Pessimism or Reality?

[RalphiusMaximus 5,993]

I will be very interested to see if by the end of the season we have knocked over a top 8 side this year.

We did beat Freo who currently sit in there at the moment, but they have a pretty tough run home.

It is conceivable that we may not have notched a win against a single top 8 side this year when finals come around.

Wins thus far coming against:

Port (17th)

Brisbane (15th)

GC (16th)

Richmond (13th)

Freo (7th with a tough run home)

Essendon (9th with a tough run home)

Adelaide (14th)

Most assume we will / can beat Port, Rich and GC when we meet them for a second time this year.

If we cant beat WCE, Carlton or Geelong, then there is a real chance it cant happen.

Did we roll a top 8 side last year? We got mighty close against the pies and WB.

Where did the Swans finish last year? We made them look second rate.

[The Chazz 4,077]

We won't progress until the 'senior' players are Grimes, Jones, Watts, Scully, Trengove, Gysberts, et al.

Green, Davey, Moloney, Rivers, and Sylvia cannot drive us to where we want to go.

Green and Davey have, of course, been down.

Rivers and Sylvia are anything but consistent - although I am holding them to a higher standard, but that is the burden of being a senior player.

And Moloney is a good leader, but doesn't back it up in big games. In all thrashings this year - bar Coll - Brent hasn't cracked 20 touches. His bad games have to get better or he won't lose the 'beating up on poor sides' tag that some have given him.

This isn't doom and gloom, the talent may come on, in large measure, next year.

But the club has to take a risk and attempt to fast track them by giving them the Leadership Group, and then choosing their captain. If it's Brent, then fine. If it's Green, I'd be surprised but that's fine too.

We need them to take over the club soon and drive us to where we want to be.

This post hasn't been given anywhere near the credit that it deserves. Why not? Because it's reality, and a lot of Melbourne supporters on here would prefer not to face it.

I'm glad you have that opinion RPFC; maybe you, me, and the very few others need to catch up for a beer one day at a game so we can get a chance to talk sense to a fellow Demon supporter!

[Born to Run 204]

This post hasn't been given anywhere near the credit that it deserves. Why not? Because it's reality, and a lot of Melbourne supporters on here would prefer not to face it.

I'm glad you have that opinion RPFC; maybe you, me, and the very few others need to catch up for a beer one day at a game so we can get a chance to talk sense to a fellow Demon supporter!

I don think that any of the above is definitely incorrect, but I also don't think we can claim it as 'reality' and definite. Just because you believe in it does not mean that other peoples concern for the future, which is developed as a result of current performances, is unfounded.

You are right, it is not all doom and gloom and as was said we MAY develop very quickly in the next few years. But if you are honest with yourself, you need to allow for the possibility that we also MAY not greatly improve simply because we have a young list and a lot of players who were high draft picks.

I was very sure that the formula to success was the pathway we have taken in the last few years. But it was a pathway which is at odds with how SOME other clubs have done it (Geelong, Sydney as examples). Only time will tell if we got it right for our club.

So, while you think it nonsensicle to evaluate the chance of success until such time as our younger group step up to be leaders, I think that it is fair and reasonable to wonder if those leaders will be enough from what we know about them today. I am sure that is what the Board and coaching staff have to do each year, so if there is a deficincy that they forecast, they can try and fill it. There is a chance that they might say we need a strong leader from another club right now as we dont think that we will have the leaders we need for a few years to come (who really knows).

There are two sets of emotion out there on the topic of Melbournes potential to achieve success with what we currently have. Those being i) complete confidence which is coupled with a great deal of patience and the other being ii) nervousness which is coupled with a sprinking of self doubt after a long period of tough times.

Seriously, I think I am in the middle of both of these views. Lets hope we can start to get better sooner rather than later, as I would so much prefer to read about ins and outs each week, and our chances against team x and y than I would about wondering if we got our last 4 years of list strategy right or wrong.

[rpfc 27,646]

I don think that any of the above is definitely incorrect, but I also don't think we can claim it as 'reality' and definite. Just because you believe in it does not mean that other peoples concern for the future, which is developed as a result of current performances, is unfounded.

You are right, it is not all doom and gloom and as was said we MAY develop very quickly in the next few years. But if you are honest with yourself, you need to allow for the possibility that we also MAY not greatly improve simply because we have a young list and a lot of players who were high draft picks.

I was very sure that the formula to success was the pathway we have taken in the last few years. But it was a pathway which is at odds with how SOME other clubs have done it (Geelong, Sydney as examples). Only time will tell if we got it right for our club.

So, while you think it nonsensicle to evaluate the chance of success until such time as our younger group step up to be leaders, I think that it is fair and reasonable to wonder if those leaders will be enough from what we know about them today. I am sure that is what the Board and coaching staff have to do each year, so if there is a deficincy that they forecast, they can try and fill it. There is a chance that they might say we need a strong leader from another club right now as we dont think that we will have the leaders we need for a few years to come (who really knows).

There are two sets of emotion out there on the topic of Melbournes potential to achieve success with what we currently have. Those being i) complete confidence which is coupled with a great deal of patience and the other being ii) nervousness which is coupled with a sprinking of self doubt after a long period of tough times.

Seriously, I think I am in the middle of both of these views. Lets hope we can start to get better sooner rather than later, as I would so much prefer to read about ins and outs each week, and our chances against team x and y than I would about wondering if we got our last 4 years of list strategy right or wrong.

I didn't think you could infer that much into a short post that simply intimated our senior players aren't good enough and aren't good enough leaders.

I think you basic point is that I have too much faith in the kids we have.

I don't know how you judge that, but we will see. From what I have seen in their short careers - I see quite a lot of talent and leadership from Frawley, Garland, Trengove, McKenzie, Grimes, Watts, Scully, Gysberts, Tapscott, Petterd, Bail, et al.

I see a greater will to compete, I see better body language onfield, and I see more consistent performances than I see from seasoned senior players.

I am hardly taking a giant leap of faith to say that our future with these senior players - Frawley, Garland, Watts, Jurrah, Grimes, Scully, Trengove, McKenzie, Gysberts, Bail, and Tapscott - will be better than with Moloney, Green, Rivers, Davey, and Sylvia.

There really is no comparison.

[The Chazz 4,077]

I didn't think you could infer that much into a short post that simply intimated our senior players aren't good enough and aren't good enough leaders.

I think you basic point is that I have too much faith in the kids we have.

I don't know how you judge that, but we will see. From what I have seen in their short careers - I see quite a lot of talent and leadership from Frawley, Garland, Trengove, McKenzie, Grimes, Watts, Scully, Gysberts, Tapscott, Petterd, Bail, et al.

I see a greater will to compete, I see better body language onfield, and I see more consistent performances than I see from seasoned senior players.

I am hardly taking a giant leap of faith to say that our future with these senior players - Frawley, Garland, Watts, Jurrah, Grimes, Scully, Trengove, McKenzie, Gysberts, Bail, and Tapscott - will be better than with Moloney, Green, Rivers, Davey, and Sylvia.

There really is no comparison.

This is a big issue that we need from our current senior players, but sadly, I don't think they have it in them. And it's probably that issue that you can see in some of our younger players already. What I mean is that the gap between the best and worst of Sylvia, Moloney, Davey, Green and Rivers, is far too great. Compare it to the gap of Frawley, Jones, Trengove and to some extent Tapscott and Martin this year, they are quite consistent performers. While I appreciate that someone like Jones is not likely going to be a superstar of the competition, 9 times out of 10 you know what you are going to get from him, and that tenth time isn't much less. It is up to the development of these players to make sure we get them to the next level, and keep taking those forward steps, because I get the impression that they don't stand for poor personal performances. If Trengove is having a bad game, you know where he will bottom out (and it's not that much of a fall from his best), if Davey or Syvlia have a bad game, we have no idea how bad it will be.

But sadly, it is because our senior players have this attitude, actually, I don't know if attitude is the right word, maybe "inability" to reduce the gap between their best and worst that is ensuring our losses this year are greater than what would be hoped.

The positive out of it all is that we are not on our own. Last weekends games saw a few clubs in the same boat as us (Essendon, North, Bulldogs). I know you shouldn't compare Game A to Game B, but where I was frustrated on Sunday was that we were beaten by 54 points, the Gold Coast were beaten by the same, does that mean that the gap between us and the Hawks is the same as the gap between the Suns and the Pies? Shouldn't we finish closer to the Hawks than what the Suns did to Collingwood? I think last year we played a lot like what the Suns are doing this year (exciting, not left wondering, etc), but the scoreboard looked better for us.

[deejammin' 2,096]

This kind of thread where comparisons with last year are being touted may be more useful at the end of the season when the whole picture has played out, however assuming we win the ones would should win and lose the ones against more favoured teams then I feel that when comparing this season to the previous one there has been one glaring omission from our analysis:

Many are stating that we will have improved this season as we will most likely win 2 more games than last year (10.5 vs 8.5), yet we are ignoring the fact that there was no GCS in the AFL last year. In fact those two extra wins (should they eventuate) will both be over the Gold Coast Suns and while a win is a win and you can only beat who you play on the day, I hardly think beating a new franchise full of kids with no established culture which didn't have a home stadium until mid-season should be the thing we hang our hat on in terms of improvement.

I for one think to this point we have gone backwards on last year, here's my comparison for some key performances:

*Where last year we smashed Sydney in every key facet, this year Sydney led us for the entire game and it was only 15 minutes of good football that saved Melbourne from a loss.

*Last year we played two fine performances against the eventual premiers, first a game we should have won having led all day and a hard fought draw. This year we had one of the most insipid floggings the team has had in a while, despite this being an enormous game with a great build up.

*Last year the team got to within 5 points of a Bulldogs outfit that was flying in a tough Friday night game we easily could have won (still not over the pink umpires) this year, in a game that could see this Melbourne team stamp itself as a serious threat to the top 8, coming off 2 fine performances, we were flogged by a Bulldogs team that has been down all year.

*Our wins have all been against teams we should be a fair way ahead of the only one close to a suprise was against Essendon, a team that has been up and down and is hard to gauge improvement against.

*Last year we were beaten dissapointingly by WC, yet this year we were absolutely demolished in a disgraceful performance. Consider that last year the teams were even at half time before we fell away and compare that to this years effort.

The list goes on but I struggle to find an instance in which we have improved on performance from last year, perhaps the first half against Hawthorn in rd 2 but is that really enough for a full season. Yes we have lost some experienced players, but really we should be seeing some improvement in performance, not in a win loss ratio but rather how we compete within games. Ultimately I have to agree with the OP that I am a lot less excited about the future this year than I was last year, and I don't really know whether our list has quite as much upside as people seem to think. I guess time will tell.

As I said in the first sentence however I am Optimistic that some good performances in the next 3-6 weeks will show without a doubt some team improvement on last year.

GO DEES!!!!!!

[Tony Tea 2,792]

I see no reason to revise what I wrote before the season:

The Demons have several problems. A couple, which you mention, are the transition and the youth/experience. The Dees' footy department have taken a major gamble by letting Bruce & McDonald go. They are banking on the young blokes coming through with an eye to next year (not 2011), but if Melbourne struggle to get their hands on the footy this season this will be held up as a root cause and the natives will get mighty restless. With that in mind it has been interseting to see Bailey & Schwab quietly massage Melbourne fans' expectations downwards. Another issue, which Gerard Healy & Mark Stevens mentioned, is the ability of good sides to pick apart the Demon defence. The way Essendon did it is similar to what Geelong (both with Thompson in the coaches box; and now three weeks ago with Sean Wellman providing inside oil) used to do: that is, spot up short targets in space just inside the 50, which is similar to a basketball team opening up the keyway by hitting threes. Draw opponents up the ground and you open spaces in behind.

My personal concern is size & aggression. Ever since John Northey left Melbourne have played "pretty" footy when they are on, but have not looked like winning when they are off. Why are they off? Because opposition coaches man up on Melbourne and force them into mistakes. Melbourne have barely won a match in the last 19 seasons where the other side has also played well. This is because Melbourne have lacked grunt under Bailey, Daniher, Balme & the two stand-in coaches. Until Melbourne realise that footy is about big blokes knocking over big blokes they will continue to struggle in big matches, simply because the opposition will knock them off the footy, block their running lines, scrag them into places where the footy doesn't go. This is why there will be games this year where Melbourne cannot get their hands on the footy at clearances because they will get muscled off the ball. Melbourne, despite Jones and Moloney's undoubted strength (McKenzie is important but might have OP and Gyzberts has not played enough footy) will sometimes get belted in close.

Malthouse, Sheedy, Roos & Matthews all understand that footy is a contact sport and that the biggest baddest sides usually win big matches. Go back through the years and you will almost universally find that the teams that win premierships do so on the back of big players, a solid defence and fierce man on man aggression. Northey knew that, Balme and Daniher never really embraced it, now it is up to Curley Bailey to instill in his players big game winning grunt.

[Born to Run 204]

I didn't think you could infer that much into a short post that simply intimated our senior players aren't good enough and aren't good enough leaders.

I think you basic point is that I have too much faith in the kids we have.

I don't know how you judge that, but we will see. From what I have seen in their short careers - I see quite a lot of talent and leadership from Frawley, Garland, Trengove, McKenzie, Grimes, Watts, Scully, Gysberts, Tapscott, Petterd, Bail, et al.

I see a greater will to compete, I see better body language onfield, and I see more consistent performances than I see from seasoned senior players.

I am hardly taking a giant leap of faith to say that our future with these senior players - Frawley, Garland, Watts, Jurrah, Grimes, Scully, Trengove, McKenzie, Gysberts, Bail, and Tapscott - will be better than with Moloney, Green, Rivers, Davey, and Sylvia.

There really is no comparison.

Very valid comments.

Fair call.

Its my pessimism coming through which at times gets the better of me! I have got to keep the faith that it will all come together.

God I hope that it pans out well as it really feels like a lifetime ago since I have gone to games with absolute confidence that we will be ultra competitive and are a genuine contender.

[rpfc 27,646]

The list goes on but I struggle to find an instance in which we have improved on performance from last year, perhaps the first half against Hawthorn in rd 2 but is that really enough for a full season. Yes we have lost some experienced players, but really we should be seeing some improvement in performance, not in a win loss ratio but rather how we compete within games. Ultimately I have to agree with the OP that I am a lot less excited about the future this year than I was last year, and I don't really know whether our list has quite as much upside as people seem to think. I guess time will tell.

As I said in the first sentence however I am Optimistic that some good performances in the next 3-6 weeks will show without a doubt some team improvement on last year.

GO DEES!!!!!!

All our losses bar St Kilda have been pathetic. This is true.

But comparing specific games last year to the same specific teams this year is not the greatest way of measuring our improvement.

I still feel the worst game we have played in the last two years occured in 2010.

The WCE game at the G was an absolute disgrace - to kick only 6 goals against the eventual wooden spooners at home was pathetic.

So whenver someone reminds me of the Sydney game, I remind them of the WCE game.

We are stalling or pur improvement is marginal, we are not going backwards.

[deejammin' 2,096]

BUMP

OP Spot on, time really flew...