33 minutes ago, Altona-demon said:

There's an overriding assumption in this thread that "copying" the modern template will be the answer to the woes we are currently experiencing as a team.

With this assumption comes the rationalisation of draft picks potential / alignment to that assumption.

The first order question is whether we should copy (i don't think so), or whether we should pick the gameplan that will in 2-3 years be the new dominant style. I believe it was Sam Mitchell that noted that his challenge when coming to the Hawks was not to copy the then current dominant style, contested defence zone that Melbourne had mastered, but to define what would be copied next.

I think we can all agree he's been sucessful in this. My question, does Goody have that sort of innovation in his kit bag?

You have to understand that Goody's coaching philosophy is largely a defensive one, so his response to anything will be from a place where defence is king.

I have a funny feeling that the evolution of the modern game will be one that looks to restrict the free flowing nature of it and look to lock down ball movement and transition. Maybe its a higher press, making the ground skinnier or flood the corridor etc who knows, but its a ying and yang...the game has - IMO - become too open / offensive, which will be corrected in the coming years by and over-the-top defensive style plan and the cycle will continue.

1 minute ago, GS_1905 said:

You have to understand that Goody's coaching philosophy is largely a defensive one, so his response to anything will be from a place where defence is king.

I have a funny feeling that the evolution of the modern game will be one that looks to restrict the free flowing nature of it and look to lock down ball movement and transition. Maybe its a higher press, making the ground skinnier or flood the corridor etc who knows, but its a ying and yang...the game has - IMO - become too open / offensive, which will be corrected in the coming years by and over-the-top defensive style plan and the cycle will continue.

Agreed - an astute observation. The question for the club is what side of the ledger (Yin or Yang) do we want to be?

My gut feel is that you are right, and that if we can find the way to address this I think we win in the medium to long-term.

Some observations along the lines of what you are suggesting with the higher press (is that similar to Richmond 2018-2020 btw?):

1. The umpiring of HTB is allowing players to ride tackles longer, which means forward half pressure and tackling as a tactic has become less effective.

2. Players are getting better at spreading at the right time, decision making, meaning defending the open expanses of a football ground is becoming much harder. This is equally hard for the zone to adjust as "triggers" for spreading are becoming harder for defenders to follow, this is becoming apparent with Melbourne as teams "run through" our zone.

3. Would be interested to analyse the scoring patterns of the good teams, when they match up against good defending teams.

3 minutes ago, GS_1905 said:

You have to understand that Goody's coaching philosophy is largely a defensive one, so his response to anything will be from a place where defence is king.

I have a funny feeling that the evolution of the modern game will be one that looks to restrict the free flowing nature of it and look to lock down ball movement and transition. Maybe its a higher press, making the ground skinnier or flood the corridor etc who knows, but its a ying and yang...the game has - IMO - become too open / offensive, which will be corrected in the coming years by and over-the-top defensive style plan and the cycle will continue.

Undoubtedly, the next evolution will be a defence based game but this current style of game was created to open up our gamelan - very effectively, I might add. It’s all cyclical.

No matter what we try and do, we need better skills across the park to be able to execute the very thing that wins games, kicking the ball through the big sticks more than the opposition.

2 minutes ago, BW511 said:

Undoubtedly, the next evolution will be a defence based game but this current style of game was created to open up our gamelan - very effectively, I might add. It’s all cyclical.

No matter what we try and do, we need better skills across the park to be able to execute the very thing that wins games, kicking the ball through the big sticks more than the opposition.

What does remain constant through most games styles is an ability to score from turnover. Which we bucked the trend in '21 (although our centre clerance dominance in Q3, probably fudged the stats on that night).

Scoring largely comes from turnover.

If you turn the ball over teams try to go as quickly as they can because it is harder for the defence to organise.

It relies on running and trust in your teammates to support the defensive matrix you are trying to implement. If there's a breakdown in that, either because communication is bad or one in the chain fails you get punished.

Its why players like Fritsch kill teams. They dont provide pressure or tackles. And it looks like the way we look look now, hopeless. Like players haven't a clue what they are supposed to be doing. Its why heads get dropped because the 'system' keeps breaking down.

Geelong are well drilled and are patient. They have a lot of trust in their team mates and are content to kick it all day sideways until an overlap or gap appears. When it does they all know what to do - spread and run. The kicker often kicks to space for their team mate to run onto - a much easier kick than the hail Mary's we try to pull off under pressure.

Its all a failure of coaching to drill the players on what and where they are supposed to be. And failing to drop players that refuse to adhere to the new style.

2 hours ago, jnrmac said:

Scoring largely comes from turnover.

If you turn the ball over teams try to go as quickly as they can because it is harder for the defence to organise.

It relies on running and trust in your teammates to support the defensive matrix you are trying to implement. If there's a breakdown in that, either because communication is bad or one in the chain fails you get punished.

Its why players like Fritsch kill teams. They dont provide pressure or tackles. And it looks like the way we look look now, hopeless. Like players haven't a clue what they are supposed to be doing. Its why heads get dropped because the 'system' keeps breaking down.

Geelong are well drilled and are patient. They have a lot of trust in their team mates and are content to kick it all day sideways until an overlap or gap appears. When it does they all know what to do - spread and run. The kicker often kicks to space for their team mate to run onto - a much easier kick than the hail Mary's we try to pull off under pressure.

Its all a failure of coaching to drill the players on what and where they are supposed to be. And failing to drop players that refuse to adhere to the new style.

The scary thing is thru the first month we are actually top 3 in the comp for turnover difference and created more turnovers than the opposition for our first three games. And bottom three from scores from turnovers. Aye caramba.

49 minutes ago, Jjrogan said:

The scary thing is thru the first month we are actually top 3 in the comp for turnover difference and created more turnovers than the opposition for our first three games. And bottom three from scores from turnovers. Aye caramba.

Maybe that's why SG is optimistic we are doing numerous things right but execution is very poor

When it doesn't work it looks a mess

1 hour ago, Jjrogan said:

The scary thing is thru the first month we are actually top 3 in the comp for turnover difference and created more turnovers than the opposition for our first three games. And bottom three from scores from turnovers. Aye caramba.

Has there ever been a better argument to therefore ignore most stats as every movement etc deserves a qualification.

Football really isn't that complicated.... unless you're us .

46 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

47 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

Maybe that's why SG is optimistic we are doing numerous things right but execution is very poor

When it doesn't work it looks a mess

Even if we correct that substantially though Jnr we still have....

1. Poor decision making coming inside 50. Eg; bombing wide or deep into a pocket instead of looking inside more often for the free player on 45s, fat side over the top to advantage or kicking to someone on a lead.

2. A forward line that struggles to take many marks inside 50 and who are very often poor at converting. How often have we kicked ourselves out of the game early in the last few seasons?

3. Pressure that is often below the AFL average. Since 2024, we have been one of the worst pressure teams going both in our forward 50 and in a general sense.

I personally can't see us fixing some or all of these in the near term when we've had 2.5 seasons (or thereabouts) to fix No.2 and failed miserably (so far).

Edited Wednesday at 05:453 days by Demon Dynasty

On 08/04/2025 at 14:52, KozzyCan said:

2023 we were first for inside 50s with an average of 58.4. 6th for marks inside 50 with 12.8, 4th for shots on goal with 26.7 but 6th for goals again with 12.8. I believe this is the year you were talking about where we successfully locked it into our forward half but couldn't really improve our scoring off the back of it.

Thanks for doing the research that I should have done. 2023 was really one that got away. Frustrating as hell.

7 hours ago, Jjrogan said:

The scary thing is thru the first month we are actually top 3 in the comp for turnover difference and created more turnovers than the opposition for our first three games. And bottom three from scores from turnovers. Aye caramba.

I didn't know this. That's actually huge and something we can hang our hat on. Where did you read this?

Edited Wednesday at 11:103 days by Adam The God

21 hours ago, Altona-demon said:

There's an overriding assumption in this thread that "copying" the modern template will be the answer to the woes we are currently experiencing as a team.

With this assumption comes the rationalisation of draft picks potential / alignment to that assumption.

The first order question is whether we should copy (i don't think so), or whether we should pick the gameplan that will in 2-3 years be the new dominant style. I believe it was Sam Mitchell that noted that his challenge when coming to the Hawks was not to copy the then current dominant style, contested defence zone that Melbourne had mastered, but to define what would be copied next.

I think we can all agree he's been sucessful in this. My question, does Goody have that sort of innovation in his kit bag?

100 x this post.

10 hours ago, Adam The God said:

I didn't know this. That's actually huge and something we can hang our hat on. Where did you read this?

Calculated and confirmed off Wheelo. We've been +5, +5 +8 and -4 so far. Pies and Cats ahead of us. Hawks and Saints just below. Port, NM and Rich make bottom three.

5 hours ago, Jjrogan said:

Calculated and confirmed off Wheelo. We've been +5, +5 +8 and -4 so far. Pies and Cats ahead of us. Hawks and Saints just below. Port, NM and Rich make bottom three.

Reinforces my view that we are OK with the defence, contest and forcing turnovers but are clueless with ball in hand.

20 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

Reinforces my view that we are OK with the defence, contest and forcing turnovers but are clueless with ball in hand.

And my understanding is we don't have a ball movement coach amongst our ranks. A bad oversight that.

3 minutes ago, Adam The God said:

And my understanding is we don't have a ball movement coach amongst our ranks. A bad oversight that.

I believe we just play soccer at training these days 😊

10 minutes ago, Adam The God said:

And my understanding is we don't have a ball movement coach amongst our ranks. A bad oversight that.

I think that’s Chaplin’s role and maybe a bit of Sam Radford.

The issue is the caps put on coach spending, which probably limits where we can spend our money.