Time to go Goody?

[DubDee 25,438]

I wonder how the ‘Time to go Hinkley’ thread is going over at PowerLand

[binman 42,468]

14 minutes ago, Binmans PA said:

He looks like he's fatiguing significantly in the last few weeks.

Another pre season under his belt and Koz will be even better next year.

If we get some young blokes from the first round of the draft, it might mean we only need Koz to occasionally pinch hit, but mostly stay forward.

Robbing peter to pay paul has been an underrated issue for us this season.

JVR, riv and koz all playing in the middle when we'd be better off if they were allowed to play their best positions.

Edited August 4 by binman

[DeeSpencer 25,376]

1 hour ago, Binmans PA said:

Really? We added ANB and Rivers to midfield. What do you mean we've done nothing to add fresh legs?

To the list, we’ve relied on super raw kids to come in down back and forward (and man a wing all year with no break).

[titan_uranus 24,963]

1 hour ago, Heart Beats True said:

I’ll ask a genuine question, did any of those coaches, apart from Longmire, get handed a solid list and a strong culture off the back of a succession plan?

Goodwin was handed the reins to a club that was on the up thanks to Paul Roos and some solid recruiting. All of the above coaches (apart from Longmire) came into clubs that were heading south.

I don’t agree with the premise of your argument. The three years under Roos fixed a lot of problems but it’s a bit of a stretch to suggest Goodwin was just handed everything he needed. 

At any rate, Chris Scott fits the bill of the question you’re asking. And is the only one of the coaches I mentioned who has more flags than Goodwin. 

I’d also argue that Voss, Longmuir and McRae started off with stronger platforms based on their clubs’ lists and cultures. 

And plenty of other coaches have failed with more. 

[ElDiablo14 4,990]

2 hours ago, Jibroni said:

 

With respect Binman that is no reason for the Top side to lose by over 100 points, apart from Papley and Amartey the had almost had a full strength team.

There is still time for Sydney but assuming their season falls off a cliff questions will need to be asked; after 12 years at the helm.

We might as well just default the season right? I am honestly tired of the injuries card we like to use when things are going bad, as if we were the only team that is impacted.

Most teams will have interrupted preseasons, injuries and all sorts of trouble during the H&A, but champion teams find a way to overcome the adversity. We haven't.

[Adam The God 30,037]

1 hour ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Oh dear.

We're still loading when finals has been shot and players are banged up.

There's excuses and then there's this. 

I've heard it all now @middleagedemon

Who said we were loading?

[Watson11 2,240]

1 hour ago, DubDee said:

I wonder how the ‘Time to go Hinkley’ thread is going over at PowerLand

Considering that every coach who has coached as many games as Hinkley has got their team to a GF and Hinkley hasn’t, it’s a lost final or two from exploding again. 

[Bombay Airconditioning 6,298]

Surely we’re going to try and poach Hawthorns strength and conditioning coach?

[demon3165 2,665]

2 hours ago, binman said:

I reckon they've gone up, but only because at the beginning of the season whilst he was regularly going to centre square bounces it was often only 5 or 6 times.

A few times of late it has been 10 plus timed.

Kossie will never be a midfielder hasn't got the tank or the knowledge to be a midfielder he is an instinct player and does his best work as a forward.

[seventyfour 1,121]

Interestingly in the flag era Richmond had two midfield coaches - stoppage (Mcqualter) and spread (Caracella).

This year we've had problems in both areas of our game. If we can afford it, we should follow a similar structure.

Edited August 4 by seventyfour

[djr 1,430]

18 hours ago, Jaded No More said:

Where’s Sydney? They haven’t showed up either. In fact I think they forgot to board the plane. 

I recall that they have form in this area. Didn't they fail to show up in a GF a few years ago? Who was the coach?

[Demon Disciple 12,005]

When was the last time a team got done by 100 points during the season, then went on to win the flag?

[Watson11 2,240]

1 minute ago, Demon Disciple said:

When was the last time a team got done by 100 points during the season, then went on to win the flag?

1945

[Demon Disciple 12,005]

4 minutes ago, Watson11 said:

1945

Concerning for the Swans.

[Sir Why You Little 36,906]

7 minutes ago, Demon Disciple said:

When was the last time a team got done by 100 points during the season, then went on to win the flag?

Carlton 1995??

They lost a couple mid Season. 
Players cleaned up apparently….

[djr 1,430]

3 hours ago, binman said:

I agree that is very likely, and said as much last week.

As you say, not an excuse just a factor.

(And I wouldn't sleep on the blues or pies for the same reason- I reckon both have got upside in terms of their running power)

But even so losing they probably win a couple of those games if not for injury. And certainly not torched by 112 points. 

On loading, teams that can't cover the ground (either because of loading, or as i think is the case with us just not fit enough) are getting torched this season with all teams playing transition, turnover football.

Running power, stamina and ability to cover the ground at speed have become absolutely critical.

As hoyne has frequently pointed out on sen, 16 of the last 17 premiers have been top 4 in scores from turnover (we were the exception in 2021).

Our opponents have ruthlessly exploited our lack of spread in the last few weeks as evidenced by the huge diff in uncontested possessions.

As someone who punts on line bets, I closely follow margins and the margins this year have been extreme.

So many good teams getting blown out by really big margins.

@WheeloRatings do you have any easily accessible data on margins this year compared to previous years. 

We were ranked #1 for Score from Turnover Differential in 2021. We were #4 in 2022 and #3 in 2023. This season, we have plummeted to #15, just ahead of North, Richmond and WC. 

Do you have any ideas as to why, in relation to this stat, we have fallen off the cliff this season? I think this stat fairly depicts our ladder position.

[binman 42,468]

26 minutes ago, djr said:

We were ranked #1 for Score from Turnover Differential in 2021. We were #4 in 2022 and #3 in 2023. This season, we have plummeted to #15, just ahead of North, Richmond and WC. 

Do you have any ideas as to why, in relation to this stat, we have fallen off the cliff this season? I think this stat fairly depicts our ladder position.

I don't think the bolded bit is correct  (nor the orher numbers).

Just doing a quick search, it's actually 17 of the lasy 18 flag winners have been ranked top 3 for scores from turnover differential- and im 99% sure we were the outlier.

From this article:

In 17 of the last 18 seasons, the premiers have sat in the top three for the score from turnover differentials competition-wide.

Champion Data’s Daniel Hoyne defines a turnover as: When you win the ball back off the opposition and your ability to score off that. Or when you cough the ball up to the opposition and how well you defend that opposition possession.

“People hate that I keep saying this, but I’ll back history until history changes,” Hoyne said on SEN’s Sportsday.

“The number one go-to that we constantly refer to is: how is your turnover game and where is that actually poised?

“So the points differential from turnover is the ‘real ladder’.

“Why is it the ‘real ladder’? Because 17 of the last 18 premiers have been top three. Not top six, not top eight, but top three in the turnover game.

“So it’s 60 per cent (or more) of your score (being from turnover).

Edited August 4 by binman

[binman 42,468]

27 minutes ago, djr said:

We were ranked #1 for Score from Turnover Differential in 2021. We were #4 in 2022 and #3 in 2023. This season, we have plummeted to #15, just ahead of North, Richmond and WC. 

Do you have any ideas as to why, in relation to this stat, we have fallen off the cliff this season? I think this stat fairly depicts our ladder position.

There's a few reasons why we are 15th for turnover diff I reckon.

Number one is fitness. It's an incredibly taxing style of play aerobically and I don't think we have ever got fit enough. The pies have struggled on turnover for the same reason.

I think our poor skills is another key factor - we give the ball back too easily and often don't take advantage when we win a turnover.

That's exacerbated by not being able to field our best 23 often enough.

And implementing a new model is hard- particularly for the defence which has found it hard im the back half of the year to cover entries (though to be fair that's more on our inability to consistently apply pressure to the kicker or slow ball movement- see point one).

[djr 1,430]

48 minutes ago, binman said:

I don't think the bolded bit is correct  (nor the orher numbers).

Just doing a quick search, it's actually 17 of the lasy 18 flag winners have been ranked top 3 for scores from turnover differential- and im 99% sure we were the outlier.

From this article:

In 17 of the last 18 seasons, the premiers have sat in the top three for the score from turnover differentials competition-wide.

Champion Data’s Daniel Hoyne defines a turnover as: When you win the ball back off the opposition and your ability to score off that. Or when you cough the ball up to the opposition and how well you defend that opposition possession.

“People hate that I keep saying this, but I’ll back history until history changes,” Hoyne said on SEN’s Sportsday.

“The number one go-to that we constantly refer to is: how is your turnover game and where is that actually poised?

“So the points differential from turnover is the ‘real ladder’.

“Why is it the ‘real ladder’? Because 17 of the last 18 premiers have been top three. Not top six, not top eight, but top three in the turnover game.

“So it’s 60 per cent (or more) of your score (being from turnover).

If you go to WheeloRatings/Team Stats/2021/Difference/Score Sources/Turnover you will find that we were #1 in 2021, #4 in 2022 and #3 in 2023. Yes I read that article and it was quite compelling.

Edited August 4 by djr

[Bombay Airconditioning 6,298]

On 03/08/2024 at 15:11, Satyriconhome said:

Which parts?

The way we move the ball, our fwd line and the way we deliver the ball inside fwd 50. We have some class fwds but we make it so hard for them.

[dazzledavey36 54,093]

Well this is damning..

 

[Roost it far 8,105]

The team and coaches needs some fresh eyes and legs going into the preseason. This feels like an incredibly important 6 months if we're going to rise again next year and beyond. Get the draft wrong, have players not fit and fully bought in and a plan we can't execute seamlessly and we'll likely stay out of contention. Get it right and I'm a believer that we can push hard again for the foreseeable future.

 

[titan_uranus 24,963]

1 hour ago, binman said:

There's a few reasons why we are 15th for turnover diff I reckon.

Number one is fitness. It's an incredibly taxing style of play aerobically and I don't think we have ever got fit enough. The pies have struggled on turnover for the same reason.

I think our poor skills is another key factor - we give the ball back too easily and often don't take advantage when we win a turnover.

That's exacerbated by not being able to field our best 23 often enough.

And implementing a new model is hard- particularly for the defence which has found it hard im the back half of the year to cover entries (though to be fair that's more on our inability to consistently apply pressure to the kicker or slow ball movement- see point one).

IMO the clear number 1 factor isn't fitness, it's skills. We turn it over far too often across our own half-forward line and get burnt the other way because we're not set up deep defensively. Meanwhile our own poor skills mean that when we take the ball of our opponents we don't generate enough shots and then we don't convert them.

I also think another key factor is our woeful midfield. We concede too much territory from being so poor at stoppage that we're playing too much of the game in our back half and spending too much time and energy defending, leading to more poor kicks out and more turnovers.

15 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Well this is damning..

 

We're not a side/list that can compete when we're 18th for clearances.

Being so poor at stoppage is a big reason why we're 12th for inside 50s. 

Plenty of other factors at play, including our own desire in the first half of the year to play less of a high forward half press, and obviously we're worse in the middle given no Trac and half an Oliver, but our collective midfield efforts this year have not been good enough.

[Sir Why You Little 36,906]

20 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Well this is damning..

 

They are the fundamentals of the modern game 

We have just lost it all….

[picket fence 16,992]

34 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Well this is damning..

 

Yep definately time for a NEW coach!