http://bigpondvideo.com/afl/253959

Another great insight.

Howerver I would love to see how Cam rates all MFC players. and how the supporters would rate the players!

Bit light on for me this week.

That matrix is fairly self-explanatory, didn't need 15 minutes to describe it. I would've liked to have seen some content on the strategy of paying 100% of the cap this year with front ended contracts as well as some examination of the 'out of contract' cycle to display how we're structuring the contracts so that we don't see all our guns out of contract in the one year and all our lesser players out of contract the following year.

That kind of info could've been explored without impinging on any confidentiality. Things like getting Trengove & Tapscott on a different contract cycle to Scully & Gysberts is very clever and is an interesting topic to discuss with supporters who may not be aware of this level of forward planning.

Bit light on for me this week.

That matrix is fairly self-explanatory, didn't need 15 minutes to describe it. I would've liked to have seen some content on the strategy of paying 100% of the cap this year with front ended contracts as well as some examination of the 'out of contract' cycle to display how we're structuring the contracts so that we don't see all our guns out of contract in the one year and all our lesser players out of contract the following year.

That kind of info could've been explored without impinging on any confidentiality. Things like getting Trengove & Tapscott on a different contract cycle to Scully & Gysberts is very clever and is an interesting topic to discuss with supporters who may not be aware of this level of forward planning.

Unfortunately, we would not be the only ones watching that with interest, I would go as far to say, that the players don't know what each player is being paid or what rating they have apart from maybe their own.

The Whiteboard is an overview, if he did an in depth the video could last three or four hours.

Try the matrix yourself and gave up after three players, judging them as 1 to 7 became too much for me

I didn't suggest at any point that any salary details or player ratings be disclosed.

Things such as our paying 100% of the cap in front-ended contracts as well as the length of players' contracts are generally widely published in the press, and indeed advertised by the Club. I was suggesting perhaps a bit of non-player specific detail just offering an overview of the strategy with cap space and contract cycles would be interesting insight that wouldn't give up any competitive advantage.

I enjoyed it, simple, well explained and easy to follow. Watching these things makes me feel a little more confident that our club can dig itself out of the hole it is in. I wonder if there was a strategy like this in place 3 or 4 years ago, and if so whether it was along the same line.

One question I do have is whether or not you judge the players against a team that in premiership mode, or our current team, or perhaps the average of the competition? In some of the examples of how to rate players he suggested that some would be given a score of 3 if they were part time players, but part time in what team, clearly most of our players wouldn't play in Geelong's team, but a lot of them play every game.

Still it was interesting, and I can see the methodology behind the plan. I would love to see the matrices the club has come up with.

I enjoyed it, simple, well explained and easy to follow. Watching these things makes me feel a little more confident that our club can dig itself out of the hole it is in. I wonder if there was a strategy like this in place 3 or 4 years ago, and if so whether it was along the same line.

One question I do have is whether or not you judge the players against a team that in premiership mode, or our current team, or perhaps the average of the competition? In some of the examples of how to rate players he suggested that some would be given a score of 3 if they were part time players, but part time in what team, clearly most of our players wouldn't play in Geelong's team, but a lot of them play every game.

Still it was interesting, and I can see the methodology behind the plan. I would love to see the matrices the club has come up with.

The way I interprested was to judge them against an example, I picked Geelong, so I started with Scully, compared to Ablett who is a 7 obviously, I had Scully as a 5 based on his physical atttributes, draft choice etc, then I moved onto Trengove, the Gysberts then I gave up.......

argh!~!!!! going mad - even with the silverlight upgrade they won't work on my mac and the second installment still hasn't been added to youtube.

I'm dying here!

PLEASE... someone.. help.

argh!~!!!! going mad - even with the silverlight upgrade they won't work on my mac and the second installment still hasn't been added to youtube.

I'm dying here!

PLEASE... someone.. help.

My silverlight 3.0 is cool as, that's interesting..

Has anyone done this matrix on our list. I would be interested in seeing it if they have. I'm sure it would create a lot of debate. I'm in the middle of mine now

The Bermuda Triangle contains Bruce,Miller,Dunn,Martin,Warnock.

That was a very insightful 14 minutes, Thankyou cameron very much.

It does make going through the dark days easier.

Still want to see a crack this saturday though!!

I can just see people doing the matrix as the game progresses!!! B) B)

My version of the matrix is attached. For those who haven't watched the video, note that players in the 30+ range are graded on their historical output; players in the 8-11 years range are graded on their actual output and all others are graded on their potential output when they reach the 8-11 range.

In our current team, I only ended up with six players in the target range for a premiership team (Bruce, McDonald, Davey, Sylvia, Green, Rivers) and none of those were category 7 players.

The only players set to move into the premiership target range of the matrix in the near future were Bate, Frawley and Jones - again, none as cat 7 players.

However, I had 16 of our 25 "development phase" players ranked from category 5 to 7, as follows:

Cat 7: Grimes, Jurrah, Morton, Scully, Trengove, Watts

Cat 6: Garland, Gysberts, Strauss

Cat 5: Bennell, Blease, Gawn, Maric, McKenzie, Tapscott, Wonaeamirri

By my sketchy reckoning, we are only set to lose three players from the premiership range of the matrix in the next five years, while as many as 16 or 17 players are set to move in (pending form and fitness, of course). At best, we would end up with 20-odd players in the target range and five or six of those could be genuine stars of the competition.

It's going to be a very interesting few years. Emotion aside, I reckon watching the Dees in the next five years will be an instructive case study in list management for years to come, regardless of the outcome.

Edited March 31, 201015 yr by MikeyJ

Nice work Mikey,

I would love to see a comparision with where the team was at in 2007 when Bails took over. See the devolpment we have gained with 3 years at the bottom

Go dees

I'm really really impressed that the club have recognized the unique situation the club is in and promoting it; that is, a club at the very bottom in every aspect, building towards a strong and successful future.

The information they are giving out isn't a trade secret, but few supporters are aware of a lot of these aspects.

Eventually, these videos will bring a lot of positive attention to the club and it is also a good way of explaining to angry supporters just what the club needs to go through.

5 year plans often don't work because by the nature of the game it takes longer than 5 years.

Oh, and all the videos are up on youtube now :)

My version of the matrix is attached. For those who haven't watched the video, note that players in the 30+ range are graded on their historical output; players in the 8-11 years range are graded on their actual output and all others are graded on their potential output when they reach the 8-11 range.

In our current team, I only ended up with six players in the target range for a premiership team (Bruce, McDonald, Davey, Sylvia, Green, Rivers) and none of those were category 7 players.

The only players set to move into the premiership target range of the matrix in the near future were Bate, Frawley and Jones - again, none as cat 7 players.

However, I had 16 of our 25 "development phase" players ranked from category 5 to 7, as follows:

Cat 7: Grimes, Jurrah, Morton, Scully, Trengove, Watts

Cat 6: Garland, Gysberts, Strauss

Cat 5: Bennell, Blease, Gawn, Maric, McKenzie, Tapscott, Wonaeamirri

By my sketchy reckoning, we are only set to lose three players from the premiership range of the matrix in the next five years, while as many as 16 or 17 players are set to move in (pending form and fitness, of course). At best, we would end up with 20-odd players in the target range and five or six of those could be genuine stars of the competition.

It's going to be a very interesting few years. Emotion aside, I reckon watching the Dees in the next five years will be an instructive case study in list management for years to come, regardless of the outcome.

Well done MikeyJ on your post

Even though I disagree with some of what you have listed as possible B&F's.

Well done MikeyJ on your post

Even though I disagree with some of what you have listed as possible B&F's.

Yeah, they were tough ones and there's plenty of room for movement.

I basically ranked it thus:

Cat 7 - stars of the comp

Cat 6 - capable of multiple AA jumpers and B&Fs

Cat 5 - capable of high B&F finishes

The reason I've got so many of the developing guys as Cat 5 is because Schwab described Cat 4 as being a player who needs to play to their utmost ability to be guaranteed a senior game. If you take Schwab's Cat 5 (poss B&F) and Cat 4 (must produce best every week) literally, there's a huge gap between the two.

In all reality, not many players are capable of winning a B&F, and those who are, are also generally capable of winning an AA jumper in a good year. However, I reckon most players who are senior regulars are capable of a top-5 B&F finish in a good year.

To label the likes of Gawn, Aussie, Tapscott and Bennell, among others, as Cat 4 player seemed too pessimistic at this early stage of their careers. As their careers progress, I've no doubt that group will fragment considerably.

What would your assessment be, HT?

Edited April 1, 201015 yr by MikeyJ

My version of the matrix is attached. For those who haven't watched the video, note that players in the 30+ range are graded on their historical output; players in the 8-11 years range are graded on their actual output and all others are graded on their potential output when they reach the 8-11 range.

In our current team, I only ended up with six players in the target range for a premiership team (Bruce, McDonald, Davey, Sylvia, Green, Rivers) and none of those were category 7 players.

The only players set to move into the premiership target range of the matrix in the near future were Bate, Frawley and Jones - again, none as cat 7 players.

However, I had 16 of our 25 "development phase" players ranked from category 5 to 7, as follows:

Cat 7: Grimes, Jurrah, Morton, Scully, Trengove, Watts

Cat 6: Garland, Gysberts, Strauss

Cat 5: Bennell, Blease, Gawn, Maric, McKenzie, Tapscott, Wonaeamirri

By my sketchy reckoning, we are only set to lose three players from the premiership range of the matrix in the next five years, while as many as 16 or 17 players are set to move in (pending form and fitness, of course). At best, we would end up with 20-odd players in the target range and five or six of those could be genuine stars of the competition.

It's going to be a very interesting few years. Emotion aside, I reckon watching the Dees in the next five years will be an instructive case study in list management for years to come, regardless of the outcome.

Don't know how to knock one of them up, good effort.

First I think you have underestimated how long a few players have been on the list. Jamar, Rivers and Bell have been on the list more than 8 years. Dunn, Newton and Bate are in their sixth year and Garland his fourth.

Mine is pretty close to yours. I moved Jamar, Petterd, Tapscott, Blease and Bail up one catergory and Bruce, Miller, Rivers, Jones and Bate down one catergory.

What would your assessment be, HT?

Is Bruce DefB&F (Cat 6) because he has won one ?

Having not given it alot of thought just yet, Green looks out of place. But that is probably because he hasn't won a B&F, even though he more than likely deserved to have won one recently. (ie. when Bruce won it). Some, including myself would have Green in Cat 6; or according to some opposition supporters - even perhaps Cat 7... ?

First I think you have underestimated how long a few players have been on the list. Jamar, Rivers and Bell have been on the list more than 8 years.

This is all of their 8th year.

Here's mine.

I think I'm a bit out on a few of the ages though.

Don't know how to knock one of them up, good effort.

First I think you have underestimated how long a few players have been on the list. Jamar, Rivers and Bell have been on the list more than 8 years. Dunn, Newton and Bate are in their sixth year and Garland his fourth.

Mine is pretty close to yours. I moved Jamar, Petterd, Tapscott, Blease and Bail up one catergory and Bruce, Miller, Rivers, Jones and Bate down one catergory.

I was going off debut dates on the club's official website, so that would be where the differences lie!

FWIW, here's the correct ones if one goes by years at the club:

Garland - fourth year

Bate - sixth year

Dunn - sixth year

Newton - sixth year

Bell - eighth year

Rivers - eighth year

Jamar - ninth year (2002 Rookie Draft was actually held at the end of 2001; similarly, the 2010 Rookie Draft was held in Dec 2009)

And I reckon it's tough on Bruce to move him down one category. Say what you like about his kicking in recent seasons but he's won a B&F and has produced some stellar form over his career. I reckon his output over his career has been a bit better than some of the other Cat 5 players. Similar thoughts on Jones and Bate.

Is Bruce DefB&F (Cat 6) because he has won one ?

Having not given it alot of thought just yet, Green looks out of place. But that is probably because he hasn't won a B&F, even though he more than likely deserved to have won one recently. (ie. when Bruce won it). Some, including myself would have Green in Cat 6; or according to some opposition supporters - even perhaps Cat 7... ?

Cat6, according to Schwabby, is regular B&F and AA. As Cam has won 1 of those he is Cat5 for me. Possible B&f if everything goes right, which it did that year. Brock would have won it if hadn't injured himself.

Green is no way a Cat 7 and doesn't have the CV of a Cat 6 according to the criteria, therefore Cat 5. He's right on the cusp of the 30+ group so I think it's fair to judge him on historical output to an extent.

Edited April 1, 201015 yr by furious d

Is Bruce DefB&F (Cat 6) because he has won one ?

Having not given it alot of thought just yet, Green looks out of place. But that is probably because he hasn't won a B&F, even though he more than likely deserved to have won one recently. (ie. when Bruce won it). Some, including myself would have Green in Cat 6; or according to some opposition supporters - even perhaps Cat 7... ?

Yeah, that was my reasoning on Bruce. by the club's model, players in his age category should be looked at on their historical output, rather than what they produce now.

On reflection, I should probably have had Green as Cat 6 because in a good team, I think he is capable of an AA jumper in his current form. He has been unlucky not to win a B&F and should go very close this year. Had we been a good side in the past three years, I suspect Green would have at least one AA jumper in his cupboard. But, facts are facts. Coulda, shoulda, woulda.

Putting any of our current players in Cat 7 is gilding the lily somewhat!

Edited April 1, 201015 yr by MikeyJ

Here's mine.

I think I'm a bit out on a few of the ages though.

Yours and mine look similar, bar a few players moved around here and there. I suspect most supporters would look something like this.

It's an interesting exercise and one that would be worth keeping track of at the start and end of each season for the next few years.

Yours and mine look similar, bar a few players moved around here and there. I suspect most supporters would look something like this.

It's an interesting exercise and one that would be worth keeping track of at the start and end of each season for the next few years.

What would be an interesting exercise for an MFC supporter, especially in terms of understanding why we have tough losses like Round 1, would be to do a matrix for MFC, then a few more matrices for clubs like Hawthorn, Geelong and Collingwood.

If you are unbiased and brutal, you can see why we have been so bad and how long it will take to get back to the top.