We're kidding ourselves!

[Lucifers Hero 37,407]

1 hour ago, iv'a worn smith said:

Agree with most of his.  As much as I hate to admit it, at this stage, the people from Princes Park have surpassed us, in terms of getting the most out of the list they have.  Bolton is a teacher, both as a profession and obviously in footy.  By saying this, I am not decrying Roos efforts with the list he took on at the beginning of his tenure, but what seems to still be missing, is the players total commitment to the cause.  With Casboult out and Kreuzer's fitness, at best, doubtful, I thought they were not a chance against a much more experienced and match hardened Cats outfit.

It was not all that long ago, we thought our backline was OK and what we needed to was to get depth in the middle and some key forwards.  Now our backs have seemingly gone backwards and unless our mids turn up with their collective brains in gear, we get beaten.

My view, going into this season, was that we were entitled to consider us at least on a par with St. Kilda, Brisbane, GCS, Port, Pies and Tigers and maybe as good as the Doggies. Certainly better than Essendon and Carlton - although clearly Carlton have surprised many so called experts so far.

I don't have the answers, but I would have hoped that by now the mindset of our list can at least cope with the ups and downs of professional footy,  as well as the pressure cooker environment of game day.  Clearly, other clubs, with not necessarily more talent than us, have managed to do so.  To me this is the most frustrating aspect of what our supporters are forced to endure.  Our hopes and expectations are built one week, only to come crashing down the following.  I know, I know, such is the lot of a Dees supporter, but frankly I am tired of this meek acceptance of what seems to be a reality on most Dees supporters' minds.  I'm not sure why, accepting the shorter turnaround and travel, but this week's loss somehow as left me flatter than any other this season.

 We are now rapidly approaching the half way mark of the season and we need to get this right, if we want to be seen as truly 'developing', by the footy world, with understandably higher expectations for 2017.  Right now, I don't think we can justify such an expectation. 

The problem is that the other teams you mention (except Bris) are developing faster than us!  (GCS will bounce back quickly once they get some of their 20 injured players back).  We are improving but not fast enough to keep up. 

Can't help but think if Roos alone (rather than a committee) were selecting the team we would not be playing so many kids.  I have this view as his history shows he doesn't play kids too early (Sydney still doesn't). 

It is in Goodwin and McCartney's interests to get as many games as possible into kids to improve their prospects in 2017 and not so interested in the senior experienced players they don't see as part of the future.  They know that Goodwin won't get much of a 'honeymoon' period from the media.  Roos said his goal was to deliver a new coach (Goodwin) a team that is ready to go in 2017 so he can hardly railroad/override the selection committee. 

Totally agree with the last para - if youngsters can't concentrate for 100 minutes or can't defend when required then we should not have so many per game.  Rotate them!  Its one thing for our coaches to have eyes on 2017 but it is time to get some real results otherwise it will sap too much energy from the players and supporters this year. 

Edited May 30, 2016 by Lucifer's Hero

[iv'a worn smith 1,979]

Even this left wing newspaper sums it up pretty well. By the way, I am an avid reader.  The Guardian's view

[H_T 2,941]

22 hours ago, Biffen said:

That's fine if we win those games we aren't supposed to .

I think we are going in to games expecting to beat anyone but capable of losing to even the worst.

The answers are not easy to find.

The issues are are across the team.Our hand and foot skills are below par.

Watts,Salem,Oliver,Jones,Petracca,Viney,Hogan,Gawn,Tmac,Jetta,Vince , Garlett and,Stretch Are the basis of a very good side.

Hunt ,Harmes,Wagner and OMac fluctuate as young guys do.

Kent ,Dunn,Garland,MJones,Michie,Kennedy,Tyson,H,Grimes have some limitations.None of these guys can use their opposite side but there is hope for Tyson.

In order to win a final/s we will need better skills across the board. Any players with these disposal issues can only be a viable part of a good side if they tackle like machines.

The back six are totally unstable .

TMac,Jetta,Dunn,Vince,Salem and Wagner would be my pick for the Hawks.Omac and Wagner are too green in tandem.

I want to see JT back for more poise and skill.

I would like to have a look at Hulett.

I think Spencer and Gawn can operate together.

Would be good if H/ Dawes could resurrect their careers but I don't see it happening .Ditto for JG.

 

Agree with this Biffen. 

Clayton Oliver, even though he's in his first year, is a vital cog in our midfield.

20 hours ago, Jaded said:

Someone explain to me please how the [censored] some clubs manage to have one [censored] season and bounce back like Carlton, and I'm still waiting for us to beat a real opposition after 10 years. 

It is just depressing to see Carlton doing so well. Their list isn't even that good! 

Everything is awesome at Carlton. Bolton is a revelation.

 

[Gator 16,921]

There's been a bit of discussion about Carlton on this thread.  It's worth noting a couple of things about their list as they entered the weekend's game (injuries during the game aside).

They had 4 former pick 1's, two former pick 2's, a pick 3 and two pick 10's.  All up they had 9 former top 10 picks and 11 within the top 13.  Half of their team was drafted within the top 13 of the National Draft.  To put that in perspective we had 6 players from Saturday drafted within the top 13; and that includes both Hogan and Viney.

Our average age was 23.5 months - there's 25.11 months and our games experience average was 63.9 compared to 98.4.  Those numbers present a huge disparity.

Bolton is doing a great job, but their experience and top end talent is better than what is being reported.  

They were the 5th oldest team on the weekend and even older than the geriatrics from Fremantle.

[Lucifers Hero 37,407]

Thinking about where our improvement is going to come from.  

Clearly, in the next few years it will come from recruits from the last 3 years.  But we need to improve faster if we are to keep up with our 'bottom of the ladder peers' or get ahead of them.  For the sake of team and fan morale and industry cred we can't afford to not have a better 2nd half 2016.  This improvement can only come from our senior/more experienced players.  So, I extracted this table based on games at end of 2015, for 22 yo or over. 

                                        Age        Games  Improvement on 2015 (3,2,1,0)

Max Gawn                          24           39           3

Jack Watts                         24           115         2             

Neville Jetta                        25           73           2

Matt Jones                         28           51           1 (not played since injured)

Sam Frost                          22           24           0 (Not able to hold seniors selection)

Viv Michie                          23           18           0 (Not able to hold seniors selection)

Lynden Dunn                      28           161         0 (Not able to hold seniors selection)

Dean Terlich                       26           35           0 (not yet selected for seniors)

Jack Grimes                       26           98           0 (not yet selected for seniors)

Jake Spencer                     26           36           0 (not yet selected for seniors)

Chris Dawes                      27           115          0 (not yet selected for seniors)

Dom Tyson                        22           50           0 (Treading water)

Tomas Bugg                      22           65           0 (Treading water)

Ben Newton                      23           15            0 (Treading water)

Tom McDonald                  23           82            0 (Treading water)

Aaron Vandenberg             23           14            0 (Treading water)

Jeff Garlett                        26           129          0 (Treading water)

Colin Garland                   27           135           0 (Treading water)

Nathan Jones                   27           201           0 (Treading water)

Cameron Pedersen           28           52             0 (Treading water)

Heritier Lumumba             29           218           0 (Treading water)

Bernie Vince                    30           172           0 (Treading water)

Jack Trengove                  24           81             n/a (Did not play 2015)

I haven't tried to adjust for injuries etc (and I'm not sure that would make much difference to this subjective rating).  This rating may be a bit harsh on 22/23 yo but given our relative player mix I have included them in the 'senior' group.  You may wish to change the ratings but I doubt the overall picture will change much.

All the talk has been about youth and inexperience.  I for one fell for the trap of thinking that is why we aren't improving at the same rate of some other teams around our level in the league. 

My conclusion from the table is our lack of improvement is, in significant part because our senior/experienced players have not improved, so too much is falling on the shoulders of those 21yo or younger. 

For us to get better results this year our more senior players need to lift their game, do what the coaches want, get senior selection and once there play at their best and play to keep their spots. 

Edited May 30, 2016 by Lucifer's Hero

[Dr. Gonzo 22,688]

4 minutes ago, ProDee said:

There's been a bit of discussion about Carlton on this thread.  It's worth noting a couple of things about their list as they entered the weekend's game (injuries during the game aside).

They had 4 former pick 1's, two former pick 2's, a pick 3 and two pick 10's.  All up they had 9 former top 10 picks and 11 within the top 13.  Half of their team was drafted within the top 13 of the National Draft.  To put that in perspective we had 6 players from Saturday drafted within the top 13; and that includes both Hogan and Viney.

Our average age was 23.5 months - there's 25.11 months and our games experience average was 63.9 compared to 98.4.  Those numbers present a huge disparity.

Bolton is doing a great job, but their experience and top end talent is better than what is being reported.  

They were the 5th oldest team on the weekend and even older than the geriatrics from Fremantle.

Compared to our opponents on the weekend we had a relatively less experienced side too;

8 players <20 games vs their 3

12 players <50 games vs their 6

[Dr. Gonzo 22,688]

7 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

My conclusion from the table is our lack of improvement is, in significant part because our senior/experienced players have not improved, so too much is falling on the shoulders of those 21yo or younger. 

For us to get better results this year our more senior players need to lift their game, do what the coaches want, get senior selection and once their keep their spots. 

Can you articulate what you mean by "lack of improvement"? In 2013 we won 2 games, 2014 - 4, 2015 - 7. This year we've won 5 after 10 rounds. At this point last year we had 3 wins. Our percentage has also improved dramatically since 2013 and even since last year (72% after 10 games, 77% at end of season).

I don't think it's necessarily that too much is falling on young shoulders because of an underperforming senior group. I think its that having so many new/younger players means we are more susceptible to being inconsistent. Especially when playing the "total football" game style we are trying to implement, having even one link in the chain not playing well can see the structure break down - if you have 5-6 not playing well or shut out of the game by their opponents it will result in games like the weekend.

 

[iv'a worn smith 1,979]

Lies, damn lies and statistics. I am tired of excuses to be honest.  Let's stop trying to paint our situation as something which is unique.  All teams have their inadequacies to some extent.  It is how you manage those flaws which counts.  At the moment, regardless of draft picks, average age, and the basket case from where Carlton have come, they are doing a better job than us right at the minute.

Edited May 30, 2016 by iv'a worn smith

[Lucifers Hero 37,407]

39 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Can you articulate what you mean by "lack of improvement"? In 2013 we won 2 games, 2014 - 4, 2015 - 7. This year we've won 5 after 10 rounds. At this point last year we had 3 wins. Our percentage has also improved dramatically since 2013 and even since last year (72% after 10 games, 77% at end of season).

I don't think it's necessarily that too much is falling on young shoulders because of an underperforming senior group. I think its that having so many new/younger players means we are more susceptible to being inconsistent. Especially when playing the "total football" game style we are trying to implement, having even one link in the chain not playing well can see the structure break down - if you have 5-6 not playing well or shut out of the game by their opponents it will result in games like the weekend.

I certainly acknowledge that we have improved and our results eg % far better.  And I get the youth/inconsistency situation.  I am also very happy with how we are tracking.  The biggest improvement I see is our scoring built largely on more inside 50's and a greater spread of goal kickers.  Big tick!

On 'lack of improvement' I was thinking that 1) our 2016 wins have been against teams we beat last year and 2) that our senior/experienced players are basically treading water.  If this group had performed better we would have improved more or been less inconsistent.  I was also thinking that we need to show greater improvement in the 2nd half of 2016 and to do that the senior players need to lift their game, especially as young players tire and their inconsistency increases.  

Improvement for me is win about 10 games and take down 2 or 3 'big names' in the process.  I would also hope that if I redo that table at the end of the year at least half the senior players rate some improvement, especially, as the majority are at the stage where they should be performing 'at the peak of their careers'.

 

Edited May 30, 2016 by Lucifer's Hero

[Chris 2,892]

12 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

I certainly acknowledge that we have improved and our results eg % far better.  And I get the youth/inconsistency situation.  I am also very happy with how we are tracking.  The biggest improvement I see is our scoring built largely on more inside 50's and a greater spread of goal kickers.  Big tick!

On 'lack of improvement' I was thinking that 1) our 2016 wins have been against teams we beat last year and 2) that our senior/experienced players are basically treading water.  If this group had performed better we would have improved more or been less inconsistent.  I was also thinking that we need to show greater improvement in the 2nd half of 2016 and to do that the senior players need to lift their game, especially as young players tire and their inconsistency increases.  

Improvement for me is win about 10 games and take down 2 or 3 'big names' in the process.  I would also hope that if I redo that table at the end of the year at least half the senior players rate some improvement, especially, as the majority are at the stage where they should be performing 'at the peak of their careers'.

 

Wouldn't it be difficult to both be at your peak and improving?

[Lucifers Hero 37,407]

Just now, Chris said:

Wouldn't it be difficult to both be at your peak and improving?

We may have the same idea and talking around wording.  I was trying to say that if the majority of our senior players lift their game and play 'at the peak of their careers' in the 2nd half of 2016, they will have improved on their current 'treading water' position in the table...

[Chris 2,892]

1 minute ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

We may have the same idea and talking around wording.  I was trying to say that if the majority of our senior players lift their game and play 'at the peak of their careers' in the 2nd half of 2016, they will have improved on their current 'treading water' position in the table...

I agree. I don't think Vince has been playing well this year, too many bombs out of packs for my liking, especially when they go straight to the waiting opposition, Jones has been working hard but making mistakes I haven't noticed in previous years as well. They are the most important of the experienced brigade who I don't think are in great form which isn't helping. 

I don't think the whole team is in great form at the minute. They look tired to me. 

[P-man 13,285]

With all due respect LH, saying that Vince, Jones and Garlett are "treading water" is not a fair reflection on their output. They are performing at the same or similar level to last year, which is what you would expect. A ratings system that assesses their season on its own merits rather than in comparison to last year would provide a better depiction of what is required.

I also assume Bugg's rating is a mistake. Despite the fact I wouldn't classify him as a senior player, I don't see how it could be argued that he hasn't improved on 2015.

The brutal truth regarding the large remainder of that senior group is they aren't much chop. But that said, if they can come in play to their optimum, it will go a long way towards reaching that goal of 10 or 11 wins. The senior players that I'd really hope to see make an impact in the second half of the year are Dunn, Trengove, Grimes, Dawes and Lumumba. They are capable. Whether the coaches are willing to place their faith in them is another matter.

[Lucifers Hero 37,407]

3 minutes ago, P-man said:

With all due respect LH, saying that Vince, Jones and Garlett are "treading water" is not a fair reflection on their output. They are performing at the same or similar level to last year, which is what you would expect. A ratings system that assesses their season on its own merits rather than in comparison to last year would provide a better depiction of what is required.

I also assume Bugg's rating is a mistake. Despite the fact I wouldn't classify him as a senior player, I don't see how it could be argued that he hasn't improved on 2015.

The brutal truth regarding the large remainder of that senior group is they aren't much chop. But that said, if they can come in play to their optimum, it will go a long way towards reaching that goal of 10 or 11 wins. The senior players that I'd really hope to see make an impact in the second half of the year are Dunn, Trengove, Grimes, Dawes and Lumumba. They are capable. Whether the coaches are willing to place their faith in them is another matter.

Well said - the bold bit is exactly what I was getting at.

[ArtificialWisdom 3,945]

1 hour ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Thinking about where our improvement is going to come from.  

Clearly, in the next few years it will come from recruits from the last 3 years.  But we need to improve faster if we are to keep up with our 'bottom of the ladder peers' or get ahead of them.  For the sake of team and fan morale and industry cred we can't afford to not have a better 2nd half 2016.  This improvement can only come from our senior/more experienced players.  So, I extracted this table based on games at end of 2015, for 22 yo or over. 

                                        Age        Games  Improvement on 2015 (3,2,1,0)

Max Gawn                          24           39           3

Jack Watts                         24           115         2             

Neville Jetta                        25           73           2

Matt Jones                         28           51           1 (not played since injured)

Sam Frost                          22           24           0 (Not able to hold seniors selection)

Viv Michie                          23           18           0 (Not able to hold seniors selection)

Lynden Dunn                      28           161         0 (Not able to hold seniors selection)

Dean Terlich                       26           35           0 (not yet selected for seniors)

Jack Grimes                       26           98           0 (not yet selected for seniors)

Jake Spencer                     26           36           0 (not yet selected for seniors)

Chris Dawes                      27           115          0 (not yet selected for seniors)

Dom Tyson                        22           50           0 (Treading water)

Tomas Bugg                      22           65           0 (Treading water)

Ben Newton                      23           15            0 (Treading water)

Tom McDonald                  23           82            0 (Treading water)

Aaron Vandenberg             23           14            0 (Treading water)

Jeff Garlett                        26           129          0 (Treading water)

Colin Garland                   27           135           0 (Treading water)

Nathan Jones                   27           201           0 (Treading water)

Cameron Pedersen           28           52             0 (Treading water)

Heritier Lumumba             29           218           0 (Treading water)

Bernie Vince                    30           172           0 (Treading water)

Jack Trengove                  24           81             n/a (Did not play 2015)

I haven't tried to adjust for injuries etc (and I'm not sure that would make much difference to this subjective rating).  This rating may be a bit harsh on 22/23 yo but given our relative player mix I have included them in the 'senior' group.  You may wish to change the ratings but I doubt the overall picture will change much.

All the talk has been about youth and inexperience.  I for one fell for the trap of thinking that is why we aren't improving at the same rate of some other teams around our level in the league. 

My conclusion from the table is our lack of improvement is, in significant part because our senior/experienced players have not improved, so too much is falling on the shoulders of those 21yo or younger. 

For us to get better results this year our more senior players need to lift their game, do what the coaches want, get senior selection and once there play at their best and play to keep their spots. 

I like this, I would give Tyson and Bugg 1 each but other than that i agree, TMac, Trenners, Vanders, Newton, Frost are the only 0s I see there that havent already reached or gone past their ceiling 
Garlett might be able to get better but im not sure he will (he is pretty good as is just needs consistant performances)

[Gator 16,921]

The most disappointing aspects are that if Viney is held there's virtually no-one other than Jones to shoulder the load.  If Viney is beaten we look limp in the midfield.  We didn't work hard enough and for a team that is supposedly built around "competitors" there's nowhere near a hard enough edge.

We could have been in the 8 after this weekend, so one must question how hungry this group is.  

[The heart beats true 16,549]

3 hours ago, iv'a worn smith said:

Even this left wing newspaper sums it up pretty well. By the way, I am an avid reader.  The Guardian's view

What I find most interesting about this is that Demonland has rapidly turned into a race to see who can declare this a new false dawn the quickest. I've seen enough this year to know that we are moving in the right direction. No amount of hand ringing on here, or working stats to suit your argument will convince me otherwise. It doesn't make me 'soft', or a 'fool'  - it just makes me hopeful and optimistic (you know - a supporter). Every team we beat now everyone is quick to call useless. Really? GWS? We pushed North to within a kick (and got rubbed by the umps)?

I realise I'm not going to convince a lot of you but I say relax, focus on the potential and stop trying to kill yourselves with angst. You may be very surprised at whats round the corner - I hope so (for all of our sakes).

 

 

[iv'a worn smith 1,979]

2 minutes ago, The heart beats true said:

What I find most interesting about this is that Demonland has rapidly turned into a race to see who can declare this a new false dawn the quickest. I've seen enough this year to know that we are moving in the right direction. No amount of hand ringing on here, or working stats to suit your argument will convince me otherwise. It doesn't make me 'soft', or a 'fool'  - it just makes me hopeful and optimistic (you know - a supporter). Every team we beat now everyone is quick to call useless. Really? GWS? We pushed North to within a kick (and got rubbed by the umps)?

I realise I'm not going to convince a lot of you but I say relax, focus on the potential and stop trying to kill yourselves with angst. You may be very surprised at whats round the corner - I hope so (for all of our sakes).

 

 

No doubt your observations are on the money HBT, but as Dees supporters, we have seen it all too often, not to be cynical.  It is somewhat of a habit for us

[rjay 24,099]

48 minutes ago, ProDee said:

The most disappointing aspects are that if Viney is held there's virtually no-one other than Jones to shoulder the load.  If Viney is beaten we look limp in the midfield.  We didn't work hard enough and for a team that is supposedly built around "competitors" there's nowhere near a hard enough edge.

We could have been in the 8 after this weekend, so one must question how hungry this group is.  

We fell back pretty quickly without him firing no doubt there.

...also a crook Tyson didn't help, he does a lot of the grunt work that was missed on the weekend.

 

[rjay 24,099]

7 minutes ago, The heart beats true said:

What I find most interesting about this is that Demonland has rapidly turned into a race to see who can declare this a new false dawn the quickest. I've seen enough this year to know that we are moving in the right direction. No amount of hand ringing on here, or working stats to suit your argument will convince me otherwise. It doesn't make me 'soft', or a 'fool'  - it just makes me hopeful and optimistic (you know - a supporter). Every team we beat now everyone is quick to call useless. Really? GWS? We pushed North to within a kick (and got rubbed by the umps)?

I realise I'm not going to convince a lot of you but I say relax, focus on the potential and stop trying to kill yourselves with angst. You may be very surprised at whats round the corner - I hope so (for all of our sakes).

 

 

I haven't seen many declaring a false dawn, just a check on expectations.

We've got some real talent to move forward but also a big list of kids that could go either way. I'm tipping with the development team, more will make it than not but also a few 'land' favourites could soon become whipping boys....

[stuie 7,374]

1 hour ago, ProDee said:

The most disappointing aspects are that if Viney is held there's virtually no-one other than Jones to shoulder the load.  If Viney is beaten we look limp in the midfield.  We didn't work hard enough and for a team that is supposedly built around "competitors" there's nowhere near a hard enough edge.

We could have been in the 8 after this weekend, so one must question how hungry this group is.  

There is, but they're kids and weren't playing on the weekend.

It's the mature bodies and leaders that are letting us down and letting it slip in this regard.

 

[DeeZone 8,048]

On 28 May 2016 at 5:57 PM, Franky_31 said:

We could be better if we didnt bomb it from 45-75 out in hope. This happens even with a free kick or a mark. Kent Jones Tyson just dont even try, they bomb.

I cant remember when I saw someone hit up Watts or Hogan on a lead more than twice a game.

If Hogan is double tagged, he should be dragging 2 defenders to the "other side" opening up the fat side. Maybe he just hangs in close.

I dont know why other teams seem to be able to hit up forwards yet our entries are fraught with sh!t kicks.

We hit up their backs ok, particularly Westhoff!!!

[DeeZone 8,048]

4 hours ago, ProDee said:

There's been a bit of discussion about Carlton on this thread.  It's worth noting a couple of things about their list as they entered the weekend's game (injuries during the game aside).

They had 4 former pick 1's, two former pick 2's, a pick 3 and two pick 10's.  All up they had 9 former top 10 picks and 11 within the top 13.  Half of their team was drafted within the top 13 of the National Draft.  To put that in perspective we had 6 players from Saturday drafted within the top 13; and that includes both Hogan and Viney.

Our average age was 23.5 months - there's 25.11 months and our games experience average was 63.9 compared to 98.4.  Those numbers present a huge disparity.

Bolton is doing a great job, but their experience and top end talent is better than what is being reported.  

They were the 5th oldest team on the weekend and even older than the geriatrics from Fremantle.

Some great numbers there ProDee, starts to make sense how they have just gotten so good over night. That list has been building for 5 years, Mick just couldn't get it out of them on the park.!!

[beelzebub 22,542]

Well that was fun while it lasted

Looking towards 2017 now...

For all our cultural shift and blah blah blah we still know how to Fuqq any season of football dont we.

Still some mentally scarred out there....get rid of them ffs  Melbourne   and get rid of that stupid bloody diamond while youre at it too

[Cheap Seats 3,303]

Talk about throw the baby out with the bathwater kind of stuff happening here.

Not sure whos kidding who in this thread, 

At rd 10 we're 5 & 5 with a couple tough losses and a couple games we could have easily won.

Beats the last few years ... and before anyone gets their knickers in a knot I think 2016 yr is another building block, Im not getting carried away with media hype