Leaderboard

Toumpas turned 20 just over 8 weeks ago, his career must nearly be over. Viney is 19, Trengove 22, Salem 18, Tyson 20. They are KIDS, they're not men yet. In those five we have the makings of a quality midfield with both inside and out side players, but they need time. Our club is coming from a long way behind the 8ball. If Roos chooses not to stay longer than two years we can only hope the likes of George Stone does.

It's very much like the chicken and the egg, bad recruiting vs development, I think we have recruited badly with a number of players namely the project players and not recruited for the here and now with some of our selections. 2010 we had a good balance with Scully and Trengove playing with Junior, a fit Jamar, Green, Jones and Maloney's big body. Whilst we were mid table I think we were somewhat on the right track. To me the way we drafted in 2009 was the way to draft Scully, Trengove & Tappscott were ready to go and Gysberts was a project player who the club obviously felt had something to work with. Think back to the side we had in 2006 and how the young players of Bate, Dunn, Bartram and Jones fitted in because they were surrounded by older players who took a lot of pressure of them. The club needs to learn from the Gysberts, Cook & Morton picks ON how to screen and target players with a greater desire and workrate. 2008 was a bad draft, I have no problem with the club taking Watts at number 1, but taking Blease & Strauss with our next two picks left us with 3 project players and nobody ready to step straight in. That type of drafting is going to leave holes which on our list were amplified by bad drafting towards the end of Dannihers reign and the premature moving on of Junior, Miller and some other senior players left a massive dearth we are still struggling to recover from. We could not have timed things any worse with the last 3 drafts being severely compromised with the two new clubs coming in, but IAH we have not helped ourselves. I hope we learn and learn quickly about picking the right players, it is not easy and there are always surprises and luck plays a big part but targeting long term prospects and skinny kids to much is fraught with danger. The Hawks are renowned for their kicking skills but never underestimate the targeting they did under Brereton & Dunstalls influence of targeting hard nose honest footballers, they overlooked Judd because of concerns with his shoulders but Hodge was vital and his influence is massive in the culture of the club. It would appear on face value Roos has started to address this with our trading & drafting last year, Tyson, Michie, Cross & Vince ready to go and Salem/JKH can be allowed to develop at VFL and come in when they are ready. It is what Roos did but time will tell. There is a kid I know being looked at by several clubs who will be in this years draft and has all the right attributes on face value, size, skill and some good athletic ability. He has been a highly regarded player for a number of years and should be in our state 18's this year. This is the kids biggest year in terms of his footy future but he is not as fit as he should be and spent a large part of the off season lazing around. To me that is a large warning sign, the kid thinks it will just happen for him and does not have the right attitude as opposed to another potential draftee who has recognised deficiencies in his own game and has started working with a sprint coach to increase his speed and acceleration. The second kid is a very long shot to be drafted or even rookied but the extra time he is doing in the gym and with the sprint coach just to get the best out of himself is something which has a lot of upside and potential in the right environment. The likes of Lyon, Roos and Malthouse can teach any player with adequate skill but the right desire to fit into their game structure and it is something the MFC needs to consider strongly in their recruitment and drafting process as opposed to trying to draft potential project players who have had it easy at junior level but lack the hunger and desire to really succeed. I am sure the new Footy department are well aware of this and have started to address this and whilst we will go through some more ups and downs we will see different types of players being targeted.

Unfortunately I too don't have the experience you're seeking. I suspect it's a mixture of treatment, expectations on individual players, selection decisions, understanding a players strengths and weaknesses, and crucially the leadership group. It probably includes the whole fabric and culture of a club. It's intangible, but I reckon Roos and co know how to do it. A youngster that joins the Sydney Swans goes through an induction process. This may be the same at most/all clubs, but it's driven by the LG. Sydney's LG virtually runs the club with the imprimatur of the coach. Tom Mitchell is going to be a genuine star. Yes, he had injury issues in his first season, but he also played plenty of footy at their lower level. He didn't play a senior game in his first year. Scully, Watts, Morton and Trengove come to the club and there's much fanfare. The Kids get talked up a lot. They're anointed as the ones that are going to drive the club up the ladder. Rather than just settle in, learn from the senior group, play most of the year at Casey, they're given exalted status. The psyche of the whole club is wrong. They players feel expectation that they shouldn't and senior players probably get their noses out of joint, especially when they see their teammates pensioned off or leave for other clubs. There's probably not one easy answer, but there's been a culmination of poor decisions adversely effect young players drafted to this club.

For years now I've read that "we've failed to develop our players". I've been one that's said it. Our youth just doesn't seem to improve in our system and in fact some seem to deteriorate. I know that "development" means "improvement' and going from being a promising junior to a competent AFL player but what is the process and what does "development" entail? I fail to believe we've haven't committed the resources to player development. In Bailey's time we had Viney and Kelly O'Donnell in charge of development. In Neeld's time we had head coach, line coach and assistant line coaches. We've had player welfare managers and sports psychologists. We've had specialist running coaches and kicking coaches. We've spent the money but haven't developed our players. Why? Is there anyone on this site who has experience in "player development" that can tell me what it involves. And can you give any insight into why, despite committing the resources, we appear to have failed so badly at this aspect of football. And further, have we got it in place now? Like everyone I trust Roos knows what it looks like and how to do it but I reckon the term is thrown around without any real understanding of what is involved. I'd like to hear more from those that know.

I didn't see the game, but from the press conference, the vibe I got from roos was he wanted to put his game style and list up against the best team in the comp, one on one to see how it stood up. I can't imagine him panicking over a scratch match, putting numbers behind the ball so maybe we get a "respectable" 50 point loss instead. What would he learn then?

I saw enough in the Richmond and Geelong games to be quietly enthused. One bad game against the best team in it doesn't evaporate the other two performances. I'm very much looking forward to the year, but it's a real downer about our key forwards. It definitely makes a big difference to our playing style/performance.

Also Aiden Riley (22) - If we get these players on the park together for 3 years + they'll know what each is capable of and 'be in the right spot' - like Hawthorn, Geelong - I can't wait to see them grow togehter into a competitive Midfield

Seems like a fairly simple equation. We had a D-grade midfield, we're now maybe B-grade. We're still going to get smashed by a well-drilled side with an A-grade midfield. If Roosy can't come up with a way to offset this - and without tall forwards and Garland, and with only Spencer as ruck - we're gonna get smashed this year against the sides with A-grade midfields. If we've modelled our game style on the Hawks - "once we get it, we try to keep possession until we score" - then it sounds like it was simply the Master vs the Apprentice. Then again, any game style breaks down if you can't get first hands on the ball.

Sounds like someone already did.

Toumpas was bog in the intra club recently,and is still a kid. He was pretty handy against richmond too. Not all kids have the body of wines to crash in and under all the time. I still have high hopes for Jimmy, and those who have given up on him already,are simply fickle. Its the start of his second year for gods sake.

The way things are shaping we might find Garland as a KPF!!!!!

I don't know if we had any control. And I don't think we had half our team out, we had most of our forward line and reading the scores it doesn't seem like it went in there much. Even if it made the result 5 goals different it was still very poor for us. And whilst I know team have had floggings in practice matches before I can't think of a team, other than a development team, who have come from a position such as ours where the building of confidence has been one of the major, if not the major focus. I don't have the details, but who did GWS and GCS play on the weekend? And I can't image Clarkson was thrilled with his sides last practice match. It was a poor result all round and trying to paint it otherwise doesn't rub with me.

Be thankful for small mercies - AFL cuts trade period by a week

It is something I experienced in my youth .usually after a debutante ball .very strenuous dances back then. Vigorous ,rapid tempo, cha cha cha.

"There's Something About Richard".... we got a bleeder!!

I didn't say Trengove was a bad player, but he was a player most were disappointed with. Trengove is playing as an outside midfielder with an inside midfielder's athletic set. Brock McLean has an inside midfielder's skill set while playing as an inside midfielder. Lenny Hayes is similar. Both win ball inside and outside because they are smart players (like Trengove). They start inside and move outside. That's what Trengove should do. But this relies on two things. Either: - Trengove develops his inside game enough to be a genuine inside midfielder who can then use his class on the outside to be damaging, or - Trengove develops his speed to beat his direct opponents (other outside midfielders) in open space. The former is entirely possible, while the second is near impossible. The former is a product of development while the second is not. The worst case scenario is that neither thing happens and he just ends up as a good player for us. As for Hannebury, he is much faster than Trengove. He's also an exceptionally good anaerobic runner (think Dane Swan). Trengove is more similar athletically to McLean, Bartel and Hayes than to Hannebury. This is the style of game he should be playing, being able to intelligently work into space rather than have to beat his man in a race out there. I've been away, plus I've also been lurking around. Watts has every chance of making it under Roos. If we can teach Watts how to play football (and he has improved markedly in his first few games this year) then he'll be an absolute jet. Strauss is the least talented, but he has the attributes to make it, even if it requires a simplified role for him. I think he could become a decent player in the back line, provided that he is given a job to do and very, very clear instructions on what that job is and extensive education on how to play exactly that role. Blease is a bit more tricky because his lack of endurance makes him very vulnerable. He could only play as a deep forward or back, but I don't think he is clean/agile enough in those confines to do it. I'm not sure that development will make him the player everyone thinks he could be, but rather he is a luxury in a team that is already really good.

OUCH.

It's a good post and something that I've been thinking about for a while. I also don't have experience in this field. Development, to me, is the ability to improve a player's game to its highest possible level. In some areas this scope is virtually zero, and in others it's immense. Skill deficiencies are definitely able to be developed. You can't turn Jayson Daniels into Darren Jarman, but you can turn Jack Fitzpatrick into Nick Riewoldt. Game knowledge can be developed. Look at the number of Irish players who become high possession getters. Look at Anthony Koutoufides. Look at Daniel Merrett. Athleticism is unlikely to be developed, especially speed. You might get bigger and you might get a bit more endurance, but if your role requires speed then you'd better already have it. Coaches are responsible for developing the former, but recruiters are responsible for the latter. This is through tutoring and training good habits and educating the player to recognise these things himself. That's what I believe it to be. To expand on your topic somewhat, I think that the poor return on our drafting has been a combination of both poor drafting and development, but I think different players have not met expectations due to either. In sort, though, I think it boils down to 1) selecting players who will improve greatly with development and then 2) ensuring we develop them well. First of all, to analyse where our issues have been, let's look at some of the success stories of our (relatively) recent drafting. I'm not talking in terms of player X vs player Y, but some of the players we have drafted who have turned into good AFL players. N Jones, Grimes, Frawley, Garland, McDonald. Hmmm, it's not a particularly long list! These players all have 2 things in common: 1) The first thing that I look at that these players have in common is their mental strength. They are, what you call, 'teacher proof'. That is, it doesn't matter who was in charge, they were always going to get the best out of themselves because they would do extra work, look at their own game, do research and make sure they improved. 2) The second thing is that they all have athletic attributes that suit the role they are expected to play. What do I mean by this? Jones and Grimes are midfielders who have better endurance and gut running than most others in the competition and have passable speed and strength. Frawley and Garland play near goal and are blessed with what is most important in that role - speed. Frawley has power and Garland has agility, which are important in their roles. McDonald is a negating defender who plays further from goal, but he has exceptional endurance and good size. His poor kicking is not a big issue because of his role. You could throw McKenzie in that group too from the rookie list. Each of these players had issues. But they were all issues that could be improved with development. Jones was an outside midfield who had to be taught how to play inside. But he had the athletic attributes and the mentality to do this. Grimes had injury issues and robotic kicking. The kicking issue could have been improved with development, but instead we found him a role where it was less of an issue. Frawley came as a poor kick and a bit 'green' (ie, didn't know how to get involved in the game). Kicking could be developed from poor to decent and he could be taught how to play (because he was instinctively good in contests). Garland had played little footy. Development could teach him this. McDonald was a poor kick who didn't know how to play. His kicking and knowledge could be developed. What about the ones where they have disappointed us: Watts, Trengove, Cook, Blease, Strauss, Tapscott. These have disappointed for different reasons, but generally one of two reasons - either they are/were athletically unsuited to their role, or there were not developed well (and weren't 'teacher proof'). Trengove, Cook, Tapscott, (maybe Blease) are all athletically unsuited to their roles at AFL level. Trengove was recruited as an all around midfielder who could deliver the ball forward when in space, but does not have the speed to get on the end of the ball in space. He is athletically well suited to being an inside midfielder, but isn't the role that he plays. He needs development of his inside game (which should be possible) to be a top level player. At the moment it's like recruiting Lenny Hayes to play on the wing. Cook is a key forward who's big strength was his ball use and endurance. Unfortunately he was very slow and very slight, which meant that it was almost impossible for him to get the footy in his role. His strengths were great, but irrelevant when he was so athletically unsuited to his role. This can't be developed and is not to blame. Tapscott is small in AFL terms, but big in juniors. His strengths at junior levels don't translate to AFL level. So we need to look for his other AFL strengths, which are ...... his kicking which, like Cook, is irrelevant if your athletic failings mean you can get the ball. His downfalls can't be adequately developed and therefor is not to blame. The others (Watts, Blease Strauss), are what I would call development related problems. Each of these has athletic strengths (with one major weakness for Blease) that are very, very well suited to their roles. However, the development has failed them. Watts has the speed, skill etc etc to make him dominant in most AFL roles. But he came to the club needing to learn how to play, the expectations and how to influence AFL footy. He was given games and told to develop. But he isn't 'teacher proof'. He played roles that were easy for him to use his skills, but he didn't really learn anything. Now he's 5 years into his career and he is still needing to be taught how to play football. This is a development problem. Blease has speed and skill (with awful endurance), which is a great skill set for a small forward/back role. Unfortunately he is still playing like a kid, rather than an AFL player. He doesn't get involved in games because he hasn't been developed properly. And he certainly isn't 'teacher proof'!! Strauss has great athletic attributes and a great kick, which is perfect for the small back role. But he's not that bright and not 'teacher proof', so he needs help. He can be developed to play a role in defence, but he hasn't been taught how to play footy yet. This is a development problem. There are certain things that you need to be able to do to be successful in your role at AFL level, and certain things that you can get by without. But these all relate to your role. In junior football these things aren't necessarily limiting to your performance, but at AFL level they do. We have drafted players who are athletically unsuited to the role we expect them to play, and we have also failed to develop players who should otherwise be able to be good footballers.

Modern day ruckmen need to be able to do far more than only tap work. That's the least of Spencer's concerns anyway. The guy cannot do the basics. The bare minimum. He drops marks, fumbles has a terrible kick and not a fantastic footy brain. I'm not here to have a go at him. I'm being brutally honest in my assessment and any non-biased supporter would say the same thing. Gawn and Jamar are clearly our preferred choices for ruckman as they each contribute a wider range of attributes. Spencer may improve his 'tap work', but that doesn't affect any of the other glaring deficiencies in his game. At AFL level, you bother have the time nor the resources to have someone on the senior list who needs to improve so many areas and attributes in order to be a 'decent' player. Spencer is getting a gig because nobody else is fit. We all know that. There's nothing to debate. He'll continue to play until Gawn and Jamar are fit.

James Frawley, Col Garland, Nathan Jones there aren't too many on our list who have started out as decent players who flashed talent but actually gone through the gears and got better year by year to reach a high level. The other aspect is not individual development but team development. Dean Bailey's Melbourne team from 2008-2010 actually came through as an improving group. It was build on shifting foundations and crashed in a heap in late 2011 but the team really improved as a unit for a few years there. This year will be a lot about team development as they start to play the game plan and play together. If it works then we will have a playing group that looks vastly improved as competitive losses or wins makes everyone look better than consecutive 10 or 15 goal thrashings. If we build a base of a team that can at least compete then when we bring in the likes of Salem, Kent, Toumpas, JKH as well as the ones who can hopefully fight for themselves like Hogan, Tyson and Viney they will develop individually.

Has there ever been such a long thread about a player who did not play for the Demons? I posted earlier that this was pointless (and better to focus discussion on those players we actually do have) and someone replied that there was a point - it was a chance to 'vent'. Fair enough. But surely by now all those with volcanic feelings have vented.

It's so much more than bad drafting.

I love how he chases down and tackles mids, that sort of effort is fantastic from a big bloke

Very constructive 'master'.

I share that view. I think we are being misled on the injury front. BUT if it translates to wins I can probably live with the deception. It probably has to do with membership sales and also not flagging player 's injuries to the opposition. Many will remember Sheedy's flu as the reason given for many hidden injuries of Bomber players over the years. If we were told that Hogan and Clark were out for the year, how many memberships would be lost. I think we are just going to have to live with some inaccurate injury info from the club but we are not alone in this, they all do it. 4-6 anyone?

Barry Hall confirmed on TV recently that Roos requires 2 fundamentals from his footy sides, winning contested footy and tackling pressure. The only player at Sydney that I don't consider strong in those combinations is Jetta, but his line breaking ability is rare. Toumpas was drafted as a mid, so will need to greatly improve in those areas, which I'm sure he will. If Roos was coach last year I doubt Toumpas would have played a game. So you're right to say we need to give him time and good development. But it if we have a Jetta type in our team it won't be Toumpas.

Toumpas has played one season in one of the worst midfields of all time under a rubbish coach with hips recovering from surgery. All of you judging his career over already must of only started watching footy in 2013. Far out.

Your arguments are very simple and I've used them myself, often. It's not like I'm unfamiliar with the players in question or their weaknesses. I have no doubt that the environment at this club over the last few years coupled with terrible decision making and a lack of quality senior players was not conducive for any young player to realise their capabilities. They were seen as the solution and developed accordingly when they should have been learning their craft and not exposed to a toxic environment. They were handled terribly. The fact that some then get churned by the system is entirely unsurprising and not in itself definitive. Those early years are very important for a player's career. I also have no doubt that some recruiting selections were poor. You and others seem to think it's an either-or situation. It isn't. Things run far deeper.

Top observation. I think you're absolutely on the money here - it's a good thing for Roos to see those deficiencies exposed prior to the season commencing.

Numbers!! Ollie averaged 19 per game on a full preseason with no injuries. Toump's last 6 games average was 16 disposals. Started from a long way back and came good the further the season went on. It's only pre season ffs. You show your ignorance and your complete and utter lack of footy nous, you need a mix of players JVF. Can't all be inside beasts. If you watch closely, you would see the Roos plan with inside mids Cross, Tyson, Jones and Vince etc fighting for ball and Toump playing high half forward then following packs and staying outside for handball gives and to block if ball comes out the back. Numbers are hard to get in our forward line at the moment moron. At least try to understand a game plan.

Wines isn't an outside player with precision skills, but he crashes into contests, wins the ball and gets a lot of possessions quickly and can seriously impact games. He looks like a star. If Toumpas is a soft outside player who we need for versatility, then he isn't a good enough soft outside player, or at least yet. He doesn't look like the devastating type, he moves around a bit awkwardly and doesn't really dictate play and win enough of the ball. You can't simply get by with skills, you need awareness, pace, hardness- all things Toump is lacking in to make an impact at AFL level

I wasn't talking about Wines, I was talking about Toumpas. I love Wines and would be wrapped if he was a demon, but bagging out Toumpas because he's not an inside hard nut shows you have no understanding of the idea of different roles in a footy team, especially under someone who's as big on roles as Paul Roos.

I was there yesterday and was pretty upset. What we can take is it's not gonna be the last time that we're put to the slaughter by a side this year. We were alright for the first quarter in terms of possession quantity/quality, but from then we were just a lost cause. Numerous times our entire 18 were in their defensive half and since we gave up on a forward line the Hawks just toyed with us and had Luke Hodge as a singular guarding defender and put Gibson forward. I don't think it was quite as devastating as some performances last year, but it had a similar feel. The Hawks are just a masterful side who we are nowhere near in getting close to in a head to head. They just play a possession style so much better and know where to run and who to run with. Plus they have a plethora of forward options. They made our midfield look shabby again too. Not sure about stats, were stats of the game posted anywhere/counted? Vince was very quiet after quarter time as were most. Grimes and Frawley were solid in defence, which was a bit consoling. Most players had pitiful disposal. N.Jones was probably our best mid. By the way, I could do without seeing Shannon Byrnes play. I would've rather seen Evans play or JKH or Viney starting the game. I can't see what value he adds to the team and was hugely disappointing last year and regularly makes blunders

Watts will play possibly play deep forward because we'll need him to (for now) The midfield stuff might need to be put on hold for the time being. A forward line containing Watts, Howe, Fitzpatrick, Trengove and JKH might have to suffice. We'll probably need another tall as well but other than Pedersen, there's not a lot of choice. If we decide to go smaller we may as well add pace - whoever is quickest out of Byrnes, Kent or Bail might get a go. If JKH doesn't play, then 2 of the aforementioned may need to play. Fitzy can do the part time ruck work and he does add much needed pace in the forward line. It's not ideal but it may work - a lot will depend on how the Saints play. If Watts doesn't go forward we could be leaving ourselves without a functioning forward line. Hard to win when that happens. Above all else, we need wins to help our confidence and to help reinforce the new game plan. As someone else said in another thread, if the Hawks game was the first of our 3 lead in practice games, our mood may well be a lot more buoyant. All's not lost. When the Hawks bring their 'A' game, they will slaughter sides other than the top teams. Thank goodness we don't play them until round 20 ... there's at least another 6 games this year where we'll be trying to limit the damage. The rest, we can at least take it up to the opposition and we will win our fair share of games. 6-10 wins as a ceiling but the players and coaches should have no such limit. We can eke out a win against St Kilda but we'll need Roos to be right on top of his game. He's a top quality match day coach so we can expect him to pull a few tricks.

Really happy to have Jimmy at the club.

Reckon Vince and Tyson are revelations and we'll be singing their praises for much of the season.

Give the person who started this thread an award for originality. It can start again in a fortnight's time if we disappoint against St. Kilda.

We played the whole 2nd qtr like this but what was really disappointing was that when we had a kickout none of our players went back into our forward half so the kickout went toward the boundary then (if we got the ball) there was absolutely no-one to kick to. We start handballing back and side and of course Hawks pack-attack us and get ball back. Its hard to believe our game plan is for all to stay in our back half when we have a kickout. Its either our game plan to do this or our players weren't following our game plan. What was surprising is that that game plan was not working but we seemed incapable of changing. Scary if this continues...lost a fair bit of hope on Saurday.

I have been saying it for years and am happy to be proven wrong but we should trade Watts while he still has some sort of currency. Hid had 5 years and the longer this charade goes on the more we lose from it. He is not cut out for it.

I understand your point 'stuie' re Toumpas but if you really asked Roos I think he would want the same type of player in his midfield. Tough, strong, head over the ball, run forward and back, contested ball winners who also spread. Sounds a bit like the Sydney midfield. I don't agree with the idea of inside and outside players, all players need to be able to get their own ball and all players need to know how to use it. Jimmy has been disappointing to date but he has time to get it right. So far he hasn't shown game sense as he hasn't got to where the ball is enough. As for elite skills he certainly has a good kicking style but has often got it wrong in application. Don't assume Salem is the same type of player as Toumpas because they look alike. Salem at junior level was known for his attack on the ball and tackling plus of course his long left foot.

We are half way there.See ball Watch other team get ball. Just need to change the second part.

You cannot guess BBP?

we need role players, Toumpas has elite skills and game sense, with time and confidence he will be able to show how damaging he can be as an outside player, and we have Chunk, Cross, Trengove and Viney going in and getting the ball to him in the meantime, Salem will be much the same when he starts playing at AFL level

yep and yep

But totally pointless. What good does it do to endlessly moan about the choice. We have new recruiters whom most agree did pretty well last year, so how does moaning about alleged past errors help them, the club or the supporters? There are plenty of other things the club has to get right with the players we do have - better to concentrate discussion on that surely.

Probably Maia Westrupp.

We just need to get over Wines, he is a port player until at least 2017 now

Totally agree with you, lets hope the boys get together at training on Monday and make a pact to not let a blow out like that happen again in 2014.

Get it online at the Dees Shop: https://shopdesq.imgstg.com/index.cfm?orgid=1749

Yeah, why fix the club when we can continue on with great Demon people like Chris Connoilly and Cameron Schwab Fair dinkum, Crackers Keenan is a [censored] moron