7 hours ago, GS_1905 said:

All Max has to do is what TDK, LJ do. Large run and jump. Knee into the guts and chest of Xerri. Ruck isnt that hard if you have the tool and attributes, which Max does have. 

I was baffled why Max stayed on the ground as much as he did.. Perhaps its just his age showing and we have to accept it.

Hes done his ACL a numerous times to be fair. I can understand why he does what he does. 

Just a curiosity..

How long before the AFL media jackals set their sights on dear Simon ? 

Possibly Essendon and Carlton are providing a screen ... 

7 hours ago, seventyfour said:

Drafting talls is a coin flip at best, and it takes years for them to have an impact.

• Jefferson and JVR were both drafted in the first round since we won the flag. Unfortunately neither have worked in that time.
• Maybe we could've drafted Armstrong last year, but it wouldn't make any difference to us this year. We'd have given up Landford or Lindsay to do so.
• The only decent talls from 2022 are Mac Andrew, Jye Amiss and Sam Darcy. We didn't have the rights or draft picks to get them. The next best is JVR.
• There's only one 193cm+ player in the 2022 draft who has played more than 10 games (Cadman).

If you look at trading instead, it's impossible. Jackson left us with one destination in mind and there was nothing we could do. This is the story with trading for talls. Clubs don't let them go easily. When they go, usually they have only one team in mind. We tried hard to get Max Gruzewski from GWS last year and they refused to budge. 

We should have tried to get Lloyd Meek Freo when they took Jackson. He wasn’t high value then. Grundy was an error.

6 hours ago, Roost it far said:

You’re not accounting for injuries as a reason. We can sit back and pick apart Goodwin but in 23 we lost Petty, a seriously in form Melksham and Gus in the last weeks and still only just lost.  Add those 3 and I reckon we’re Premiers. You take DeGoey, Mihochek and Sidebottom out of Collingwood and they don’t win the flag. Last year we had 50% Oliver, Petracca gone in July, May hobbling and several others injured, including Max. We missed finals by a couple of close losses to PA, GWS and one other I can’t recall. Yesterday was horrible but our formline isn’t the train wreck many here believe it to be. We’ve so far lost 2 matches and were without May, Pickett, McVee, Melksham and Tholstrup. We lost both Jefferson and Lever in game and Max was given a complete dusting. Add all those players back in the side and I’ll bet my last dollar were a much improved side. 

This is why I haven't had real issues with Goodwin the latter parts of last year culminating in Sunday.
We have no excuses not to beat the Roos, but the manner in which we lost is the telling thing. Our losses seem to fall into two camps since mid last year:

1. Noble defeats (that we could win if our mindset was right)
2. Smashings (that show we've dropped our heads)

Both are attitude-based, and that ultimately springs from the coach. I don't think Goodwin has the capacity to truly motivate our group, and that means he has to go.

1 hour ago, Chook said:

This is why I haven't had real issues with Goodwin the latter parts of last year culminating in Sunday.
We have no excuses not to beat the Roos, but the manner in which we lost is the telling thing. Our losses seem to fall into two camps since mid last year:

1. Noble defeats (that we could win if our mindset was right)
2. Smashings (that show we've dropped our heads)

Both are attitude-based, and that ultimately springs from the coach. I don't think Goodwin has the capacity to truly motivate our group, and that means he has to go.

Out of interest, what other sorts of losses are there?

8 hours ago, seventyfour said:

If you look at trading instead, it's impossible. Jackson left us with one destination in mind and there was nothing we could do. This is the story with trading for talls. Clubs don't let them go easily. When they go, usually they have only one team in mind. We tried hard to get Max Gruzewski from GWS last year and they refused to budge. 

The other difficulty is that to get players to come to your club you need $$$, i.e., salary cap space. We have a few players on very very good coin, and quite a few on good coin, and there's not much room to manoeuvre.

Time for a change of coach. Thanks for your service Simon.

9 hours ago, seventyfour said:

Drafting talls is a coin flip at best, and it takes years for them to have an impact.

• Jefferson and JVR were both drafted in the first round since we won the flag. Unfortunately neither have worked in that time.
• Maybe we could've drafted Armstrong last year, but it wouldn't make any difference to us this year. We'd have given up Landford or Lindsay to do so.
• The only decent talls from 2022 are Mac Andrew, Jye Amiss and Sam Darcy. We didn't have the rights or draft picks to get them. The next best is JVR.
• There's only one 193cm+ player in the 2022 draft who has played more than 10 games (Cadman).

If you look at trading instead, it's impossible. Jackson left us with one destination in mind and there was nothing we could do. This is the story with trading for talls. Clubs don't let them go easily. When they go, usually they have only one team in mind. We tried hard to get Max Gruzewski from GWS last year and they refused to budge. 

You mean Wade Derksen??

11 minutes ago, KingDingAling said:

Time for a change of coach. Thanks for your service Simon.

Changing coaches without changing lists achieves little to nothing. In most cases, clubs continue on the same trajectory. Plenty of studies out there.

Generates a feel-good factor, maybe sells a few more season tickets, but beyond that ... 

10 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

Back to on field tho - it’s a work in progress trying to mold square pegs (Oliver, Tracc, Viney, Sparrow) in to round holes. Unfortunately we’ve been unwilling or unable to trade any of those out for value and are trying to win and stay up whilst we move to a new generation of midfielders. 

In a nutshell.

17 minutes ago, bing181 said:

The other difficulty is that to get players to come to your club you need $$$, i.e., salary cap space. We have a few players on very very good coin, and quite a few on good coin, and there's not much room to manoeuvre.

I beg to differ. We still haven't replaced Brayshaw who was on good coin.

2 minutes ago, WERRIDEE said:

I beg to differ. We still haven't replaced Brayshaw who was on good coin.

Yes, but he's the only one - perhaps that's how we were able to seriously look at Houston.

Also, Brayshaw's contract situation was only resolved during 2024, so it's only the last trade season that anything might have been possible. Not sure who from the players up for trade we should have been looking at? Ginnivan or Membrey?

2 minutes ago, bing181 said:

Changing coaches without changing lists achieves little to nothing. In most cases, clubs continue on the same trajectory. Plenty of studies out there.

Generates a feel-good factor, maybe sells a few more season tickets, but beyond that ... 

Goodwin and Chaplin should go.

Jones\Radford and Bassett are safe.

Lets look at the list shall we

May - Stays

van Rooyen - Stays

Salem - trade him to Richmond where they need experince.

McVee - Stays

Petracca - Stays but if he wants to go he can go.

Windsor - Stays

Viney - Stays

Lever - Stays

Spargo - goes if he does stay I don't have any problems with it.

Turner - Stays

Gawn - Stays

Tholstup - Stays

Oliver - Personally I think he goes but if he stays I'm fine with it.

Billings - Goes

Langdon - Stays

Laurie - I think he's contracted but he goes IMO trade him for nothing he was a top 20 pick.

Bowey - Goes in a trade someone will take him.

Melksham - Goes Retires

Langford - Stays

Lindsay - Stays

Jefferson - Stays

Howes - Goes delist

McAdam - Retire if you know what's good for you

Rivers - Stays

McDonald - Goes Retires

Adams - Stays

Hore - Delist

Verrall - Delist or stays don't care.

Campbell - Stays

Sharp - Stays

Fritsch - Stays but I'd be shopping him around.

Sparrow - Stays

Fullerton - Delist

Petty - Stays

Pickett - Stays but if he wants to go go

Chandler - Stays

Sestan - Delist

Mentha - Stays

Woewodin - Delist

Brown - Delist

Johnson -Stays

Henderson - Stays

Kentfield - Delist

Moniz-Wakefield - Stays

Culley - Stays for now have to see more of him.

That's 16 players out of the club not including. The 5 possibles. Changes will be made to the list as well as the coaching staff.

17 minutes ago, bing181 said:

Yes, but he's the only one - perhaps that's how we were able to seriously look at Houston.

Also, Brayshaw's contract situation was only resolved during 2024, so it's only the last trade season that anything might have been possible. Not sure who from the players up for trade we should have been looking at? Ginnivan or Membrey?

That's one quality player we can get and it wouldn't surprise me if we done a salary cap dump on Oliver.

Some of you blokes need to chill. No way in the world Goody goes. Let alone after round 2. 

7 hours ago, bing181 said:

Changing coaches without changing lists achieves little to nothing. In most cases, clubs continue on the same trajectory. Plenty of studies out there.

Generates a feel-good factor, maybe sells a few more season tickets, but beyond that ... 

That's one view....

Another..

Same ingredients...  possibly a variation on a recipe....  different  chef can result in a very different meal. 

The point being you can't just assume that a different coach will utilise his assets in essentially the same manner. Logic suggests the opposite.  

Goodwin hit his peak in 21...

Been all downhill since..... just how far down the mountain do you want to slide ? 

There is absolutely no consistency about Melbourne at present. 

18 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

That's one view....

It's not a view, it's what multiple academic studies say. e.g.

"The current study reported that mid-season coach turnover may result in short-term improvement in team results and physical match performance. However, this effect disappears after a period of approximately 5 games."

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-14996-z

 

"We find that for particularly poorly performing teams, coach replacements have little effect on team performance as measured against comparable teams that did not replace their coach. However, for teams with middling records—that is, teams where entry conditions for a new coach appear to be more favorable—replacing the head coach appears to result in worse performance over subsequent years than comparable teams who retained their coach."

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1540-6237.2012.00929.x

 

"The estimation results indicate that the average cumulative effect of a change of coach on subsequent match results within the same season is uniformly negative for up to nine games after the change takes place, but close to zero from about 10 games onwards."

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/23736446_Modelling_employment_durations_of_NHL_head_coaches_Turnover_and_post-succession_performance

etc. etc.

Also ... regression to the mean.

 

18 minutes ago, bing181 said:

It's not a view, it's what multiple academic studies say. e.g.

"The current study reported that mid-season coach turnover may result in short-term improvement in team results and physical match performance. However, this effect disappears after a period of approximately 5 games."

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-14996-z

 

"We find that for particularly poorly performing teams, coach replacements have little effect on team performance as measured against comparable teams that did not replace their coach. However, for teams with middling records—that is, teams where entry conditions for a new coach appear to be more favorable—replacing the head coach appears to result in worse performance over subsequent years than comparable teams who retained their coach."

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1540-6237.2012.00929.x

 

"The estimation results indicate that the average cumulative effect of a change of coach on subsequent match results within the same season is uniformly negative for up to nine games after the change takes place, but close to zero from about 10 games onwards."

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/23736446_Modelling_employment_durations_of_NHL_head_coaches_Turnover_and_post-succession_performance

etc. etc.

Also ... regression to the mean.

 

Now run that same study for sides that win a premiership with the replacement coach…

We're not out here to be the median team you know.

27 minutes ago, bing181 said:

It's not a view, it's what multiple academic studies say. e.g.

"The current study reported that mid-season coach turnover may result in short-term improvement in team results and physical match performance. However, this effect disappears after a period of approximately 5 games."

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-14996-z

 

"We find that for particularly poorly performing teams, coach replacements have little effect on team performance as measured against comparable teams that did not replace their coach. However, for teams with middling records—that is, teams where entry conditions for a new coach appear to be more favorable—replacing the head coach appears to result in worse performance over subsequent years than comparable teams who retained their coach."

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1540-6237.2012.00929.x

 

"The estimation results indicate that the average cumulative effect of a change of coach on subsequent match results within the same season is uniformly negative for up to nine games after the change takes place, but close to zero from about 10 games onwards."

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/23736446_Modelling_employment_durations_of_NHL_head_coaches_Turnover_and_post-succession_performance

etc. etc.

Also ... regression to the mean.

 

Again... its  A view ..   how you come by it is all but irrelevant in so much as it's ONE view.

There are others..  

Lots of highly regarded folk once thought odd things about the solar system. 

The evidence is plainly before us.  We're going backwards.

11 hours ago, beelzebub said:

Just a curiosity..

How long before the AFL media jackals set their sights on dear Simon ? 

Possibly Essendon and Carlton are providing a screen ... 

We are already in their sights BZ.

Your second line is spot on as to why the heat is low....for now.  In addition we are slowly but surely becoming the irrelevant club that we were prior to 2021.  That will play out in memberships, the fixture days and timelslots, lack of prime time matches etc if we continue on this route for much longer.

Losing eventually results in a loss of previous gains etc.

As they say in the classics, winners are grinners

19 hours ago, leave it to deever said:

Changing coaches is not going to change the negligence of the club's poor drafting in regards to a decent hand for Max who could also help our fwd line. The club wasn't off course with the Grundy experience except for two small details...

Grundy doesn't mark and he's no fwd. I mean other than that it was a brilliant move.

Also it's not going to reverse the bad form of our only TWO tall/ fwds in Fritta and Jvr.

( Disco and Jeffo don't count as yet).

Or produce another key fwd somehow.

I mean it's not like Goody can put a rocket up these two by dropping them. We don't have anyone to fill their place. So there's that.

However, I'll go to my grave yelling Goody cost us a flag with the five game part timer in Laurie as the sub when Gus was almost decapitated. Sure just one player but we were effectively one man down because of it in a game that went down to the wire. And while Goody couldn't predict the sub would be needed for the whole game, that's kinda of the point. Laurie was so far out of his depth in a normal game not to mention a final in front of 80 odd thousand. My goodness Simon, what were you thinking? I know, I know, it's history. But how often do you get a double chance in this game?

And this is why he gets the benefit of any doubt. Flags are just so rare, you have to hang on with both arms to any coach that delivers one.

But one thing for sure, complacency is a success killer in this game, so it's a fine line.

In any event, these things have a momentum all of their own. A couple more performances like Sundays and the noise around Goody will get very loud. 

And while I'm sure the club will keep him all year, failure to make finals again will produce a cacophony of coach killing calls, that the decision will be made for it.

Just saying.

 

Agree that Goodwin cost the club a flag with the non Grundy selection. Bailey Laurie??? WTFuurrg.

Edited March 24Mar 24 by picket fence

8 hours ago, WERRIDEE said:

Goodwin and Chaplin should go.

Jones\Radford and Bassett are safe.

Lets look at the list shall we

May - Stays

van Rooyen - Stays

Salem - trade him to Richmond where they need experince.

McVee - Stays

Petracca - Stays but if he wants to go he can go.

Windsor - Stays

Viney - Stays

Lever - Stays

Spargo - goes if he does stay I don't have any problems with it.

Turner - Stays

Gawn - Stays

Tholstup - Stays

Oliver - Personally I think he goes but if he stays I'm fine with it.

Billings - Goes

Langdon - Stays

Laurie - I think he's contracted but he goes IMO trade him for nothing he was a top 20 pick.

Bowey - Goes in a trade someone will take him.

Melksham - Goes Retires

Langford - Stays

Lindsay - Stays

Jefferson - Stays

Howes - Goes delist

McAdam - Retire if you know what's good for you

Rivers - Stays

McDonald - Goes Retires

Adams - Stays

Hore - Delist

Verrall - Delist or stays don't care.

Campbell - Stays

Sharp - Stays

Fritsch - Stays but I'd be shopping him around.

Sparrow - Stays

Fullerton - Delist

Petty - Stays

Pickett - Stays but if he wants to go go

Chandler - Stays

Sestan - Delist

Mentha - Stays

Woewodin - Delist

Brown - Delist

Johnson -Stays

Henderson - Stays

Kentfield - Delist

Moniz-Wakefield - Stays

Culley - Stays for now have to see more of him.

That's 16 players out of the club not including. The 5 possibles. Changes will be made to the list as well as the coaching staff.

Definately trade Fritsch, he is so vanilla and systematic of our forward line malaise!

Also who thought it a good idea ti put Laurie on a multi year contract?? Madness and dont get me started on Fullarton!

9 hours ago, bing181 said:

Changing coaches without changing lists achieves little to nothing. In most cases, clubs continue on the same trajectory. Plenty of studies out there.

Generates a feel-good factor, maybe sells a few more season tickets, but beyond that ... 

With a new coach comes a new game, something we are in desperate need of

1 minute ago, Billy said:

With a new coach comes a new game, something we are in desperate need of

Not worth it if the coach can't motivate and inspire and have the ability change things up a little in game though.

Would need to be someone who brings the game style plus that for mine.

There isn't an abundance of that just waiting in the wings but I'd be seriously considering horse as that option.

Michael Voss will be available