11 hours ago, binman said:

Spot on.

And I'd add going from the 2nd slowest in getting the ball forward in the first 12 weeks of 2025 to 4th in the last six weeks is not indicative of a 'complete change' of style.

For one thing, a six week period is a relatively small sample size to use as evidence of a 'complete change' of game style (they may well end up near the bottom of that table this season too - and from memory they also started to get it forward quicker near the end of last home season and in the finals, so perhaps they are deliberately following a similar pattern).

Secondly that is one stat, and ball movement is just one element of a team's game plan (eg how a team defends is arguably a more significant element of a teams game plan) - in isolation a change to that stat is not evidence of a complete change in style. A tweak perhaps but certainly not a radical change.

The pies have made a similarly dramatic change in reagard to their method of transitioning the ball as also evidenced by an isolated stat (albeit one that doesn't aggregate several data points Luke speed of ball movement) one hoyne has also discussed.

The pies have gone from one of the quickest to play on from a mark or free to the slowest.

Big change, but it's just one element of their method - and no one is suggesting they have changed their game plan. Tweaked it yes, changed it no.

From memory they were also the fastest ball movement team and are now in the bottom third (I might be wrong on that). Again noone is arguing tha5 is evidence they have completelychanged their game plan.

And as you note Pennant, tweaks are way easier to implement than wholesale changes to a team's game plan and method the dees have undertaken.

In any case, it's worth noting that goody deserves kudos for the fact that the dees have in fact implemented a new game over the last two seasons, in particular this season (we started the process in the first half of last year and as goody has said, unfortunately reverted in the second half of the 2024 season to try and eke out some wins to make finals).

There are any number of metrics that evidence our radical change in game plan - eg scores from defensive half, speed of ball movement (equal first in the AFL), how quickly we are playing on after a mark or free (top 3 in the AFL) etc.

The fact that we haven't been winning this year doesn’t negate the fact we have implemented a new method.

I would argue the key reason we have not won more games is not that we have failed to implement the new method but that we don't have enough players with the requisite skill set to implement it optimally. The most obvious indicator of that is our crazy scores from turnovers numbers (I'm guessing bottom three).

But our high turnover numbers can also be seen as evidence of working to implement a new transition based game plan - ie we are trying to take the game on just turning it over too often (ie we could reduce turnovers by reverting to our old, down the line, forward half game plan and/or playing g slow and/or not taking on the sort of high risk kicks the transition method demands).

A lot is made of mcrae being able to implement a similarly radical change in game plan in terms of movimg away from Buckley's defence first method but he had a major advantage over Goody.

Mcrae's game plan requires players suited to that style, namely a solid core of players who can consistently hit high risk kicks and not too many turnover merchants.

In terms of the former, unlike goody, he had a lot of senior players with above average to elite foot skills (eg Pendulbury, Sidebottom, Mcreee, Quaynor, Josh Daicos, Elliot, Hoskin Elliot) and had the good fortune of his tenure coinciding with the debut of the most consistently damaging kick in the AFL in Nick Daicos.

We are 13th on scores against from turnover. 10th on scores from turnover.

Netted, we are 10th overall on differential.

The top 8 in both stats is pretty much the top 8, but really that shouldnt be too much of a surprise. Most scores come from turnovers and if youre in the top 8 logic says youll have the better percentage and therefore be most likely in the better half for turnover stats.

As for game plan, i agree with you there is a clear shift in our game plan, you may not like what you are seeing or agree with it, but if you cant see we are trying to switch more especially in the back half what games are you watching? Salem is 3rd in the league for marks! That's not nature thats nuture.

I also agree with the consensus we need some better penetrating kicks. Pies have 4 of the top 30. Adelaide have Dawson and elite kicks forward of centre. Brisbane have Zorko and the Luggage. We have.... Melksham, who is quietly the best in the AFL (with both feet) and Bowey, just. I reckon Lindsay and Langford are above average for now but may nudge elite. However, Windsor and Pickett are below average and ill bet my bottom dollar they will remain so. You can count on one hand players that significantly improve their kicking after they are drafted. Pickett however can create scoring opportunities from nothing so ill take the bad with the good every day of the week if he's in the middle.

I know I harp on it elsewhere but our biggest issue by far and part of the reason our game plan has looked so ordinary this year is because we have generational low output from our key forwards. The worst this century. Its not just the delivery as others find a way to get marks inside 50. If we had the output of even bang average kpf forward in our team, say Peter Wright and Mabior Chol we would be contending for the 8. But end of the day thats not enough, to win a flag we need a few more elite kicks. Sad thing is I think both Oliver and Petracca are having decent seasons apart from their kicking, which in Petraccas case will mean revert, so i dont really know how we're going to solve this puzzle.

Edited July 17Jul 17 by Jjrogan

7 hours ago, Jjrogan said:

We are 13th on scores against from turnover. 10th on scores from turnover.

Netted, we are 10th overall on differential.

The top 8 in both stats is pretty much the top 8, but really that shouldnt be too much of a surprise. Most scores come from turnovers and if youre in the top 8 logic says youll have the better percentage and therefore be most likely in the better half for turnover stats.

As for game plan, i agree with you there is a clear shift in our game plan, you may not like what you are seeing or agree with it, but if you cant see we are trying to switch more especially in the back half what games are you watching? Salem is 3rd in the league for marks! That's not nature thats nuture.

I also agree with the consensus we need some better penetrating kicks. Pies have 4 of the top 30. Adelaide have Dawson and elite kicks forward of centre. Brisbane have Zorko and the Luggage. We have.... Melksham, who is quietly the best in the AFL (with both feet) and Bowey, just. I reckon Lindsay and Langford are above average for now but may nudge elite. However, Windsor and Pickett are below average and ill bet my bottom dollar they will remain so. You can count on one hand players that significantly improve their kicking after they are drafted. Pickett however can create scoring opportunities from nothing so ill take the bad with the good every day of the week if he's in the middle.

I know I harp on it elsewhere but our biggest issue by far and part of the reason our game plan has looked so ordinary this year is because we have generational low output from our key forwards. The worst this century. Its not just the delivery as others find a way to get marks inside 50. If we had the output of even bang average kpf forward in our team, say Peter Wright and Mabior Chol we would be contending for the 8. But end of the day thats not enough, to win a flag we need a few more elite kicks. Sad thing is I think both Oliver and Petracca are having decent seasons apart from their kicking, which in Petraccas case will mean revert, so i dont really know how we're going to solve this puzzle.

Top post.

Agree on the forwards, though of course it would help if our inside 50 kicks were higher quality.

JVR has picked a bad year to plateau and petts has been average.