arousal and 'flow' are linked to anxiety (in the broader sense of the term) and the nature of the challenge at hand relative to levels of skill. We have a high-risk (and so high demands on skill execution), high energy game-plan in place (with a young but talented team on the field). As such, our optimal arousal for peak performance could be seen as being set further around the figurative horseshoe, with a greater build-up in reaching a flow-state and a smaller window before tipping beyond. AFL also has one one of the longest run-times for a sport of its type, which compounds the issue of trying to operate in a narrower band of effective arousal.

Some will argue this is just another way of saying we need to maintain intensity or be more 'switched on', but I think it's a little more complex than that. And Goody keeps urging the team to 'get back to its brand' when we're down, but we may not have the capacity to do so yet from an 'arousal' perspective when peak-arousal is set at a higher and less forgiving point. Super-elite athletes such as Roger Federer seem to have the ability manage their arousal states and achieve flow at a lower rate of intensity (or earlier along the horse-shoe and then within a wider band), but we're a team of kids. As we develop, peak arousal will gravitate back to the centre, yet we will still be playing the same high risk, high energy game-plan. Goodwin has set a high bar, and the pay-off will come.

Fans want to believe in psych issues such as mental fragility and hubris but this is an elite sports environment (and we're also not privy to internal biodata and how the team might be being managed). I half-joked previously that Macca should take the last two minutes of pre-game and half-time address, but this could be well off the mark.

@Skuit - nice breakdown. Without lecturing or admonishing you - the inverted u hypothesis is archaic and redundant, and I'd be worried if this was one way that the department made sense of psychological states and reasons for not performing well, or in line with the brand.  The inverted u hypothesis is about getting to your optimal performance state... which doesn't exist  there is no evidence that exists (even though its a lovely fuzzy concept) and certainly is not sustainable. Was Jeffy in flow state in Alice? Was Hall in flow state in the first qrt...nope - both were simply 'on task' when the opportunities presented. So it's a fallacy (read, a [censored] waste of time) trying to pursue optimal arousal states, when the real emotional experience of playing AFL is... stressful, anxiety provoking, includes fear and (the positive emotions)... it takes far too much emotional effort to try and avoid that discomfort whilst trying to perform. This is what actually increases performance inconsistency. Trying to fix legitimate experiences, whilst not willing to have them and stick to behaviours that you would do when feeling good/comfortable/not fatigued etc etc etc

Jargon such as mental fragility, mental toughness are catch all, simplistic terms for making sense of - at a particular point in time, why was x person unwilling/unable to do what matters while x (thoughts, feelings, emotions) was showing up. And the punters/commentators use such term, to make sense of - x person typically can do a behaviour (kick a goal) , why not then, i am soooooo disappointed. 

Goodwin speaks of brand --> read this as personal values. And the only reason anyone is ever willing to have discomfort ...is in service of what matters (gut running, the emotional experience of getting collected under a high ball, the urge to guide a kick under stress rather than kick fully through it).