Justin Kossie

[Hannabal 4]

He did win the Rising Star in his 1st year...I would be pretty confident to say that whichever club had rights on the early picks in the Kosi year, would have taken him also. Just like they would have all taken Watts.

Will you say the same about Watts in 10 years if he doesn't work out as we hope? Pretty easy sledge IMO.

Not sure about that at all. I think his best position is as a ruckman working around the ground. I wouldn't expect anything better than 30 goals out of him even with no Reiwoldt.

Not sure about a dozen.

Many 'experts' will match a teams bottom six against another teams when the 'front liners' are seeming to be evenly matached. The bottom six of St Kilda's has been mentioned plenty of times as the 'very' reason they struggle to take that final step.

I would suggest the bottom 6 is very relative. You have just emphasised this further by adding in another 6 players.

Pace has never been their go. Structure certainly has but it is quite difficult to set up your structure effectively when the opposition set up so well and don't allow you to.

The forward pressure Collingwood has been renowned for this year won the day.

They're just too slow and have a bunch of ordinary footballers. They have no forward line. There's little to no depth. This catchcry about "bottom 6" is a crock.

St.Kilda's better player were poor. Dal Santo and Montagna were soft. Hayes did nothing. Riewoldt had a bad one and turned it over with terrible kicks. Milne was unsighted. Goddard was the only top liner to hold his head high. These reasons are far more relevant as to why the Saints were flogged.

The Saints bottom 6 last week were just a bad yet there was a draw. This week their better players had really poor ones.

The "bottom 6" argument doesn't hold. There's a myriad of reasons to explain yesterday.

[Red Sox 2]

They're just too slow and have a bunch of ordinary footballers. They have no forward line. There's little to no depth. This catchcry about "bottom 6" is a crock.

St.Kilda's better player were poor. Dal Santo and Montagna were soft. Hayes did nothing. Riewoldt had a bad one and turned it over with terrible kicks. Milne was unsighted. Goddard was the only top liner to hold his head high. These reasons are far more relevant as to why the Saints were flogged.

The Saints bottom 6 last week were just a bad yet there was a draw. This week their better players had really poor ones.

The "bottom 6" argument doesn't hold. There's a myriad of reasons to explain yesterday.

Yeah, your points stack up well. Especially in respect to yesterday. I still think the bottom 6 comparision does have some merit where evenly matched teams are concerned. Maybe all it does is consolidate a point about the entire 22.

Bit harsh on Hayes, IMO he tried damn hard. His efforts in the last 2 minutes of the games sum him up and probably emphasise your points on Dal Santo and especially Montagna.

[e25 5]

R. Eddy?

The bloke is a solid role-player and teams need them, but the saints seem to have too many.

Bit harsh to criticize him when he played on with a broken arm early in the game.

[Red Sox 2]

They are actually my points but who cares....

my mistake

[Goodvibes 3,596]

I've always been interested in the top 6 v bottom 6 argument. The theory shouldn't be taken out of context. I think I'm right in saying (and I'm sure H will correct me if I'm wrong) that the top 6 of each team is a solid way of determining who will stil be around come the business end of the season rather than helping decide who will win a one-off game. The Saints clearly had the best 6 going into yesterday's game. Riewoldt, Goddard, Hayes, Fisher, Dal Santo and Montagna are better than Swan, Didak, Pendlebury, Thomas, Maxwell and Cloke. If Collingwood had lost last week I'm sure many would have been pointing to Davis, Toovey, Blair, Macaffer, Leigh Brown and Beams as the reasons. St Kilda's bottom 6 (for arguments sake), Eddy, Peake, Dempster, Jones, McQualter and Baker are clearly weak links particularly when it comes to the quality of their skills, which was viewed by Ross Lyon as one of the key differences between the teams. But the bottom 6 players of each team aren't very different. I thought Leigh Brown struggled in both games despite having a great season. Blair seemed a little overawed and Beams was well down on his usual output in both grand finals. Davis was obviously a major disappointment and Toovey did what he normally does and played a role without starring. It could be easily claimed that Jones, Dempster and McQualter (role players) played an equally significant part in St Kilda's finals campaign.

It seems clear that Collingwood won because their structure was more successful than St Kildas and their middle 10 players produced more on the day. Whilst Collingwood's top 6 outperformed their counterparts I don't buy the Riewoldt and Milne having poor games theory. Both were starved of opportunities and with the exception of Roo's brain explosion he worked as tirelessly as he did during the draw. Top 6, bottom 6 and the middle 10 is interesting in theory but when it comes down to it, a solid team-oriented defence and the ability to win the pill have always been the secrets to success. I think if you're top 6 contains 4 elite midfielders and quality key position forward and a quality key position defender then you're well on the way to a flag.

At the end of the day, who really cares unless we can apply the lessons of the most recent Grand Final to the team we all support?

Put simply, will Watts, Frawley, Scully, Trengove, Sylvia and Grimes develop into one of the best top 6's in the competition?

With quality veterens like Green, Jamar and Davey with plenty of footy still in them, core players such as Morton and Jurrah (perhaps deserving of mention in the group above), Garland, McKenzie, Bate, Dunn, Wonaemirri, Petterd and Bennell and a group of exciting, relatively untried youngsters such as Blease, Gysberts, Stauss, Tapscott, Gawn, Fitzpatrick, pick 12 (2010) and possibly Viney in the future, we're obviously heading in the right direction.

What we should have learnt, however, from Malthouse this year and Clarkson in 2008 and even Roos in 2005 is that a successful structure and team ethos can overcome more talented teams. Whilst I'm excited like everyone else here at Demonland about the potential of our list, I'm equally excited by our improving off-field situation. Improved facilities, a growing staff and football department and a healthier bottom line are massively important. Surely we've never been better placed in many a decade than we are now.

[dee-luded 2,959]

He'd be a very good player if he wasn't on the same team as Riewoldt.

He'd be a very dominant VFL player.

Just doesn't seem to believe in his own Mojo.

[DeezMan 4]

I hope people realise that Kossie has no peripheral vision at all. No joke.

It's actually a serious issue and it's little wonder he collides with teammates and blunders around so much.

[dee-luded 2,959]

I hope people realise that Kossie has no peripheral vision at all. No joke.

It's actually a serious issue and it's little wonder he collides with teammates and blunders around so much.

I know what you mean,,, But I wonder if that is caused by something else, that is, he has to try So Hard to focus/concentrate, to get it right, (85%) that his vision is so tightly focused, that he's a narrow vision. If that is the case, then he would be trying at his maximum already, (overtrying) with no more upside, but a very strong chance to collide with others.

Passe'.

[jumbo returns 6,741]

I hope people realise that Kossie has no peripheral vision at all. No joke.

It's actually a serious issue and it's little wonder he collides with teammates and blunders around so much.

Is it possible that he's still suffering from the Giansiracusa bump?

He showed absolutely no awareness that day....

[jumbo returns 6,741]

He did win the Rising Star in his 1st year...I would be pretty confident to say that whichever club had rights on the early picks in the Kosi year, would have taken him also. Just like they would have all taken Watts.

Will you say the same about Watts in 10 years if he doesn't work out as we hope? Pretty easy sledge IMO.

I was at the game when Stewie Lowe gave this kid his number and I thought at the time that it was premature.

The 'next' step is the biggie and we must all agree that Watts has struggled with the pace of AFL footy - BUT, there's awareness, decision making, poise and PACE from Jack - attributes that Kosi will never have. Rising star? Sorry, don't rate it. Easy sledge? Maybe. But, I'm Joe Public who observes and is a keen pundit of the game. This guy has massive defiencies and I'm still pondering why he's on a list.

[pitmaster 3,578]

Bottom six is an interesting theory and has some relevance but what really hurt the Saints was lack of pace and lousy disposal both around the field and up forward. Had Schneider's miss after the H_T siren, and his poster just after the restart both gone through, and a couple of other posters found the mark then the psychological pressure on Collingwood would have been totally different.

I reckon their defensive mindset is crippling them, though and they don't get the best out of the best six as a result.

I'd hate to watch them every week. Simply too slow to combat Pies press yesterday.

[jnrmac 20,186]

I've always been interested in the top 6 v bottom 6 argument. The theory shouldn't be taken out of context. I think I'm right in saying (and I'm sure H will correct me if I'm wrong) that the top 6 of each team is a solid way of determining who will stil be around come the business end of the season rather than helping decide who will win a one-off game. The Saints clearly had the best 6 going into yesterday's game. Riewoldt, Goddard, Hayes, Fisher, Dal Santo and Montagna are better than Swan, Didak, Pendlebury, Thomas, Maxwell and Cloke. If Collingwood had lost last week I'm sure many would have been pointing to Davis, Toovey, Blair, Macaffer, Leigh Brown and Beams as the reasons. St Kilda's bottom 6 (for arguments sake), Eddy, Peake, Dempster, Jones, McQualter and Baker are clearly weak links particularly when it comes to the quality of their skills, which was viewed by Ross Lyon as one of the key differences between the teams. But the bottom 6 players of each team aren't very different. I thought Leigh Brown struggled in both games despite having a great season. Blair seemed a little overawed and Beams was well down on his usual output in both grand finals. Davis was obviously a major disappointment and Toovey did what he normally does and played a role without starring. It could be easily claimed that Jones, Dempster and McQualter (role players) played an equally significant part in St Kilda's finals campaign.

It seems clear that Collingwood won because their structure was more successful than St Kildas and their middle 10 players produced more on the day. Whilst Collingwood's top 6 outperformed their counterparts I don't buy the Riewoldt and Milne having poor games theory. Both were starved of opportunities and with the exception of Roo's brain explosion he worked as tirelessly as he did during the draw. Top 6, bottom 6 and the middle 10 is interesting in theory but when it comes down to it, a solid team-oriented defence and the ability to win the pill have always been the secrets to success. I think if you're top 6 contains 4 elite midfielders and quality key position forward and a quality key position defender then you're well on the way to a flag.

At the end of the day, who really cares unless we can apply the lessons of the most recent Grand Final to the team we all support?

Put simply, will Watts, Frawley, Scully, Trengove, Sylvia and Grimes develop into one of the best top 6's in the competition?

With quality veterens like Green, Jamar and Davey with plenty of footy still in them, core players such as Morton and Jurrah (perhaps deserving of mention in the group above), Garland, McKenzie, Bate, Dunn, Wonaemirri, Petterd and Bennell and a group of exciting, relatively untried youngsters such as Blease, Gysberts, Stauss, Tapscott, Gawn, Fitzpatrick, pick 12 (2010) and possibly Viney in the future, we're obviously heading in the right direction.

What we should have learnt, however, from Malthouse this year and Clarkson in 2008 and even Roos in 2005 is that a successful structure and team ethos can overcome more talented teams. Whilst I'm excited like everyone else here at Demonland about the potential of our list, I'm equally excited by our improving off-field situation. Improved facilities, a growing staff and football department and a healthier bottom line are massively important. Surely we've never been better placed in many a decade than we are now.

bottom 6 arguments are a bit spurious IMO. For a man on man comparison they are interesting but teams don't play like that. They play zones and 'roles'. Dawson isn't a great footballer but he plays a role. Same for Dempster and about 8 others. The Pies play a similar game relying on a structure and roles to be filled. Often these roles don't require great players but someone who competes hard and provides a contest so that another player can come and back them up. Nathan Brown is a good example. PLayed his role and O'Brien and Shaw assisted and helped sweep the ball from defence. If you were to stack NBrown up against a lot of players he would be an 'average' sort of footballer. But in their game plan he does a great job.

The Swans were similar which is where Lyon learned his coaching trade.

It's all about systems and structures.

[Supermercado 2,802]

He's achieving Juice levels of worth at the moment. At least our version has a catchier nickname.

[e25 5]

No, it's not.

Malthouse is under contract for 3 further years.

The pies will make anyone pay through the nose if they try to poach him.

The point of a gameplan or system being able to overcome more talented teams is valid, but only to an extent.

One of the keys is developing playersand teaching them the certain style over the space of years, so they can react on instinct in many situations.

Our team is largely not yet at this stage.

[Dee Fan 3,247]

I really like two of your points Vibes, the one above and the passion for everyone to make concrete assessments from one game which of course is just rot.

So here is my question. Malthouse has shown that he has the "system". I actually think he's been a wonderful coach for Collingwood and got them into two GF when they weren't a top two team and he won with a team yesterday that IMO is not the best in terms of talent.

He and Bailey come out of contract in 2011.

Interesting.

Don't get me wrong I think that Malthouse is a good coach but remember he has the whole Collingwood machine behind him; this includes the best facilities the biggest supporter base and heaps of cash. I would love to see how Melbourne would perform if they had crowds of 60,000 plus each week with more than 60%-70% supporting us, with the best training facilities, with the best medical attention, the capacity to fly to arizona each year for a bonding session. I recall Brad Green saying how good it will be to have medical facilities on site instead of having to make an appointment with a doctor then a Physio. We have been a basket case for so long now we accept that what we get is just the norm and don't understand how tough it is for a club like ours to win a flag. I reckon that Collingwood would start the year with a 50% chance of winning a flag whereas we would more that likely be a 5% chance if that.

How good would it be to travel to SA and play the Crows with a huge number of our own supporters there instead of the 300 to 400 we currently get? How good would it be if top line players wanted to come to us and we could pick and chose? It's not just the coach or the players or the game plan it's the conditions under which you operate and some of the coaches have done a fantastic job of almost manufacturing a silk purse out of a sow's ear.

Sorry to go off topic but I just felt like putting that down.

Regarding Kossi, he has lost any semblance of class he ever had and he is just a tragic waste of space now, I don't know if St Kilda will keep him and i don't know if anyone else would want him.

[The Big Ticket 94]

Should consider himself very lucky to have received a new contract. Hasn't been the same since that bump.

[Fork 'em 6,991]

I was at the game when Stewie Lowe gave this kid his number and I thought at the time that it was premature.

Abit of inside info .

Lowe gave Kossie his jumper because the kid idolised him and was struggling mentally at the time due to a persistant back injury that was keeping him from the field while Reiwoldts star was rising rapidly .

[monoccular 17,573]

The manoeuvrability of Bate

The heart and aggression of Newton

The awareness of ............ nobody and nothing!

Very disappointing

[Ned 156]

I disagree. I think his confidence is shot. He was very good last year and is a massive unit. The right coach could turn him around, I reckon. But I think it would cost a lot to get him and isn't worth it for our team at this stage.

[darkhorse72 1,925]

As people have said he has no awareness whatsoever. He has the lowest awareness score ever recorded at a draft camp. All he can see is the ball, hence he wipes out team mates all the time.

Though that video of him poking 3 team mates in a row in the eye while trying to high five was bloody funny.