old dee 24,093 Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 do you think it's too late to return to Junction Oval? Not sure dc probably hard to get out of the new lease. But surely our newly reappointed CEO could arrange a reasonable exit. It is worth a try as I think you are onto something here
bing181 9,480 Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 Any-one who saw Rocky Balboa defeat Ivan Drago in Rocky IV knows that the facilities one has access to train with are irrelevant. It's a joke right?
bing181 9,480 Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 do you think it's too late to return to Junction Oval? Yeah, we could probably even get Bailey and his team back in place.
Sir Why You Little 37,498 Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 It's a joke right? you would hope so. Rocky Balboa was a ficticious hollywood character so i doubt his surrounds were real anyway!Plus Sly was in his 60's when he did that last movie, which was ok considering.. But hardly a template for the real world!!
Hannibal 5,814 Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 I think Hawthorn has shown that you don't need to draft kids with mongrel or kids who look like brick sh*thouses to win flags. To win flags you need a mature tough core group, a couple of genuine stars, other quality ball users, and solid structures. l agree that they don't all need to be mongrels, but with Hodge, Lewis, Sewell, and Mitchell running your engine room and setting standards others will follow. If you don't have players with their mongrel driving the team you won't win flags.
Brian Wilson 331 Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 you would hope so. Rocky Balboa was a ficticious hollywood character so i doubt his surrounds were real anyway! Plus Sly was in his 60's when he did that last movie, which was ok considering.. But hardly a template for the real world!! Whoa. Rocky isn't real? But they have a statue for him in Philadelphia. They don't make statues for fictional characters do they? Next you will be saying that Norm Smith was a fictional character. After all, he has a statue. I thought that the nickname 'red fox' was a bit too good to be true.
Sir Why You Little 37,498 Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 Whoa. Rocky isn't real? But they have a statue for him in Philadelphia. They don't make statues for fictional characters do they? Next you will be saying that Norm Smith was a fictional character. After all, he has a statue. I thought that the nickname 'red fox' was a bit too good to be true. i know it's hard to believe that "Rambo" was not a documentary and that Foghorn Leghorn is in fact a cartoon character.
daisycutter 30,027 Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 i know it's hard to believe that "Rambo" was not a documentary and that Foghorn Leghorn is in fact a cartoon character. you obviously haven't been to disneyland. i've personally shaken hands with most of their cartoon stars. as real as you and i
old dee 24,093 Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 you obviously haven't been to disneyland. i've personally shaken hands with most of their cartoon stars. as real as you and i The amazing part dc is they don't seem to age and how do they manage to be in LA, Orlando, Paris and Hong Kong at the same time.
titan_uranus 25,268 Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 To win flags you need a mature tough core group, a couple of genuine stars, other quality ball users, and solid structures. l agree that they don't all need to be mongrels, but with Hodge, Lewis, Sewell, and Mitchell running your engine room and setting standards others will follow. If you don't have players with their mongrel driving the team you won't win flags. I don't disagree with this. Some people rant and rave about how we drafted 'schoolboy nice kids', and cite Watts and Cook. I think the bigger issue is that they came to a club with no leadership and without senior players who put their head over the ball week in, week out, and deliver consistent football, setting examples.
old dee 24,093 Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 I don't disagree with this. Some people rant and rave about how we drafted 'schoolboy nice kids', and cite Watts and Cook. I think the bigger issue is that they came to a club with no leadership and without senior players who put their head over the ball week in, week out, and deliver consistent football, setting examples. I don't disagree with this. Some people rant and rave about how we drafted 'schoolboy nice kids', and cite Watts and Cook. I think the bigger issue is that they came to a club with no leadership and without senior players who put their head over the ball week in, week out, and deliver consistent football, setting examples. Othe agrue that it is due to lack of "Development" Handy excuse IMO You cannot make chocolates out of boiled lollies.
titan_uranus 25,268 Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 Othe agrue that it is due to lack of "Development" Handy excuse IMO You cannot make chocolates out of boiled lollies. I make that argument too. It's not about trying to pinpoint one sole reason why we stink. There are multiple. In my mind, two of the biggest and most predominant are our core senior players (brought to the club from 2001-2006, or so) are poor leaders, and that our coaching and development staff under Dean Bailey were terrible and didn't develop anyone on our list as they could or should have been. The result being that many of our players aren't as fit as they should be, and were trained to play poor quality football with a lot of uncontested, downhill skiing stuff, and no contested ball. Hawthorn has shown that you can make 'chocolates out of boiled lollies'. Players like Rioli, Suckling and Schoenmakers weren't drafted because they were hard nosed or aggressive. They were drafted because of their elite skills. They were physically small, too. But they have gone to a club with strong leadership and professional coaching and development, and have matured as players. At Melbourne, we have brought in talented players like Strauss, Morton, Watts, Cook, Gysberts etc, and injected them into an environment of unprofessionalism, lower standards, and poor coaching, with leaders who can't lead. No wonder they're going nowhere.
rpfc 29,043 Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 Othe agrue that it is due to lack of "Development" Handy excuse IMO You cannot make chocolates out of boiled lollies. Jack Watts is hardly 'boiled lollies'... If he ever realises that he is 196cm and 98kg (when he gets there) and plays with consistent urgency and intensity he will be quite a player...
bing181 9,480 Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 ... and that our coaching and development staff under Dean Bailey were terrible and didn't develop anyone on our list as they could or should have been. The result being that many of our players aren't as fit as they should be, and were trained to play poor quality football with a lot of uncontested, downhill skiing stuff, and no contested ball. Fair enough, but Bailey didn't have the facilities, the resources or the Neil Craigs to work with either. There's no single reason, it's the bigger picture and how all of the parts fit together. Trengove said something along the lines of "we didn't know what it took to be AFL footballers".
Sir Why You Little 37,498 Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 you obviously haven't been to disneyland. i've personally shaken hands with most of their cartoon stars. as real as you and i haha!! I would love to hang out with Foghorn & Wylie E Cyote. Brilliant actors who would play it hard.
old dee 24,093 Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 Fair enough, but Bailey didn't have the facilities, the resources or the Neil Craigs to work with either. There's no single reason, it's the bigger picture and how all of the parts fit together. Trengove said something along the lines of "we didn't know what it took to be AFL footballers". The truely strange thing is bing That he played way better when he did know what it took than when he did know. How does that work?
old dee 24,093 Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 haha!! I would love to hang out with Foghorn & Wylie E Cyote. Brilliant actors who would play it hard. Never gave up either wyl
John Crow Batty 8,895 Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 Never gave up either wyl But born losers sadly.
rpfc 29,043 Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/7415/newsid/148411/default.aspx Craig says that we are too focussed on facilities for a competitive edge when it is personnel that is important as the facilities become elite across all clubs.
bing181 9,480 Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 The truely strange thing is bing That he played way better when he did know what it took than when he did know. How does that work? Well, I'm a kind of "big picture" kind of guy, and I think that the club is trying to build Trengove into the kind of all-round A-grade player that we all hope he'll become. If that takes a few small steps back along the way to develop and consolidate areas of his game that are (were?) lacking, then fine by me. I for one also felt that it started to work for him, and later in the season he started to show a bit - at exactly the time when younger, tired bodies are supposed to fade. 21 disposals, 6 marks and 5 tackles in a losing side in the last game of the season isn't too bad. To add to that, it takes years for (most?) players to develop and consolidate, and Trengove wouldn't be the first "young gun" to have a few up and down seasons till he finds his mojo. As a for example, Dayne Beams has had the same, presumably, high quality coaching and facilities for 4 years, but it's only this year that he's taken it up a notch.
beelzebub 23,392 Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 Nice to see Craig coming out to bat. Kicking that idiot LLoyd back to the gutter with his smarmy "up himself" commentary tucked securely up his rectum where it belongs.
old dee 24,093 Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 Nice to see Craig coming out to bat. Kicking that idiot LLoyd back to the gutter with his smarmy "up himself" commentary tucked securely up his rectum where it belongs. Agree bb final someone tells one of these media idiots were to get off. Hope this is a sign of things to come. I suppose miracles happen infrequently. But when can we expect a bit of fight from our CEO and Chairman
Sir Why You Little 37,498 Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 Well said Neil. Thanks for the straight answer. Lloyd better sharpen his media skills.
timD 994 Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 http://www.melbourne...11/default.aspx Craig says that we are too focussed on facilities for a competitive edge when it is personnel that is important as the facilities become elite across all clubs. Craig says that it is the people that make the big difference? Hmmm, I wonder how we can maximises our chances of getting the best of them...
Miles from Nowhere 199 Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 Nothing new at all being said. I guess if its repeated enough then it might sink into the general public about the extent of the gulf between rich and poor. But what he said is accurate. And MFC are indeed battling to compete in a market where the high jump bar for football operations is rising in costs, sophistication and expertise. Up to now MFC have struggled in all three categories. Ha Ha! I think I would trust Mathew Lloyds judgement on a matter than a faceless know all who thinks every player is expected to wear a GPS and Jones would not be expected too. Bizarre. Don't fall for that gormless diver ever again - that would indeed be bizarre.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.