Aggression

[DEMON WITHIN 0]

Watching the tigers vs pies game tonight, i have put my finger on something that has concerned me about the best 22 we have put together through the draft over the past few years...the key ingredient i feel we lack is agression, appetite for the contest or big personalities that set a team alight.

Collingwood needs no explanation...they hunt and are more aggressive than any team ive seen since the all conquering brisbane team.

But let me compare us to the also young and inexperienced tigers...

I think we are a much better list than richmond, but what i love about their team is home pumped up their best players get...riewolt, deledio, cotchin, martin and even the lesser lights like king all possess that excitement factor. When they are up and about, they just bring so many others into the game...

Who are our players that really get fired up? Moloney, jones, sylvia...i struggle to think of those that impose their emotional and physical attributes on a game, even when we are on top. I wonder if this is because we arent yet confident in our bodies (i notice the 3 players i chose are all bigger, stronger) or whether our top picks who i think wil be our future leaders are quite intraverted characters.

this is something difficult to teach and maybe will naturally improve with time and confidence, but i do think we need to start doing the little things like congratulating team mates after goals...getting other team mates involved and fired up...and obviously continuing to do those lifting things...smothers, tackles etc.

Thoughts?

[Gorgoroth 12,447]

We def need more aggression.

And at the moment we do not seem to have a player who get's shitty and decides to take the game on and drag others along, Sylvia is about the one who I would expect to do it a bit more, he does a bit, Moloney tries.

But as of yet we do not have a Lenny Hayes who drags his team with him and makes them be better players and harder at it.

[Akum 2,660]

Watching the tigers vs pies game tonight, i have put my finger on something that has concerned me about the best 22 we have put together through the draft over the past few years...the key ingredient i feel we lack is agression, appetite for the contest or big personalities that set a team alight.

Collingwood needs no explanation...they hunt and are more aggressive than any team ive seen since the all conquering brisbane team.

But let me compare us to the also young and inexperienced tigers...

I think we are a much better list than richmond, but what i love about their team is home pumped up their best players get...riewolt, deledio, cotchin, martin and even the lesser lights like king all possess that excitement factor. When they are up and about, they just bring so many others into the game...

Who are our players that really get fired up? Moloney, jones, sylvia...i struggle to think of those that impose their emotional and physical attributes on a game, even when we are on top. I wonder if this is because we arent yet confident in our bodies (i notice the 3 players i chose are all bigger, stronger) or whether our top picks who i think wil be our future leaders are quite intraverted characters.

this is something difficult to teach and maybe will naturally improve with time and confidence, but i do think we need to start doing the little things like congratulating team mates after goals...getting other team mates involved and fired up...and obviously continuing to do those lifting things...smothers, tackles etc.

Thoughts?

The thing about Richmond is that they're strongest where we're weakest, in the midfield. I expect them to smash us for clearances & contested possessions, unless we really find some aggression, as you say.

[grant 10]

We simply haven't drafted aggressive players as of late, and it's an area of the game we're definately lacking. I was very dissapointed we didn't draft Jack Darling, as another aggressive half-forward/back to team up with Tapscott and Sylvia. Instead we selected Cook who will take years to develop, but that Darling kid will be a formidable player from day one that you just know has what it takes to make the grade...

[Grandson of a gun 276]

We simply haven't drafted aggressive players as of late, and it's an area of the game we're definately lacking. I was very dissapointed we didn't draft Jack Darling, as another aggressive half-forward/back to team up with Tapscott and Sylvia. Instead we selected Cook who will take years to develop, but that Darling kid will be a formidable player from day one that you just know has what it takes to make the grade...

Yeah but Cook has the potential to go well past Darling as his career progresses and we didn't need another mid sized forward. When is our best chance at a flag? 2014 onwards. They are drafting for then, not for the now.

Back to the original post-

I agree we need to show more aggression and a greater appetite for the contest. You don't have to be talented at all to go in hard for the ball and lay tackle after tackle after tackle. I disagree that it has to do with recent draft picks as Scully, Trengove, McKenzie, Gysberts have all shown an appetite for the hard ball and contest. I think it has much to do with the players still being light and needing to add more size to their frames. Eventually they get tired quicker and they get bumped off the ball as a result.

For all the talk of rotations, presses, zones, set plays etc football is still, at the core, a very basic game.

The team that has a greater appetite for the contest, is harder at the ball than their opponent, wins more contested footy and lays more tackles wins 90% of the time. This is where i would love to see the greatest leap in the development of our players. If it becmoes an automatic part of their game that they possess and display these attributes for 120 minutes then everything else will flow. Our players will in turn get more of the ball, have more space and time to use it, hit our targets better and see more scoreboard pressure applied. The players and the team will look and be much better.

[rhaz 342]

We simply haven't drafted aggressive players as of late, and it's an area of the game we're definately lacking. I was very dissapointed we didn't draft Jack Darling, as another aggressive half-forward/back to team up with Tapscott and Sylvia. Instead we selected Cook who will take years to develop, but that Darling kid will be a formidable player from day one that you just know has what it takes to make the grade...

To be fair, he lasted another 14 picks after we took Cook. There must be reasons for a lot of clubs not taking him until later. Perhaps lack of upside? Cook may end up being a lot better than Darling. It's too early to say now.

Aggression comes with confidence which is something i think we lack more than anything.

[Wadda We Sing 10,685]

Great post....its been a bit typical of Melbourne over the last 30ys or so.....will never forget how Essendon exploited that to the max in 2000 gf.....Football is a simple game ...just look at Swan he plays so simply.. just anticipates and yet gets 30 odd possis every game.....couldn't help but notice the played on kick in, whoever it was, played on from the goal square and ran like a man possessed from the goal square and before you knew it was almost on the wing when he kicked.....that's aggression.

[Mallee Bull 97]

Great post....its been a bit typical of Melbourne over the last 30ys or so.....will never forget how Essendon exploited that to the max in 2000 gf.....Football is a simple game ...just look at Swan he plays so simply.. just anticipates and yet gets 30 odd possis every game.....couldn't help but notice the played on kick in, whoever it was, played on from the goal square and ran like a man possessed from the goal square and before you knew it was almost on the wing when he kicked.....that's aggression.

Thats a bit unfair. Melbourne were a much younger side with much smaller bodies playing against an Essendon side in it's prime with many seasoned big bodies. We were never going to be able match it with them for physicality - although watching the Ox fly the flag was good.

However, I do agree that we seem to lack consistent aggression compared to some other clubs. Hopefully it will come with time. Tappy has agro, Martin has had it this year. Your not going to have 22 aggressive players in a side ever, as long as you have a few in each part of the ground, that will keep the other sides on edge.

[DEMON WITHIN 0]

For fear of contradicting myself i want to place a few extra pieces of information out there to further illustrate sides of this argument...these are the possible draft decisions which may have changed the landscape of our team...

2007- Morton (pick 4) vs Dangerfield (10)

2008- Watts (1) vs Hurley (5)

2009- Scully (1) or Trengove (2) vs Martin (3)...Also missing out on a player we chased like Luke Ball (pick 30)

2010- Cook (12)vs Darling (26)

Now what i do know, is that the footy department has a long-term and not short-term plan. If we can all look back to the year McLean and Sylvia were recruited...this was directly a response to requiring 2 big bodied inside midfielders. We also all know the many disastrous examples of picking for needs first...i strongly believe (and i dont want this to become a who will be better than who discussion) that the recruiting people believe our picks have greater upside long term and that their skill sets will offset the physicality and aggression the other players i mentioned bring.

For those that attended the draft function in 2009, they will remember Chris Connoly describing Tappy as the enforcer in our envisiaged grand final team...so they do still think this quality is golden. I like all of you want the ultimate success, i AM willing to continue to be patient, but i want out players to start to develop KILLING instincts and REAL HARDNESS...this will lead them to become like the hard, consistent champion teams like the Lions, Cats and now Pies...and nothing like the DOGS with "hardness" (apologies to hodge and mitchell) like the Hawks

[jackaub 1,402]

For fear of contradicting myself i want to place a few extra pieces of information out there to further illustrate sides of this argument...these are the possible draft decisions which may have changed the landscape of our team...

2007- Morton (pick 4) vs Dangerfield (10)

2008- Watts (1) vs Hurley (5)

2009- Scully (1) or Trengove (2) vs Martin (3)...Also missing out on a player we chased like Luke Ball (pick 30)

2010- Cook (12)vs Darling (26)

Now what i do know, is that the footy department has a long-term and not short-term plan. If we can all look back to the year McLean and Sylvia were recruited...this was directly a response to requiring 2 big bodied inside midfielders. We also all know the many disastrous examples of picking for needs first...i strongly believe (and i dont want this to become a who will be better than who discussion) that the recruiting people believe our picks have greater upside long term and that their skill sets will offset the physicality and aggression the other players i mentioned bring.

For those that attended the draft function in 2009, they will remember Chris Connoly describing Tappy as the enforcer in our envisiaged grand final team...so they do still think this quality is golden. I like all of you want the ultimate success, i AM willing to continue to be patient, but i want out players to start to develop KILLING instincts and REAL HARDNESS...this will lead them to become like the hard, consistent champion teams like the Lions, Cats and now Pies...and nothing like the DOGS with "hardness" (apologies to hodge and mitchell) like the Hawks

At last people on this site are realising we have not selected the right type of players for the modern game

Some have been saying this for as long as bailey has been in charge

Also it is no use hoping that Cook et al will become what we need

By that time it will be too late

[Guest DeesPower]

We def need more aggression.

And at the moment we do not seem to have a player who get's shitty and decides to take the game on and drag others along, Sylvia is about the one who I would expect to do it a bit more, he does a bit, Moloney tries.

But as of yet we do not have a Lenny Hayes who drags his team with him and makes them be better players and harder at it.

We do have a few up and comers who i think will mature into those types. I would list Trengove, Tappscott, Gawn, Morton, James Frawley, Jack Grimes, Jordie McKenzie as having potential in this area. From what we know of Jack Viney he apparently is "a chip off the old block" and is very much like his father in that respect except more so.

However, the one I think who might surprise us all is Liam Jurrah. Even given he has played less than 20 games, he has no hesitation in "giving it" to the opposition backmen after he weaves his magic which must drive them bonkers. He also does not lack courage, and as he gets more experience in AFL im sure he will become a leader in that respect. It is a good attribute as a key position forward.

[Grandson of a gun 276]

At last people on this site are realising we have not selected the right type of players for the modern game

Some have been saying this for as long as bailey has been in charge

Also it is no use hoping that Cook et al will become what we need

By that time it will be too late

Crap.

Great way to demonstrate you have absolutely no idea on drafting, player development or the modern game right there...

[sylvinator 96]

For fear of contradicting myself i want to place a few extra pieces of information out there to further illustrate sides of this argument...these are the possible draft decisions which may have changed the landscape of our team...

2007- Morton (pick 4) vs Dangerfield (10)

2008- Watts (1) vs Hurley (5)

2009- Scully (1) or Trengove (2) vs Martin (3)...Also missing out on a player we chased like Luke Ball (pick 30)

2010- Cook (12)vs Darling (26)

Now what i do know, is that the footy department has a long-term and not short-term plan. If we can all look back to the year McLean and Sylvia were recruited...this was directly a response to requiring 2 big bodied inside midfielders. We also all know the many disastrous examples of picking for needs first...i strongly believe (and i dont want this to become a who will be better than who discussion) that the recruiting people believe our picks have greater upside long term and that their skill sets will offset the physicality and aggression the other players i mentioned bring.

For those that attended the draft function in 2009, they will remember Chris Connoly describing Tappy as the enforcer in our envisiaged grand final team...so they do still think this quality is golden. I like all of you want the ultimate success, i AM willing to continue to be patient, but i want out players to start to develop KILLING instincts and REAL HARDNESS...this will lead them to become like the hard, consistent champion teams like the Lions, Cats and now Pies...and nothing like the DOGS with "hardness" (apologies to hodge and mitchell) like the Hawks

Very interesting post Demon Within. Even though you only post on this site every so often, you are one of the best posters out there and you really know you're footy.

I think you make an interesting point. I don't think anyone could argue that (perhaps by coincidence) we've drafted a few super athletic, but not particularly aggressive players through the draft of recent times- Cale Morton, Jack Watts, Lucas Cook, Bennel, Strauss, Maric all time to mind.

I think it is something we are lacking. And I think we probably will draft 1-2 more Tapscott type players in coming seasons.

However, I wouldn't be picking players in the draft purely because they'll be impacting AFL quicker or be more physical as teenagers. Our time will be 2013 onwards. Therefore the question for us is never who will be impacting games in 2011, but who will be impacting games 2013 and beyond. For that reason we've been able to draft for the future over the past 2-3 seasons and we should reap the rewards. I would argue that all the players we recruited have greater upside than the players we missed out on, especially Watts and Morton.

Watts and Morton are great examples. By 2013, Watts and Morton will be fully developed physically, Watts will have 60 games and Morton 80 games under the belt. They'll both be 196cm, 95kg+, incredible athletes and with some outstanding skill sets and attributes. If these 2 guys fulfill their potential that could see us winning a premiership and we'll be thankful the club looked long term, because those 2 players were never going to dominate in their first 3 years of footy.

[rpfc 27,692]

At last people on this site are realising we have not selected the right type of players for the modern game

Some have been saying this for as long as bailey has been in charge

Also it is no use hoping that Cook et al will become what we need

By that time it will be too late

You're just a flamethrower.

You've posted:

1. We haven't selected the right type of player.

2. It is Bailey's fault, and you were right all along (sure...).

3. Just a repeat of point (1). With particular reference to the last draft.

4. An addendum to the repeated post intimating that the last draft will not help us as they will take too long to develop.

Try making an argument with your posts, and not just throwing out wild sentences that are purely intended to rile people up.

And you can shout at posters all you like, it won't get your point out of the gutter.

[dee-luded 2,958]

For fear of contradicting myself i want to place a few extra pieces of information out there to further illustrate sides of this argument...these are the possible draft decisions which may have changed the landscape of our team...

2007- Morton (pick 4) vs Dangerfield (10)

2008- Watts (1) vs Hurley (5)

2009- Scully (1) or Trengove (2) vs Martin (3)...Also missing out on a player we chased like Luke Ball (pick 30)

2010- Cook (12)vs Darling (26)

Now what i do know, is that the footy department has a long-term and not short-term plan. If we can all look back to the year McLean and Sylvia were recruited...this was directly a response to requiring 2 big bodied inside midfielders. We also all know the many disastrous examples of picking for needs first...i strongly believe (and i dont want this to become a who will be better than who discussion) that the recruiting people believe our picks have greater upside long term and that their skill sets will offset the physicality and aggression the other players i mentioned bring.

For those that attended the draft function in 2009, they will remember Chris Connoly describing Tappy as the enforcer in our envisiaged grand final team...so they do still think this quality is golden. I like all of you want the ultimate success, i AM willing to continue to be patient, but i want out players to start to develop KILLING instincts and REAL HARDNESS...this will lead them to become like the hard, consistent champion teams like the Lions, Cats and now Pies...and nothing like the DOGS with "hardness" (apologies to hodge and mitchell) like the Hawks

My thoughts at this stage >

2007- Morton (pick 4) vs Dangerfield (10) Not happy Jan

2008- Watts (1) vs Hurley (5) Satisfied at this stage

2009- Scully (1) or Trengove (2) vs Martin (3)...Also missing out on a player we chased like Luke Ball (pick 30) This will be determined when Pen says 'Hello', to paper!

2010- Cook (12)vs Darling (26) Satisfied with this.

[Roost It 1,434]

We simply haven't drafted aggressive players as of late, and it's an area of the game we're definately lacking. I was very dissapointed we didn't draft Jack Darling, as another aggressive half-forward/back to team up with Tapscott and Sylvia. Instead we selected Cook who will take years to develop, but that Darling kid will be a formidable player from day one that you just know has what it takes to make the grade...

Don't doubt Cooks aggression. he will become a strong unit and he's an aggressive type.

[Sir Why You Little 35,321]

The Filth & Essendon have aggression in their culture. It is always there.

Essendon is a perfect example this year. Sure they may burn out later this season, but the application standard has been set.

We are nowhere near that (yet). Bailey was coached by Sheeds so he must be aware of it.

We lost our club aggression in 1965 & it is going to be the hardest thing to instill again.

In some ways i am sad John Northey wasn't coaching this list-He knew about aggression from his Richmond days.

I am a Bailey fan, but he must demand more from this list soon, because Essendon have gone past us (again) & i hate it.

[jayceebee31 692]

Crap.

Great way to demonstrate you have absolutely no idea on drafting, player development or the modern game right there...

so true

[jackaub 1,402]

You're just a flamethrower.

You've posted:

1. We haven't selected the right type of player.

2. It is Bailey's fault, and you were right all along (sure...).

3. Just a repeat of point (1). With particular reference to the last draft.

4. An addendum to the repeated post intimating that the last draft will not help us as they will take too long to develop.

Try making an argument with your posts, and not just throwing out wild sentences that are purely intended to rile people up.

And you can shout at posters all you like, it won't get your point out of the gutter.

Well i guess you are riled sorry for that!Maybe you are just about making excuses

Perhaps you should think about your advice. Any way on a more positive note

I do believe we have a lot of positives going forward Im so glad we have picked up Tapscott Scully Trengove Gysberts

I am not so happy we picked up Moreton and Watts but i guess i am entitled to my opinion as are you

[Tony Tea 2,792]

Watching the tigers vs pies game tonight, i have put my finger on something that has concerned me about the best 22 we have put together through the draft over the past few years...the key ingredient i feel we lack is agression, appetite for the contest or big personalities that set a team alight.

You put your finger on the right something, if a little belatedly. We have lacked aggression since Northey was coach. Flat track bullies, down hill skiers, April premiers, take your pick. This current undersized squad will need to bulk up significantly for us to challenge for a flag in the next few years. At least this mob has age on its side and last year's draft selections indicate that Melbourne are at least thinking big. Jack Viney is reputedly a grunt player, too. The current apparent lack of muscle has been exacerbated by the pruning of McDonald, Miller and, although he was never a heavy hitter, Bruce. (There could well be salary cap issues with their delistings.)

The more I think of Melbourne, ahem, going forward, the more I think Bailey may mirror Matty Knights: clean out the dead wood, stock up on youth, get replaced just as the players are ready to roll. To give Bailey credit, it was a massive gamble to delist the above three players, but he has put Melbourne's future ahead of his own prospects and that needs due recognition.

[rpfc 27,692]

Well i guess you are riled sorry for that!Maybe you are just about making excuses

Perhaps you should think about your advice. Any way on a more positive note

I do believe we have a lot of positives going forward Im so glad we have picked up Tapscott Scully Trengove Gysberts

I am not so happy we picked up Moreton and Watts but i guess i am entitled to my opinion as are you

You can have your opinion. And I can have my opinion on your opinion...

[Dee-mon 9]

Consistent skills execution and even temperament wins out over aggression!

... he has put Melbourne's future ahead of his own prospects and that needs due recognition.

I agree!

[Demonic Ascent 0]

For fear of contradicting myself i want to place a few extra pieces of information out there to further illustrate sides of this argument...these are the possible draft decisions which may have changed the landscape of our team...

2007- Morton (pick 4) vs Dangerfield (10)

2008- Watts (1) vs Hurley (5)

2009- Scully (1) or Trengove (2) vs Martin (3)...Also missing out on a player we chased like Luke Ball (pick 30)

2010- Cook (12)vs Darling (26)

Now what i do know, is that the footy department has a long-term and not short-term plan. If we can all look back to the year McLean and Sylvia were recruited...this was directly a response to requiring 2 big bodied inside midfielders. We also all know the many disastrous examples of picking for needs first...i strongly believe (and i dont want this to become a who will be better than who discussion) that the recruiting people believe our picks have greater upside long term and that their skill sets will offset the physicality and aggression the other players i mentioned bring.

I was thinking about this yesterday as I watched Jack Darling play another impressive game in his first year. Obviously it's way too early to tell as Cook hasn't played and won't be able to impose himself on games for a few years, but when you look at that list you see that we have opted for players with skill and finesse rather than mongrel and, in some cases, raw instinct.

I am willing to give the club the benefit of the doubt as Watts was a monty over Hurley (and also NicNat I think), and Darling was looked over by every club including WCE with the player we picked (Cook) being an AA CHF. Added to this was the query over Darling's head injury and "character" (though I reckon this last point is crap) and the fact that he would add to our list of not-quite-KP 191-192cm half forwards. In 2009 drafting Scully and Trengove was also a monty and I'm not unhappy with either of them. Would I like Martin as well? Hell yes but it doesn't work that way.

Going back to Morton I can't really comment. Yes Dangerfield would be nice however Morton had big wraps on him and that draft is looking particularly weak after the first few picks. I'm prepared to give Morton a bit more time though if we could get something for him (like a compo pick from GWS) I wouldn't be unhappy with that. I think he'll still be a good player and versatile though maybe not elite and a bit too much of a wilting flower.

Although I am willing to give the club the benefit of the doubt over the last few drafts (and it may prove over the course of time to have been the correct decisions), I think this year we really should be going for someone with some raw aggression and hunger for the contest rather than someone who can dominate open games against kids in the under 18's and score well on the high jump and beep test at draft camp. We need a couple more no-nonsense enforcers. This can be difficult because some would say this is what the likes of Moloney and Jones (and even McLean) were drafted for and they are only goers who will never be elite and will not be any more than bit players who cannot drag their sides to victory. So we need to try and look at a balance of taking a ready made player (like a Rich, Hurley, or Darling) who can impact the game from day one.

Edited April 16, 2011 by Demonic Ascent

[rpfc 27,692]

I will put this here rather than starting a new thread - Todd Viney was interviewed on 3AW before the match and, while it was a nothing interview, they asked about the differences he has noticed since he has arrived at the Demons to the Hawks and Crows.

He said flat out that the pure talent at the Dees was startling and the kicking skills better than at both of his previous clubs - he intimated that there was a noticeable lack of physicality compared to the Hawks and the Crows.

I guess, at least they're aware of it...

[P-man 13,353]

By 2013..Morton will be fully developed physically, 95kg+

Let's hope so. Right now a strong gust of wind would have him worried.