Casey and recruitment holding back player development.

[Demonsterative 3,020]

Neelds recruited Magnet and Couch to the club trying to create competition for midfield spots. In reality these two players are holding back the development of other players. They are monopolising midfield spots at Casey not allowing the younger players to play and learn their craft in the midfield.

The top clubs don't just have midfielders, they have utilities. Midfielders who can rotate back and forward. Our 3 rd world midfield is a result of Casey more interested in winning VFL games. Why has Strauss not been given a role in the centre of the ground. He has good size and skills, but the club has tried to fill the medium back flanker role. Why not play him as a defensive midfielder?

Blease has been type casted as an outside winger/forward. Why not rotate him in through the middle using his pace to be offensive or be defensive. He didn't play this role at Casey. A perfect place to learn this craft. Rioli plays midfield at times why not Blease?

Why has Tapscott played entirely as a forward flanker. Why not let him use his physicality in the centre square at Casey or Afl level? How do we know he can play this role?

Taggert is a midfielder. When given a role in the middle he will produce a high possession game. Yet he is developed this year as a HFF. Why?

Evans was recruited as a midfielder yet also played a HFF role at Casey too. Give him a go in the centre

Magner, Couch and Rodan have ultimately hindered the development of others and contributed to our 3rd world midfield.

I love watching Casey and love their success. But, we need our own VFL that is focused on the development of our players first and foremost. IMO our recruitment and our association with Casey is holding back our midfielders.

Time the club develops midfielders first who can play forward or back.

[old dee 23,801]

I disagree 100%

If anything Casey helps.

At the very least our juniors get to feel what winning is like.

[Ted Lasso 19,526]

Magner and Couch in particular play a huge role in Casey winning games, there is huge value in our VFL team having a winning culture and feeling while our AFL team doesn't as it gives the players who struggle at AFL level a chance to go back, play in a few wins and play some good football to knock the door down and get back in, i cannot see one instance where the recruitment of couch and Magner has hindered the development of any player on our list, if the club wanted a taggert to play as an attacking midfielder at casey make no mistake he would.

[DeeSpencer 25,767]

Yes I agree with this.

Our recruiting and developing has been upside down. It's been about defenders/forwards who can go into the midfield and not the other way round.

Geelong have been the industry leaders at doing it the other way. Their forward line and backline is full of junior midfielders who then play midfield at VFL level

Now their VFL team also has Troy Selwood as a midfielder and a leader and I bet they sometimes have a more experienced guy in their midfield when available so on that account I'm happy with Magner and Danny Nicholls (casey listed) as starting midfielders at Casey. But for lots of the start of this year we had Rodan and Couch in their as well. And that was mind numbing especially when it became clear Neeld (or Craig) had little intent to play those players.

So what I'd do is play Rodan forward with stints in the middle. Couch off half back to work on his run and disposal and interchange him with Magner for some games.

Then I'd get Blease, Kent, Taggert, Tynan, Tapscott, Strauss etc

The entire recruitment of Magner and Couch was a debacle. Late rookie pics are speculative at best, so why pick 2 practically identical players as depth.

[Kiss of Death 755]

I'm getting a little déjà vu... Sandy being dominant with Sautner comes to mind

[DeeSpencer 25,767]

Magner and Couch in particular play a huge role in Casey winning games, there is huge value in our VFL team having a winning culture and feeling while our AFL team doesn't as it gives the players who struggle at AFL level a chance to go back, play in a few wins and play some good football to knock the door down and get back in, i cannot see one instance where the recruitment of couch and Magner has hindered the development of any player on our list, if the club wanted a taggert to play as an attacking midfielder at casey make no mistake he would.

There's only so many midfield minutes available. Plug Couch, Rodan, Magner and Danny Nicholls in for 75% game time in the centre square each week and there's no time for Taggert.

Fevola helped Casey win games and Sauntner helped Sandringham win games but at no stage did we develop a key forward for Melbourne. We burnt picks on Jack Watts (he might make it as a player but he won't be a key forward) and Lucas Cook and then had to invest pick 12 on Mitch Clark and pick 20 on Chris Dawes.

That's 2 picks were we could've got decent midfielders to get us out of this dump, how ironic.

Winning should be a focus and a priority but winning whilst developing should be the goal.

That's why Geelong are second on the ladder and St Kilda are third last. Chris Scott knew it and Ross Lyon didn't.

[DeeSpencer 25,767]

I'm getting a little déjà vu... Sandy being dominant with Sautner comes to mind

You got in just in front of me!

The other thing I forgot to add is that VFL midfield is the heat of the moment. It's where it takes the most physical players who also run the hardest.

Playing forward pocket your opponent might be a guy who isn't up to scratch fitness wise or pace wise, can't really defend etc. Playing in the midfield is where you come up against the Magner's and Couch's and therefore can compete when you get to AFL.

Edited July 30, 2013 by the master

[Demonsterative 3,020]

A winning culture is great, I agree. But how do we expect the types of Taggert, Strauss, Evans, Barry, Tapscott, Barry, Kent(when at Casey), Blease(when at Casey) to be midfielders at AFL when Magnet and Couch monopolise these roles? I was at Werribee last week and Viney played a fair portion at HFF.

IMO Magner and Couch aren't AFL players. I would rather our younger ones learn their craft at casey and therefore have a go (and impact at AFL level) in the midfield.

The top 4 clubs have approx 14 midfielders who rotate thru the middle and play flanker roles.

Carlton suffer from having 3 very good small forwards who do not impact in the midfield. Time the club developed as many midfielders as possible. It's modern day football. Strauss is type cast as a flanker. Poor development IMO

[Demonsterative 3,020]

I disagree 100%If anything Casey helps.At the very least our juniors get to feel what winning is like.

OD, the best players at VFL play in the important roles, ie midfield. Why play Taggert against lessor players playing CHB. Where is the development?

A winning culture is only great if its the MFC players ate contributing to the winning. ATM Casey is winning on the back of McKenzie, Magner and Couch winning he ball. Taggert can do this, albeit inconsistently, due to youth. I rather Casey scrape I to the finals on the back of Taggert, Barry, Tapscott etc

Magner, Couch and McKenzie will not help the MFC raise its ladder position

[Demonsterative 3,020]

On a another note, Hogan is playing a KP role and is the first choice when going forward. Yes he is a freakish good player and players have trust he will produce results. How can the Taggerts of this world gain the same trust/role if they aren't given the chance

[Machsy 2,858]

I disagree 100%

If anything Casey helps.

At the very least our juniors get to feel what winning is like.

Completely agree with you.

The kids at Casey get to experience what it is like and should be like, when our gameplan is able to be implemented successfully.

As opposed to senior level, when all they get to do is practice limiting the damage, with occasional periods of bending over and copping it.

[Young Dee 1,303]

You could see Magner and couch as mentors for the young draftees and help create a winning culture in which development is best.

As for not playing Taggert and tapscott in the middle - I agree. If we want them to be mids play them as mids (Taggert may be building up his tank but can't he do that as a mid?)

Couch I defiantly think is a list clogger tho

Edited July 30, 2013 by Young Dee

[ThreeOneSix 954]

Having midfielders who know what they are doing can only help the young kids.

If we had Tapscott and Blease running through the midfield and getting kicks as our best players, they'd learn nothing.

These types learn for Magner and Couch, that is why they are vital to have around.

Not only that, it gives any forwards a chance to kick some goals, as we see with Hogan.

Plus, when Viney was at Casey, he was in the midfield whenever he liked, so it's just a case of us having no other young mids coming through.

Stark might get a run in the there next year, but he needs to put on some size or he'll get flat stanlied.

[dazzledavey36 55,057]

Stark wont be there next year.

[rjay 25,002]

There is definitely a need for Taggert to play mid to develop, when he plays there he plays well and his disposal into the forward line is far superior to the senior players who have been clogging places in both VFL and AFL. When Kent goes back he needs to build his work rate as a mid in the VFL and not a forward, Tapscott the same, they need to get the footy. At least they've started running Tynan up the ground a bit.

It's good to have the likes of Magner but not with Couch and Roden in as well taking the midfield spots. Have them rotate through with one or two of the younger players in there with them. I'm not sure what experience they give to the younger players anyway as they have really not achieved much at the higher level but at this level they play some good footy and help balance the team I guess.

[Nasher 33,616]

Stark wont be there next year.

Why's that? I thought there was a mandatory 2 year commitment to interstate rookies?

[Demonsterative 3,020]

The fact is Taggert Tapscott and others are not getting quality timenin the middle. No wonder we lack mids. All our Mids are flankers in a much inferior league

[mauriesy 7,302]

I don't get it.

"Top 4 clubs have approx 14 midfielders".

But somehow Casey only has 2, that aren't giving everyone else a look-in?

[Earl Hood 6,086]

Having midfielders who know what they are doing can only help the young kids.

If we had Tapscott and Blease running through the midfield and getting kicks as our best players, they'd learn nothing.

These types learn for Magner and Couch, that is why they are vital to have around.

Not only that, it gives any forwards a chance to kick some goals, as we see with Hogan.

Plus, when Viney was at Casey, he was in the midfield whenever he liked, so it's just a case of us having no other young mids coming through.

Stark might get a run in the there next year, but he needs to put on some size or he'll get flat stanlied.

There is a lot of talk about player development and our poor record in this area. Jet Jackson spoke of our failure in this area last night. Can someone spell out exactly what this development looks like? For the past three years we have been at AMMI with all its state of art facilities, we have Dave Misson flogging them, we train every day with numerous assistant specialist coaches. What are we not developing?

My simple mind thinks that first round picks should be able to manage their own development as long as they have access to reasonabe training regimes. Later draft selections may need mentoring, specialist training and time to develop and then a specific role to play.

Gee wiz we had some great players in the 90's who had to train at Junction Oval with nothing but an oval and some balls to kick. Would Garry Lyon, Nietz, the Ox and Todd Viney not be competitive today because they weren't accessing the elite facilities at AAMI? I don't think so.

PJ talked of player development and culture a la Geelong and Sydney as what we need to replicate. The more I look at the elite teams the more I think young player development is optimised when a club has the luxury to play their young guns for 40 or so games in the VFL and then bring them in for a game with a Stevie J, josh Kelly and Joel Selwood playing around them in a winning side. That is positive player development. Interestingly only a few clubs can meet those criteria, the ones that already have a group of hardened, elite champions to show the way.

Melbourne does not have those resources and one of our big problems has been our lack of hard arsed, talented, experienced leaders from the Daniher era. Once Neitz retired and we sent Junior packing that was about it. We thought our best option was to draft as much young first round draftees as possible. As we know we drafted a succession of kids who had one thing in common, they all needed and were looking for leadership! No ambitious, confident, physically hard draftees for us just nice, supposedly skilled athletes. We continue to pay the price for these drafting decisions. Neeld pissing off the senior group and then losing the likes of Maloney and Rivers just made things worse.

[drdrake 3,180]

What a load of garbage, have a good look at the Casey team, basically every available player is in the Casey firsts, I think a couple of weeks ago we had 15+ MFC players in the Casey team. No disrespect to Casey, but the Casey FC is the Melbourne VFL team with Casey Top up players.

Player Development hasn't been hindered by our relationship with Casey, look at the best players last week Hogan, Taggert, Strauss, Spencer and Tynan/Barry also had very good games.

There are no players that aren't getting games because Casey players, this is the difference between Casey and Sandy, our young players spent more time in the Sandy seconds because the Sandy players were played.

[old dee 23,801]

What a load of garbage, have a good look at the Casey team, basically every available player is in the Casey firsts, I think a couple of weeks ago we had 15+ MFC players in the Casey team. No disrespect to Casey, but the Casey FC is the Melbourne VFL team with Casey Top up players.

Player Development hasn't been hindered by our relationship with Casey, look at the best players last week Hogan, Taggert, Strauss, Spencer and Tynan/Barry also had very good games.

There are no players that aren't getting games because Casey players, this is the difference between Casey and Sandy, our young players spent more time in the Sandy seconds because the Sandy players were played.

You have my vote dr.

[PJ_12345 1,098]

There's only so many midfield minutes available. Plug Couch, Rodan, Magner and Danny Nicholls in for 75% game time in the centre square each week and there's no time for Taggert.

Fevola helped Casey win games and Sauntner helped Sandringham win games but at no stage did we develop a key forward for Melbourne. We burnt picks on Jack Watts (he might make it as a player but he won't be a key forward) and Lucas Cook and then had to invest pick 12 on Mitch Clark and pick 20 on Chris Dawes.

That's 2 picks were we could've got decent midfielders to get us out of this dump, how ironic.

Winning should be a focus and a priority but winning whilst developing should be the goal.

That's why Geelong are second on the ladder and St Kilda are third last. Chris Scott knew it and Ross Lyon didn't.

Be careful when using Geelong an example for player development and draft picks - their amount of father son players has given them a huge advantage almost making them an exemption to the rule in terms of being able to capitalise on the draft pools.

[rpfc 28,546]

I don't get it.

"Top 4 clubs have approx 14 midfielders".

But somehow Casey only has 2, that aren't giving everyone else a look-in?

Exactly.

If these players cannot share some of the VFL midfield load then I don't shake my head at Welsh and Casey - I shake my head at our recruitment.

Edited July 31, 2013 by rpfc

[rjay 25,002]

Exactly.

If these players cannot share some of the VFL midfield load then I don't shake my head at Welsh and Casey - I shake my head at our recruitment.

I'm not sure it's about sharing a load but at times it looks as though preference is given to Couch, Magner and Roden to take these midfield positions when maybe it would be better for the club to develop some of the younger players. Now there could be a number of reasons for this, some to do with injury and development and others to do with just winning games of football.

Personally, form the outside looking in I think a few of our younger players would benefit from more midfield time.

[drdrake 3,180]

If you watch Casey, beside Magner and Couch, the young Casey Midielders I think Gent and Best are very good players, ideally would love these to be two Melbourne players, but the fact is these guys are better midfielders than the Melbourne young midfielders, in fact if these two were on the MFC list they would most likely be getting a game.

Just shows the real lack of any Midfielders we have