WELCOME TO THE MELBOURNE FOOTBALL CLUB - BEN KENNEDY

[Guest]

21 hours ago, ProDee said:

No I don't. 

Kennedy is depth.  At 2 clubs he's shown that he can't consistently impact games and has obvious limitations. 

And I just don't rate Neal-Bullen.  He has an excellent tank, but horrible disposal under pressure.  He fumbles, panics and makes poor decisions. 

If he ends up making it great, but it's my considered opinion that he won't. 

I hope and trust this view doesn't cause offence.

Neal Bullen doesn't have any outstanding attributes.  Probably won't make it.

 

I think Kennedy has some AFL attributes but I don't like his mental approach to the game.  Too self focused.

Edited September 26, 2016 by Guest

[Ted Lasso 19,513]

7 minutes ago, Stretch Johnson said:

Neal Bullet doesn't have any outstanding attributes.  Probably won't make it.

 

I think Kennedy has some AFL attributes but I don't like his mental approach to the game.  Too self focused.

this pre season will be huge for ANB

[Guest]

21 hours ago, Abe said:

I remember watching them on the weekend and seeing so much in what they do being what Macca teaches the players in his small groups at training, gettting low when attacking the ground ball and so on, they're taught to play inside and outside footy the right way from the start and they develop well into at least solid role players, which allows them to have 35 players on their list ready to step up at play a role at AFL level at any moment.

I think the Bulldogs are a big source of inspiration for the MFC.  They are poor, success starved and have found a way to beat the AFLs franchise in a prelim with their own young outfit.

A lot of clubs will be watching them closely.

I would like to think that some similarities exist between the two clubs.

[Ted Lasso 19,513]

1 minute ago, Stretch Johnson said:

I think the Bulldogs are a big source of inspiration for the MFC.  They are poor, success starved and have found a way to beat the AFLs franchise in a prelim with their own young outfit.

A lot of clubs will be watching them closely.

I would like to think that some similarities exist between the two clubs.

The biggest and most obvious difference is the standards, when they play they bring the effort and intensity every week, we bring it maybe 40% of the time and that shows why one team missed the finals and one team is playing in a grand final with every chance to take it out. 

so much of the development within this group comes when we bring that effort and attack on the ball for 4 quarters more often than not, our best is good enough to play in and win finals but if you drop off any team will expose you.

[Gator 17,332]

32 minutes ago, Abe said:

The biggest and most obvious difference is the standards, when they play they bring the effort and intensity every week, we bring it maybe 40% of the time and that shows why one team missed the finals and one team is playing in a grand final with every chance to take it out. 

so much of the development within this group comes when we bring that effort and attack on the ball for 4 quarters more often than not, our best is good enough to play in and win finals but if you drop off any team will expose you.

Most analysts, including Paul Roos early in his tenure, have said that the Dogs were about 18 months ahead of Melbourne in terms of their development. 

This is borne out when you look at recent ladder positions and average age/games played.

In 2014 the Dogs finished with 7 wins and 81%.  They showed the sort of inconsistency you're now lamenting with the Dees. But people forget the 2014 Dogs and only concentrate on the current incarnation.  We're better than the 2014 Dogs.

18 months.

Edited September 26, 2016 by ProDee

[Akum 2,660]

18 minutes ago, ProDee said:

Most analysts, including Paul Roos early in his tenure, have said that the Dogs were about 18 months ahead of Melbourne in terms of their development. 

This is borne out when you look at recent ladder positions and average age/games played.

In 2014 the Dogs finished with 7 wins and 81%.  They showed the sort of inconsistency you're now lamenting with the Dees. But people forget the 2014 Dogs and only concentrate on the current incarnation.  We're better than the 2014 Dogs.

18 momths.

The only rider to that is that we need to continue our improvement over the next 18 months as much as the Dogs have over the past 18 months.

The last time we've been about this far (2010) we couldn't take it any further and dropped off a cliff. It's still all in front of us.

[Gator 17,332]

Just now, Akum said:

The only rider to that is that we need to continue our improvement over the next 18 months as much as the Dogs have over the past 18 months.

The last time we've been about this far (2010) we couldn't take it any further and dropped off a cliff. It's still all in front of us.

Yep.  I never said there were any guarantees.

[mo64 5,874]

26 minutes ago, ProDee said:

Most analysts, including Paul Roos early in his tenure, have said that the Dogs were about 18 months ahead of Melbourne in terms of their development. 

This is borne out when you look at recent ladder positions and average age/games played.

In 2014 the Dogs finished with 7 wins and 81%.  They showed the sort of inconsistency you're now lamenting with the Dees. But people forget the 2014 Dogs and only concentrate on the current incarnation.  We're better than the 2014 Dogs.

18 months.

Your argument doesn't factor in the abilities of the coaches.  The Dogs development has been fast tracked by a brilliant coach. Any comparison to the 2014 Dogs is irrelevant because they had a poor coach. Name one analyst who thought that the Dogs would be anything other than a bottom 4 team in 2015, especially after their B&F from 2014 in Libba did his knee?

The days of premiership clocks are over. Free agency and a more fluid trade period means that it's far easier to make a monumental leap. Planning for incremental improvement is doomed for failure.

When Roos arrived, Peter Jackson expected us to be playing finals by 2016. Roos has brought stability to the club but little else. Unless Goodwin is more inventive than Roos, we won't be playing finals next year.

[whatwhat say what 22,745]

kennedy has attributes that we need - pace, defensive accountability, ability to hit the scoreboard - but he does it in patches at this stage in his career rather than with any sense of consistency.

[rjay 24,917]

17 minutes ago, mo64 said:

Your argument doesn't factor in the abilities of the coaches.  The Dogs development has been fast tracked by a brilliant coach. Any comparison to the 2014 Dogs is irrelevant because they had a poor coach. Name one analyst who thought that the Dogs would be anything other than a bottom 4 team in 2015, especially after their B&F from 2014 in Libba did his knee?

The days of premiership clocks are over. Free agency and a more fluid trade period means that it's far easier to make a monumental leap. Planning for incremental improvement is doomed for failure.

When Roos arrived, Peter Jackson expected us to be playing finals by 2016. Roos has brought stability to the club but little else. Unless Goodwin is more inventive than Roos, we won't be playing finals next year.

You were making an argument until the last paragraph 'mo'. 

Jackson didn't expect us to play finals in 2016, it was a goal not an expectation.

 

Edited September 26, 2016 by rjay

[mo64 5,874]

1 minute ago, rjay said:

You were making an argument until the last sentence 'mo'. 

Jackson didn't expect us to play finals in 2016, it was a goal not an expectation.

 

Well we fell short of achieving our goal.

[ArtificialWisdom 4,045]

18 minutes ago, DemonAndrew said:

kennedy has attributes that we need - pace, defensive accountability, ability to hit the scoreboard - but he does it in patches at this stage in his career rather than with any sense of consistency.

Agree, he is the perfect candidate to 'turn his career around' and lock himself in the 22, but if he doesnt do it this pre-season his clock will start ticking and the club will likely begin looking elsewhere.

[Gator 17,332]

20 minutes ago, mo64 said:

Your argument doesn't factor in the abilities of the coaches.  The Dogs development has been fast tracked by a brilliant coach. Any comparison to the 2014 Dogs is irrelevant because they had a poor coach. Name one analyst who thought that the Dogs would be anything other than a bottom 4 team in 2015, especially after their B&F from 2014 in Libba did his knee?

The days of premiership clocks are over. Free agency and a more fluid trade period means that it's far easier to make a monumental leap. Planning for incremental improvement is doomed for failure.

When Roos arrived, Peter Jackson expected us to be playing finals by 2016. Roos has brought stability to the club but little else. Unless Goodwin is more inventive than Roos, we won't be playing finals next year.

And what argument do you think you're reading.

I have a solitary argument that I put forward and that is we're 18 months behind the Dogs.

Do you disagree ?

I've already said to another poster that there are no "guarantees" and obviously there are a multitude of factors that determine how a team develops.

But as I've already asked, what "argument" do you think you're reading from my post ?  

[Bluey's Dad 3,419]

1 hour ago, Stretch Johnson said:

I think the Bulldogs are a big source of inspiration for the MFC.  They are poor, success starved and have found a way to beat the AFLs franchise in a prelim with their own young outfit.

A lot of clubs will be watching them closely.

I would like to think that some similarities exist between the two clubs.

 

Yeah, but they've done it in a 'gap year', between the fall of Hawthorn and the rise of GWS.

Our 'proper' finals run is still probably a few years yet, right when GWS will be at their peak.

Not to discount the Bullies fantastic achievement, just saying that timing has helped

[mo64 5,874]

Just now, ProDee said:

And what argument do you think you're reading.

I have a solitary argument that I put forward and that is we're 18 months behind the Dogs.

Do you disagree ?

I've already said to another poster that there are no "guarantees" and obviously there are a multitude of factors that determine how a team develops.

But as I've already asked, what "argument" do you think you're reading from my post ?  

I refute your argument that at the start of 2015 we were 18 months behind the Dogs in development. And I also refute your argument that analysts believe that was the case at the time. 

Your statement is purely based on hindsight, and it serves no purpose because it can't be proven or disproven. As you say "there are a multitude of factors that determine how a team develops."

[Gator 17,332]

2 minutes ago, mo64 said:

I refute your argument that at the start of 2015 we were 18 months behind the Dogs in development. And I also refute your argument that analysts believe that was the case at the time. 

Your statement is purely based on hindsight, and it serves no purpose because it can't be proven or disproven. As you say "there are a multitude of factors that determine how a team develops."

Well it was said and I agree.  It was foresight and hindsight.  

And it was right.

[xarronn 380]

59 minutes ago, Choke said:

 

Yeah, but they've done it in a 'gap year', between the fall of Hawthorn and the rise of GWS.

Our 'proper' finals run is still probably a few years yet, right when GWS will be at their peak.

Not to discount the Bullies fantastic achievement, just saying that timing has helped

Interesting theory about the 'gap year".

Firstly, it disregards the rise of Sydney, who have smashed their last two opponents, so it's not clear there is a gap at all.

Secondly, by stating that timing has helped, you are in fact underestimating the 'dogs.  They have played scintillating football in the finals. It's worth considering that if there is a 'gap year' they created it.

They knocked both of those teams out, otherwise one or the other would be playing in the Grand Final.

[Gator 17,332]

1 hour ago, mo64 said:

I refute your argument that at the start of 2015 we were 18 months behind the Dogs in development. And I also refute your argument that analysts believe that was the case at the time. 

Your statement is purely based on hindsight, and it serves no purpose because it can't be proven or disproven. As you say "there are a multitude of factors that determine how a team develops."

May 10, 2014

 

Melbourne coach Paul Roos said the final quarter was a lesson in composure for his young side.

 

"We're still developing obviously," Roos said after the match.

 

"The Bulldogs, in terms of where they were, they're about two-and-a-half years with Brendan and we're seven games in and that probably showed tonight.

 

"At crucial times in the game they just did those little things a bit better than we did and in the end that really was the difference. It was a terrific game, a combative game but it just shows the Bulldogs' development at this stage is a bit ahead of our development."

 

Link

http://www.afl.com.au/match-centre/2014/8/melb-v-wb

 

How anyone could question the Dogs being ahead in development is beyond me.  

[Hellaintabadplacetobe 4,294]

Anyway, back on to the topic....Kennedy`s decline from the first 5 or 6 rounds was alarming. Looked like we had one of the recruits of the year, turned out to be another Newton/Michie type recruit. Real disappointment after what he showed he can offer us.

[stuie 7,374]

So in 18 months we'll be as good as the Bulldogs because a few people said so hey?

Remember when we were the "next dynasty" too?

Yeah, how about we make it happen rather than expect it to happen. This is the old Melbourne attitude creeping back in.

 

[stuie 7,374]

44 minutes ago, ProDee said:

May 10, 2014

 

Melbourne coach Paul Roos said the final quarter was a lesson in composure for his young side.

 

"We're still developing obviously," Roos said after the match.

 

"The Bulldogs, in terms of where they were, they're about two-and-a-half years with Brendan and we're seven games in and that probably showed tonight.

 

"At crucial times in the game they just did those little things a bit better than we did and in the end that really was the difference. It was a terrific game, a combative game but it just shows the Bulldogs' development at this stage is a bit ahead of our development."

 

Link

http://www.afl.com.au/match-centre/2014/8/melb-v-wb

 

How anyone could question the Dogs being ahead in development is beyond me.  

 

July 27, 2010

"The way that they played the game you would think you are seeing the superpower of the future," Voss said

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2010-07-27/demons-afls-next-superpower-voss/921380

 

[Ted Lasso 19,513]

50 minutes ago, stuie said:

So in 18 months we'll be as good as the Bulldogs because a few people said so hey?

Remember when we were the "next dynasty" too?

Yeah, how about we make it happen rather than expect it to happen. This is the old Melbourne attitude creeping back in.

 

I don't understand this post Stuie, are you being deliberately confrontational? 

fairly certain ProDee is not a member of the footy department ( please correct me if i am wrong) so i don't understand why his post bothers you, it's not like a supporters attitude has any real bearing on how the players are going to play or train, you'd like to hope they'd be a little bit better than that.

[stuie 7,374]

5 minutes ago, Abe said:

I don't understand this post Stuie, are you being deliberately confrontational? 

fairly certain ProDee is not a member of the footy department ( please correct me if i am wrong) so i don't understand why his post bothers you, it's not like a supporters attitude has any real bearing on how the players are going to play or train, you'd like to hope they'd be a little bit better than that.

It's a forum isn't it? I'm entitled to my opinion just as much as "ProDee" aren't I?

To me, it's silly to try and infer we will be as successful as the Bulldogs in 18 months, we just have to wait for it. We're a completely different team coming from a completely different spot. We haven't played finals for 10 years, they played prelims in 08, 09 and 10. Now we have "ProDee" telling us we're better than them at the same time, when clearly the context is completely different, if not irrelevant to us.

There's already a bit too much "head wobble" going on about us from our supporters, and we've seen how well that has worked out in the past. If we really have to look at the Bulldogs as our example, then let's look at their work ethic, effort and self awareness and realize where we really are in the pecking order and that it's not going to just happen.

In summary, let's learn from OUR past, not use other teams as an (irrelevant) example of where we're at.

 

 

[Ted Lasso 19,513]

1 minute ago, stuie said:

It's a forum isn't it? I'm entitled to my opinion just as much as "ProDee" aren't I?

To me, it's silly to try and infer we will be as successful as the Bulldogs in 18 months, we just have to wait for it. We're a completely different team coming from a completely different spot. We haven't played finals for 10 years, they played prelims in 08, 09 and 10. Now we have "ProDee" telling us we're better than them at the same time, when clearly the context is completely different, if not irrelevant to us.

There's already a bit too much "head wobble" going on about us from our supporters, and we've seen how well that has worked out in the past. If we really have to look at the Bulldogs as our example, then let's look at their work ethic, effort and self awareness and realize where we really are in the pecking order and that it's not going to just happen.

In summary, let's learn from OUR past, not use other teams as an (irrelevant) example of where we're at.

 

 

I don't think what he's suggesting is that we'll magically wait it out, i think what he was suggesting that another 18 months under quality coaching, development and natural progession and this side should be a top 8 side like the Bulldogs, keeping in mind that they finished 7th, i think that should be the expectation.  

I do understand what he means when he uses the Bulldogs as a comparison because as a club they're quite similar to us in being a smaller, less rich club.

[Sir Why You Little 37,034]

24 minutes ago, Abe said:

I don't understand this post Stuie, are you being deliberately confrontational? 

fairly certain ProDee is not a member of the footy department ( please correct me if i am wrong) so i don't understand why his post bothers you, it's not like a supporters attitude has any real bearing on how the players are going to play or train, you'd like to hope they'd be a little bit better than that.

It's just Stuie. He can't not post something  

it's a discussion board. 

How advanced the Demons are will depend on their fitness after the break. If they are really serious