On 15/12/2010 at 01:42, Deelirium said:

i don't think that the dees' will have the breakout year that we all are seeming to expect and or wanting, although don't get me wrong i hope to god we win the premiership.

But i think we will have a 10 or so wins year, and then the year after will be the charge.

I reiterate that would love for a better year than i expect, but i feel around the 9-11 wins will be where we land.

My thoughts exactly.

We have a very good draw probably the best in 5 years.

We look like starting 2011 with a near full list of fit players with good pre seasons behind them.

The number of games played by our list has risen considerably on last year.

To finish any lower than 9th in IMO will be a poor result.

I will be disappointed if we do not make the finals

  On 15/12/2010 at 02:06, e25 said:

I think this is what I'm alluding to...

I mean, he's an A-grade player already.

What do you want from him? A B&F? A Brownlow?

It he maintains his current form I'll be bloody happy.

I won't. I will think he has under-achieved.

He is not an A grade player yet. Last season may have been his best but consistency comes with having great games back to back and seasons back to back.

We have seen Sylvia mature as a player and is now showing us what he can do. The next step is for him to become a consistent performer in as many games and as many seasons as possible. The big games most importantly.

As soon as that happens, he will become A grade in my eyes.

  On 15/12/2010 at 06:41, stevethemanjordan said:

I won't. I will think he has under-achieved.

He is not an A grade player yet. Last season may have been his best but consistency comes with having great games back to back and seasons back to back.

We have seen Sylvia mature as a player and is now showing us what he can do. The next step is for him to become a consistent performer in as many games and as many seasons as possible. The big games most importantly.

As soon as that happens, he will become A grade in my eyes.

Spot on. Waiting, hoping & really wanting Colin Sylvia to play some BOG games against top sides (like his game against the Filth QB 2009) we have all seen Col rip it up against the likes of Richmond-Time to take on the best of them Col, next year. (As long as your toe is ok...)

  On 15/12/2010 at 00:42, Deeoldfart said:

While acknowledging our loss of experience, I reckon this will be offset to some degree by our more favourable draw, and the experience that we have already put into some our young guns. 11 or 12 wins would be a solid pass mark for me, and probably get us into the finals. If we could then go on to win a final, we will be ahead of schedule and earn a credit rating IMO.

If we cannot achieve this, I feel it would be very disappointing. We have the fixture to win at least 14 games. We also need to settle our best 22 into somewhat of a consistent team. Let the rest develop at Casey in a winning enviroment.

With the draw we've been given, my pas for next season is 13 wins. Looking at next year I've got us at 13-15 wins, clearly putting us into the finals. More than 15 would be a spectacular success. Less than 13 disappointing.

My wish list for next year is fairly simple. I want Petterd and Jurrah to play most if not all games. I'd like Watts to kick a bag of 4 or more at least once. I want the backline to get even more stingy. I want Blease, Tapscott and Gysberts to get Rising Star Noms. I want to see us not being bullied by the teams with older lists.

If we can manage all of that, I'll be thrilled with the year.

15 wins is a top 4 team...

  On 15/12/2010 at 02:15, hardtack said:

I agree with louie in that Sylvia needs to play at his best, but far more consistently so... if he does that, then those other rewards (Brownlow votes etc) will come regardless. Another who needs to be far more consistent in 2011 is Moloney who many are touting as captain material (I'm guilty of touting him as VC material)... but he did go missing in action at critical times this year.

Petterd and Jurrah just need to be injury free and playing at the levels they were when they were on the field this year... Jurrah has it well within him to kick 60+ in 2011. The other "correction" that needs to be made in order to ensure our success, is to get Garland and Warnock (assuming he gets a few games) to play without giving away so many free kicks.

I Don't expect Sylvia, to have to play to his best at all... But what I do expect from Col, is a maturity & a consistent high level of footy, without any 'sucked In' efforts.

We are down Jnr Mac, Miller & Bruce,,, so we are down on maturity & physical size & composure. I expect the opposition will target any weaknesses they imagine in our remaining experienced players.

So I'm not putting the Bar Too high, for our experienced players, but rather a steady & reliable approach from them. I'll leave the freak shows to LJ & Petterd, Davey & Bennell,,, with improved efforts from Morton,,, Grimes, Trengove, Jones, Garland.

When you look at our draw it is favourable and people can immediately jump to a thought that we should win 13 or more games. But you must remember that we are not a top 8 team yet and nor do we have the consistency and ruthlessness yet to win all the games we should and steal a couple we shouldn't. I expect that we will drop a couple of the games that may have been pencilled in at the start of the year. Remember, other teams will improve also.

I see our pass mark as being:

10-12 wins.

44 quarters won for the year (exactly half of the quarters played for the year).

More consistency between performances, eliminating or at least minimising the massive form drops we've seen in blocks of 3-4 rounds.

Being more competitive against the top teams- i suppose measured by a good percentage and no floggings.

If all of this gets us into the finals then so be it, however if we win 11 or 12 games and miss out on percentage then i still think it will be a good season and we will have continued progressing. Just openly saying 'playing finals' without a games figure on it is misleading because some years teams have made the finals with 10 wins, other years it's taken 11 or 12. It just depends on how the season unfolds.

This is all predicated on a good run with injuries, especially to key players.

And i would love to see Strauss cement his spot, Blease and Tapscott debut and play a third to half the season and Grimes play all 22 matches!!!

I don't care about how many games we win. If the only thing that you judge the season on is the number of wins then you just don't have a good enough awareness of where we are as a club.

Some people need to attribute a really basic metric to measure the success of a season. That's their problem, but it's going to be frustrating through the year when these same people come back here after a loss and bag all and sundry after a close loss, or claim everyone as a superhero after a close win.

I want to see signs that we will win a flag. We won't win a flag next year, but I want to see that we can/will. I want to see the development in individual players and I want to see games and patches within games where we look genuinely good. Not just where we scratch out ugly wins here and there like the Kangaroos, but times where we dominate games.

We could be unlucky and win 6 games, or be lucky and win 12. Neither matters very much next year, but if we see Scully/Trengove/Watts/Grimes/Jurrah etc start to dominate good players, and the side start to dominate teams (even just for short periods here and there) then I'll be absolutely rapt.

  On 15/12/2010 at 08:59, Axis of Bob said:

I don't care about how many games we win. If the only thing that you judge the season on is the number of wins then you just don't have a good enough awareness of where we are as a club.

Some people need to attribute a really basic metric to measure the success of a season. That's their problem, but it's going to be frustrating through the year when these same people come back here after a loss and bag all and sundry after a close loss, or claim everyone as a superhero after a close win.

I want to see signs that we will win a flag. We won't win a flag next year, but I want to see that we can/will. I want to see the development in individual players and I want to see games and patches within games where we look genuinely good. Not just where we scratch out ugly wins here and there like the Kangaroos, but times where we dominate games.

We could be unlucky and win 6 games, or be lucky and win 12. Neither matters very much next year, but if we see Scully/Trengove/Watts/Grimes/Jurrah etc start to dominate good players, and the side start to dominate teams (even just for short periods here and there) then I'll be absolutely rapt.

2011 will be our fourth year into the Rebuild, What i want to see next year is a club seriously planning to win games. Not so much hoping. There were enough signs last season to prove that the club is doing the right thing (collingwood & Sydney games) and you could feel it in the crowd-we are getting pumped.

2011 i suppose i want to see a little more attitude, some of our young players know they can cut it at the top level now-2011 is the season they start to do it as second nature, i am hoping.

Next season DB has also got to back his judgements and go for it on match days.

We have been given a draw many clubs would envy so i hope we are fighting for a finals spot come late August next year.

  On 15/12/2010 at 08:59, Axis of Bob said:

I don't care about how many games we win. If the only thing that you judge the season on is the number of wins then you just don't have a good enough awareness of where we are as a club.

Some people need to attribute a really basic metric to measure the success of a season. That's their problem, but it's going to be frustrating through the year when these same people come back here after a loss and bag all and sundry after a close loss, or claim everyone as a superhero after a close win.

I want to see signs that we will win a flag. We won't win a flag next year, but I want to see that we can/will. I want to see the development in individual players and I want to see games and patches within games where we look genuinely good. Not just where we scratch out ugly wins here and there like the Kangaroos, but times where we dominate games.

We could be unlucky and win 6 games, or be lucky and win 12. Neither matters very much next year, but if we see Scully/Trengove/Watts/Grimes/Jurrah etc start to dominate good players, and the side start to dominate teams (even just for short periods here and there) then I'll be absolutely rapt.

I agree with what you say in part, and that is why many posters put a win range. To account for a bit of luck.

It is also why things like quarters won and a more consistent output in performances are key indicators and good ways to gauge how the season is going and our youngsters are progressing.

  On 15/12/2010 at 08:59, Axis of Bob said:

I don't care about how many games we win. If the only thing that you judge the season on is the number of wins then you just don't have a good enough awareness of where we are as a club.

Some people need to attribute a really basic metric to measure the success of a season. That's their problem, but it's going to be frustrating through the year when these same people come back here after a loss and bag all and sundry after a close loss, or claim everyone as a superhero after a close win.

I want to see signs that we will win a flag. We won't win a flag next year, but I want to see that we can/will. I want to see the development in individual players and I want to see games and patches within games where we look genuinely good. Not just where we scratch out ugly wins here and there like the Kangaroos, but times where we dominate games.

We could be unlucky and win 6 games, or be lucky and win 12. Neither matters very much next year, but if we see Scully/Trengove/Watts/Grimes/Jurrah etc start to dominate good players, and the side start to dominate teams (even just for short periods here and there) then I'll be absolutely rapt.

Good post.

Agree entirely.

  On 15/12/2010 at 03:46, e25 said:

People seem to continually miss that Sylvia has become consistent.

Not quite. After he came back from the injury, I still thought he could have done a lot better in certain games.

A very good year though, definitely.

And I think you're overrating him slightly when you say he's an A-grader.

If he can back up his work from this year, next year, he'll have genuinely arrived in my mind.

He has.

People in general just haven't recognized it yet.

  On 15/12/2010 at 00:55, maurie said:

A+: Top 4

A: Finals

B: More wins than last year, just outside top 8

C: Same wins as last year

D: Fewer wins than last year

E: Bottom 4

nailed it

  On 15/12/2010 at 08:59, Axis of Bob said:

I don't care about how many games we win. If the only thing that you judge the season on is the number of wins then you just don't have a good enough awareness of where we are as a club.

Some people need to attribute a really basic metric to measure the success of a season. That's their problem, but it's going to be frustrating through the year when these same people come back here after a loss and bag all and sundry after a close loss, or claim everyone as a superhero after a close win.

I want to see signs that we will win a flag. We won't win a flag next year, but I want to see that we can/will. I want to see the development in individual players and I want to see games and patches within games where we look genuinely good. Not just where we scratch out ugly wins here and there like the Kangaroos, but times where we dominate games.

We could be unlucky and win 6 games, or be lucky and win 12. Neither matters very much next year, but if we see Scully/Trengove/Watts/Grimes/Jurrah etc start to dominate good players, and the side start to dominate teams (even just for short periods here and there) then I'll be absolutely rapt.

So if I follow your premise you would not care less if we were winless, as long as certain players start to dominate opposition and the side dominates the opposition, even if only for short periods here and there.

You have got to be joking Bob.

Do you not think there is any benefit in a few ugly wins and some pretty ones that get us into the finals and give the players some finals experience and belief that they can mix it with anyone?

  On 15/12/2010 at 08:59, Axis of Bob said:

I don't care about how many games we win. If the only thing that you judge the season on is the number of wins then you just don't have a good enough awareness of where we are as a club.

Some people need to attribute a really basic metric to measure the success of a season. That's their problem, but it's going to be frustrating through the year when these same people come back here after a loss and bag all and sundry after a close loss, or claim everyone as a superhero after a close win.

I want to see signs that we will win a flag. We won't win a flag next year, but I want to see that we can/will. I want to see the development in individual players and I want to see games and patches within games where we look genuinely good. Not just where we scratch out ugly wins here and there like the Kangaroos, but times where we dominate games.

We could be unlucky and win 6 games, or be lucky and win 12. Neither matters very much next year, but if we see Scully/Trengove/Watts/Grimes/Jurrah etc start to dominate good players, and the side start to dominate teams (even just for short periods here and there) then I'll be absolutely rapt.

Why didn't you just agree with BB ? Did you read his post ?

  On 15/12/2010 at 11:14, Redleg said:

So if I follow your premise you would not care less if we were winless, as long as certain players start to dominate opposition and the side dominates the opposition, even if only for short periods here and there.

You have got to be joking Bob.

Do you not think there is any benefit in a few ugly wins and some pretty ones that get us into the finals and give the players some finals experience and belief that they can mix it with anyone?

That is not what he is saying at all, and I expect better from you R.

We are saying that you cannot judge the MFC next year on wins and losses - we are still developing;

Our best mids will 20, 19, and 19.

Our CHB and FB will 22/23.

Our CHF will be 20 and our long term hope for FF will be 22.

If we can stop getting blown away in quarters and win 40+ quarters then we will be thereabouts. I expect us to be playing for a finals spot in Rd 24 against PA but we are not going to win the flag so who gives a flying frack.

Some think that winning 13 games will mean progress and it probably will, but winning 9 games and have Watts tear up 5 games and Trengove learn HB, and have McKenzie average 20+ disposals is just as good for our flag hopes.

  On 15/12/2010 at 08:46, dee-luded said:

We are down Jnr Mac, Miller & Bruce,,, so we are down on maturity & physical size & composure.

You do realise that Miller played only 6 games this year ? Why so many have to include him as a seemingly significant loss is beyond me. And if you agree that he's not a significant loss then why include him ?

It just helps the line of thinking, doesn't it ? I'd suggest that you re-evaluate the line of thinking.

  On 15/12/2010 at 11:14, Redleg said:

So if I follow your premise you would not care less if we were winless, as long as certain players start to dominate opposition and the side dominates the opposition, even if only for short periods here and there.

You have got to be joking Bob.

Do you not think there is any benefit in a few ugly wins and some pretty ones that get us into the finals and give the players some finals experience and belief that they can mix it with anyone?

Redleg if Bob agrees with me, and he just seems to have restated my position, he's saying that wins are not the measure of success for next year.

All of us want to win a flag and to do that we need to start to show certain characteristics. These characteristics are not measured by wins but by looking at certain aspects of the performance of the team. I've specified gameplan (evidence that we have a coaching panel smart enough to compete and the emergence of elite players because without them you can forget it). Bob may have others.

No, Bobs not joking, he just looks beyond simplistic measures that in themselves mean little.

  On 15/12/2010 at 11:34, Hannabal said:

You do realise that Miller played only 6 games this year ? Why so many have to include him as a seemingly significant loss is beyond me. And if you agree that he's not a significant loss then why include him ?

It just helps the line of thinking, doesn't it ? I'd suggest that you re-evaluate the line of thinking.

Steadying influence maybe?

His impact would be minimal, but it is lost nonetheless.

...and it makes the argument seem better at first glance.

  On 15/12/2010 at 11:14, Redleg said:

So if I follow your premise you would not care less if we were winless, as long as certain players start to dominate opposition and the side dominates the opposition, even if only for short periods here and there.

You have got to be joking Bob.

Do you not think there is any benefit in a few ugly wins and some pretty ones that get us into the finals and give the players some finals experience and belief that they can mix it with anyone?

I think the key is that the wins aren't the important thing; the improvement and development is.

And if they continue as they should, the likelihood is that we will get more wins.

There is the unfortunate possibility that the improvement & development could occur without an increase in the wins column.

That'd be a shame, but it's not something we should be concentrating on. It's merely icing.

  On 15/12/2010 at 23:47, e25 said:

...and it makes the argument seem better at first glance.

Clearly not to me.

  On 15/12/2010 at 23:54, Hannabal said:

Clearly not to me.

No, obviously not.

I could have been a bit more harsh about it, but held back.