Copying the Bulldogs

[Dante 2,739]

9 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

Zaine Cordy had 4 tackles including a monster one on Hannebery early for his goal but he's a very limited player as a forward. 

I'd expect Cloke wouldn't be as good defensively but would offer more with the ball. They obviously think they can get him fitter, more mobile and more confident. 

I expect Cloke will end up depth behind Crameri but by having the extra tall he could give them the option play Stringer as a proper utility in the midfield and even down back. He's a shell of the player he was last year.

Stringer was terrible at times yesterday, he actually got in the way several times and they would probably have been better without him, although he would have demanded a reasonable player to look after him, just in case.

Do you think he's drunk too much of his own bathwater?

 

[Ted Lasso 19,549]

13 hours ago, mo64 said:

I been saying it for 2 years, it all comes down to the coach. Roos felt he needed 2 years of a defensive gameplan before he let the players attack. Beveridge walks in and has his team playing an attacking style, which the players embraced, but realised that it wouldn't take them all the way. Within the space of 1 preseason, Beveridge has them being the best defensive team in the comp.

And don't get me started on Roos' list of excuses when the team had a shocker. Despite having horrible luck with injury, Beveridge never made excuses, and instilled belief in his whole squad. 

Beveridge has been innovative from day one, whilst Roos felt he was just a caretaker coach whio could take the pressure off the club.

The thing you're either ignoring or missing was Macca, he did something very similar to what Roos did taught the dogs how to defend and play contested footy and Bevo was able to come in to a really solid list, and add the offensive layer, Macca deserves a lot of credit for where the Dogs are now, Bevo's done a great job, but it's really been built over both coaches. 

[mo64 5,881]

1 hour ago, Dante said:

Remember the list that Roos inherited, I do it was a shambles and he had to spend the next couple of years ridding us of the deadwood. You can say what you want about Roos but he has regenerated our list and we are where we are at the moment because of him, the last lot will go this year, I believe.

Roos had to rid us of 50 years of mediocrity, apart from some patches of finals, which we were never a realistic chance to win, we have been garbage. The Bullies had some good players and played finals a few years ago, the culture at that club was far superior to ours, whose isn't, and as we'd been destroying our list they'd been building theirs.

I'm excited by our list, Pertacca can be our Bont, Hunt can be our JJ, Hogan can be our Boyd, Max is better than Roughy and we have a pretty exciting bunch of kids in the midfield with Oliver, Viney, Dom and Brayshaw capable of going to the next level. Roos has left us in good shape and now it's up to Goodwin to deliver.

 

 

That's just utter BS. Show me one comment by a person that was bullish about the Dogs when Beveridge took over. And you talk about their culture. Their captain walked, their Brownlow medallist walked, Higgins walked, their coach was sacked, their CEO was sacked. They didn't even have a coach appointed when preseason training had started. They were a trainwreck when Beveridge took over.

And Hogan can be our Boyd. Get serious. Boyd has played one good game in his career to date. Beveridge has turned him into a role player. Hogan has tonnes more talent than Boyd ever will.

[TeamPlayedFine39 8,510]

There is no way Beveridge could have coached the 2014 Demons list to any success - loved 'me, but that list was shocking. He inherited a great young, quick, hard and talented list.

[rjay 25,092]

1 hour ago, Dante said:

Stringer was terrible at times yesterday, he actually got in the way several times and they would probably have been better without him, although he would have demanded a reasonable player to look after him, just in case.

Do you think he's drunk too much of his own bathwater?

 

Stringer has a bad shoulder and will go in for an op.

Interesting they took the tape off it when he went back to VFL, probably so as not to mark the target. Little bit like the subterfuge with Lin Jong.

Hasn't been able to play with the injury.

Some can, others can't. It did his confidence in.

[rjay 25,092]

21 minutes ago, mo64 said:

That's just utter BS. Show me one comment by a person that was bullish about the Dogs when Beveridge took over. And you talk about their culture. Their captain walked, their Brownlow medallist walked, Higgins walked, their coach was sacked, their CEO was sacked. They didn't even have a coach appointed when preseason training had started. They were a trainwreck when Beveridge took over.

 

Hindsight is a wonderful thing, maybe you should go back and analyse the comments made at the time and see how far off the mark they were rather than use them to back a spurious argument.

[Dante 2,739]

14 minutes ago, mo64 said:

That's just utter BS. Show me one comment by a person that was bullish about the Dogs when Beveridge took over. And you talk about their culture. Their captain walked, their Brownlow medallist walked, Higgins walked, their coach was sacked, their CEO was sacked. They didn't even have a coach appointed when preseason training had started. They were a trainwreck when Beveridge took over.

And Hogan can be our Boyd. Get serious. Boyd has played one good game in his career to date. Beveridge has turned him into a role player. Hogan has tonnes more talent than Boyd ever will.

2012 They won 8 games we won 2

2013 They won 7 games we won 4

2010 They played finals, finished 4th and won 14 games. We won 8 and finished 12th.

In the years 2012 and 2013 we had Mark Neeld who not only decimated our list, he also destroyed all the players that we had, most of whom were second raters to say the least. The Bullies had a good list even though they had turmoil at the club and if you'd like to take the time to compare the two lists at the start of Roos reign and the start of Bevos reign, let me know if you can see any difference. How many of the players that were in the Bullies side yesterday were there when he arrived, how many of the players in the side that played the last game of Melbourne's season were there when Roos started?

Their Captain walked for Money, the BM left because he was shown the door, Higgins left for money and isn't that the way to do it; get rid of the money men and those that have a poor attitude.

How many times have you seen a club with a good list of players come good after they get rid of an unpopular coach and some poisonous players?

Hogan has shown that he can be a top liner and Boyd has been ordinary to date, but the way Boyd stamped his authority on the game yesterday says to me that he will be a force in the competition.

 

[Satyriconhome 10,879]

http://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/how-luke-beveridge-built-the-bulldogs-up-from-brendan-mccartneys-focus-on-the-contest/news-story/e5b94059f95c2b650e19a747cf92c393

Gee this sounds familiar

Edited October 2, 2016 by Satyriconhome

[Satyriconhome 10,879]

• Liam Picken,
• Mark Austin,
• Shaun Higgins

HB

• Robert Murphy,
• Dale Morris,
• Jack Macrae

C

• Tom Young,
• Matthew Boyd,
• Adam Cooney

HF

• Fletcher Roberts,
• Stewart Crameri,
• Will Minson

F

• Luke Dahlhaus,
• Jake Stringer,
• Daniel Giansiracusa

Fol

• Tom Campbell,
• Ryan Griffen,
• Tom Liberatore

I/C

• Marcus Bontempelli,
• Nathan Hrovat,
• Jason Johannisen

Sub

• Koby Stevens

McCartney's last team, so Beveridge had a massive cleanout

Forgot to add Jordan Roughead out with injury and Lin Jong omitted

And Dickson, Smith, Hamling and Biggs were on the list

Edited October 2, 2016 by Satyriconhome

[junk 342]

The Bulldogs got rid of their affliated VFL side and went alone. I am all for us to dump Casey and the development squad (too many byes).Our 2nds are called the Demons anf if we need 3rds they could a affliated club or academy as long as there are the same number of teams as the 2nds,no odd no.of teams thus reducing byes. 2nds and 3rds to play 22 games like the AFL and finals.

[Satyriconhome 10,879]

5 minutes ago, ENYAW said:

The Bulldogs got rid of their affliated VFL side and went alone. I am all for us to dump Casey and the development squad (too many byes).Our 2nds are called the Demons anf if we need 3rds they could a affliated club or academy as long as there are the same number of teams as the 2nds,no odd no.of teams thus reducing byes. 2nds and 3rds to play 22 games like the AFL and finals.

I know the result was wrong for MFC, but the two teams who played in the VFL grand final were Footscray and Casey, so the affiliation or non affiliation seems to make little difference

[DeeSpencer 26,082]

4 minutes ago, ENYAW said:

The Bulldogs got rid of their affliated VFL side and went alone. I am all for us to dump Casey and the development squad (too many byes).Our 2nds are called the Demons anf if we need 3rds they could a affliated club or academy as long as there are the same number of teams as the 2nds,no odd no.of teams thus reducing byes. 2nds and 3rds to play 22 games like the AFL and finals.

The Hawks have won 3 flags with Box Hill. I'd stick with Casey as long as the alignment works as it has this year where both clubs bought in to a shared vision. The Dogs did well bringing the Footscray brand back and playing at Whitten Oval but that isn't something we can do. If we want our own VFL team we need a home base.

Max King is the only player to spend a long time in the Development league, everyone else has been in the seniors unless coming back from injury. The Casey senior players - Tim Smith, Hutchins, Keilty, Munro, Morris, Scott were strong contributors in addition to the Melbourne players, they weren't overpowering or overpowered.

I don't see a need for 22 games. Fringe players should get chances in the AFL team. Young developing players can only handle about 18 in a season as is and that's probably including preseason. The AFL season is too long for most players as is.

 

[Sir Why You Little 37,133]

It is all about ATTITUDE

Something the MFC still lacks if they couldn't be bothered turning up to play against Carlton in Round 22

[old dee 23,872]

8 hours ago, Colin B. Flaubert said:

No chance in hell that Bevo would have been able to thrive like he has at the Dogs had he come to us after 2011.

And why do we have to be so reactive? I now the OP has said that we shouldn't outright steal the Dogs' game plan but ever since I have arrived at Demonland all I have ever heard about is how we need to play Clarko footy (and before that we had to master the forward press). Why can't we just play our own style?

 

Which is?

[Demon Dynasty 17,109]

22 hours ago, chook fowler said:

You never win a flag by copying anybody. Innovation and team commitment and cohesion are the go.

That is exactly correct.

This is where the Club lives and dies by what is put in place to support the players. Starting with the President, the administration and the Coach.

Then the recruiting dept and list management. Then the support staff including assistants, doctors, trainers etc and last but not least the facilities.

I believe we have all of the above in place with the exception of 3 things.....

1. You need a great man manager Coach. We had that in Roos but we won't know whether Goody is this until we know.
2. The list still needs some serious work and IMO we are still 2 drafts away (approx 8 to 10 very solid 'experienced' recruits) from turning into a consistent finals challenger.
3. We do not have a Space/Place for the Melbourne faithful, players/officials and potential supporters (who might visit to use the facilities to hang out in and come together on a regular basis nor on a big occasion like a GF appearance for those who can't get a ticket!). Ie., there's no home ground/club rooms/social facility that we associate with being a part of and essence of what it is to be the MFC. Pretty much all other clubs have this that i can think of immediately.

On point No. 3 you can laugh and joke if you wish, but i think this is a crucial factor towards our short and long-term success and towards becoming a serious AFL club in the hunt for silverware and regular finals appearances.

Having such a facility/space/place/club would allow for the players and the club to bring out their best. It might help towards making the players/FD etc feel as if they 'owe' it to give something back to an all round great club with a great vibe, feel and facilities. Their family/friends are also welcome and frequent there. They see them and regular supporters there. In doing so, they will feel some sort of 'weight' to perform to their very best and also feel some sort of connection/loyalty effect, to some degree, with the genuine supporters/members regularly present and close up, showing their faces around the club. Not just a distant noisy throng of faces that you see once every other week or so at the G and the odd 'Saty' loyal type who can make a training session on a working day. A bit easy come, easy go without a genuine club venue/facility IMO.

At this point we do not have and never have had this facility/area/space/genuine social facility that makes the MFC feel like a genuine 'real' footy club with a cross section of real people, both officials and others, mixing together under the one roof.

I hark back to my visit to the Dog Kennel on a work assignment last year. I posted this on the 20th August 2015....

..... "I'm sitting in the Barkers Cafe at the Whitten, oddly enough on a work assignment, watching how vibrant and "together" this place feels ... our old boy Lukey Beveridge standing around happily chatting to some eager patrons/supporters hanging off his every word. I often wondered why we never had a place for our supporters to truly hang out together with clubmen and players just floating around. I guess that's because we've never been a truly "local" club that ppl can associate with and just "hang out" together with officials and players alike...as one. Im not saying by any means this is the answer to all our woes either. And the Doggies hardly have a proud record to bark about. But gee I'd kill for a place like this that actually feels like a real footy club. A place where ppl can come and "belong" and feel a part of.

Oh well. Maybe in my next lifetime eh "..... end.

The only time i have ever felt that the MFC came close to feeling like a Doggy, Hawks, Blues or a Cats type club set up and feel was the Northy years. Swooper new the importance of creating a 'club' type feel both to encourage the supporters into the club (both in numbers, passion/atmosphere and hopefully conversion to additional memberships with success) and the players to have some sort of connection to the supporters. He opened the club up a little to the supporters and allowed them some limited space and time (in the rooms before and after a game) to mix it with the players. Although it's only a small part of what is really needed, it was better than nothing at all.

I hope i am wrong but my personal view is, that unless we address Point No.3 we may never get our hands on another piece of AFL silverware.

If i had some say in the future of the MFC i would be seriously looking at all options to fix this ASAP, including the potential of leasing Waverly Park, once the Hawks move out (as one option). I can't think of any other serious alternatives at this stage that are easily accessible out east which fit in with our push into the outer Easter (Casey) region and alignment with Casey. It may not be ideal but it sure offers us an oval, training facilities and a few nice food/bev and fitness venues inside, where members, players and friends/family/officials and the public can hang out. A place that the MFC can truly call home and it actually feels like (and is!!) a real club! They may have outgrown the venue now after so much success but Waverly certainly hasn't hindered the Hawks in any way!

Edited October 2, 2016 by Rusty Nails

[Adam The God 30,420]

On 10/1/2016 at 8:44 PM, praha said:

Bit tough. Dees still had a lot of ego that didn't buy into Roos, and depth that struggled at AFL level.

We were and still are coming from much further back than the Dogs were. 

Roos was extremely diplomatic. He kept his cards close to his chest. Bevvy is emotional and a good people person. So is Roos, but they're two totally different personalities. Beveridge is more like Clarkson.

Roos is just Roos.

Knowing Luke, this is completely untrue. He may have learnt under Clarkson, but he's nothing like Clarkson and he's as cool as a cucumber. If anything he can come across as emotionless, rather than emotional. Roos, Clarkson and Luke are all very different people.

Furthermore, it'll be interesting to see how Clarkson goes if Fagan heads north as is being suggested. Who will keep the angry little man on a leash? 

11 hours ago, grazman said:

I'm not sure about copying the Bulldogs, but I have thought that since Roos came on board that we were only 12-18 months behind them in terms of developing our list.  There are some similarities with that way we are going about it, which isn't really copying them, but more following what we have known about footy for the longest time and that is you need to get your hands on the pill first to win games of footy.   

They have more experience across the back six (Murphy, Boyd, Morris) that really sets up the way they play and its interesting that their zone defence is the way we are setting up as well (much to the chagrin of many of our supporters - see either St Kilda game day threads from this year)   Like us they don't really play man on man (i.e. kpd on kpf)  in their back six where they rotate onto different players to cover player moving up the ground.  The exception yesterday was Hambling who was given the job on Buddy, although I think he should be making some sacrificial offerings to the footy Gods for the rest of his career after Buddy rolled his ankle.   They're flexible enough to adapt to circumstances and whilst a parochial view I think our younger tall defenders are the equal if not better than theirs. I also think when Hunt, Salem, Wagner, Hibberd etc play more games together that it will become tighter and our counter attacks from the back half will look more structured rather than a bit haphazard the way they did at times this year.

Their best 6 in Bont, Libba, Wallis, Hunter, McRae and Stringer are good/elite but in comparison I think Hogan, Petracca, Gawn, Viney, Oliver and Brayshaw are going to be just as good if not better.

The one area I think we will be better than the dogs is in our forward structure.  I think they were fortunate in playing another side whose game plan is really suited to a different venue.  They rely heavily on running and carrying the ball into the forward fifty and most of their goals came from scrambled forward fifty entries.  I think/hope with Hogan, Watts and Weideman/Hulett we would kick a winning score if we had as many forward fifty entries as the dogs did yesterday.

I'd also count Tyson in that group. And if he's not in our top 6 in 2-3 years and still playing as he is, that'll be one scary top 6.

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

11 hours ago, Colin B. Flaubert said:

Why can't we just play our own style?

I heard Clarkson say recently something that I have argued for a long time on these forums, that it was all about playing to the strengths of a team.

There is no one set way to play the game (besides a few non-negotiables such as tackling), because no two lists are ever the same.

[jnrmac 20,188]

10 hours ago, rjay said:

Hindsight is a wonderful thing, maybe you should go back and analyse the comments made at the time and see how far off the mark they were rather than use them to back a spurious argument.

It's not hindsight. Every commentator had them pencilled in for bottom 3.

Here's 3 comentators in this article. They were a basket case.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/footy-15/western-bulldogs-2015-preview-no-more-offfield-excuses-says-david-king/news-story/717840874f2ef20a30b40fb50e05d53c

 

Edited October 2, 2016 by jnrmac

[Dante 2,739]

21 minutes ago, Clint Bizkit said:

I heard Clarkson say recently something that I have argued for a long time on these forums, that it was all about playing to the strengths of a team.

There is no one set way to play the game (besides a few non-negotiables such as tackling), because no two lists are ever the same.

Question is, do you play to the strengths of the side you currently have or the side you intend recruiting, remembering that a football list is fluid. 

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

13 minutes ago, Dante said:

Question is, do you play to the strengths of the side you currently have or the side you intend recruiting, remembering that a football list is fluid. 

Current.

[rjay 25,092]

24 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

It's not hindsight. Every commentator had them pencilled in for bottom 3.

Here's 3 comentators in this article. They were a basket case.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/footy-15/western-bulldogs-2015-preview-no-more-offfield-excuses-says-david-king/news-story/717840874f2ef20a30b40fb50e05d53c

 

You're not reading me correctly 'jnrmac'...what I'm saying is we now have the benefit of hindsight and can see the list and club (Dogs) was much better than thought at the time.

We can have no doubt that looking at our list at the same time it was a basket case as was the club. The poster I was replying to seemed to want to compare Beveridge  and Roos. There is no point in that, we can see by using hindsight that their list was in much better shape than ours.

Somehow he was trying to back up his point by using the type of articles you are posting now. Hindsight tells us they are wrong so why use them to make an argument now that Beveridge would have come in and taken us to the promised land in a couple of seasons and Roos had no idea about what he was doing.

The problem with commentators is they tend to jump on bandwagons and don't do serious enough analysis.
This is why many had Richmond in the 8, some top 4, and in 2015 most predicted Carlton would be pushing for the 8.

David King (says David King) by the way is a champion data parrot, he doesn't go on air without consulting "Luffy" first, talks with him every morning apparently. Even with this wealth of data whenever he has to make a prediction the only one I can remember him getting right was Neeld not being up to it.

[Tony Tea 2,809]

Ahem. Clarko footy.

[Gator 17,474]

On 01/10/2016 at 7:37 PM, DeeSpencer said:

But they are now the pacesetters of the comp...

I don't agree with this assertion.

They came 7th in a year with no standout and were the team in the best form at the right time.

Edited October 3, 2016 by ProDee

[jnrmac 20,188]

9 hours ago, rjay said:

You're not reading me correctly 'jnrmac'...what I'm saying is we now have the benefit of hindsight and can see the list and club (Dogs) was much better than thought at the time.

We can have no doubt that looking at our list at the same time it was a basket case as was the club. The poster I was replying to seemed to want to compare Beveridge  and Roos. There is no point in that, we can see by using hindsight that their list was in much better shape than ours.

Somehow he was trying to back up his point by using the type of articles you are posting now. Hindsight tells us they are wrong so why use them to make an argument now that Beveridge would have come in and taken us to the promised land in a couple of seasons and Roos had no idea about what he was doing.

The problem with commentators is they tend to jump on bandwagons and don't do serious enough analysis.
This is why many had Richmond in the 8, some top 4, and in 2015 most predicted Carlton would be pushing for the 8.

David King (says David King) by the way is a champion data parrot, he doesn't go on air without consulting "Luffy" first, talks with him every morning apparently. Even with this wealth of data whenever he has to make a prediction the only one I can remember him getting right was Neeld not being up to it.

I get all of that. I just don't agree with it. Beveridge has been an outstanding coach from day 1. I think the list he had was pretty ordinary and in total disarray.

What he has is a game plan, not unlike Clarko, where players can come and go but they all know and perform their role. He has turned ordinary players into good ordinary players. He also re-defined roles for his senior players like MBoyd, Murphy and Morris as he realises they are the heartbeat of the club.

What worries me about Goodwin is that he has never coached a side at any level (excluding the NAB Cup this year.)

[rjay 25,092]

15 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

I get all of that. I just don't agree with it. Beveridge has been an outstanding coach from day 1. I think the list he had was pretty ordinary and in total disarray.

What he has is a game plan, not unlike Clarko, where players can come and go but they all know and perform their role. He has turned ordinary players into good ordinary players. He also re-defined roles for his senior players like MBoyd, Murphy and Morris as he realises they are the heartbeat of the club.

What worries me about Goodwin is that he has never coached a side at any level (excluding the NAB Cup this year.)

You are arguing a different point so I'm not sure you do get all that.

Beveridge has been a terrific coach, not saying he hasn't.

I didn't even mention Goodwin, he has nothing to do with the point I'm making.

The point is the state of the list & club at the time Roos took over with us and Beveridge took over at the Dogs.

So you think their list was around par with ours?

All good we just don't agree on that.