Jump to content

Cam Schwab's Whiteboard

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

75 Excellent

About Cam Schwab's Whiteboard

  • Rank
    Rookie Demon

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Unfortunately most of the gains from this year are improvements to individual players that are still on the fringe of best 22 when everyone is up and going. It's been good to see Lockhart, Hore, and Baker have an impact, but that's not where the real improvement comes from imo. Outside of this, Gawn remains stellar, and Salem and Petracca are building their fine careers, but not many others in the established team have done much this season (apologies to Frost, who has been excellent). Big improvements don't come from finding some decent role players, but positive changes to the way the team structures itself, approaches the game, and plays the game. All we've seen here is stagnation or slightly worse performance in the things that the club says wins games of football (contested ball, inside 50s, tackles), and total incompetence offensively. Sure, some individuals have had good moments against the tide, but that's not enough when the gameplan, style of play, and approach doesn't go anywhere. What's most worrying for me is: What if it's not a failure of players to carry out the gameplan (explaining the lack of improvement from so many players)? What if, instead, it's the plan that is stifling the development of the players so that they have no chance to get better? If the vast majority of 'positive signs' are from those who weren't really exposed to it all previously, perhaps that suggests that the environment is not conducive to better play.
  2. Good work @Lord Nev I'm not as concerned with Viney's kicking as I am with the fact that inefficiency and inaccuracy has spread throughout the team like wildfire. Jack has his limitations and will never be Salem or Watts when disposing of the ball, but I think his positives far outweigh those limitations. I too would like to see how this year's kicking looks in comparison to previous years, and last year in particular. Ultimately, Viney is an inside midfielder who will win us the ball, and win it back if we lose it. He will only ever be an average kick, and will often be disposing of it in traffic and under pressure simply due to the role he plays. My concern is that the way the team plays means that all players are kicking from and into traffic, which makes things that much harder. Oliver and Brayshaw are good kicks, particularly the former, as is Jones. The problem I see is that they are never in a position of space to be able to execute as well as they should. The forward line is a horror show, and I don't think anyone apart from Salem and Melksham (with apologies to a couple of others) are going to have much to work with when kicking it in. Should the club do a better job of constructing the way the ball moves down the field, as opposed to ramming it through, I think a lot of the disposal issues will clean up.
  3. Just another one we agree on. I'm over this 'trade Petracca' rubbish. Yes, his set shots have been poor this year, but outside of maybe Hunt, that's true of the entire team. However, Tracy's had a really strong year as a forward in a team that has absolutely no idea how to use the ball. The team crying out for explosiveness, class, and creativity, and half the people on here want to trade one of maybe 4 players that actually possess the talents that win football games. Unreal.
  4. Yep, absolutely nailed it! I think it might have been prior to last season (maybe the one before?), but I remember the club saying that they would be playing the fittest players to start the season. From there, we saw Maynard etc. playing because they were ready to go more than others. Whilst it seemed strange to see certain players picked early, I could buy it because it was a justified approach. What I'm most annoyed about is that the football department knew the players weren't fit enough for such a manic gamestyle, yet persisted with it anyway. Why didn't they adjust things to try and eek out a couple of good results early in the season instead of setting the team up to fail? Maybe go very defensive and less taxing. Then, as players regained health and fitness they could have gradually opened the gameplan up to where they see it being successful. Instead, supporters have heard the same thing each and every week - a doubling down of a style that was exposed in the Prelim, and has been destroyed since. If things aren't working because the gameplan is wrong, that's an indictment on the football department for not adjusting during the preseason. If they aren't working because the players simply aren't physically capable of adhering to it, that's also an indictment on the football department for not having adjusted once this knowledge was clear. It is the preseason - A completely botched preseason
  5. I imagine DeGoey cheated forward (which opposition teams have every right to do against Melbourne) and our midfielders/defenders were ball hunting as usual. I imagine Garlett ran back to cover for someone else not doing their job.
  6. Agree with all of this - Melbourne are being beaten the same way every week. Throughout the day I heard three different Collingwood players state that Melbourne would rush at the ball in all parts of the ground, and they would simply pick the ball/ball carrier off once the ball was won by Melbourne. In the finals last year, Geelong and Hawthorn tried to match Melbourne at this without success. West Coast played smarter rather than harder, knowing that the high press, rush the ball, 'chaos' style can be countered if you back off a little, encircle and pressure the ball carrier, and are willing to push the ball into space once the turnover is achieved. Teams seem to be allowing Melbourne's gameplan to play out as scripted without fear it will damage them and comfortable that it will allow them to be efficient the other way. That this is continuing after 13 games is an absolute indictment on the club. Yes, the list has been in bad shape (and mismanaged imo), but I also believe that Melbourne looks like it's players are unfit, slow, and lazy because the gameplan is horrendously inefficient (i.e. so much work has to be done to score and defend), and places people out of position for anything but push forward, repeat stoppage, and contested ball win. There are two key examples of this that are happening each and every game: 1) The forward line 'box' setup that asked the ball to be placed inside that box 30m out from goal, leading to what seems to be a crowded and unskilled forward line as forwards rush the ball and compete against eachother; and 2) The midfield instruction to win the ball at all costs, where midfielders are either out of position once the ball is lost (too close to the play), or are unable to break through the encirclement and are out of position once the ball is turned over. Time to try and construct some goals through control and creativity, rather than just beating other teams over the head through brute force. Oliver, Brayshaw, Viney, Gawn, Jones, Harmes, etc. are all great ball winners, and it's time to allow them to do that and build the team around them winning the ball as opposed to having the entire team emulate them.
  7. There are no lies nor misrepresentation in my post, and it is indeed a critique of what you have written. Your first comment in this thread stated that Sam is a sensitive soul and a worrier. You then raised Jack Watts to imply that his attitude failed to have the ruthlessness of a winner, drawing a line between he and Sam’s comments about the contract negotiation. Further, you said that Sam’s vulnerabilities concern you because it doesn’t align with that of a winner. In the other thread you mention Millennials need to realise that they are also ‘men’, and questioned whether Goodwin “strip[ped] the paint off the walls and eviscerate a few egos in response to multiple players costing us the game in the forward 50? If not then we’ve got a real problem”. To suggest that these comments are not directed towards Sam is disingenuous at best. The clear implication from your posts is that sensitivity and emotion are not traits found in high-achieving individuals. My suggestion is that drawing a line between positive performance and the denial or suppression of emotion is an outdated and erroneous belief that is no longer considered a sign of strength or toughness. Toughness and strength come from one’s ability to show emotion and vulnerability, particularly in a climate where people do their best to denigrate such displays. The key point is to divorce the idea that mental toughness is found in those who deny emotion as opposed to those that display it, or that the solution to difficult situations is to simply be harder and more fierce. AFL can be brutal, but that does not mean that it cannot be engaged with in ways other than what has traditionally been accepted. Finally, that emotion and sensitivity should be relegated to the 'personal' sphere only is an outdated attitude that pertains to once-popular considerations over the warm nature of the domestic sphere vs. the cold, hard public sphere where real achievement and progress is found. This is a position that has been destroyed for decades now.
  8. Throughout this thread you have indeed questioned Sam's mental toughness, commitment to the team (and to football generally), and expressed that he does perhaps does not have the fortitude to cope with modern football. Maybe Sam expressing himself in such a way actually demonstrates mental toughness and an ability to cope with an industry that, as you suggest, chews individuals up and spits them out. That is, of course, not to mention that masculinity and an ability to cope with a difficult situation is in no way linked to expressions of 'alpha' attitudes or traits within the individual. If, as you say, it's all about mindset, then Sam's self-reflective and honest mindset should prove to be a great asset when he faces difficult times in his career. Although maybe Goodwin simply yelled at him for missing that goal like you suggested he should in another thread, and so Sam just submitted and signed the contract extension. Though this seems unlikely to me considering the intelligent manner with which Sam presents.
  9. Sounds like I would qualify as a 'younger fella' under those terms. My work also has me engaged with young people, as well as researching attitudes around identity and the like. I would suggest that you are correct in that ideas around masculine identity and expressions traditionally 'alpha' attitudes are undergoing a significant change, with a large portion of that stemming from young people. Traditional gender roles have been making way for new, socially-centered expressions of what it means to be male (and indeed female, or any non-binary) for so time, with these trends gaining more public traction in more recent times. Under these new terms, expressions of vulnerability and emotion, as has been shown by Sam in this interview, are not only allowed, but encouraged as both a healthy way of engaging with the world and nothing to be considered as abnormal. Rest assured that your son is entering into a very different world that you may have seen as a young adult. Having said that, there is also clear evidence of a reaction against this, and a retreat into more traditional, hyper-masculine, and conservative male roles that are tied to biology and social/political structures that have been around for millennia.
  10. Taylor, like many in the Boys Club that is AFL media, try their best to drag football back to the 80s and 90s comfort zone they long for. The game has moved past the 'harden up', Northey-to-Stynes approach into something much more individualised and productive. Many (most?) players simply do not respond to what Taylor is advocating, and that's why the ability to communicate is paramount for AFL coaches these days. Mind you, Taylor's inability to intelligently communicate has been on display for years, so no one should be surprised. 1.8 is a collective choke, and to blame a single shot on goal is not only erroneous, but potentially dangerous to the development of Wiedeman and his team mates.
  11. Melbourne have been bad, but posts like this are just pathetic. Hope you feel better attacking someone through the anonymity of the internet.
  12. This surely is the buy-in that was the buzz a couple of weeks ago. I think @beelzebub was the first to suggest that maybe the players just don't rate the gameplan, and are therefore failing to carry it out as expected. Clearly Lewis doesn't like it. My take on it all is: Goodwin implemented his plan, unsuccessfully, and was then forced to make the changes that saw the team turn it around late last year. However, over summer the coaching staff have reverted back to the original and the players, having experienced too many of the same losses, are just not liking it. That would go someway to explaining Roos suggesting they aren't playing the way Goodwin wants, and also the constant bombing it forward blindly.
  13. For anyone at the game, was the press still as tight as it has been? Hard to tell on tv, but it looked like the same super-aggressive press, just maybe 20m further towards Richmond's goal.
  14. I really don't see Wied as the issue. A 21year old with 20 games in a team who seem to think blind kicks over the shoulder are a viable way forward. Don't forget he was only to be the second tall behind McDonald, who has been so bad he was playing at the other end of the ground last night. He might need to play at Casey for some confidence, but career over at Melbourne? Please.
  • Create New...