The youngest most inexperienced side

[The Chazz 4,077]

4 minutes ago, stuie said:

Right, so that's a lot of posts you've made for someone who doesn't have an opinion then....

Oh, I didn't realise you wanted my opinion, you didn't actually ask.

My view is that while our defence has leaked a lot of easy goals, I think given they are trying to get used to the balance of attack and defend, they are doing a great job.  Due to the outs (experience) that I've previously mentioned, I think that the younger players, in particular Wagner and Hunt, are going well.  I don't think having an experience "gulf" is a negative for these guys, mainly because it appears that even for the experienced guys that have managed to get on the park, that they are struggling with the new game plan too.

I think our disposal coming out of the backline has been the best it's been for a long time.  Obviously still has a lot of work needed, but generally, I don't cringe when our HBF kick it out, especially when comparing it to the days when Grimes was down there.

On the leaking of goals, it's amazing to think that while sometimes it's like we have NFI down back, we are only 8 points worse off YTD.  Truth be known, we will actually have conceded less points than last year after this week's game.

If I had to choose one or the other, I would say our backline hasn't gone backwards this year.  Further to that, the fact we can see the type of footy we want to play is a massive improvement compared to previous years.  Their best has been excellent, but the gap between great and pus is still too wide.  This will change with more games and development of players playing under a "new" game plan.  It has to be mentioned though that when our defenders have looked ordinary at best, it has generally been on the back of our midfield getting a touch up.  Do we invest more in to strengthening the midfield, so that it helps out backline?

Finals this year is highly unlikely, but we can't lay total blame on our lack of experience in the back half.  What I am satisfied with is that we've been able to let our long-term defenders learn in the seniors, without it being too much of a burden on the rest of the team.  This experience/development will prove invaluable.

 

[stuie 7,374]

5 minutes ago, billy2803 said:

Oh, I didn't realise you wanted my opinion, you didn't actually ask.

My view is that while our defence has leaked a lot of easy goals, I think given they are trying to get used to the balance of attack and defend, they are doing a great job.  Due to the outs (experience) that I've previously mentioned, I think that the younger players, in particular Wagner and Hunt, are going well.  I don't think having an experience "gulf" is a negative for these guys, mainly because it appears that even for the experienced guys that have managed to get on the park, that they are struggling with the new game plan too.

I think our disposal coming out of the backline has been the best it's been for a long time.  Obviously still has a lot of work needed, but generally, I don't cringe when our HBF kick it out, especially when comparing it to the days when Grimes was down there.

On the leaking of goals, it's amazing to think that while sometimes it's like we have NFI down back, we are only 8 points worse off YTD.  Truth be known, we will actually have conceded less points than last year after this week's game.

If I had to choose one or the other, I would say our backline hasn't gone backwards this year.  Further to that, the fact we can see the type of footy we want to play is a massive improvement compared to previous years.  Their best has been excellent, but the gap between great and pus is still too wide.  This will change with more games and development of players playing under a "new" game plan.  It has to be mentioned though that when our defenders have looked ordinary at best, it has generally been on the back of our midfield getting a touch up.  Do we invest more in to strengthening the midfield, so that it helps out backline?

Finals this year is highly unlikely, but we can't lay total blame on our lack of experience in the back half.  What I am satisfied with is that we've been able to let our long-term defenders learn in the seniors, without it being too much of a burden on the rest of the team.  This experience/development will prove invaluable.

 

I genuinely do. We may argue about it cos we don't see things the same, and I don't think it's necessary on a forum to start every post with "IMO" so I figured you would get that my posts are merely my opinion.

You make some very good points, and a lot I agree with, big hopes for Hunt and Wagner especially, but I do worry about that "gulf" as I feel they need experience around them on game day and senior bodies to carry the load so we don't run them into the ground.

For me, it's just about the balance and security. It's great if the kids are earning games and getting opportunity, but the lack of senior depth is a major concern for me this year. It may be bolstered next year with a fit Lumumba, Melksham, maybe some form improvements from others, but none of those factors carry much of a guarantee. I feel we need to improve our mature backline depth this offseason or I worry we won't be able to pace out the development of the kids properly.

 

[The Chazz 4,077]

8 minutes ago, stuie said:

I genuinely do. We may argue about it cos we don't see things the same, and I don't think it's necessary on a forum to start every post with "IMO" so I figured you would get that my posts are merely my opinion.

You make some very good points, and a lot I agree with, big hopes for Hunt and Wagner especially, but I do worry about that "gulf" as I feel they need experience around them on game day and senior bodies to carry the load so we don't run them into the ground.

For me, it's just about the balance and security. It's great if the kids are earning games and getting opportunity, but the lack of senior depth is a major concern for me this year. It may be bolstered next year with a fit Lumumba, Melksham, maybe some form improvements from others, but none of those factors carry much of a guarantee. I feel we need to improve our mature backline depth this offseason or I worry we won't be able to pace out the development of the kids properly.

 

Stuie, very readable post, thank you.

Seriously though, has your account been hacked?

[stuie 7,374]

20 minutes ago, billy2803 said:

Stuie, very readable post, thank you.

Seriously though, has your account been hacked?

Haha been asked that a bit lately.... Nah, just blocked a few pests which increased my zen

[praha 11,255]

37 minutes ago, stuie said:

I genuinely do. We may argue about it cos we don't see things the same, and I don't think it's necessary on a forum to start every post with "IMO" so I figured you would get that my posts are merely my opinion.

You make some very good points, and a lot I agree with, big hopes for Hunt and Wagner especially, but I do worry about that "gulf" as I feel they need experience around them on game day and senior bodies to carry the load so we don't run them into the ground.

For me, it's just about the balance and security. It's great if the kids are earning games and getting opportunity, but the lack of senior depth is a major concern for me this year. It may be bolstered next year with a fit Lumumba, Melksham, maybe some form improvements from others, but none of those factors carry much of a guarantee. I feel we need to improve our mature backline depth this offseason or I worry we won't be able to pace out the development of the kids properly.

 

It has a strong stench of 2010, doesn't it? We have a stronger young brigade imo but it's almost like we've made the same mistakes. Most of our "depth" players have less than 30 games experience, so if we get injuries suddenly we're bringing kids in with zero experience.

[Roost It 1,434]

17 minutes ago, praha said:

It has a strong stench of 2010, doesn't it? We have a stronger young brigade imo but it's almost like we've made the same mistakes. Most of our "depth" players have less than 30 games experience, so if we get injuries suddenly we're bringing kids in with zero experience.

It's nothing like 2010. We have a stable club, excellent coaches and a list chock full of forward and mid talent who have all shown more than any of the 2010 brigade

[Satyriconhome 10,880]

46 minutes ago, stuie said:

Haha been asked that a bit lately.... Nah, just blocked a few pests which increased my zen

About time you did that, nice little discussion you had there     my take I'll wear some of the lookaway moments from the defenders as we get experience into them both individually and as a flexible unit

[stuie 7,374]

1 hour ago, Roost It said:

It's nothing like 2010. We have a stable club, excellent coaches and a list chock full of forward and mid talent who have all shown more than any of the 2010 brigade

I don't think he was saying the whole club is like 2010, just the fact that we're having to play these kids in defence when it would be better if we had some quality mature players to shoulder the load a bit.

 

[45HG 1,559]

Looking at the average games list, am I right in saying two of our most experienced sides this year fronted up against Essendon and St kilda?

[Bitter but optimistic 22,289]

2 hours ago, stuie said:

Haha been asked that a bit lately.... Nah, just blocked a few pests which increased my zen

Be honest Stu, now that you and I, are BFF's and drinking buddies my goodwill has rubbed off on you and made you a better person.

Who knows, we might even attend the GAT's closing down party together!

[Ethan Tremblay 31,294]

3 hours ago, stuie said:

Haha been asked that a bit lately.... Nah, just blocked a few pests which increased my zen

 

9 minutes ago, Bitter but optimistic said:

Be honest Stu, now that you and I, are BFF's and drinking buddies my goodwill has rubbed off on you and made you a better person.

Who knows, we might even attend the GAT's closing down party together!

I don't think Stu's going to see your post.

[Bitter but optimistic 22,289]

Just now, Ethan Tremblay said:

 

I don't think Stu's going to see your post.

Among your other attributes (that I alluded to on another thread) you are also a base and cynical fellow Ethan.

Where would Stu be without me?

[Demon Dynasty 17,135]

On 6/8/2016 at 7:04 PM, 45HG said:

Looking at the average games list, am I right in saying two of our most experienced sides this year fronted up against Essendon and St kilda?

Correct. The 3 most experienced teams this year were against the Tiges (75.1), Saints (75.0) and the Bombers (73.4)

The 3 least experienced sides were against the Lions (57.9), the Giants (62.8) and the Pies (62.9).

The 3 largest differentials (the first two no surprise) were against the Roos (-87.6), Hawks (-60.7) and the Pies (-30.6).

Edited June 9, 2016 by Rusty Nails
A dash missing with the Hawks number..well done Devil!

[faultydet 7,623]

8 hours ago, Sir Why You Little said:

The upcoming draft is all about trading and Free Agency for the MFC. 

A helluva lot of experience has left the building. We neeed to replace that age bracket with hardened skill otherwise it will be 2010 all over again. 

Getting 50-60 senior games into a bunch of kids is a waste of time if they just get belted weekly 

i am concerned about this, recruiting Melksham has hurt us badly. We needed his experience in 2016. If TMac goes there is more experience we have to find 

But we haven't been belted weekly SWYL.

And we wont know if Melksham's recruitment has hurt us, before he has played a single game. (yes, I know I said differently last year)

maybe you will see melky come in and be a mainstay from day 1. He certainly fits with the "take no schit" players we have picked up recently.

I know I campaigned heavily against picking him up, but now that he is ours, I cant wait to see him knocking people ars over head, across the half back line.

 

[Biffen 12,949]

I'm predicting that most of our players will age in time.

It's a bold statement but I stand by it.

[Adam The God 30,645]

1 hour ago, Rusty Nails said:

Correct. The 3 most experienced teams this year were against the Tiges (75.1), Saints (75.0) and the Bombers (73.4)

The 3 least experienced sides were against the Lions (57.9), the Giants (62.8) and the Pies (62.9).

The 3 largest differentials (the first two no surprise) were against the Roos (-87.6), Hawks (60.7) and the Pies (-30.6).

Good post.

The inexperienced players aren't the problem at our club, it's the senior players. Naturally, much of our inconsistency will be down to the inexperience on our list, but also the up and down form of players with experience who should be doing a whole lot better.

[Sir Why You Little 37,368]

1 hour ago, faultydet said:

But we haven't been belted weekly SWYL.

And we wont know if Melksham's recruitment has hurt us, before he has played a single game. (yes, I know I said differently last year)

maybe you will see melky come in and be a mainstay from day 1. He certainly fits with the "take no schit" players we have picked up recently.

I know I campaigned heavily against picking him up, but now that he is ours, I cant wait to see him knocking people ars over head, across the half back line.

 

Yes i agree. But i also wanted finals this year. 

We are behind where we should be Fault. 

[Demon Dynasty 17,135]

1 hour ago, AdamFarr said:

Good post.

The inexperienced players aren't the problem at our club, it's the senior players. Naturally, much of our inconsistency will be down to the inexperience on our list, but also the up and down form of players with experience who should be doing a whole lot better.

Something along those lines. Many say the bottom 6 players define a team from week to week. As to whether it has any validity i have no idea.

In the end i think general work ethic, talent at the top end (100+ gamers) and leadership (knowing what to do & how to win etc) are 3 critical components in successful sides.

Roos would appear to have solved the work ethic issue and we have turned this around since the ugly years. Cross played a big role in helping here.

Talent at the top end of our experienced 100+ gamers? We could argue that till the cows come home i guess but what we can't argue is that at present we don't have enough experienced/ elite talented players (especially by foot/cool head in a crisis etc) at the top end (100 / 150+ games). Really hope this is our focus for next season.

With regard to leadership. outside of Jones, Vince & Viney through the middle and to some degree Tmac/Vince down back, we are still searching for a strong leader up forward (could be Hulk in future given enough games & to some extent Watts is offering this a little by example) and a very strong leader down back to command/organise the troops (Frawley!).

Oh, plus we need 1 or 2 match winners (champs) who can take control of a game and win it through sheer will/effort and skill. They may be in the list now (eg., Clarry/Tracc/Viney/Hoges/Tyson) but no one has reached these heady heights ....yet. Fingers crossed.

Edited June 8, 2016 by Rusty Nails

[faultydet 7,623]

7 hours ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Yes i agree. But i also wanted finals this year. 

We are behind where we should be Fault. 

Yeah, so did I.

 

I even fell for our pre-season form, and had a few pesos on us making the 8.

*sigh*

[Ron Burgundy 8,588]

On 18 April 2016 at 8:54 PM, george_on_the_outer said:

Everyone gets the correlation between success and age wrong.

Good players will still be playing at 27.  Poor players won't be. 

So sides with lots of old players have lots of good players.ala Hawthorn, Geelong, North ( at the moment)

That is not to say you can't have a good team of young players ( like ourselves, we hope), because it just means those good players will be around for a long time to come.

What it does say is that if you have a team of young players year after year then you will not find success.  In that case all you are doing is replacing poor players.

I agree with this - but the issue here is that this particular young experienced group of players is very competitive and looks to be a tight group that is well coached and will be playing together for many years to come.

That's why the young, inexperienced group in this instance is so relevant and so exciting.

 

[stuie 7,374]

11 hours ago, Rusty Nails said:

Correct. The 3 most experienced teams this year were against the Tiges (75.1), Saints (75.0) and the Bombers (73.4)

The 3 least experienced sides were against the Lions (57.9), the Giants (62.8) and the Pies (62.9).

The 3 largest differentials (the first two no surprise) were against the Roos (-87.6), Hawks (60.7) and the Pies (-30.6).

 

9 hours ago, AdamFarr said:

Good post.

The inexperienced players aren't the problem at our club, it's the senior players. Naturally, much of our inconsistency will be down to the inexperience on our list, but also the up and down form of players with experience who should be doing a whole lot better.

Hang on...

That's a bit of a shallow analysis I think AdamFarr.

We won the game against the Tiges, the Saints always beat us (plus, Etihad), and the Bombers game... Well that was a massive failure by the senior players, agreed.

But look at the opposition when we played a young side. Lions are rubbish, GWS were missing a bunch of key players, and the Pies were rubbish when we played them too. Don't you think it's a coincidence we just happened to pick a young side when coming up against a weaker opposition?

Also, have a think about who the best players were in those games where we had the biggest differential (obviously opinion based):

v Roos - Gawn, Vince, Viney

v Hawks - Vince, Tyson, Jones

v Pies - Bugg, Viney, Gawn

I don't think it's right to be so critical of the senior players. You need to remember that it's a whole team game and the senior players are not only trying to do their roles, but also pick up the slack of the young inconsistent players while teaching them at the same time. Just have a look at the backline, they have struggled in a big way without Lumumba and Salem. Now I'm not saying our senior stocks are great, we still have work there, but let's not get sucked in to praising all the kids for their potential while bashing the senior players who are trying to not only do their jobs but also often some of the jobs of the inconsistent and inexperienced young players.

 

[Devil is in the Detail 883]

16 hours ago, Rusty Nails said:

Correct. The 3 most experienced teams this year were against the Tiges (75.1), Saints (75.0) and the Bombers (73.4)

The 3 least experienced sides were against the Lions (57.9), the Giants (62.8) and the Pies (62.9).

The 3 largest differentials (the first two no surprise) were against the Roos (-87.6), Hawks (60.7) and the Pies (-30.6).

Hate to nit pick but I am guessing -60.7 against Dawks??

[Bimbo 943]

For those who say things havent changed since 2010 - 

The Queens Birthday team of 2010 was:

Bartram   Warnock    Frawley

Jones       Rivers       Grimes

Bruce       Trengove  Scully

Jetta         Bate          Dunn

Green       Miller         Davey

 

Jamar       Moloney     McKenzie

 

Garland Morton Gysbert Watts

 

Emer:  Bennell Paul Johnson Cheney

Sylvia must have been injured.  

 

Of the seven players still on the list who could teach the young players the right attitudes, only Jones, Jetta and Watts are certainties to be selected on Monday with Trengove almost certainly so.  

If Viney plays on Monday, a possible team is:

Jetta              T McDonald     Frost

Hunt              O McDonald     Wagner

Stretch           Tyson               Vince

Watts             Dawes              Petracca

Garlett           Hogan               Kent

 

Gawn      Jones     Viney

Oliver Trengove Kennedy  Bugg

 

Injured and others include:  Salem, H, Brayshaw, Dunn, Garland, ANB, M Jones, Grimes, Vandenberg, 

 

The teams that have risen quickly have often a solid senior base.  I am not posting to cast any aspersions on an earlier regime, but I know which team I would rather follow into the next six years!!!!!!!!

Even if it is a bit younger and less experienced,  

 

 

[praha 11,255]

On 6/8/2016 at 4:59 PM, Roost It said:

It's nothing like 2010. We have a stable club, excellent coaches and a list chock full of forward and mid talent who have all shown more than any of the 2010 brigade

That is not what I meant. From an on-field perspective in 2010, we eventually struggled because you had young kids shouldering the load. We have added Vince and H to the fold for experience but in much the same way, we have very unexperienced players in areas that win and lose matches. I also said we have a stronger young brigade this time, but I guess you skipped over that part. In 2010 we had many young kids that showed promise, and the media was showering us with praise. It broke down. I am fearful of another breakdown, and I think we need another player of Vince's caliber into the club.

[Moonshadow 17,678]

Carey's famous five: the next generation of AFL stars

Has Jack Viney in there.