We're kidding ourselves!

[mo64 5,874]

16 minutes ago, ArtificialWisdom said:

I cant get over how nobody else sees this. Look at each of these teams best on the weekend

Carlton: Gibbs, Docherty, Armfield. Curnow (Ed), Rowe, Cripps    Total games: 576 Avg: 96 lowest: 32
St Kilda: Steven, Armitage, Reiwoldt, Fisher, Geary                               923, 185, 122
Bulldogs: Wood, Dahlhaus, Liberatore, Macrae, Hunter, Suckling          505, 84, 46
Power: Wingard, Gray (R), Ebert, Dixon, Westhoff, Boak                       872, 145, 75

Our best from win the week before:
Melbourne: Hogan, Bugg, Stretch, Petracca, Garlett, Oliver, Watts      395, 56, 5 (4 played less games than all listed above)

They might be having faster "rebuilds" but they are lead by seasoned stars, we are lead by children

What a ridiculous analysis? You're comparing our best players from our win against an undermanned basket case in Brisbane to Carlton's best players in a win against flag favourite's Geelong. Nothing can be garnered from such a comparison. 

You're really clutching at straws. 

 

[Dr. Gonzo 24,219]

2 minutes ago, iv'a worn smith said:

Yep, we are led by children.  As I said earlier in a post on this topic, the poor MFC is unique and no other AFL side has had to experience the same list issues or administration problems that we have had to.  Not all that long ago, the Bullies sacked their senior coach, who is now with us, Cooney and Griffen walked out and that all now seems like a distant memory.

 

1 minute ago, mo64 said:

What a ridiculous analysis? You're comparing our best players from our win against an undermanned basket case in Brisbane to Carlton's best players in a win against flag favourite's Geelong. Nothing can be garnered from such a comparison. 

You're really clutching at straws.

That's the point though - our senior players haven't been good enough to lead us through. Other than Jones who have we got? We've got Vince now but he's been imported and been a great pickup. Dunn? Garland? Dawes, Lumumba, Pedersen (when they've been able to get on the park). TMac is still 23, Watts 25. We don't have the senior players and onfield leadership, we are still in the midst of cultural change. We've got the personnel in now but they're still kids and need time to grow into their roles. 

We're still paying for the actions of the previous admin and FD's, that's why it's been such a long climb back. We gutted the list and stuffed up our recruiting at a time when the Saints and Dogs were playing in PF's and GF's. Even Carlton has a core group who played SF's for a couple of years. They've still got a core of senior players, we haven't.

Saying that Jones has been a lone hand for the better part of a decade isn't hyperbole, it's been him and not much else.

[1 red eye 1 blue eye 771]

13 hours ago, Wiseblood said:

Melbourne fans do this better than most.  You see it in the gameday threads, around the league threads etc.  Constant moaning about how we lost to this team or why we can't be that team.  It's a talent that is unmatched by opposition supporters.

It's a struggling footy club, followed by possibly the oldest average supporter base, and a natural human condition. Older> grumpier.

[ArtificialWisdom 4,045]

9 minutes ago, mo64 said:

What a ridiculous analysis? You're comparing our best players from our win against an undermanned basket case in Brisbane to Carlton's best players in a win against flag favourite's Geelong. Nothing can be garnered from such a comparison. 

You're really clutching at straws. 

 

Ok fair point, how about this then.

Vs Essendon:  Thomas, Gibbs, Curnow, Murphy, Simpson, Byrne, Kerridge     997, 143, 8 
Vs Fremantle:  Cripps, Kerridge, Murphy, Simpson, Curnow, Thomas             824, 137, 32

Are they even enough comparisons for you? Interesting how those are even higher averages! If you would like we can look at it again assuming they beat Brissy this week.

[mo64 5,874]

17 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

 

That's the point though - our senior players haven't been good enough to lead us through. Other than Jones who have we got? We've got Vince now but he's been imported and been a great pickup. Dunn? Garland? Dawes, Lumumba, Pedersen (when they've been able to get on the park). TMac is still 23, Watts 25. We don't have the senior players and onfield leadership, we are still in the midst of cultural change. We've got the personnel in now but they're still kids and need time to grow into their roles. 

We're still paying for the actions of the previous admin and FD's, that's why it's been such a long climb back. We gutted the list and stuffed up our recruiting at a time when the Saints and Dogs were playing in PF's and GF's. Even Carlton has a core group who played SF's for a couple of years. They've still got a core of senior players, we haven't.

Saying that Jones has been a lone hand for the better part of a decade isn't hyperbole, it's been him and not much else.

We'll agree to disagree. The difference between Beveridge/Bolton and Roos is that Beveridge and Bolton walked into the door and gave the players belief in themselves. They also gave their players a gameplan that was workable from day 1. No talk of taking 2 years to learn this or that. That's the crutch that Roos has always leant on, and will continue to until he sails into the sunset with his retirement paid for by the MFC.

 

BTW, the core of the Blues finals teams included Waite, Garlett, Betts and Judd, and even then they made the finals by default (Bombers kicked out).

Edited May 31, 2016 by mo64

[Dr. Gonzo 24,219]

7 minutes ago, mo64 said:

We'll agree to disagree. The difference between Beveridge/Bolton and Roos is that Beveridge and Bolton walked into the door and gave the players belief in themselves. They also gave their players a gameplan that was workable from day 1. No talk of taking 2 years to learn this or that. That's the crutch that Roos has always leant on, and will continue to until he sails into the sunset with his retirement paid for by the MFC.

 

BTW, the core of the Blues finals teams included Waite, Garlett, Betts and Judd, and even then they made the finals by default (Bombers kicked out).

Do you remember how bad we were in 2013? We won 2 games, 50% - we would've only won 1 game (luckily against a fast finishing Bulldogs) if GWS weren't still finding their feet.

What Roos has had to achieve compared to Bolton and Beveridge is incomparable.

 

EDIT: They also had Murphy, Gibbs, Kreuzer, Walker, Curnow, Simpson - they also made finals in 2009-11, not just by default in 2013.

Edited May 31, 2016 by Dr. Gonzo

[rjay 24,928]

29 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

 

That's the point though - our senior players haven't been good enough to lead us through. Other than Jones who have we got? We've got Vince now but he's been imported and been a great pickup. Dunn? Garland? Dawes, Lumumba, Pedersen (when they've been able to get on the park). TMac is still 23, Watts 25. We don't have the senior players and onfield leadership, we are still in the midst of cultural change. We've got the personnel in now but they're still kids and need time to grow into their roles. 

We're still paying for the actions of the previous admin and FD's, that's why it's been such a long climb back. We gutted the list and stuffed up our recruiting at a time when the Saints and Dogs were playing in PF's and GF's. Even Carlton has a core group who played SF's for a couple of years. They've still got a core of senior players, we haven't.

Saying that Jones has been a lone hand for the better part of a decade isn't hyperbole, it's been him and not much else.

Spot on 'Dr. Gonzo'... our leaders have been the problem on the back of poor recruiting and development over many years.

Jones has been a lone hand, we picked up Vince who has been a beauty for us but our own and other imports have been a bust.

We rely heavily on our young kids and anyone that can't see the difference between our list, St Kilda, Carlton, Footscray and even the EFC list is "kidding themselves".

We have a great core of kids, 2 senior leaders and another bunch of kids that could go either way.

One of the reasons I started this topic was I think apart from the supporters it's time the FD stopped kidding themselves and Roos stopped talking c...p about Trengove putting his hand up and put him in. The kid is a leader and one of the better skilled players at the club, he had a bad foot injury, he's done his time and it's time to see whether he can come back and play at senior level.

We badly need leaders at this club, lets see if Jack can stand up now.

I think it's great to see Daisy at Carlton now playing some good footy, people forgot how good he was and they watched a shadow running around the last couple of years, a kid who could kick long goals from beyond 50 couldn't get the distance from inside 30.

Lets hope Jack returns and resumes from his first couple of years. He will be a very important player if he can.

[Radar Detector 1,347]

1 hour ago, ProDee said:

Really ?  Hogan, Oliver, Brayshaw and Salem could be "boom or bust" ?

You should learn to back your eyes a bit more.

And even on limited viewing Stretch, Harmes and Hunt have shown a greater propensity to contest and tackle than Blease, Strauss, Maric and co.  Stretch averages double their disposals for starters and even though he's outside he cracks in far more.

Anyway, I'm happy to relax knowing the list we're building and you can just hope we're getting things right.

I was saying that Oliver, Hogan and Brayshaw are not too dissimilar from Scully, Trengove and Frawley at the same stage. The others I mentioned which you highlighted above are where I feel we have a bit of an edge today on where we were in 2010. I personally just can't extrapolate that just yet into certain success like you and many others seem able to. But don't let all that get in the way of your pompous condescension.

[Sir Why You Little 37,039]

2 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Who said Carlton are better than us? I'm as annoyed with the ups and downs as anyone but some people need to get a grip. We're not sub-AFL standard anymore, teams lose games sometimes. We're on track to be in the mix for finals (granted the next month may put paid to that) which is about where we're at. The Essendon loss was infuriating but other than that we've lost 2 games against better ranked teams and 2 games against 50/50 opponents. We've also beaten one team better than us, 2 against worse teams and 2 against 50/50 sides. So all up I'd say we're about par for the course. Not exceeding where we should be but not worse.

We are sub standard AFL defensively

Edited May 31, 2016 by Sir Why You Little

[Demon Dynasty 17,109]

1 hour ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

They lost to WCE by 8 une eints the week before and beat the Lions by 80inpoints two weeks before that. They weren't struggling like Gold Coadecint are they justisweren't dominating as some expected them to. We definitely didn't play to our ability but this was a genuine 50/50 game, one in which we went in underdogs. Some are acting like it was the Essendon loss all over again - it's not. It was annoying, frustrating whatever but its not burn the house down blow up the list stuff that some on here are making it out to be.

We are building a young developing list. Roos said he should've made more changes - he's said that a couple of times. But how do you make 4 changes to a team that won by 10 goals? How is that good for morale? I think he's also protecting the players by taking the heat while getting games into the kids. Would you rather Petracca and Oliver are in the team or out? Hunt and Wagner? Sure the argument could be made for Oscar McD but overall we're playing the kids because the facts are they are the better options.

West coast are  Domain bullies. Havent won away from home since Rnd 16 last year against a mediocre Pies outfit who we also beat 2 weeks later.

Most teams are smashing the lions away from home, Including us by over 10 goals In Rnd 9.

I would hardly be hanging my hat on those 2 results as justifaction as to why we performed so poorly.

I have no qualms with playing the kids, just not so many at the one time, especially In defence. We look like millionaires when they (and the more seasoned players) are on. But when a few too many of them are off on the day the result Is usually a shocker/blow out. 

Roos said he regrets not having the courage to stand by his earlier decision to rest more youngsters from the week before. We paid the price for that lack of courage/Indecision. Not saying we wld have one had he bitten the bullet either but the result may have been much closer or maybe an over the line result.

Power also have no recognised ruckman atm and pretty much only one key avenue to goal In Dixon with 2nd string tall. Some quality smalls yes but they were as vulnerable as you would have gotten them In the last year or so, hence the dissapointment from many on here with the nature of the loss.

 

[Demon Dynasty 17,109]

Cant edit on phones lol!

That's "Won" and "no" 2nd string tall forward :-S

[Gator 17,361]

26 minutes ago, Radar Detector said:

I was saying that Oliver, Hogan and Brayshaw are not too dissimilar from Scully, Trengove and Frawley at the same stage. The others I mentioned which you highlighted above are where I feel we have a bit of an edge today on where we were in 2010. I personally just can't extrapolate that just yet into certain success like you and many others seem able to. But don't let all that get in the way of your pompous condescension.

In no universe was Frawley in Hogan's league.  Even when he made AA he wasn't a patch on Hogan, who is chronically undervalued for some reason.  A victim of his own standards.

Josh Kennedy is the reigning Coleman Medalist and best traditional key forward in the comp (there's never been anyone like Buddy) and check out Hogan's stats in comparison.

Average Disposals:

Kennedy 15.7 (157); Hogan 15.6 (156)

Marks:

Kennedy 7.6 (76); Hogan 7.6 (76)

Contested Marks:

Kennedy 2.3 (23); Hogan 2.6 (26)

Marks inside 50:

Kennedy 4 (40); Hogan 3.6 (36)

Inside 50's

Kennedy 2.6 (26); Hogan 2.8 (28)

Goal assists:

Kennedy 1.1 (11); Hogan .7 (7)

Goals:

Kennedy 3.7 (37); Hogan 2.6 (26)

Hogan is already a gun and some Melbourne supporters don't even realise it.

Tom Lynch (Gold Coast) is recognised as a gun key forward and in AA form.  He's also in his 6th season.  Let's compare he and Hogan.

Average Disposals:

Lynch 14 (140); Hogan 15.6 (156)

Marks:

Lynch 6 (60); Hogan 7.6 (76)

Contested Marks:

Lynch 2.6 (26); Hogan 2.6 (26)

Marks inside 50:

Lynch 2.8 (28); Hogan 3.6 (36)

Inside 50's

Lynch 2.4 (24); Hogan 2.8 (28)

Goal assists:

Lynch 1.1 (11); Hogan .7 (7)

Goals:

Lynch 3.4 (34); Hogan 2.6 (26)

Hogan has Lynch covered in just about every stat except goals kicked and the only reason for that is goal kicking accuracy.  Hogan has had one more shot at goal (45 to 44).  

I accept that Scully and Trengove were rated as highly as Oliver and Brayshaw, however, the latter two will become big bodied mids, who are the most likely to succeed.  And already Oliver is as clean in close as any Melbourne player I've ever seen.  I'm not sure what you're missing to think the jury is still out on him.

Happy to leave it there and agree on our differences.

Edited May 31, 2016 by ProDee

[Demon Dynasty 17,109]

7 minutes ago, ProDee said:

In no universe was Frawley in Hogan's leaguin.  Even ishen he made AA he wasn't a patch on Hogan, who is chronically undervalued for some reason.  A victim of his own standards.

Josh Kennedy is the reigning Coleman Medalist and best traditional key forward in the comp (there's never been anyone like Buddy) and check out Hogan's stats in comparison.

Average Disposals:

Kennedy 15.7 (157); Hogan 15.6 (156)

Marks:

Kennedy 7.6 (76); Hogan 7.6 (76)

Contested Marks:

Kennedy 2.3 (23); Hogan 2.6 (26)

Marks inside 50:

Kennedy 4 (40); Hogan 3.6 (36)

Inside 50's

Kennedy 2.6 (26); Hogan 2.8 (28)

Goal assists:

Kennedy 1.1 (11); Hogan .7 (7)

Goals:

Kennedy 3.7 (37); Hogan 2.6 (26)

Hogan is already a gun and some Melbourne supporters don't even realise it.

Tom Lynch (Gold Coast) is recognised as a gun key forward and in AA form.  He's also in his 6th season.  Let's compare he and Hogan.

Average Disposals:

Lynch 14 (140); Hogan 15.6 (156)

Marks:

Lynch 6 (60); Hogan 7.6 (76)

Contested Marks:

Lynch 2.6 (26); Hogan 2.6 (26)

Marks inside 50:

Lynch 2.8 (28); Hogan 3.6 (36)

Inside 50's

Lynch 2.4 (24); Hogan 2.8 (28)

Goal assists:

Lynch 1.1 (11); Hogan .7 (7)

Goals:

Lynch 3.4 (34); Hogan 2.6 (26)

Hogan has Lynch covered in just about every stat except goals kicked and the only reason for that is goal kicking accuracy.  Hogan has had one more shot at goal (45 to 44).  

I accept that Scully and Trengove were rated as highly as Oliver and Brayshaw, however, the latter two will become big bodied mids, who are the most likely to succeed.  And already Oliver is as clean in close as any Melbourne player I've ever seen.  I'm not sure what you're missing to think the jury is still out on him.

Happy to leave it there and agree on our differences.

Based on those excellent comparative stats from your good self, he Is one greedy man Pro! (GA ave of 0.7 vs 1). 

Also when was the last time a Demon forward (other than Hulk...I think In his 7 goal effort earlier this season) took 7 marks Inside 50? Neita maybe?

[Demon Dynasty 17,109]

7 or more I mean! 

[Dr. Gonzo 24,219]

1 hour ago, Sir Why You Little said:

We are sub standard AFL defensively

Rubbish - we're not as good as the best teams but to say we are "sub-AFL standard" is just hand-wringing.

Note - we are comfortably in the top tier of clubs offensively to date this season.

[Dr. Gonzo 24,219]

1 hour ago, Rusty Nails said:

West coast are  Domain bullies. Havent won away from home since Rnd 16 last year against a mediocre Pies outfit who we also beat 2 weeks later.

Most teams are smashing the lions away from home, Including us by over 10 goals In Rnd 9.

I would hardly be hanging my hat on those 2 results as justifaction as to why we performed so poorly.

I have no qualms with playing the kids, just not so many at the one time, especially In defence. We look like millionaires when they (and the more seasoned players) are on. But when a few too many of them are off on the day the result Is usually a shocker/blow out. 

Roos said he regrets not having the courage to stand by his earlier decision to rest more youngsters from the week before. We paid the price for that lack of courage/Indecision. Not saying we wld have one had he bitten the bullet either but the result may have been much closer or maybe an over the line result.

Power also have no recognised ruckman atm and pretty much only one key avenue to goal In Dixon with 2nd string tall. Some quality smalls yes but they were as vulnerable as you would have gotten them In the last year or so, hence the dissapointment from many on here with the nature of the loss.

 

I'm not saying people can't be disappointed with the loss - I was/am disappointed with the loss. But the fact is we are about on par with Port Adelaide and went into the game underdogs. The margin blew out in the end but for much of the game we were in touch with them just couldn't land those couple of blows which would've put the psychological pressure on them. And that was with us playing well below our capabilities.

WCE played off in the GF last year, they kept up with the Swans for much of the game. I don't think they're a premiership contender but they're definitely gonna play finals. They're ahead of both us and Port home or away and Port did well to almost roll them. The Lions almost rolled the Swans and kept with the Hawks for 3/4's. Things aren't as black and white as you think the competition is as even as its been in some time. If a team is down by even 5% you won't win against a team who is "on". That's what happened to us on the weekend, it will probably happen again before the years out. Melbourne supporters need to stop riding the rollercoaster and assess things over the course of the year and the last 3 years.

I have a feeling Roos is shielding the players/team talking about selection decisions. No club is going to make 4 changes to a team that won by 10 goals unless they've got top 10 players banging down the door. Who didn't play who should have? Grimes? Michie? Spencer? Frost? Would those guys have really been the difference between winning and losing on the weekend? Even Trengove isn't gonna come in and win the game off his own boot in his first game in 2 years. The fact is we lost against Port because they ran harder, applied more pressure and disposed of the footy more accurately than us. That wouldn't have changed with one or two changes in personnel.

[Wiseblood 24,637]

Say one thing about our defensive system - it's certainly brought up some vigorous debate from both sides.

At least there is a positive side to the discussion these days.  While it might not look pretty at times at least we can see where we are headed and what we are trying to implement.  It was only a few years ago that we had no idea about the direction we were headed in as a club.  Those days are gone.

Be patient.

[Middymalt 244]

Rather Hogan than Boyd I reckon Patton was the real deal before injury if hogan goes home this year and I think he will stay we want Freo first pick for the next 2 seasons and  Lachie Neeld .

Edited May 31, 2016 by Middymalt

[Wiseblood 24,637]

Just now, Middymalt said:

Rather Hogan than Boyd I reckon Patton was the real deal before injury if hogan goes home this year and I think he will stay we Freo first pick for the next 2 seasons and  Lachie Neeld .

Any relation to Mark?  

[Radar Detector 1,347]

1 hour ago, ProDee said:

In no universe was Frawley in Hogan's league.  Even when he made AA he wasn't a patch on Hogan, who is chronically undervalued for some reason.  A victim of his own standards.

Josh Kennedy is the reigning Coleman Medalist and best traditional key forward in the comp (there's never been anyone like Buddy) and check out Hogan's stats in comparison.

Average Disposals:

Kennedy 15.7 (157); Hogan 15.6 (156)

Marks:

Kennedy 7.6 (76); Hogan 7.6 (76)

Contested Marks:

Kennedy 2.3 (23); Hogan 2.6 (26)

Marks inside 50:

Kennedy 4 (40); Hogan 3.6 (36)

Inside 50's

Kennedy 2.6 (26); Hogan 2.8 (28)

Goal assists:

Kennedy 1.1 (11); Hogan .7 (7)

Goals:

Kennedy 3.7 (37); Hogan 2.6 (26)

Hogan is already a gun and some Melbourne supporters don't even realise it.

Tom Lynch (Gold Coast) is recognised as a gun key forward and in AA form.  He's also in his 6th season.  Let's compare he and Hogan.

Average Disposals:

Lynch 14 (140); Hogan 15.6 (156)

Marks:

Lynch 6 (60); Hogan 7.6 (76)

Contested Marks:

Lynch 2.6 (26); Hogan 2.6 (26)

Marks inside 50:

Lynch 2.8 (28); Hogan 3.6 (36)

Inside 50's

Lynch 2.4 (24); Hogan 2.8 (28)

Goal assists:

Lynch 1.1 (11); Hogan .7 (7)

Goals:

Lynch 3.4 (34); Hogan 2.6 (26)

Hogan has Lynch covered in just about every stat except goals kicked and the only reason for that is goal kicking accuracy.  Hogan has had one more shot at goal (45 to 44).  

I accept that Scully and Trengove were rated as highly as Oliver and Brayshaw, however, the latter two will become big bodied mids, who are the most likely to succeed.  And already Oliver is as clean in close as any Melbourne player I've ever seen.  I'm not sure what you're missing to think the jury is still out on him.

Happy to leave it there and agree on our differences.

I agree with much of what you say overall including on Hogan and Oliver. I  also believe that our development now is much better. But history just tells me not to extrapolate this too far too early. Hogan could leave or Oliver could get a career threatening injury like Trengove. Gawn and Petracca have both already done ACLs, Brayshaw has now had a spate of concussions and Salem has had muliple injuries/health issues. These are the guys I am highly confident will make it along with Viney, Tyson and T-Mac.

Anyway, I'm not as far away from your view as you probably think so also happy to leave it there. I 100% hope you turn out to be correct.

[Middymalt 244]

3 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

Any relation to Mark?  

I was thinking that when I posted lachie ? He's a good player.

[Middymalt 244]

2 minutes ago, Radar Detector said:

I agree with much of what you say overall including on Hogan and Oliver. I  also believe that our development now is much better. But history just tells me not to extrapolate this too far too early. Hogan could leave or Oliver could get a career threatening injury like Trengove. Gawn and Petracca have both already done ACLs, Brayshaw has now had a spate of concussions and Salem has had muliple injuries/health issues. These are the guys I am highly confident will make it along with Viney, Tyson and T-Mac.

Anyway, I'm not as far away from your view as you probably think so also happy to leave it there. I 100% hope you turn out to be correct.

I watched Trengove play u18 at casey he was to slow Scully is a gun hrs dominated this year less rotations he's killing it.

[John Crow Batty 8,863]

I have a feeling we might see a special effort from the boys this weekend. The pending fixture for the rest of the season is scary and it might shake them up finally and there is nowhere to hide.

Edited May 31, 2016 by america de cali

[Bay Riffin 1,474]

17 minutes ago, america de cali said:

I have a feeling we might see a special effort from the boys this weekend. The pending fixture for the rest of the season is scary and it might shake them up finally and there is nowhere to hide.

Clarkson will have studied us by now, and be ready to slice open our game plan, as he has done every year.

[Gator 17,361]

27 minutes ago, Middymalt said:

I watched Trengove play u18 at casey he was to slow Scully is a gun hrs dominated this year less rotations he's killing it.

Just a silly comment.  

He ran 2.97 seconds for 20 metres, which is considered good pace.  His bio's said he had good pace.  And if he was "too slow" recruiters wouldn't have drafted him at pick 2 and he wouldn't have been labelled in SA as the best junior since Buckley.

That said, Sam Mitchell is slow.  Luke Hodge is slow.  Scott Pendlebury is slow.  Patrick Cripps was considered by some to be slow (although he's OK in my eyes).  Jimmy Bartel is slow.  If you're good enough you're quick enough.

That said, I repeat, Trengove wasn't slow at 18.

Edited May 31, 2016 by ProDee