Ed Langdon says "I told you so"

[Mach5 4,768]

I’m just happy that the focus is still on unlocking ways to beat other teams rather than us. 

[layzie 34,014]

Smooth operator.

[Cheap Seats 3,310]

On 6/15/2023 at 12:25 PM, A F said:

A question that could be posed far more heavily to Collingwood, our own main competitor. Or Port, one of our other competitors.

This group of players got the job done less than 24 months ago.

And in 2023, it's clear we've made substantial tweaks to our system, but retained the emphasis on CP and defence, playing to our strengths.

But our system tweaks are going to take a little longer to perfect. We still don't move the ball quickly totally instinctively like Collingwood do. However, if we bring our pressure game, we have multiple ways of winning the game. It's not just force them down the line to our interceptors via upfield pressure anymore. It's more sophisticated. And we score not just from stoppage, but from turnover and against the likes of Collingwood, this is a very tried and true formula for success against their high risk game style.

It's a great discussion point and you can take the glass half full or glass half empty option.

Ive gone with glass half empty as since 2021 we have struggled to best the good sides. I think the pies win was out first real big win over the last 19 months. Again that's debatable but as we're talking about the dees I'll keep it to us.

Only time will tell, and there would be another solid argument that no one wins finals in July, but I'd personally like to see us score more fluently against good sides 

I think the freo game confirmed we can be stopped by a good defence and if teams play high risk high reward footy it exposes our backline. 

But time will tell. We are definitely a chance, but the season is super close this year and we will need a lot to go right.

The only other real discussion point (and its probably been brought up in another thread, sorry I've been sick and not following if that's the case), but do we have a good midfield balance? Are we too contested footy heavy and do not have enough ball users and speed?

The midfield functioned well without Oliver. Clearly Oliver is a must play but I've always questioned if we carry too many ball winners and not enough ball users.

[tiers 2,843]

5 minutes ago, Cheap Seats said:

The midfield functioned well without Oliver. Clearly Oliver is a must play but I've always questioned if we carry too many ball winners and not enough ball users.

Its not ball users we need but ball carriers who can break through.

We lost Hunt and Bedford (who were otherwise not best 22) but, apart from occasional Kozzie, there is no one else. Time to find some run.

[Gawndy the Great 9,011]

On 6/15/2023 at 8:32 PM, dee-tox said:

Just trying to be objective but it is the depth of Collingwood's midfield that makes them so dangerous. As much as we dislike him, Degoey is a dynamic player that can break lines and Sidebum is an elite user of the ball. They complement the other Pie midfielders. The more the ball was in the hands of Taylor Adams, Noble, etc. the better it was for us.

And their other mids (Daicos bro's, Pendles) were clearly not 100%.

If we meet in Sept and both lists are at full health and are in form, it will be hard to split them. Ultimately we have a harder game style to play against and relies on turnover to score (good for finals) and fewer components that must go right.

Pies style is high risk, but also relies on high skill. Something that tends to fall apart when nervy and subject to high pressure. 

[Cheap Seats 3,310]

4 hours ago, tiers said:

Its not ball users we need but ball carriers who can break through.

We lost Hunt and Bedford (who were otherwise not best 22) but, apart from occasional Kozzie, there is no one else. Time to find some run.

True.

I do think part of the reason is because goody favours defence and contests the bigger body slower types are preferred.

But it does create a balance issue on offence.

[JimmyGadson 3,455]

5 hours ago, tiers said:

Its not ball users we need but ball carriers who can break through.

We lost Hunt and Bedford (who were otherwise not best 22) but, apart from occasional Kozzie, there is no one else. Time to find some run.

An accurate kick gets to its target quicker than a ball carrier takes to get it there. 

They're both important, obviously. And for different reasons. Positionally speaking. But to suggest that we don't need ball users and only ball carriers is a bit silly. 

A winger's ability to run all day is clearly super important, especially the way in which we deploy ours. But even Langdon's good line breaking comes undone with his poor ball use, more often than I'd like. (Yes, I'm obviously still aware of the importance of his run and how valuable it is). 

The decision to let Frost and Hunt go is proof of what I'm saying however. There's no point being a line breaker if you turn the ball over the majority of the time. And I can't say we miss them for that reason exactly. 

We don't have a problem with run.  We have a problem with ball use, execution and decision making. Plain and simple. We are a forward half team, we consistently get the ball inside 50. But we fluff so many opportunities due to our lack of composure, ball use and execution. 

We've built a list to compete in September which as we all know differs from regular season football significantly but I swear to god we're about three players off from being unstoppable. 

Whilst we still have Max and May playing solid football, we need to address this in the off-season.

One inside/outside mid with ball use, class and x-factor (Duursma) 

One small high half-forward link up player with elite skills in the Papley role (Watson) 

If we could land these two, I'd be ecstatic. Might be hard. 

But I digress.

Ed Langdon. Great player. Onya Ed. 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 19, 2023 by JimmyGadson

[tiers 2,843]

11 hours ago, JimmyGadson said:

An accurate kick gets to its target quicker than a ball carrier takes to get it there. 

They're both important, obviously. And for different reasons. Positionally speaking. But to suggest that we don't need ball users and only ball carriers is a bit silly.

An accurate kick from 20-30m closer to goal offers even more opportunities to penetrate a defence.

Please do not make nonsense inferences from what I said. It's just that, at the moment, we have plenty of ball users but a dearth of ball carriers (Ed L excepted of course).

Frost and Hunt were undone more by the team's lack of a plan to take advantage of their unique skills than by their respective deficiencies.

[radar 1,865]

Defence looks so much safer with Salem finding form.

And McVee ....

[IRW 1,387]

On 6/13/2023 at 9:03 AM, Demon17 said:

So a year ago it was 'All duck or no dinner' and Ed gets crunched for it.

He was on the money then, and MFC showed yesterday that if the corridor is denied to the Pies they are just another good team with problems when their first choice strategy is addressed by the opposition. 

The talk now primarily will be how the Dees unlocked the Pies game plan.  Good coaches elsewhere will be taking notice. The trick will be having the talent to execute.

Well done Ed.

Wow  that's a big call .

Can you get him to fix the Dee's forward structure please?

" forward line like a 3 Michelin star kitchen but the chef has called in  "work from home "but no one has told the footy dept"

[binman 43,818]

On 6/15/2023 at 8:42 PM, Mach5 said:

I’m just happy that the focus is still on unlocking ways to beat other teams rather than us. 

This. 

At club land they no doubt don't worry about media noise, and the Pies for instance would be under no illusions about who are the key rivals and the threat they pose.

But it can't hurt to have the whole footy media, and therefore most footy fans too, think the Pies method is the template for success that all other clubs have to find a 'blueprint' to defeat.

And so the starting point for every single analysis of who might win the flag is that the Pies are unquestionably the best team and ipso facto have the best method. 

And therefore the starting point for the analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of any contender, us for instance, is what they have to do to counter the Pies. As opposed to what weapons and strategies they have the Pies might have to worry about (which if they ever get to that point, is almost an afterthought).

So, for example, where is the discussion about whether, when the whips are cracking come finals, the Pies can physically match the power and strength of the lions and the dees' mids and flankers?

I mean after all, they lost two finals last year in part because the Swans and Cats were too tough in the clinches.

And they have lost to two of three games this season against key rivals in the lions and the dees - and in both games they were physically outmatched.   

We had to deal with that constant scrutiny last year - how do you beat the dees?

By mid season, the consensus was you simply can't beat the dees if you play slow and allow us to get set defensively. Playing fast was the only avenue to beating us.

And that is where the game has gone - fast transition.

Teams like Carlton who were slow to that party are now desperately trying to retool their method. Slow won't cut.

The pies are being lauded for introducing a 'new' exciting method, which is fair enough i guess. But it was the dees that forced that shift in footy because it was clear we were nigh on unbeatable if we were allowed to control the tempo and oppo transition was slow. 

The big difference between the focus on how to defeat our method in 2022 and the focus this season of how to beat the Pies' method, is we were coming of winning a flag in one of most dominant finals series EVER.

And the Pies are coming off a 2022 season where they lost two of three finals and failed to even make the Grand Final, let alone win it.

The Cats, basically took our territory, forward half footy, contested ball game plan as the template and tweaked it a bit - and won the flag. Meaning the last two flags have been won by teams with very similar methods

By the by, it's worth noting that the Cats, like us in 2021, really got rolling in the last two months of the season and again like us, starting playing much faster and really hammered teams.

In their last three home and away games, the Cats smashed their opposition, scoring 110 points against the Saints, 119 against the Suns and 131 against the Eagles.

Then come finals they scored only 78 points against the Pies, but scored 120 points against the Lions, smashing them by 71 points before destroying the Swans in the Grand Final scoring 133 to win by 81.

The last two GFs have been won by teams playing a very similar method, which in turn is based on the uber successful Tigers' method.

The tigers won the flag in 2020, 2019 and 2017. 

Meaning you could make a case that five of the last six flags have been won by teams with relatively similar methods and game plans. 

Why then is the Pies method the template for success this season? 

It defies logic and history (replicate what flag winners do).

But i'm sure Goody is fine with the Pies being held up as the templar. 

Edited June 20, 2023 by binman

[Demon17 5,203]

On 6/20/2023 at 1:38 PM, IRW said:

Wow  that's a big call .

Can you get him to fix the Dee's forward structure please?

" forward line like a 3 Michelin star kitchen but the chef has called in  "work from home "but no one has told the footy dept"

Whats a big call.?

I don't think ed can fix our fowards. It worked fine in a chaotic manner against the pies. Who knows how we will go against the cats.

[whatwhat say what 22,949]

On 6/20/2023 at 2:29 PM, binman said:

This. 

At club land they no doubt don't worry about media noise, and the Pies for instance would be under no illusions about who are the key rivals and the threat they pose.

But it can't hurt to have the whole footy media, and therefore most footy fans too, think the Pies method is the template for success that all other clubs have to find a 'blueprint' to defeat.

And so the starting point for every single analysis of who might win the flag is that the Pies are unquestionably the best team and ipso facto have the best method. 

And therefore the starting point for the analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of any contender, us for instance, is what they have to do to counter the Pies. As opposed to what weapons and strategies they have the Pies might have to worry about (which if they ever get to that point, is almost an afterthought).

So, for example, where is the discussion about whether, when the whips are cracking come finals, the Pies can physically match the power and strength of the lions and the dees' mids and flankers?

I mean after all, they lost two finals last year in part because the Swans and Cats were too tough in the clinches.

And they have lost to two of three games this season against key rivals in the lions and the dees - and in both games they were physically outmatched.   

We had to deal with that constant scrutiny last year - how do you beat the dees?

By mid season, the consensus was you simply can't beat the dees if you play slow and allow us to get set defensively. Playing fast was the only avenue to beating us.

And that is where the game has gone - fast transition.

Teams like Carlton who were slow to that party are now desperately trying to retool their method. Slow won't cut.

The pies are being lauded for introducing a 'new' exciting method, which is fair enough i guess. But it was the dees that forced that shift in footy because it was clear we were nigh on unbeatable if we were allowed to control the tempo and oppo transition was slow. 

The big difference between the focus on how to defeat our method in 2022 and the focus this season of how to beat the Pies' method, is we were coming of winning a flag in one of most dominant finals series EVER.

And the Pies are coming off a 2022 season where they lost two of three finals and failed to even make the Grand Final, let alone win it.

The Cats, basically took our territory, forward half footy, contested ball game plan as the template and tweaked it a bit - and won the flag. Meaning the last two flags have been won by teams with very similar methods

By the by, it's worth noting that the Cats, like us in 2021, really got rolling in the last two months of the season and again like us, starting playing much faster and really hammered teams.

In their last three home and away games, the Cats smashed their opposition, scoring 110 points against the Saints, 119 against the Suns and 131 against the Eagles.

Then come finals they scored only 78 points against the Pies, but scored 120 points against the Lions, smashing them by 71 points before destroying the Swans in the Grand Final scoring 133 to win by 81.

The last two GFs have been won by teams playing a very similar method, which in turn is based on the uber successful Tigers' method.

The tigers won the flag in 2020, 2019 and 2017. 

Meaning you could make a case that five of the last six flags have been won by teams with relatively similar methods and game plans. 

Why then is the Pies method the template for success this season? 

It defies logic and history (replicate what flag winners do).

But i'm sure Goody is fine with the Pies being held up as the templar. 

fantastic post @binman

i think yr right when you say that the filth aren't held up as the method needed to play to win the flag

and, really, their game plan is not too dissimilar to that of the tigs, us, or the cats, in terms of taking territory, repeat forward entries, etc etc

[binman 43,818]

12 minutes ago, whatwhat say what said:

 

And, really, their game plan is not too dissimilar to that of the tigs, us, or the cats, in terms of taking territory, repeat forward entries, etc etc

Exactly.

The key difference is the pies' defensive line pushing up and not having a goal keeper.

And they take more risks. 

I think those two differences, which are interconnected, are also their biggest vulnerabilities. 

All duck no dinner.

[Roost it far 8,634]

36 minutes ago, binman said:

Exactly.

The key difference is the pies' defensive line pushing up and not having a goal keeper.

And they take more risks. 

I think those two differences, which are interconnected, are also their biggest vulnerabilities. 

All duck no dinner.

Careful, look what happened to the last guy who said that about the Pies