The Goodwin Imprint

[Mazer Rackham 14,968]

Anyone recall the prelim final '97, Adel v Dogs. Goodwin's first season in the AFL.

All I remember about that game was the Dogs strolling it in, 4 goals up with 10 to play or something, and the Crows hauled it in. They just didn't give up. Ran, ran, ran. At them and at them and at them. I imagine that would have had a big impact on a young player.

I was thinking about that when I posted last week about how we "swarmed" all over the Dogs. It was a lot like that. (In my memory at least.)

Sat nite, we did it. Just didn't give up. At them and at them and at them.

Is this a hallmark of Goodwin's style. I think it must be.

We've seen it in parts in most games this year. We saw it in its purest form in the Dogs game.

We saw in against C'wood. They don't have any game plan but to be "intense" and "hard at it" and they brought it that day. It wasn't enough.

WCE threw it all at us, thinking we would break. Do a Melbourne and give up a 4 or 5 goal lead in the first, game over. We did a Melbourne all right. New Melbourne. Goodwin Melbourne.

I reckon this will work very well for us. Reputation counts for a lot. All the clubs are watching. Future opponents, if/when they can't break us, will fold. Because they know what's coming.

And a good thing too. We can't go 110% for 4 quarters every match and still put a fit 22 on the field. Lots of players are carrying injuries.

Hopefully this is a phase where we establish ourselves and can use the threat of being Goodwin Melbourne to win, rather than having to actually do it for 120 minutes.

(Interesting that every week we are putting a different 22 out there because of injury and still manage an effective combo. The dark days of gifting games to NQRs because we had no one else suddenly seems light years away.)

We will see a different mindset from the oppo now. They know they have to lift to play us and win.

The shoe is on the other foot. We're not trying to beat them so much as they're trying to beat us. Beating Goodwin Melbourne turns out to be a difficult thing.

GO DEMONS!!!

[Sir Why You Little 34,420]

16 minutes ago, Ted Fidge said:

Anyone recall the prelim final '97, Adel v Dogs. Goodwin's first season in the AFL.

All I remember about that game was the Dogs strolling it in, 4 goals up with 10 to play or something, and the Crows hauled it in. They just didn't give up. Ran, ran, ran. At them and at them and at them. I imagine that would have had a big impact on a young player.

I was thinking about that when I posted last week about how we "swarmed" all over the Dogs. It was a lot like that. (In my memory at least.)

Sat nite, we did it. Just didn't give up. At them and at them and at them.

Is this a hallmark of Goodwin's style. I think it must be.

We've seen it in parts in most games this year. We saw it in its purest form in the Dogs game.

We saw in against C'wood. They don't have any game plan but to be "intense" and "hard at it" and they brought it that day. It wasn't enough.

WCE threw it all at us, thinking we would break. Do a Melbourne and give up a 4 or 5 goal lead in the first, game over. We did a Melbourne all right. New Melbourne. Goodwin Melbourne.

I reckon this will work very well for us. Reputation counts for a lot. All the clubs are watching. Future opponents, if/when they can't break us, will fold. Because they know what's coming.

And a good thing too. We can't go 110% for 4 quarters every match and still put a fit 22 on the field. Lots of players are carrying injuries.

Hopefully this is a phase where we establish ourselves and can use the threat of being Goodwin Melbourne to win, rather than having to actually do it for 120 minutes.

(Interesting that every week we are putting a different 22 out there because of injury and still manage an effective combo. The dark days of gifting games to NQRs because we had no one else suddenly seems light years away.)

We will see a different mindset from the oppo now. They know they have to lift to play us and win.

The shoe is on the other foot. We're not trying to beat them so much as they're trying to beat us. Beating Goodwin Melbourne turns out to be a difficult thing.

GO DEMONS!!!

Are the Casey Demons playing with the same intensity?

 

[JAG007 163]

1 hour ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Are the Casey Demons playing with the same intensity?

 

Yes Casey definitely playing the same game plan with the same contested ball intensity, which really helps when the guys get the call up to play for Melbourne.

 

[Sir Why You Little 34,420]

11 minutes ago, JAG007 said:

Yes Casey definitely playing the same game plan with the same contested ball intensity, which really helps when the guys get the call up to play for Melbourne.

 

So injuries are factored into Goodwins plans. 

We lose 1 or 2 and players come in ready to take up the slack. 

I bet Norm Smith had the same Philosophy, simple. But so necessary. 

Back in Norm's era Casey players didn't get paid so they were seriously desperate to break into the senior side....

[radar 1,848]

Stat somewhere showed how we are no "Danger/wood" 

No Jones/Oliver

no Trac/Viney

more players getting over 20 per game than any other team, admittedly high possession game. 

Premierships are won, not with several champions. 

Rather the strength of your list 16 to 25. 

Hopefully our "C" grade footsoldiers continue to evolve to Higher status. 

Edited June 26, 2017 by radar

[jnrmac 18,914]

4 hours ago, Ted Fidge said:

I reckon this will work very well for us. Reputation counts for a lot. All the clubs are watching. Future opponents, if/when they can't break us, will fold. Because they know what's coming.

And a good thing too. We can't go 110% for 4 quarters every match and still put a fit 22 on the field. Lots of players are carrying injuries.

Hopefully this is a phase where we establish ourselves and can use the threat of being Goodwin Melbourne to win, rather than having to actually do it for 120 minutes.

 

The corollory of this is what we have seen in the past 10 years. EVERY team believed they could beat Melbourne. Even teams on the bottom of the ladder with nothing to play for saw it as an pportunity to chalk up a win as we were mentally fragile.

We will still have ups and downs but we are no longer mentally fragile.

It won't be long before we take a game by the scruff of the neck and get 5-6 goals up early and keep going. Teams will give in like we did to them in days gone by....

I for one am looking fwd to it.

Edited June 26, 2017 by jnrmac

[Sir Why You Little 34,420]

19 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

 

The corollory of this is what we have seen in the past 10 years. EVERY team believed they could beat Melbourne. Even teams on the bottom of the ladder with nothing to play for saw it as an pportunity to chalk up a win as we were mentally fragile.

We will still have ups and downs but we are no longer mentally fragile.

It won't be long before we take a game by the scruff of the neck and get 5-6 goals up early and keep going. Teams will give in like we did to them in days gone by....

I for one am looking fwd to it.

The first was the Bulldogs game. They collapsed very early. 

[daisycutter 28,459]

thread title should be a ludlum novel 

[Skuit 9,113]

The thing that stood out with me for the Crows during their flag era was the attack off half-back and the type of players used in defence (as well as having a blessed injury run and along with positional flexibility). I think the Crows were really the first to make running, rebounding half-backs a focal point. That's what I see Goody bringing from his early days.

[monoccular 16,017]

3 hours ago, Skuit said:

The thing that stood out with me for the Crows during their flag era was the attack off half-back and the type of players used in defence (as well as having a blessed injury run and along with positional flexibility). I think the Crows were really the first to make running, rebounding half-backs a focal point. That's what I see Goody bringing from his early days.

Yes, very similar (other than their blessed injury run).

He does need to change his surname though....Good win is understating.  Should be Great win.