Bad bump IMO. Off the play.

The point of this thread is to look away from the wins and losses to determine other KPI's to see how we're progressing.

At the moment we're looking at 10 and a half wins. 2 more wins than last year. 2 wins against Gold Coast.

I have changed computers (no Excel (helps me do the math) on the new one) but I will get them up soon.

Too many brackets.

Bad bump IMO. Off the play.

The point of this thread is to look away from the wins and losses to determine other KPI's to see how we're progressing.

At the moment we're looking at 10 and a half wins. 2 more wins than last year. 2 wins against Gold Coast.

But...but..but...we've lost experience, we're younger...we've undergone leadership change and our midfield....

excuses, excuses.

two steps backwards, one step forward.

The same ridiculous and rhetorical question that you and your ilk pedal round here all the time as some kind of justification for your short-termism and myopia.

No-one has ever posted here that they're "happy" after a bad loss or mediocre performance.

The win against Essendon didn't just come out of nothing, it was built on development and work, albeit with little to show for it.

It's a process.

How's the process coming along now Bingo?

Tell you what the stat that counts is the winning margin and "did you win this game by more than you won the last one".

Football is evolving all the time and if you don't change with it you finish up as a perennial loser, what we do this year compared to last year means nothing unless we are winning more games than we are losing and are climbing the ladder. We can recruit a certain player or players to win the flag in 2015 then find when we get there the players we have recruited for our run at that years flag are no longer the types suited to the current trend of play. All this 5 year plan is plain [censored], you have to go for it every year and stop trying to justify our shithouseness with all these excuses and KPI crap.

If you are satisfied with incremental increases in performance then you'll be waiting longest than 5 years for our tilt at the flag.

KPI's and stats only tell you what you did do, often the biggest problem is what you didn't do.

And this. KPI's anyone still reckon we can get by with incremental increases?

I'll tell you one very important KPI, our season was over after 5 rounds this year when most of us expected some sort of improvement. Other clubs that were behind us are now in front of us and pulling away, you can use statistics to justify anything you want but at the end of the day performance is what counts. You can stick your process it's useless if the players don't know what it is.

Winning/Losing that is the only thing that counts.

Bump.

But you said we have to go for it every year. Recruiting mature players at the end of this year will give us a better shot at winning the flag next year. Therefore, by your reasoning, we should recruit mature players.

After all. According to you. 5 year plans are crap. We could find out in 5 years time that the game has changed and the young players we could have recruited this year will be redundant.

Imagine if this happened at the end of the Blues game.

Dean Bailey meets with Jim Stynes.

Jim says 'Dean, what happened?'

Dean - 'We lost. We didn't play with enough passion.'

Jim - 'But what areas did we lose in Dean? Did we lose the clearances?'

Dean - 'Don't worry about that Jim. Clearances are a KPI and they are crap. We lost. Next time we have to win. Thats all that matters.'

Jim - 'Dean, im worried about the inside 50's. What are you going to do about it?'

Dean - 'Your not getting it Jim. Inside 50's are another KPI. It's all [censored]. Besides they are footballers. They wont understand what your talking about. Next time i'll tell them to go out there and win after all thats all that matters.'

Want to add anything to your KPI theory; are you looking through the stats sheet now trying to gain a positive or are you looking at the scoreboard saying wtf?

What do you think the conversation between Jimmy and Dean will be this week?

Dean - if we can incrementally improve our 1%'s Jim we might be able to get the margin under 35 goals next year. And if we can improve our tackle count who knows the margin might shrink to 33 goals.

Football doesn't have to be that complicated.

Want to add anything to your KPI theory; are you looking through the stats sheet now trying to gain a positive or are you looking at the scoreboard saying wtf?

What do you think the conversation between Jimmy and Dean will be this week?

Dean - if we can incrementally improve our 1%'s Jim we might be able to get the margin under 35 goals next year. And if we can improve our tackle count who knows the margin might shrink to 33 goals.

Football doesn't have to be that complicated.

I've finally worked out what KPI stands for.

KICK (the) PILL IDIOT !

Hey Rpfc, has your exel been fixed in order to get the stats up, it would be great to see them

Hey Rpfc, has your exel been fixed in order to get the stats up, it would be great to see them

I will make you an rpfc promise, I will get them up by 7pm tonight.

KPI

Contested Possession Differential

2010 > -1.2

2011 > -6.2

Syd: +34; Haw: -31; BL: +4; GC: +15; WCE: -15; Adel: 24; NM: -18; St K: 6; Carl: -26; Ess: 15; Coll: -45; Freo: 17; Rich: 9; WB: -5; PA: -13; Haw: -37; Gee: -48; Carl: -20; WCE: 17

Inside 50 Differential

2010 > -7.2

2011 > -7.7

Syd: -4; Haw: -40; BL: +3; GC: +26; WCE: -29; Adel: 31; NM: -6; St K: -6; Carl: -15; Ess: -15; Coll: -40; Freo: 12; Rich: 16; WB: -10; PA: 9; Haw: -20; Gee: -37; Carl: -5; WCE: -16

Clearance Differential

2010 > -2

2011 > -2.4

Syd: -6; Haw: -10; BL: +11; GC: +7; WCE: -6; Adel: 14; NM: +8; St K: 10; Carl: -9; Ess: 0; Coll: -11; Freo: 1; Rich: 4; WB: -3; PA: -8; Haw: -4; Gee: -21; Carl: -19; WCE: -3

Turnover (Clanger) Differential

2010 >

2011 > 2.1

Syd: +3; Haw: +4; BL: +4; GC: -1; WCE:19; Adel: -2; NM: 0; St K: 6; Carl: -3; Ess: -10; Coll: 6; Freo: -14; Rich: 0; WB: 6; PA: 5; Haw: -9; Gee: 7; Carl: 0; WCE: 18

Scores Against average

2010 > 89.6

2011 > 105

Syd: 84; Haw: 122; BL: 71; GC: 69; WCE: 106; Adel: 53; NM: 124; St K: 106; Carl: 93; Ess: 68; Coll: 129; Freo: 60;Rich: 91; WB: 127; PA: 92; Haw: 132; Gee: 233; Carl: 134; WCE: 110

Percentage

2010 > 94.5

2011 > 82

Average Flag Core © players per game

2010 > 7.4

2011 > 8.1

Syd: 6; Haw: 7; BL: 9; GC: 9; WCE: 9; Adel: 8; NM: 6; St K: 7; Carl: 7; Ess: 9; Coll: 9; Freo: 9; Rich: 10; WB: 10; PA: 10; Haw: 7; Gee: 8; Carl: 7; WCE: 8.

Green KPIs means that we are maintaining or improving in that area, red will indicate any slippage.

Excel issues and my own lack of enthusiasm to do this was the delay...

Not happy reading...

And the spike of the awfulness was Bailey's last game...

Make of it what you will.

I see it as justification of the decision to end Bailey's tenure - we were not improving - and when you come to that decision you may as well let everyone know and move on.

And that is what we did.

(sigh)

I see it as justification of the decision to end Bailey's tenure - we were not improving - and when you come to that decision you may as well let everyone know and move on.

I'm beating a well dead horse, but didn't the club (ie multiple people higher than the coach, in club representative roles) say on numerous occasions that 2011 was another development year and we wouldn't be apologising for that?

edit: never mind the elephant. nothing to see, move along.

a couple of things that should go undisputed

-to win a flag you need AT LEAST 4-5 true 'star' players, that is players who are all-australian or close to it.

-in addition to this you need about 20 decent players so that, allowing for a few injuries, you never take the field with any complete spuds in the side

for different reasons, Jurrah, Scully, Morton and Grimes aren't going to deliver for this club so we find that apart from Watts and Trengove we have nobody that can become 'stars' and i'd struggle to get to 10 that you could call 'decent'

we're stuffed

we're stuffed

You might as well stop watching then. I suggest starting this week.

a couple of things that should go undisputed

-to win a flag you need AT LEAST 4-5 true 'star' players, that is players who are all-australian or close to it.

-in addition to this you need about 20 decent players so that, allowing for a few injuries, you never take the field with any complete spuds in the side

for different reasons, Jurrah, Scully, Morton and Grimes aren't going to deliver for this club so we find that apart from Watts and Trengove we have nobody that can become 'stars' and i'd struggle to get to 10 that you could call 'decent'

we're stuffed

You say that like it means something.

At the start of this season - you thought Watts played like a woman and lamented the choice of him ahead of Hurley.

How do you know Jurrah, Scully, Morton, and Grimes won't reach the levels the Jacqueline Watts will apparently reach?

If we can keep the following when they are 22 to 28 we will be a flag chance - Frawley, Trengove, Garland, Watts, Scully, Grimes, Jurrah, McKenzie, Bail, and Tapscott.

Frawley, Trengove, Garland, Watts, Scully, Grimes, Jurrah, McKenzie, Bail, and Tapscott.

like I said, only 2 of those I can see making a big impact for this club

like I said, only 2 of those I can see making a big impact for this club

...yeah, at this present time, with your history of writing off players far too early and then changing your mind without a hint, obviously, of self reflection.

We have the makings of a strong backline, forwardline, and midfield with ten players having the chance to become the stars we need.

I don't see the need to be so negative on our group - they will bounce back in 2012 and you will see some players emerge.

Be interesting to the the above stats with the ladder position of the team we played. While Geelong was a dismal day, we were also playing a likely Grand Finalist, at their home, after a distracting week internally. Last year and this year we are likely to finish 10 spots lower than them on the ladder, fewer games experience, ect... blah blah blah... point is we have under performed and lost against those teams above us (except north and Doggies) and over performed and won against those below us (except Freo, Dons and Syd).

Kind of expected, just with bigger margins (both ways) than anticipated.

C&B - 2012 will see a constellation of Stars finally emerge for the MFC, have faith.

Result = Contested Possessions took a blow v Eagles

Result = Contested Possessions took a blow v Eagles

And PA.

I think I50 are important aswell.

Thanks for putting them up rpfc..not happy reading, but I think it confirms a few things that a nicer win loss column than last year was glossing over.

The gap seems to be getting bigger between us and the top sides and while this was a development year I would have thought this would be the area in which we would have been hoping for the most development. Contesting, Winning Quarters and providing more Consistancy throughout all games were always Bailey's key indicators and these statistics are fairly damning. Also any half decent side can beat up on weaker teams, but only those who truly have the potential to go all the way compete well against the contenders, and this is where we needed to improve this year and will be looking for next year.

The interesting thing is that the KPI's have pointed to one outcome whilst it is possible the win loss column would paint a more favourable picture, seems this thread figures more in Bailey's demise than those who were screaming for a win/loss goal (like me) would have thought at the start of the season. In fact I think it would be possible that had we had the same win loss ratio but had put in tighter games against the top 5 sides Bailey would be looking at a 2 year contract extension. Keep em coming rpfc....

rpfc, could you repost without the Geelong game? Maybe at the end of the season? Got a feeling without the Geelong 'outlier' we would be far closer to a few of last year's marks.

rpfc, could you repost without the Geelong game? Maybe at the end of the season? Got a feeling without the Geelong 'outlier' we would be far closer to a few of last year's marks.

That's like saying George W should be judged on decisions he made except for that rather large one he made in 2003...

The Geelong game happened, outlier or not, it should stand with all the other losses and wins.

*BUMP*

Whats the damage RPFC??

*BUMP*

Whats the damage RPFC??

Not great...

Give me a few days, and I will wrap it up.

I think it was telling throughout the year.

Will I do it again next year?

(frustrated sigh) If we're good?