My thoughts on our gameplan / direction - agree? disagree?

[Age 485]

I have been thinking about this a bit lately and have come to the following conclusions/thoughts on the matter:

- Our gameplan. It seems Bailey has a definite gameplan in his head that he thinks will win a premiership. Quite similar to Geelongs which has been shown to be good enough, but only with the right players. When he came into the club he realised that to execute this, you need players who are highly skilled with a great work ethic and/or great fitness. You obviously cannot delist 42 players at year end so he has been basically doing this over the last few. I recall seeing an article saying that we can still expect some big changes come the end of this year, which will hopefully have our list pretty much where he wants it (or as close as he can currently get it). Due to this single focus of getting the right players and teaching the players what he believes is the right and only way, he has been (if you can call it) accepting of our defeats over the last few years in the efforts of teaching the players what he wants. As we have seen this year, this gameplan, when it seems to work, produces some good exciting football which can match it with the best teams going around. With more experience in the players and a greater understanding of the plan, this should see an even higher level of football played by the team thereby making the gameplan look brilliant. Over the past few years with us being smacked around though, all confidence has been ripped out of the team and this lack of confidence sees the players going back into almost a survival mode, in that if they don't have the ball or don't make the mistake they think they are safe, hence we keep tossing the ball around so 'I am not caught with it'. Obviously this throwing it around just does not work and our current skill level lets it down and it fails. If we can get the confidence in the players, they should not revert back to this and thereby stick with the gameplan. How to get confidence in the players? Well that is a whole other story! I have seem people question us about a plan B. Does Geelong have a plan B or do they simply believe that if they play their best they will eventually come through, it doesn't always work but I'd be happy with their success rate!

- With Bailey being a basic no-name coach and given a decent contract, he has been willing to, as mentioned above, accept the losses in order to hopefully teach. You compare this to Richmond and North where their coaches in Hardwick and Scott don't accept losses. They are trying to teach but I feel that they have the dreams of winning the flag but ultimately it is to keep making the team a good one but not great and have them competitive the whole time. Especially in North's case, they cannot bottom out (they would have folded if they were us the last 3 years) so they have a gameplan which sees them beat most of the teams they should beat but its not good enough to beat the better teams. Is funny comparing the two teams at present, they have beaten all the teams around them, but then been smacked by the better teams. We have gone very close to beating the better teams, but lose to the teams around us. This ultimately hurts them as they now seem to be always be middle of the road, and without finding another Carey, will find it hard to get out of that rut. Hardwick I think also has the constant pressure of sacking looming over him as Richmond's history of getting rid of coaches is not good. He wants to win and stay competitive to keep his job but due to bad timing with the new clubs, when they bottom out, won't reap the usual benefits so therefore he must put in a gameplan which keeps them competitive, winning games when they come up against teams who aren't on their game, but like North, will cop it from the good teams. Hopefully they find some gold in the compromised drafts, but whilst they may improve over the next few years, will they get to the top end of the ladder? Personally I think not.

The overriding issues that we have is if Bailey's gameplan isn't good enough to win the flag, will we recognise this in time and get in someone to take them to the next level, similar to StKilda with Lyon and Thomas or if the players we have chosen simply aren't good enough for this or don't come on the way we expect or hope. The other issue will how quickly the new clubs develop, if their talent is much greater than ours then beating them could be a problem.

These are just my thoughts, agree or disagree, but it's just something I have come up with after watching us the past few years.

[Deetective Sgt. Taggert 389]

I think you have made a good assessment of the strategic approach of the MFC's football department under Bailey and I think you're probably correct regarding North Melbourne but not so sure about Richmond at this early stage. I guess we can only just sit back and hope Bailey's plan comes to fruition...or spend hours debating it every week on this site

[e25 5]

He's not exactly the authority on AFL gameplans, but I did read an article the other day where Matthew Lloyd said he thought Bailey had instilled a gameplan that he thinks could

win a premiership.

Interesting, especially considering he has said the exact opposite about Knights (I tend to agree).

[Goodvibes 3,596]

When we were riding high after demolishing Sydney earlier this year, various sections of the media were talking up our potential flag credentials. Many compared our approach with Geelong. This was seen at the time to be a sterling endorsement of our direction. Having seen Collingwood win the flag and dismantled Geelong in the process, my question is simple; do we stick with what we're doing or do we adjust to a style and structure that closer resembles Collingwood?

[deanox 9,898]

When we were riding high after demolishing Sydney earlier this year, various sections of the media were talking up our potential flag credentials. Many compared our approach with Geelong. This was seen at the time to be a sterling endorsement of our direction. Having seen Collingwood win the flag and dismantled Geelong in the process, my question is simple; do we stick with what we're doing or do we adjust to a style and structure that closer resembles Collingwood?

our game plan seemed to work pretty well against collingwood this year...

[e25 5]

I also think part of Geelong's problem was its weak links.

Our team defense might need to be altered, but the general way we take the footy forward should not be obsolete.

To be honest, I think Bailey is quite adept in this regard.

[John Crow Batty 8,861]

If we don't bring our "A" for attitude game when we play the likes of WC, NM, Carlton, Freo and other middle/lower ranked sides then we will never be a serious contender. Collingwood, St Kilda, Hawthorn and Geelong have been able to make disimillar and contrasting game styles successful in the past few seasons. I think the way we are playing can be arwesome when the right incentive is there like when we play Collingwood. But in the end it means nothing because Collingwood routed the rest of the comp whilst we still drool over near enough is good enough performances.

[Guest Rojik of the Arctic]

When we were riding high after demolishing Sydney earlier this year, various sections of the media were talking up our potential flag credentials. Many compared our approach with Geelong. This was seen at the time to be a sterling endorsement of our direction. Having seen Collingwood win the flag and dismantled Geelong in the process, my question is simple; do we stick with what we're doing or do we adjust to a style and structure that closer resembles Collingwood?

I never saw that game as a take on "Geelongs" plan. It was just lazy commenting. To say that about any team that has a free running style with hard tackling to back it up is just silly. Every team wants that but it can only happen if you have the cattle.

If you ever saw the graphs of our ball use v's that of Collingwood and Geelong then you would see that it is the MFC game plan - and that I like. Maybe it won't work but it is a hell of a lot better than the early 2000's when we played follow the leader and always seemed to be 12 months behind the trends.

[Dee Fan 3,247]

We won't challenge for the flag until we learn how to win games interstate, you have to win there if you want to finish top four. It doesn't mater what sort of game plan we have if we have to play a final in South Australia we might as well not turn up.

We are lazy and only seem to put in if we think it's a milestone game like Neita's 300th or Collingwood on QB. When the boys are on their game they play a great brand of football but as Mick Malthouse said some time ago, you shouldn't need a special occasion to get the best out of you the 4 points each week should be incentive enough.

[Sir Why You Little 36,985]

a good gameplan is one that can be adjusted to suit different conditions.

Next year if rotations are limited then everything again changes. Football at the pointy end is Transient and always will be now that Teams are all professional.

There are great elements in Gelong, St.kilda, Footscray,Hawthorn etc it just depends on how good the teaching is and how quickly the Football Dept can embrace that teaching.

Footy is still attack and defend. Kck a bigger score than your opponent after 120 minutes...

Edited October 3, 2010 by why you little

[Summer Blease 0]

I think our gameplan is capable of winning a flag, but gameplan is not everything- like Robbie F suggests, will we have the gumption to win a flag?

Finals are almost a different game- the intensity shift is enourmous- hard bodies and strong minds are god in finals.

We want to win a flag, not be like a St. Kilda, and thats where I think we need some kind of leader of sorts to step up.

We need a hodge type. I can identify one in Scully, and assuming Grimes can stay on the park more often I believe he can be another. I feel desperation to win is what wins finals. Last saturday St.Kilda almost proved this. Not sure what happened to them during the week but they certainly didn't play withh that same desperation I think.

[e25 5]

Hodge-type? Scully?

I couldn't think of many players that were less alike than those 2.

[The Big Ticket 94]

Hodge-type? Scully?

I couldn't think of many players that were less alike than those 2.

Really? I think they're similar in a lot of ways.

[Summer Blease 0]

Hodge-type? Scully?

I couldn't think of many players that were less alike than those 2.

I was refering to work rate, body on the line stuff- as in inspirational leader on the field. Hodge "type" - Scully will be this

[Summer Blease 0]

I couldn't think of many players that were less alike than those 2.

Riewoldt/Newton, Ablett/Sandilands, Jurrah/Mitchell... the list goes on. I thought of them just off the top of my head.

Are you a fan of Hodge out of interest? Would you take him if he wanted to come?

[Jordie_tackles 354]

Hodge-type? Scully?

I couldn't think of many players that were less alike than those 2.

I think he is refering to the never say die attitude, work ethic etc not the actual positions or way they play. just the way that i interpreted it

[Harrisonrules 273]

It's not about one game plan. Its's about a few plans plus optional positional moves and a hell of a lot of luck with injuries. Collingwood had most of their players available. But you also have to have the ability to read the play of the other team.. who might try a few approaches/plans multiplied by 17, means you need a great tactician who gets a feel for the dynamic and evolving nature of any game as if unfolds - so you can punch and counter punch. My question concerns where is Bailey in all this. I believe he is still at the teaching stage more appropriate for an assistance coach. There is no way he is anywhere near being a priemiership coach. I cann't remember the last time I saw one coaching from the boundary line. These days that's for the Junior boys. Don't quote Roos, because he had virtually handed over to the horse up in the stand.

[Ned 156]

It's not about one game plan. Its's about a few plans plus optional positional moves and a hell of a lot of luck with injuries. Collingwood had most of their players available. But you also have to have the ability to read the play of the other team.. who might try a few approaches/plans multiplied by 17, means you need a great tactician who gets a feel for the dynamic and evolving nature of any game as if unfolds - so you can punch and counter punch. My question concerns where is Bailey in all this. I believe he is still at the teaching stage more appropriate for an assistance coach. There is no way he is anywhere near being a priemiership coach. I cann't remember the last time I saw one coaching from the boundary line. These days that's for the Junior boys. Don't quote Roos, because he had virtually handed over to the horse up in the stand.

I think the jury is still out on Bailey. I think he can be a premiership coach. He's tough, intelligent and a competitive beast (did you see him giving Sewell a mouthful just before the break in the Hawthorn match? It was gold.) The team is coming together. I'd say we should be able to make the eight in 2011 and if so, he's on his way.

[Fork 'em 6,983]

It's not about one game plan. Its's about a few plans plus optional positional moves and a hell of a lot of luck with injuries. Collingwood had most of their players available. But you also have to have the ability to read the play of the other team.. who might try a few approaches/plans multiplied by 17, means you need a great tactician who gets a feel for the dynamic and evolving nature of any game as if unfolds - so you can punch and counter punch. My question concerns where is Bailey in all this. I believe he is still at the teaching stage more appropriate for an assistance coach. There is no way he is anywhere near being a priemiership coach. I cann't remember the last time I saw one coaching from the boundary line. These days that's for the Junior boys. Don't quote Roos, because he had virtually handed over to the horse up in the stand.

I've seen Clarkeson and Sheedy on the sidelines coaching , Maybe even Malthouse this year ... Not sure .

[darkhorse72 1,906]

malthouse coached from the boundary line this year. Being on the boundary makes a massive difference in getting a message to your players as opposed to a phone call.

[The Big Ticket 94]

a good gameplan is one that can be adjusted to suit different conditions.

Next year if rotations are limited then everything again changes. Football at the pointy end is Transient and always will be now that Teams are all professional.

There are great elements in Gelong, St.kilda, Footscray,Hawthorn etc it just depends on how good the teaching is and how quickly the Football Dept can embrace that teaching.

Footy is still attack and defend. Kck a bigger score than your opponent after 120 minutes...

Yep.

Hawthorn got found out pretty quickly after '08. Opposition coaches were able to break the zone down easily with quick, precise ball movement through the corridor. So Clarkson changed it. He brought in something new and I think that's one of the reasons why the Hawks have been under performing the last couple of years. Teams take a long time to learn and implement the gameplan.

Bailey's got his plan in place, with a good view of the where the game is going.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Hawthorn got found out pretty quickly after '08. Opposition coaches were able to break the zone down easily with quick, precise ball movement through the corridor. So Clarkson changed it. He brought in something new and I think that's one of the reasons why the Hawks have been under performing the last couple of years. Teams take a long time to learn and implement the gameplan.

Hawks won a flag on the back of having a fully fit list for most of the year and players like Franklin/Roughhead contributing 200 + goals. The Hawks were crippled by injuries in the past 2 years. Its more than just gameplan.

[e25 5]

I think the jury is still out on Bailey. I think he can be a premiership coach. He's tough, intelligent and a competitive beast (did you see him giving Sewell a mouthful just before the break in the Hawthorn match? It was gold.) The team is coming together. I'd say we should be able to make the eight in 2011 and if so, he's on his way.

I'm pretty sure he was looking beyond Sewell towards his players on the field and was barking orders at them to set up to prevent a late opposition score before the end of the quarter.

He said as much when he was on the panel on Before the Game.

Edited October 3, 2010 by E25

[e25 5]

I've seen Clarkeson and Sheedy on the sidelines coaching , Maybe even Malthouse this year ... Not sure .

3/4 of the head coaches in the league did it at times this year.

Malthouse definitely did it at stages.

[rpfc 28,263]

It's not about one game plan. Its's about a few plans plus optional positional moves and a hell of a lot of luck with injuries. Collingwood had most of their players available. But you also have to have the ability to read the play of the other team.. who might try a few approaches/plans multiplied by 17, means you need a great tactician who gets a feel for the dynamic and evolving nature of any game as if unfolds - so you can punch and counter punch. My question concerns where is Bailey in all this. I believe he is still at the teaching stage more appropriate for an assistance coach. There is no way he is anywhere near being a priemiership coach. I cann't remember the last time I saw one coaching from the boundary line. These days that's for the Junior boys. Don't quote Roos, because he had virtually handed over to the horse up in the stand.

Do you honestly believe that any team has/should have 17 different game plans?

Positional changes does not a plan B make.

Coaching from a box or from the bench - the real coaching occurs on the track. And I have seen steady improvement for years now.

I don't know whether Bailey will only ever be an 'assistance coach' but he definitely isn't a junior coach.

Let's wait for failure to be disappointed, hey fellas?

I know how we all like to be on the ground floor when we turn sh!te.