2024 Game Style

[YesitwasaWin4theAges 6,708]

3 hours ago, Wrecker46 said:

I've said it in the game plan thread it's obvious what we are doing doesn't suit us. That doesn't mean it's wrong to trial it and add that play to our game.

We will SWITCH back to our proven formula in the run home. No point doing it when our best player has a mangled hand and coming off half a pre-season.

Goodwin is our first premiership coach in 50 years he is not stupid. Oliver, Petracca & Viney our greatest midfield ever but none elite kicks. We will play to our strengths when the time comes

I tend to agree Wrecker, I think it could be possible that we might have tweaked our aggressive all ground squeeze and midfield dominance to a more conservative less taxing game style to maintain our endurance for a full season.

If you had noticed we didn't come flying out of the blocks like the last 2 years entering this years opening round.

I can see Sydinee hitting a wall soon, they can't maintain that way of playing all year.

They have peaked way to early and setting themselves up for teams to take them down in the 2nd half of the year.

No 5 day breaks for them though.

Can't do that to Sydinee.

 

 

[Kent 2,913]

15 hours ago, dl4e said:

It has become way too conservative. There is no flair or run especially in the midfield.

Low iQ coach who has no offensive game plan Current Game plan is a shambles

[RedBlueandTrue 359]

1 hour ago, Kent said:

Low iQ coach who has no offensive game plan Current Game plan is a shambles

Lowest iq coach to stay in the top 4 for 3 years. Imagine he was also an intellectual like us K.

Things a bit shaky at the minute especially given finding success following stylistic change is historically instantaneous in team sport. We'll be right or we won't.

Doesn't change that Goody has delivered us success no other coach could for almost 6 decades.

[Ollie fan 3,468]

Just looked into this thread.

 First comment: the complaint is about the change in game style. For the last two years there have been any number of critics (moaners) who say Goody doesn't change things, isn't flexible. Now the complaint is that he has been flexible and changed things.

 Secondly, the theme is: Our game plan is no good. Is that what people thought after the Geelong game? Or when watching the comeback against Carlton?

Third: The complaints about failure to get a good KPF and good ball users. As others have said, it is HARD to get s good KPF to swap clubs, and the threads has noted that we tried hard to get Tex. But our recruiting over the last few years has included JVR and Jefferson, as well as trading for BBB, Schache and Fullarton - clearly the club is trying to address this, and I believe that next year JVR will be a star. But young KPFs take time to develop.

 As for good ball users. - isn't that why we picked Windsor  and traded for Hunter and Billings, and why we are playing McVee, Howes, Bowey? 
 

Yes, there is room to get much better, but noone should think the club doesn't know these things or isn't addressing them.

[jnrmac 20,154]

3 hours ago, Ollie fan said:

Just looked into this thread.

 First comment: the complaint is about the change in game style. For the last two years there have been any number of critics (moaners) who say Goody doesn't change things, isn't flexible. Now the complaint is that he has been flexible and changed things.

 Secondly, the theme is: Our game plan is no good. Or when watching the comeback against Carlton?

Third: The complaints about failure to get a good KPF and good ball users. As others have said, it is HARD to get s good KPF to swap clubs, and the threads has noted that we tried hard to get Tex. But our recruiting over the last few years has included JVR and Jefferson, as well as trading for BBB, Schache and Fullarton - clearly the club is trying to address this, and I believe that next year JVR will be a star. But young KPFs take time to develop.

 As for good ball users. - isn't that why we picked Windsor  and traded for Hunter and Billings, and why we are playing McVee, Howes, Bowey? 
 

Yes, there is room to get much better, but noone should think the club doesn't know these things or isn't addressing them.

You can't seriously be pointing to the Carlton game to say our game plan is good? You'd have to be trolling.

Carlton have lost 4 of the last 6 because the comp has worked out that you stop Cripps and Walsh there is no Carlton.  Not Melbourne though. They let C&W run riot despite the week before Collingwood showing the blueprint on how to stop them.

6 goals to nil to start the game.

The first quarters are killing us because we are the easiest side to coach against. You will never be surprised with Goodwin on game day.

And our midfield is a shadow of its former self.  Most couldn't hit a barn from 20m away

Then our main fwds have started with the stellar numbers in the first half the last two weeks. Collectively they have had something like 6 possessions total in two weeks in the first half.

Yep our game plan is going gangbusters.

[Ollie fan 3,468]

35 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

You can't seriously be pointing to the Carlton game to say our game plan is good? You'd have to be trolling.

Carlton have lost 4 of the last 6 because the comp has worked out that you stop Cripps and Walsh there is no Carlton.  Not Melbourne though. They let C&W run riot despite the week before Collingwood showing the blueprint on how to stop them.

6 goals to nil to start the game.

The first quarters are killing us because we are the easiest side to coach against. You will never be surprised with Goodwin on game day.

And our midfield is a shadow of its former self.  Most couldn't hit a barn from 20m away

Then our main fwds have started with the stellar numbers in the first half the last two weeks. Collectively they have had something like 6 possessions total in two weeks in the first half.

Yep our game plan is going gangbusters.

Collingwood, who are second favourites for the premiership, had beaten Carlton by only 6 points the week before. Carlton came out breathing fire after that loss and yes, we started slowly and poorly. Our comeback was remarkable.
 

What I was trying to say is, clearly the club is aware of these problems and is trying to address them. But it is not all doom and gloom; we have performed excellently over the last few years and I am confident we will continue to do so. No, I am not a troll. I don't come on to Demonland to bag the club. I am a supporter of the Melbourne Football Club who has faith that the coaches are trying to address these problems. I also have faith they know a lot more about what they are doing than I (or you) do.

Edited May 23 by Ollie fan

[Jaded No More 68,972]

I am not a fan of the changes to the game plan, but I am also not a premiership coach.

We need to move together with the way the game is moving forward, and that means generating more attack from half back.

Have we overcorrected? Yes I think we have
Do I think we have the foot skills required to execute this new style of play? No I don't

But I applaud Goodwin for trying to come up with new ways for us to play and win. 
Fans complained that we became easy to play against last year, complained that we lost in straight sets twice, now they are complaining because we are trying something different.

They complain because they want us to play the kids over guys like Brown, completely ignoring the fact that we have on average 5 players every week with under 20 games experience. They complain that Goodwin never changes things, yet ignore the fact that we have totally changed our midfield mix with Salem, Kosi, Rivers and ANB spending far more time on the ball than ever before.

I think that right now our list is not as good as some others, and we need to keep changing and injecting new players into the mix.
We have also once again had some injury worries, which has forced us to make changes to the game plan (losing Gus is a major blow, as was losing Bowey and then Salem, who are 2 of our best ball users). 

It is also entirely possible that we tried something, realised it's not working, and will now try and change things. The season is still very long. Nobody wins a flag in May.

[Ollie fan 3,468]

4 minutes ago, Jaded No More said:

I am not a fan of the changes to the game plan, but I am also not a premiership coach.

We need to move together with the way the game is moving forward, and that means generating more attack from half back.

Have we overcorrected? Yes I think we have
Do I think we have the foot skills required to execute this new style of play? No I don't

But I applaud Goodwin for trying to come up with new ways for us to play and win. 
Fans complained that we became easy to play against last year, complained that we lost in straight sets twice, now they are complaining because we are trying something different.

They complain because they want us to play the kids over guys like Brown, completely ignoring the fact that we have on average 5 players every week with under 20 games experience. They complain that Goodwin never changes things, yet ignore the fact that we have totally changed our midfield mix with Salem, Kosi, Rivers and ANB spending far more time on the ball than ever before.

I think that right now our list is not as good as some others, and we need to keep changing and injecting new players into the mix.
We have also once again had some injury worries, which has forced us to make changes to the game plan (losing Gus is a major blow, as was losing Bowey and then Salem, who are 2 of our best ball users). 

It is also entirely possible that we tried something, realised it's not working, and will now try and change things. The season is still very long. Nobody wins a flag in May.

100% agree

[Kent 2,913]

50 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

You can't seriously be pointing to the Carlton game to say our game plan is good? You'd have to be trolling.

Carlton have lost 4 of the last 6 because the comp has worked out that you stop Cripps and Walsh there is no Carlton.  Not Melbourne though. They let C&W run riot despite the week before Collingwood showing the blueprint on how to stop them.

6 goals to nil to start the game.

The first quarters are killing us because we are the easiest side to coach against. You will never be surprised with Goodwin on game day.

And our midfield is a shadow of its former self.  Most couldn't hit a barn from 20m away

Then our main fwds have started with the stellar numbers in the first half the last two weeks. Collectively they have had something like 6 possessions total in two weeks in the first half.

Yep our game plan is going gangbusters.

Couldn't agree more

[greenwaves 489]

David King isn't a fan of the new game style:

Simon Goodwin’s side is trying a new ball movement model in a bid to score more efficiently out of its back half, but thinks it’s “just not them.” King called for a Demons ‘powwow’ to address their current method, questioning whether it was time to play more like their brand of recent years that’s made them so successful. “I wonder how long you can continue down this path before you revert back to what you’ve always done, which has worked for them so successfully. “OK, it’s failed by a point, a goal (in previous finals) ... but I feel like that is them. Something has to change, I think there will have to be a powwow at Melbourne: ‘Can we continue to play this way with these opportunities ball in hand?’,”

Edited May 23 by greenwaves

[ANG13 2,063]

5 hours ago, Jaded No More said:

Nobody wins a flag in May.

True but two of the last three premiers have been a game clear on top of the ladder after round 11. 

[demon3165 2,798]

23 hours ago, TeamPlayedFine39 said:

I agree with everything you’ve said but none of this was part of the post/preseason narrative.  

We choked last year in the finals.  Plain and simple.  It wasn’t the game plan, selections or strategy.  We choked in front of the goals when we had more than enough opportunities to win each final.

The fans and the media screamed for gameplan changes; and that’s what we’ve got. 

Now if we only had Greg Parkes and Ross Dillon now..

[layzie 33,987]

Not going to sound popular right now, but I think we need to stick with it.

The previous method got us places yes, but to an extent has been worked out. We don't get anywhere close to the manic pressure of 2021 for it to work consistently. I don't believe you can put the toothpaste back in the tube here, we can retain elements but there is the FD clearly saw a need to bring a new look and this is how it is. Sustained games with Bowey and Salem in the will see some improvement.

There's this case floating around that we don't have the personnel for this method, we'll the same argument can be made for the previous one in that we didn't have a key forward or two to mark and goal or at very least bring the ball down and help us lock it in regularly. We also lacked the opportunistic small forward who could craft out of no-where. These deficiencies are not equal but it is a decent counter argument. 

Stick with it for a bit longer.

 

Edited May 23 by layzie

[Adam The God 30,403]

So much kneejerk to one result, albeit a dreadful result.

You get all the kneejerkers like King and co questioning the game style.

It was never going to click immediately. We saw how long it took for it to click at Collingwood in McRae's first season. They were all over the shop in the first 10 rounds of 2022. Similar can be said of Carlton under Voss last year.

More patience is needed. I think we may revert to a forward half territory game in the absence of Lever and other incepting options for a few weeks, but I'd prefer we kept trying to play the way we want to play and then be strengthened by the inclusion of Lever.

[binman 43,704]

On 22/05/2024 at 17:21, titan_uranus said:

This is a parallel discussion to the one in another thread ft. @binman, @Fat Tony and others, including me.

I think it's a touch disingenuous to now say "why did we change the game plan" when multiple times last year, including after the finals losses, Demonland was awash with "we can't keep playing like this". I also think, as @MurDoc516 has said, the way we played in 2022-23 contributed to the inaccuracy we had in finals.

Changes needed to be made to how we play. I'm just not sure now whether we've over-reacted, or our list isn't capable of playing in this modified way, or (as I think Binman would argue) we are just using this game plan to preserve bodies/fitness until later in the year.

The irony meter is getting a big work out.

As you suggest TU Demomnland has been clogged up for the last 2 seasons with cries to change our ugly, forward half game plan. Now we have, and people are pining for the old game plan. 

I don't think we are using the current method just to preserve bodies/fitness until later in the year, though i have no doubt that is a huge driver. Probably the biggest. 

As i noted in the saints pregame thread  i think we will largely revert to 'our' tried and true method, but hopefully retain some of the elements of our current method, eg hitting some high risk corridor kicks, using the lions style 20 metre forward kicks on the 45, and some run and dare off the hb. 

Those elements are important I think in terms of reducing the frequency of reentries back into a crazy crowded inside 50 (which had historically been a big driver of our low score to inside 50 ratio - or inefficiency as it is oft described).

On that point i 100% agree with @MurDoc516 and you that the way we played in 2022-23 contributed to the inaccuracy we had in finals. 

It's an  interesting factor to consider, particularly as it relates to the discussion about us changing our game plan

Last nights game provided another example of a possible correlation between a contested, forward half, high inside 50 game style.

The dogs dominated inside 50s, particularly in the last quarter. For the match, the dog were +12 for total inside 50s (60-48) and were +33 for contested possessions (which is nuts - i don't reckon there would be too many times a team has won being 33 cps down). 

I think there is enough evidence now to suggest the time in forward half model, high inside 50 numbers with lots of reentries into a crowded forward line (ie our 2021-23  game plan) contributes to inaccuracy. 

Edited May 24 by binman

[Watson11 2,241]

Last night, after Sydney scored a goal from a defensive half turnover, it was quoted they were #1 at scores from this source with 13 points a game.  @WheeloRatings is this correct? It would make no sense to base game plans off defensive half turnover if the number #1 ranked team only scored 12% of their total score from this source?  It would also mean that they score 27 points a game from kickins and defensive half stoppages. Could that be correct?

[layzie 33,987]

3 hours ago, Binmans PA said:

So much kneejerk to one result, albeit a dreadful result.

You get all the kneejerkers like King and co questioning the game style.

It was never going to click immediately. We saw how long it took for it to click at Collingwood in McRae's first season. They were all over the shop in the first 10 rounds of 2022. Similar can be said of Carlton under Voss last year.

More patience is needed. I think we may revert to a forward half territory game in the absence of Lever and other incepting options for a few weeks, but I'd prefer we kept trying to play the way we want to play and then be strengthened by the inclusion of Lever.

I'm starting to think shows like that are written in advance in a content cultivation meeting. Some writers sit there in a room at the start of the year with pencils and say something like:

"Hey this would be a good one for Kingy when the Dees have lost a few in a row, by then people will have forgotten about the Carlton final and everyone calling for them to change the game style!"

"Love it knackers, rack that one. Next topic, can everyone come up with at least 3 'don't get beaten by what you know' scenarios before the end of the day?"

Edited May 24 by layzie

[Fat Tony 5,262]

Being more expansive with our ball movement makes sense in the second halves when the game opens up, but I would like to see us be more conservative and contest based early in the game. 

I also think we need a more aggressive forward press on kick ins and when we lose possession deep inside our forward line. Being less aggressive makes it easier for oppositions to avoid kicking down the line to Max. 

[inanunda 351]

All I want to know is that after three preseasons we still have no connection between our minds and forwards. How is that possible with all the coaching, training sessions, analytics, etc?

[Watson11 2,241]

1 hour ago, binman said:

The irony meter is getting a big work out.

As you suggest TU Demomnland has been clogged up for the last 2 seasons with cries to change our ugly, forward half game plan. Now we have, and people are pining for the old game plan. 

To be fair to other posters, I don’t recall a groundswell saying change from a forward half game plan.  The complaints centred around our attacking game plan which seemed to be a safety first, bomb it to the pocket, create stoppage plan.  Most would like to see more leading, unpredictability, and trying to hit targets going inside 50.  We did it against Geelong 3 weeks ago where we showed patience until options opened up, so it is possible.

[binman 43,704]

52 minutes ago, Watson11 said:

To be fair to other posters, I don’t recall a groundswell saying change from a forward half game plan.  The complaints centred around our attacking game plan which seemed to be a safety first, bomb it to the pocket, create stoppage plan.  

But those are key elements of our previous game plan because a big part of that method was getting it forward into our front half AND keeping it there. 

Either literally by creating a stoppage, or mutiple stoppages, and trapping it inside our 50.

Or force reentries by setting up a wall, putting pressure on the defender and forcing a dump kick to one of our players.

[jnrmac 20,154]

7 hours ago, Binmans PA said:

So much kneejerk to one result, albeit a dreadful result.

You get all the kneejerkers like King and co questioning the game style.

It was never going to click immediately. We saw how long it took for it to click at Collingwood in McRae's first season. They were all over the shop in the first 10 rounds of 2022. Similar can be said of Carlton under Voss last year.

More patience is needed. I think we may revert to a forward half territory game in the absence of Lever and other incepting options for a few weeks, but I'd prefer we kept trying to play the way we want to play and then be strengthened by the inclusion of Lever.

It's not one result. It's the West Coast game, Carlton game, Brisbane game, the Port game, the Swans game.....

The Carlton game encapsulated all that is wrong with us. Goody goes out to play 'our style' when it is clear the other teams have worked Carlton out. Stop Cripps and Walsh. He doesn't appear to me to adjust his game plan to the team we are playing. He makes the occasional match up change but not so much game plan.

 

 

[Watson11 2,241]

2 hours ago, binman said:

But those are key elements of our previous game plan because a big part of that method was getting it forward into our front half AND keeping it there. 

Either literally by creating a stoppage, or mutiple stoppages, and trapping it inside our 50.

Or force reentries by setting up a wall, putting pressure on the defender and forcing a dump kick to one of our players.

Yep.  It’s been our gameplan from 2021-2023.  In 2021 we didn’t get a lot of repeat entries as it was probably a surprise to every other team how we kicked the ball inside 50 (as we flipped 100% from 2020). Result of surprise was we were ranked #1 at shots per inside 50 in 2021 at over 50%. In 2022 we dropped to #9, in 2023 to #14.

Predictability is the enemy of an attacking gameplan, as there is so much data, stats, dissection of opposition etc It’s the new definition insanity.  Ie Insanity is doing the same thing again and again and expecting the same result.

[binman 43,704]

5 minutes ago, Watson11 said:

Yep.  It’s been our gameplan from 2021-2023.  In 2021 we didn’t get a lot of repeat entries as it was probably a surprise to every other team how we kicked the ball inside 50 (as we flipped 100% from 2020). Result of surprise was we were ranked #1 at shots per inside 50 in 2021 at over 50%. In 2022 we dropped to #9, in 2023 to #14.

Predictability is the enemy of an attacking gameplan, as there is so much data, stats, dissection of opposition etc It’s the new definition insanity.  Ie Insanity is doing the same thing again and again and expecting the same result.

That's fascinating data in the first paragraph. I didn't know that ie the slide in shots per inside 50.

Crazy to think we #1 in 2021 - I'm guessing the swans are number one for that stat atm with an very different game plan (one we are trying for size now).

That's an interesting point in the second para. There was an element of that with the pies last year.

And perhaps part of goody's thinking is mixing it up this year will make it harder for opponents to get a beat on us.

[Great Sage 124]

I too called for changes to game plan after last year, but trust that the coaches are in a better position than me to make a decision.

One analogy to consider is those who look to improve their golf handicap by changing their swing. Generally at first you hit the odd better shot but are more inconsistent and therefore your handicap struggles. The strong temptation is to revert to what you know. Golf coach will always say stick with the change as those that do, more often than not, end up a better player with a better handicap.

Different sport I know, but I think many are talking about reverting to the old way before we have actually nailed the changes given at no stage has Goodwin said we are playing the way we want to.