AFL 360 asks if Melbourne can make the 8?

[Pipefitter 2,163]

We will lose both our Home games in NT and that will cost us a place in the finals. 

[iv'a worn smith 1,979]

10 hours ago, Demon Disciple said:

We were lucky to beat GWS though Ron. It was their inaccuracy during the 3rd that cost them the game.

I don't get this.  Constant observations about; if they had kicked straight, the result would have been different.  If a goal is kicked, obviously the ball goes back to the middle.  Therefore a different play ensues.  You cannot speculate about what might have been, when a different play could equally mean, a different opportunity in terms of how the next play turns out and therefore an opportunity for a different scoring result for either team.

Edited April 19, 2016 by iv'a worn smith

[Copuchas 763]

The next few weeks will reveal a lot.   I think we need to ask who's in the 8 currently that could potentially fall out?  Gold Coast top that list, having had an easy draw to date.  Geelong is second on the vulnerable list in my mind - their midfield deficiencies haven't been overcome on the back of adding Dangerfield.  We are one of a number of teams who could potentially fill those slots, the others being GWS and PA (if they get their mojo back).  Even Richmond are a chance if they get on a roll like last year, as unlikely as that seems currently.  

[nutbean 8,838]

Pretty simple to me.

On our day we should be able to beat anyone.

Cold hard logic ( on a limited data - 4 matches)

If the below teams play at 100% or we allow them to play at 100% they should beat us. ( this is based on first 4 rounds of this season so certain teams that were highly rated prior to the season have come back to the pack)

Hawthorn, West Coast, Adelaide, North, Bulldogs, Sydney.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Teams I consider us competing with for ladder position - Suns, Giants, Fremantle ( prior to the season I had them down as a much better team), Cats, Richmond

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Teams I think we should beat ( if and this is the big if  - we must turn up to play  - note Essendon game) - Saints (better than I thought) , Blues, Brisbane, Collingwood, Port (unsure about them - normally a competitor but have looked horrible), Essendon.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So by my reckoning, if we continue to play well and beat the teams we should beat and do well against our "competitors"  we will end up anywhere from 7th - 13th.

We have lost to a team (just) that most would have considered a loss ( North ). We beat a competitor in Giants, Beat a team we should beat in Collingwood and lost to a team we should have beaten in Essendon (ugh).

The huge if  - how we play. We need to beat teams that we should beat.

 

[praha 11,240]

11 hours ago, Demon Disciple said:

We were lucky to beat GWS though Ron. It was their inaccuracy during the 3rd that cost them the game.

I hate this. We weren't "lucky" at all. Their pace and spread was amazing but we defended superbly. Their inaccuracy was a product of our defensive awareness, pushing them to the flanks and pockets, forcing them to kick for goal at an angle. We deserved to win.

[Bring-Back-Powell 14,932]

12 minutes ago, Pipefitter said:

We will lose both our Home games in NT and that will cost us a place in the finals. 

If that's the case, 36,000 people should be writing PJ an email at the end of the year, urging the club to withdraw at least one of it's 2 games in the NT. It would be a tragedy if we missed finals because we sacrificed 2 home game.

In relation to the over reaction by Gerard W, I think it's more than warranted. We're just too inconsistent to be in finals discussion at this point in time.

If we beat Richmond, St Kilda, Brisbane and one of Gold Coast or Bulldogs over the next 5 weeks (6-3 after rd 9), then we can have a genuine discussion about finals. 

 

[Copuchas 763]

11 minutes ago, nutbean said:

Pretty simple to me.

On our day we should be able to beat anyone.

Cold hard logic ( on a limited data - 4 matches)

If the below teams play at 100% or we allow them to play at 100% they should beat us. ( this is based on first 4 rounds of this season so certain teams that were highly rated prior to the season have come back to the pack)

Hawthorn, West Coast, Adelaide, North, Bulldogs, Sydney.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Teams I consider us competing with for ladder position - Suns, Giants, Fremantle ( prior to the season I had them down as a much better team), Cats, Richmond

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Teams I think we should beat ( if and this is the big if  - we must turn up to play  - note Essendon game) - Saints (better than I thought) , Blues, Brisbane, Collingwood, Port (unsure about them - normally a competitor but have looked horrible), Essendon.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So by my reckoning, if we continue to play well and beat the teams we should beat and do well against our "competitors"  we will end up anywhere from 7th - 13th.

We have lost to a team (just) that most would have considered a loss ( North ). We beat a competitor in Giants, Beat a team we should beat in Collingwood and lost to a team we should have beaten in Essendon (ugh).

The huge if  - how we play. We need to beat teams that we should beat.

 

Nutbean, more elaborate but we're on the exact same page.  Would like to think that there is one more on the vulnerable list (Sydney?) but it's just not self-evident at this stage as to who that might be.  

[Oneday 248]

2 hours ago, btdemon said:

I suggest everybody has a go at the Bailey Ladder predictor. Even when i'm being very optimistic we finish about 9th. I had the Dees on 13-14 wins, and as I said, that was optimistic. There are a lot of teams who will fight for the final eight this year with the improvement of GCS and GWS. I think it is going to take about 15 wins to be absolutely certain to make it. So my answer is, in all probability we won't make it. 

I did this and had us playing the Hawks in the GF and we smashed them.

[Buzzy 992]

We've had the wood over Richmond recently, and that's what worries me going into this Sunday - and the Saints I believe are ahead of us at the moment and a more even / disciplined team.  So the next 2 weeks will tell us a lot.

With the inexperience and lack of skill level in our side, I would be staggered if w didn't have more major hiccups this year.  Making the 8 is a long way off.. and yes, probably worth a chuckle from Gerard...

[DemonLad5 1,642]

There is no doubt we are capable of beating top 8 sides, like Adelaide, Dogs, Giants, Suns, Roos etc. But the competition is bloody good this year and top 8 looks a stretch. I'd love to be proven wrong. As previously said, coming games against Tiges, Suns, Saints, Lions and Dogs will tell alot

[rjay 25,061]

1 minute ago, Buzzy said:

We've had the wood over Richmond recently, and that's what worries me going into this Sunday - and the Saints I believe are ahead of us at the moment and a more even / disciplined team.  So the next 2 weeks will tell us a lot.

With the inexperience and lack of skill level in our side, I would be staggered if w didn't have more major hiccups this year.  Making the 8 is a long way off.. and yes, probably worth a chuckle from Gerard...

I don't believe that and unfortunately we only get to test ourselves against them at Etihad. Still think a win is on the cards for us but time will tell.

[Moonshadow 17,676]

I had us winning 10-11 games this year which would show continued improvement. That still appears about right, even though it's early days. Would that put us about 11th? 

If we won 13 I'd be wrapped, but think it highly unlikely. 

[Dees2014 2,377]

11 hours ago, Ron Burgundy said:

These jokers tonight posed the question: "Can Melbourne make the 8 - real or overreaction?"

Gerard Whately laughed his head off at the mere suggestion - "steady on! Just steady on!". I normally rate the guy but this really annoyed me. His reaction is plainly based on historical bias rather than a proper assessment of where this club is at and its performances thus far this season.

This club has been ahead in every final quarter it has played this year.

And in respect of the two games it has lost:

- we absolutely deserved to win the game against the Roos, but umpiring, inexperience and bad luck cruelled the end result, and we lost by less than a kick after being 42 points down - both bozos rate the Roos highly, which has to be a relevant consideration as to our performance in that game; and

- we did not deserve to beat Essendon, but we should have beaten them despite being pathetic for the entire game and still nearly jagging it.

In short, we've not been that far off winning 4 from 4 - that means top of the table. Early days, but yes - top of the table.

So why the comedic reaction to the mere suggestion that we COULD POSSIBLY make the 8 based on our performances thus far this season?

We've shown a lot more than many better fancied teams to date.

Really hope we pump Richmond and the Saints in the next fortnight. Win these games and it simply can't be such a stupid suggestion that we might be in the mix for the 8.

C'mon Demons - it's time to prove these journos with their cliched and highly patronising opinions about the club wrong.

RB, I share your annoyance, but the point surely is that we are at 2:2. However many "maybes" and "if only" we have we can't get away from that fact. Whateley also added "it is only two weeks since they were beaten by the Dons" to his mirth while also exclaiming "steady on, steady on". I don't think this is an unreasonable reaction.

The only way to stop this is to win the games we should win consistently, and to jag a few top 8 sides. We very nearly did that against north, but at the end of the day we didn't. 

It will be very interesting to see the reaction in three or four weeks when they ask the question again (which they will) and we are in the eight, and everyone is starting to hop on the bandwagon

[Dees2014 2,377]

11 hours ago, Undeeterred said:

I don't know where else to dump this, but I happened across some highlights of our win in Geelong last year.

How's this for list improvement - these names played in that game:

• Jake Spencer
• Daniel Cross
• Jeremy Howe
• Rohan Bail
• Jimmy Toumpas
• Chris Dawes
• Aidan Riley

I reckon Dawes is the only one who would get close to a game this year.

And we beat Geelong. In Geelong.

I think the Gawn/Spencer combination worked really well in that game. A fit and firing Jake may well get into the side. Most finals teams have two tall specialist ruckman who can also play forward. Max certainly can. Pederson or Frost IMHO won't cut it as part time ruckman as we move to the business end of the season

[leave it to deever 17,517]

11 hours ago, Ricky P said:

Whilst I am pleased with our progress, "steady on" is an appropriate response until we win two games in a row.

Agreed. Bombers loss is still fresh and we were lucky to beat the giants. Great comeback and effort the last 2 weeks. I dont however believe we willl make the 8 but hope we knock on the door. I think we will amass around ten wins and launch next year. Love to be proved wrong.

[nutbean 8,838]

9 minutes ago, Dees2014 said:

I think the Gawn/Spencer combination worked really well in that game. A fit and firing Jake may well get into the side. Most finals teams have two tall specialist ruckman who can also play forward. Max certainly can. Pederson or Frost IMHO won't cut it as part time ruckman as we move to the business end of the season

That was probably the only time that Spencer/Gawn combination has really worked

Gawn has shown he can go forward and kick a goal or two.

I looked up David Hale - who I saw as the prototype for a ruckman who could then go forward and snag a goal - he was down last year but was going at a goal a game his previous seasons with the Hawks. Hale was ok as a ruckman and when you add him being dangerous going forward you had a more than handy ruckman.

Gawn can be both in my opinion but Spencer has shown glimpses and not much more.

Pedersen and Frost are not ruckman - but both have capability to help up forward. So as long as they are breaking even in the centre then to me they have more value than Spencer.

 

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,906]

3 hours ago, bush demon said:

'Making the eight' is really meaningless. It's about making the final four.

It's meaningless with respect to winning the flag. But it is not meaningless when it comes to:

• getting more prime time and televised free to air games in 2017
• getting more members in 2017 and getting those who are already members to upgrade to higher paid options (ie, coterie membership, etc)
• retaining sponsors and/or extracting more dollars from those sponsors plus getting new sponsors
• giving players the experience of playing in finals
• giving players who are thinking of leaving a reason for staying
• giving players at other clubs who we might be interested in recruiting a reason for coming

And there are probably other things, too. On the downside, we'd start pre-season training later...

Edited April 20, 2016 by La Dee-vina Comedia
Correcting language to avoid criticism from grammar pedants

[Dr. Gonzo 24,266]

11 hours ago, Peter Griffen said:

I think we can win 10-13 games if we win all the games we should win, which we won't, but we might snag a few we don't expect to win as well. 

can we make finals? yes. will we make finals? i don't think so, i think we'll be in the mix but inexperience will cost us, but next year, look out. 

 

Agreed - before the season I thought we'd be in the group of teams between 7-12th fighting for the last 2 spots in the 8. I thought we'd probably end up on about 10-11 wins and just miss out, but with a bit of luck could sneak in. I still think this.

I expected better of Gerard - anyone who laughs at the notion of us making the 8 hasn't been paying attention. These are probably the same people that had Richmond top 4 and the Pies in the finals pre-season. Delusional. I tipped the Tiges to miss the finals and couldn't understand the hype around the Pies. Yeah they have some good young mids but both forward and back they struggle big time, even moreso with Elliott and Swan out for extended periods.

[Ted Lasso 19,547]

On 4/20/2016 at 10:38 AM, Dr. Gonzo said:

 

Agreed - before the season I thought we'd be in the group of teams between 7-12th fighting for the last 2 spots in the 8. I thought we'd probably end up on about 10-11 wins and just miss out, but with a bit of luck could sneak in. I still think this.

I expected better of Gerard - anyone who laughs at the notion of us making the 8 hasn't been paying attention. These are probably the same people that had Richmond top 4 and the Pies in the finals pre-season. Delusional. I tipped the Tiges to miss the finals and couldn't understand the hype around the Pies. Yeah they have some good young mids but both forward and back they struggle big time, even moreso with Elliott and Swan out for extended periods.

The pies have just gone for names rather than role players, Howe and Aish are perfect examples, big name, terrible players. 

and the Tigers just totally overrate their list, and somehow so does the rest of the footy world, i reckon richmond will have 10-12 starting 22 players on the weekend who wouldn't get a regular spot anywhere else and they think they're a top 4 side.

we should really be 4-0 should have beaten North by 3-4 goals and they're clear on the top of the ladder, have shown in every game we can pile 6 goals in a row on easily and really blow games apart, that was something Geelong used to do very well, it'd be close, you leave the TV for a few minutes and suddenly they're 5 goals up.

I usually enjoy listening to Gerard, he always seems the only one of the two with living brain cells and like he is babysitting drunken robbo, but laughing with just silly, i hope that he is reminded of that later in the year when there are a few rounds to go and we're in the mix and looking really good.

[Undeeterred 3,124]

30 minutes ago, leave it to deever said:

Agreed. Bombers loss is still fresh and we were lucky to beat the giants. Great comeback and effort the last 2 weeks. I dont however believe we willl make the 8 but hope we knock on the door. I think we will amass around ten wins and launch next year. Love to be proved wrong.

And unlucky to lose to North.

Why do people always take the pessimistic view of this?

We won. And then lost against North. It doesn't matter how the opposition play. In the end, what counts is whether we played well enough to get across the line. And we did.

[rjay 25,061]

36 minutes ago, Dees2014 said:

I think the Gawn/Spencer combination worked really well in that game. A fit and firing Jake may well get into the side. Most finals teams have two tall specialist ruckman who can also play forward. Max certainly can. Pederson or Frost IMHO won't cut it as part time ruckman as we move to the business end of the season

Max really can't play forward...he's an on ball ruckman.

His development at Casey was held back by the idea he could be a forward/ruck and the preference for using others as the first ruck. It was only last year when Jamar was struggling with injury that Max got his chance and he took it.

Spencer may be used from time to time as a rotation when the match ups look right but we really do need to find that elusive forward/ruck. Until then it will be Pedders, Dawes, Frost...

[nutbean 8,838]

13 minutes ago, rjay said:

Max really can't play forward...he's an on ball ruckman.

His development at Casey was held back by the idea he could be a forward/ruck and the preference for using others as the first ruck. It was only last year when Jamar was struggling with injury that Max got his chance and he took it.

Spencer may be used from time to time as a rotation when the match ups look right but we really do need to find that elusive forward/ruck. Until then it will be Pedders, Dawes, Frost...

I agree that Gawn is first and foremost a ruckman. I think he is dangerous when he goes forward but he should spend the majority of the time where he does the most damage and that is as an on ball ruckman.

Spencer to me is only value if god forbid, something happens to Gawn and Gawn can't play - I prefer the pinch hitting of the others you have name at this stage. 

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,906]

We saw in the GWS game that Gawn moving into the forward line while being the number 1 ruckman didn't work as it made it too crowded and prevented Hogan from getting a clear run at the ball. That's not to say Gawm couldn't spend time forward when he's not rucking. But it's hard to see why you'd do that - if Gawn is playing he should be used where he is most valuable, and that's on the ball.

[ArtificialWisdom 4,045]

2 hours ago, nutbean said:

Pretty simple to me.

On our day we should be able to beat anyone.

Cold hard logic ( on a limited data - 4 matches)

If the below teams play at 100% or we allow them to play at 100% they should beat us. ( this is based on first 4 rounds of this season so certain teams that were highly rated prior to the season have come back to the pack)

Hawthorn, West Coast, Adelaide, North, Bulldogs, Sydney.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Teams I consider us competing with for ladder position - Suns, Giants, Fremantle ( prior to the season I had them down as a much better team), Cats, Richmond

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Teams I think we should beat ( if and this is the big if  - we must turn up to play  - note Essendon game) - Saints (better than I thought) , Blues, Brisbane, Collingwood, Port (unsure about them - normally a competitor but have looked horrible), Essendon.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So by my reckoning, if we continue to play well and beat the teams we should beat and do well against our "competitors"  we will end up anywhere from 7th - 13th.

We have lost to a team (just) that most would have considered a loss ( North ). We beat a competitor in Giants, Beat a team we should beat in Collingwood and lost to a team we should have beaten in Essendon (ugh).

The huge if  - how we play. We need to beat teams that we should beat.

 

From what ive seen of them so far I'd move Saints up to competing they are no worse off than us, but other than that you're almost spot on. I think we will likely get a scalp at some point but will also lose another 1 or 2 we probably shouldnt. We would need a hell of alot of luck and i think we are more looking at 9th-13th but it is a bit foolish to say we have no chance.

Edited April 20, 2016 by ArtificialWisdom

[Ron Burgundy 8,584]

2 hours ago, billy2803 said:

Ron, you have answered many questions that Whately would've considered.  Those being;

- We lost to North.  It's a loss, we had the opportunity to win and we didn't.  Blame the umpires, sure, but the thing you can't take away was the fact we were inexperienced.  It's this inexperience that will likely still see us lose a couple of these types of games this year.  Teams striving for finals shouldn't lose those games, they can't afford to.

- The fact that we have been ahead in the last quarter in each game means squat when determining if we are a finals side or not.  What it shows me is that we have improved significantly over the past 3 years, and I look forward to converting some of those final quarter leads in to wins.

- The fact we lost to Essendon is an absolute disgrace.  Teams that want to play finals don't deserve to be there is they can't beat sides like that.

 

Don't get me wrong, I would love to see us make the finals this year.  But I think everything has to go right for us, and a fair few things go wrong for clubs around us, for it to happen.  Generally if everything goes right for a finals bound team, they will be in the premiership hunt.  We are needing everything to go right just to make 8th.

 

I, like Whately, am not getting too carried away about our finals prospects this year.  But I'm still happy for us to fly under the radar for as long as possible - we all know too well what happens when we are pumped up too much by external sources.

I get that. The issue is not whether we make the finals or not - it was Whately's patent condescension of the club in circumstances where any other club having displayed equivalent performances throughout the NAB Challenge and the season proper would simply not have attracted anything like that annoying response (i.e. his response was not linked to performance, it merely illustrated his patronising view of the MFC).

And it [censored] me off.

For what it's worth, the better view is that we will probably miss the 8 this year. But such a question need not be met with such derision in light of our performances thus far in 2016, especially given that these bozos were talking up the Roos and GWS as potential premiership contenders in the same episode, two clubs that on any construction we've held our own against this year.