Comparing Lists

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

You could well be right RR But i still think with the influx of the 2 new teams next year-This club must Aim High, as there will be no more hiding under the Radar. I don't mean pushing players unreasnoably, what i mean is the Football dept must set a High Standard of excellence & Stick to it-enough of the young kids have a taste of senior footy now.

I bet the players are getting pretty tired of losing judging by the way they belted out the song last sunday.

our success rate in 2010 will be very interesting-we must continue to grow Membership & that means we Must be competitive. Bailey is right with that word-it says it all.

Last Saturday the Team went after the Ball-Hunted. The Weak before they almost ran away from the Ball.

I know which Game plan i want to see next year.

2010 Do it For Jimma.....

The Club is always aim high. We have not been good enough to challenge in a number of games this year or last year. And next year could be tough as well.

Dont you think the Footy Department is trying to change the culture and educated and create a high standard of excellence? How long do you think its takes young players without strong and active leadership around them to achieve it.

The path travelled and to be travelled has been hard and will be hard. Its part of the learning experience.

BTW, there was no change to the game plan. We had a team with strong emotional drivers (eg Stynes), a focus on following coaching instructions and an unbelievably benign and weakened opposition.

[H_T 3,047]

Opening Post updated. Easier to read and make sense of each players age & games played.

[H_T 3,047]

The Club is always aim high. We have not been good enough to challenge in a number of games this year or last year. And next year could be tough as well.

Dont you think the Footy Department is trying to change the culture and educated and create a high standard of excellence? How long do you think its takes young players without strong and active leadership around them to achieve it.

The path travelled and to be travelled has been hard and will be hard. Its part of the learning experience.

BTW, there was no change to the game plan. We had a team with strong emotional drivers (eg Stynes), a focus on following coaching instructions and an unbelievably benign and weakened opposition.

Next year could be just as tough, however I would expect the team to make some inroads into some of our opposition. Our competitive levels would have to be higher and for longer periods of time. I would be happy with 6-9 wins next year. If we were to get under 5 wins again. I would be disappointed but somewhat understanding as our new recruits will still be finding their feet.

I would hope the FD is trying to change the culture. The likes of Watts, Grimes & Scully would help in that regard of a high standard of excellence. The likes of Robertson skylarking on the forward line is another story.

[Rogue 585]

You put some serious work in to that post, nice work!

I agree.

I think it shows nicely why we're further away than some would like to admit.

[H_T 3,047]

Going over the list, and understanding the clubs predicament that we were to expect more "short term pain" this season. With new quality blood into the club come November, I'm expecting the club to lay good foundations over summer for a much better output next season.

How much better?

Well, I'm expecting more wins. I'm expecting alot of excitement. But I'm not expecting a finals berth. But I'll take it if it's achieved.

The new works in progress at Casey for state of the art facilities, can't come quick enough.

Rogue, what was that link again that you bumped - to go towards the funding for FD, gym etc.?

Edited July 9, 2009 by High Tower

[H_T 3,047]

Secondly, its likely that the average age and games experience of the MFC list next year will fall further as a number of senior players are retired at year end.

Quite right RR.

For example if we took out McDonald and Robertson on the above starting 22 from last weekend and replaced them with say Maric and Wonaeamirri, the Average Age for the Dees comes down to 21.24.

And there would be in excess of 420+ games of less experience.

[Hobbits's 17]

Need a cut lunch just to read through it all!

Noticing Geelong's list. Apart from their starting 22, they have not got a great deal of depth in terms of experience. But, they get by with the experience that's on the field. It will be interesting in 3-4 years time how there list will be.

Melbourne's list seems to show how the Footy department is sifting through the developing players and those on the fringe. The list is long in terms of those who have actually 'played'. i think it sends us a picture of where the club is at. Now they have to cut those who they think will not cut it at AFL any longer - who have been given plenty of chances, or are too old/down on form. e.g. D.Bell, M.Whelan, L.Dunn, P.Johnson

St.Kilda looks to have alot of depth. They've also got Tom Lynch who has not opened his tally and i rate him.

Edited July 9, 2009 by Grimes to Watts

[jnrmac 20,065]

Great post. Well done.

[Akum 2,660]

Sensational post HT. Love this sort of stuff too. A few things stand out IMO:

1. Seems that from the latest year of big recruiting, it takes about 3 years to get entrenched in the top 8 and 5 years to get to the very top. The core of Geelong's current team debuted from 99-02 & the team became big in 07. For St Kilda, 01-04, big in 09. For us, the last of our big recruiting years will be 2009, so we can hope for entrenched in top 8 in 2012 and top 2 or 3 in 2014. As has already been said.

2. Neither Geelong nor St Kilda has recruited much since the last year of their big recruiting in 2002 and 2004 respectively, Selwood being the one exception. They'll be in big trouble once they start to fall again, because at this stage nobody looks to be coming up to fill the holes that will be left when their stars from 99-02 (Geel) & 01-04 (StK) get too old. We'll need to try to avoid this, especially as it's going to be much more difficult for us in this period due to GC & WS.

3. If our big years are going to be 2012-2014, we've got plenty of great mids, defenders and forwards in the bunch that debuted from 06-09, but from your list we look as if we might be a bit light on for rucks. Jamar who debuted in 2004 and PJ in 2005 (if we keep him that long) will be at the end of their careers, and there is only Martin, though Spencer & Meesen aren't there. Do you think we'll need to recruit another ruckman this year or next year to be strong enough in the ruck in 2012-2014? Or will Spencer & Meesen be enough, with the help of an ageing Jamar?

Personally I think Hawks were a complete aberration, and might be in trouble for a little while. They sprung a major surprise on the whole comp last year by a major and very successful coaching innovation that won them many games and gave them loads of confidence (the "rolling zone"), by using their best mid (Hodge) as a quarterback, and getting champagne delivery to their two KPFs. This got them to the GF, and they surprised the red hot favourites big-time on the day. IMO they really pilfered this premiership, and good luck to them, they pilfered it brilliantly. This year, when the rolling zone, Hodge & KPFs have all been neutralised one way or another, they're back to more or less where they belong. My point is that, as you've indicated, it's the Geelong and St Kilda models that are relevant to us, while Hawthorn were/are an aberration that has much less relevance.

Again, brilliantly done HT.

[Hobbits's 17]

Sensational post HT. Love this sort of stuff too. A few things stand out IMO:

1. Seems that from the latest year of big recruiting, it takes about 3 years to get entrenched in the top 8 and 5 years to get to the very top. The core of Geelong's current team debuted from 99-02 & the team became big in 07. For St Kilda, 01-04, big in 09. For us, the last of our big recruiting years will be 2009, so we can hope for entrenched in top 8 in 2012 and top 2 or 3 in 2014. As has already been said.

2. Neither Geelong nor St Kilda has recruited much since the last year of their big recruiting in 2002 and 2004 respectively, Selwood being the one exception. They'll be in big trouble once they start to fall again, because at this stage nobody looks to be coming up to fill the holes that will be left when their stars from 99-02 (Geel) & 01-04 (StK) get too old. We'll need to try to avoid this, especially as it's going to be much more difficult for us in this period due to GC & WS.

3. If our big years are going to be 2012-2014, we've got plenty of great mids, defenders and forwards in the bunch that debuted from 06-09, but from your list we look as if we might be a bit light on for rucks. Jamar who debuted in 2004 and PJ in 2005 (if we keep him that long) will be at the end of their careers, and there is only Martin, though Spencer & Meesen aren't there. Do you think we'll need to recruit another ruckman this year or next year to be strong enough in the ruck in 2012-2014? Or will Spencer & Meesen be enough, with the help of an ageing Jamar?

Personally I think Hawks were a complete aberration, and might be in trouble for a little while. They sprung a major surprise on the whole comp last year by a major and very successful coaching innovation that won them many games and gave them loads of confidence (the "rolling zone"), by using their best mid (Hodge) as a quarterback, and getting champagne delivery to their two KPFs. This got them to the GF, and they surprised the red hot favourites big-time on the day. IMO they really pilfered this premiership, and good luck to them, they pilfered it brilliantly. This year, when the rolling zone, Hodge & KPFs have all been neutralised one way or another, they're back to more or less where they belong. My point is that, as you've indicated, it's the Geelong and St Kilda models that are relevant to us, while Hawthorn were/are an aberration that has much less relevance.

Again, brilliantly done HT.

Good post Akum.

In regards to Hawthorn though, they might be in trouble now, but they're not a complete aberration as you put it. Yeah, it was the rolling zone that they were well drilled on, but it was their quality players that helped them get there. Hodge, Franklin, Roughead, Lewis, Croad. Guess what...they're all high draft picks.... so whilst you may say that they might not be as relevant. This years pointy end of the draft will yield quality picks that will take Mfc a long way towards success.

Edited July 9, 2009 by Grimes to Watts

[Pepe Dee Pew 0]

Great work High Tower.

We need some luck with our picks this year. Scully should be a champ. Hopefully we get another 2 A graders.

The next few years will be exciting.

The big winners out of GC and WS will be Cats and Saints. They probaly will package up some over the hill players and swap tp those teams for good draft picks.

[H_T 3,047]

Sensational post HT. Love this sort of stuff too. A few things stand out IMO:

1. Seems that from the latest year of big recruiting, it takes about 3 years to get entrenched in the top 8 and 5 years to get to the very top. The core of Geelong's current team debuted from 99-02 & the team became big in 07. For St Kilda, 01-04, big in 09. For us, the last of our big recruiting years will be 2009, so we can hope for entrenched in top 8 in 2012 and top 2 or 3 in 2014. As has already been said.

2. Neither Geelong nor St Kilda has recruited much since the last year of their big recruiting in 2002 and 2004 respectively, Selwood being the one exception. They'll be in big trouble once they start to fall again, because at this stage nobody looks to be coming up to fill the holes that will be left when their stars from 99-02 (Geel) & 01-04 (StK) get too old. We'll need to try to avoid this, especially as it's going to be much more difficult for us in this period due to GC & WS.

3. If our big years are going to be 2012-2014, we've got plenty of great mids, defenders and forwards in the bunch that debuted from 06-09, but from your list we look as if we might be a bit light on for rucks. Jamar who debuted in 2004 and PJ in 2005 (if we keep him that long) will be at the end of their careers, and there is only Martin, though Spencer & Meesen aren't there. Do you think we'll need to recruit another ruckman this year or next year to be strong enough in the ruck in 2012-2014? Or will Spencer & Meesen be enough, with the help of an ageing Jamar?

Personally I think Hawks were a complete aberration, and might be in trouble for a little while. They sprung a major surprise on the whole comp last year by a major and very successful coaching innovation that won them many games and gave them loads of confidence (the "rolling zone"), by using their best mid (Hodge) as a quarterback, and getting champagne delivery to their two KPFs. This got them to the GF, and they surprised the red hot favourites big-time on the day. IMO they really pilfered this premiership, and good luck to them, they pilfered it brilliantly. This year, when the rolling zone, Hodge & KPFs have all been neutralised one way or another, they're back to more or less where they belong. My point is that, as you've indicated, it's the Geelong and St Kilda models that are relevant to us, while Hawthorn were/are an aberration that has much less relevance.

Again, brilliantly done HT.

Cheers Akum. With regard to your questions....I'll go by your points first.

1/ Your point here is valid. When comparing the Geelong/St.Kilda lists of when they were recruited/debuted the core (or main strength) of their current list were over 3-4 year gap. Geelong '99-'02, St.K '01-'04. What also must be pointed out, they have been most prudent in their recruitment since. Ie. St.K - Jones, Gilbert, Armitage, McQualter. At Geelong - Mackie, Stokes, Selwood.

As I said in an earlier post it is critical that ongoing recruitment is good post 2009.

2. So having said that in point 1, I don't agree with your second point that they have not recruited much since those periods. I think Geelong has added very well, St.Kilda have done ok also. As outlined in point 1.

But I do agree that it is imperative (ever so hard though), to recruit well during the period of GC & WS in the comp. It's nigh impossible to get a Selwood after recruiting so well as Geelong did (admittedly father/son helped); but you never know. ie. Viney Jnr.

3. I think they may have made a decision on PJ. They may stick with Meesen & Spencer and develop them. They are still young and have scope for improvement. I do think another ruckman will need to be recruited. 3 is not enough, even though we have Martin. If we don't go for a ruckman, they will be looking at Martin to do some ruckwork. I think a young ruckman at draft time could be picked up in maybe 3rd or 4th round. Then again, there is the PSD if need be. At the moment our ruck stocks look quite weak. Jamar has impressed of late. We will need Spencer or Meesen to step up. By 2012-2013 I expect one of them to be very handy. I don't know which one, but I like Spencer.

Just on your point regarding Hawthorn, I agree with G2W to a certain extent. They've had more than their fair share of injuries this year, and alot of it may be put down to their pre-season and celebrations . I don't think it was a "complete aberration". They got there by having quality players (courtesy of the draft) and the likes of Crawford and Dew were just so important. Hawthorn are still on an upward curve IMO, they are still maturing. So I don't think they're model is entirely irrelevant.

The reason I used St.K and Geelongs lists were for a number of factors: -

1/ Their lists rival each other (as pointed out by M.Thompson/G.Thomas over the years since 2004 I think).

2/ They were both 13-0 heading into Round 14 clash.

3/ That's where I hope Melbourne gets to with their list in 4-5 years time.

4/ Their sides are that good, it's not funny. I'm jealous.

Edited July 9, 2009 by High Tower

[Nasher 33,616]

3. If our big years are going to be 2012-2014, we've got plenty of great mids, defenders and forwards in the bunch that debuted from 06-09, but from your list we look as if we might be a bit light on for rucks. Jamar who debuted in 2004 and PJ in 2005 (if we keep him that long) will be at the end of their careers, and there is only Martin, though Spencer & Meesen aren't there. Do you think we'll need to recruit another ruckman this year or next year to be strong enough in the ruck in 2012-2014? Or will Spencer & Meesen be enough, with the help of an ageing Jamar?

Just FWIW in 2014, Jamar will be 30, turning 31 towards the end (same YOB as me -- kind of depressing to know that I'll be 30 before we're likely to press for our first flag in my lifetime). IMO given his type -- the very large, very slow type, odds are in his favour of still being a capable footballer at that age.

Everitt, Gardiner and King are all good examples of how durable some of this type can be in that because they were never very fast to begin with, there's not that much speed for them to lose with age. Of course it all depends on the individual, but if he isn't passed by someone better, he should still be our first ruck at that stage.

With a bit of luck, hopefully one of Spencer or Meesen will also develop in to a capable ruckman as well.

[Akum 2,660]

Just on your point regarding Hawthorn, I agree with G2W to a certain extent. They've had more than their fair share of injuries this year, and alot of it may be put down to their pre-season and celebrations . I don't think it was a "complete aberration". They got there by having quality players (courtesy of the draft) and the likes of Crawford and Dew were just so important. Hawthorn are still on an upward curve IMO, they are still maturing. So I don't think they're model is entirely irrelevant.

As far as Hawthorn's injuries are concerned, I think they've certainly made a lot of noise about it, but the table below from the Age this week would seem to indicate that it's just a lot of hot air.

Games missed by injury in 2009 for clubs' top-10 players from last year's club best-and-fairest.

Essendon 36

Melbourne 36

Fremantle 31

Richmond 28

North Melb 21

Collingw&%$ 20

Port Adelaide 20

Hawthorn 16

Carlton 15

Geelong 15

W Bulldogs 13

St Kilda 12

Brisbane Lions 10

Adelaide 9

West Coast 9

Sydney 3

I still think the biggest factors for Hawthorn's slide are that clubs have worked out their rolling zone and their use of Hodge, and have been able to nullify their seemingly unbeatable (though admittedly still dangerous) KPFs. These factors have uncovered their lack of midfield quality & depth and poor disposal skills. Again, there's a point to this for us to learn from - it's that spectacularly successful surprise tactics may get you a surprise flag, but without the depth of quality to back it up, it will be a one-off rather than the start of a long reign. Hawthorn have dropped right off their upward curve this year; they may get back on it, but on their performance this year it's hard to see where they're going to get their improvement from. It's a matter for whether it's this year or ast year that's the aberration.

By the way, us being equal top of this table (which only covers the top 10 B&F players of last year so wouldn't include the games missed by all our injured young players) may mean that we've not done quite as badly as we thought. At least we're got more justification than Hawthorn to claim that our season has been affected by injuries to top-10 players.

[H_T 3,047]

I have seen this table. The facts do not lie. However, if you take away the games Wheatley has missed our value is 23. Down from 36. For Hawthorn the likes of Croad Young Gilham Dew - were they a part of last years top 10? Crawford would have been in it yet he is not playing. So in a way it can be misleading unless closer inspection.

[45HG 1,539]

Take away Aussie and ours is down to 9 - tbh I think it's one of the worse stats I've seen.

Edited July 9, 2009 by 45hotgod

[H_T 3,047]

Take away Aussie and ours is down to 9 - tbh I think it's one of the worse stats I've seen.

Well there you go. Agree entirely.

Edited July 9, 2009 by High Tower

[Rogue 585]

Rogue, what was that link again that you bumped - to go towards the funding for FD, gym etc.?

Sorry about the delay

http://forums.demonland.com/index.php?show...5610&hl=tax

[H_T 3,047]

Sorry about the delay

http://forums.demonland.com/index.php?show...5610&hl=tax

Thanks Rogue.

Incidentally: "The Facility development fund : Help us build elite training facilities"

Is this for the facilities being built at Casey? It makes no mention of Casey in the article. Or is it for elite training facilities in Melb?

[rpfc 28,431]

Take away Aussie and ours is down to 9 - tbh I think it's one of the worse stats I've seen.

It should be 'who has missed the most games from a generally agreed starting 22?'

Hawthorn would be streets ahead but we wouldn't be far behind with Grimes (4), Green (4), Jamar (9), Garland (21), Maric (9), Buckley (9), McDonald (4), Whelan (2), Wheatley (8), Wonna (14?), and Bate, Warnock, Rivers, Jones, and Frawley all missing a game (People can make their own judgements on whether Buckley or Maric were in the 'best 22' at the start of the season, Buckley certainly did play Rd 1). That is 89 games all up.

We have only 5 players to play every game of the season.

And now, just when we want to blood some kids - Garland, Meesen, Maric, Blease, and Strauss are out for the season, and Buckley, Wonaeamirri, Spencer, and McNamara are struggling with injury.

For those upset that Dunn will come in and not a youngster, the only fit kids younger than Dunn are Watts, McKenzie, Cheney, Bail, and Batram.

[dee-luded 2,959]

I only read it late last night, Nice work HT. Glad you tidied it up.

It shows the glaring holes in our list & the poor performance with regard to recruiting & the list management during the past administrations.

Thank goodness we changed football department & admin when we did, Because IF WE DIDN'T, Wow, we could be looking @ a despicable demise of the club.

Recruiting for our Future.

[Whispering_Jack 30,136]

On Matthew Whelan. He was drafted in the 1999 National Draft and made his debut in 2000.

[45HG 1,539]

On Matthew Whelan. He was drafted in the 1999 National Draft and made his debut in 2000.

Do you disupte that HT

[H_T 3,047]

Do you disupte that HT

Didn't I say I don't dispute it 45? Apologies for not making the change. Will do it later tonight. Not possible of late.

edit: - Now done. B)

Edited July 12, 2009 by High Tower