mo64

FFS, isn't that the role of a coach? And how was he supposed to "develop some kids when he was there", when the under 19's had just been scrapped, and the draft was in full effect. Balme had a far more talented side in 1994, which included Neitz, Schwarz and Charles, who were all products of our under 19's, when Northey was there. Northey is easily the best coach we have had since Norm Smith.

Again Rhino, you're just reinforcing my argument. Bailey is building a team and a game plan around players in the under 23 bracket, who can't carry it out. Sylvia falls into the same category as Moloney I assume? What's your vision of our list in the next 2 years? And it's a given that Neitz, Yze, White, McDonald and Holland would have retired, and Weetra and Warnock will probably be cut. Who will replace them?

That's my point AOB. Bailey is playing with fire by building a team around players who don't have the physical prowess to play the way he want's them to. And with the advent of the 2 new teams, he won't get any relief in the drafts to come. And you are right. In football terms there is a difference between quick and fast. Daniel Bell is fast but not quick.

But if his teammates know where his kicks are going to go, where's the problem? He's getting caught out this year because when under pressure, he's instructed to handball or look for the perfect option. He doesn't have the athleticism to weave out of trouble. I can just see it now. The brightsiders on this forum will be calling for Moloney and Jones to be traded because they aren't adept at Bailey's game plan. BTW, Hawthorn and St.Kilda rebuilt, by trading experienced players for top draft picks, and building their side around them. Brisbane on the other hand are building their side around experienced players, and topping up through the draft. Surely you can see the difference.

I don't recall anyone being critical of Jones' decision making last year. What's changed?

There's a huge difference between building your team around a core group of players in the same age bracket, and rebuilding. By your reckoning, he's building a team around players who aren't suited to his game plan. McLean, Jones, Moloney, Sylvia aren't suited by a run and carry handball game plan. And if his plan was to rebuild, why wouldn't he have traded Robertson?

Rhino, you've finally got it. Not only will the 17th and 18th teams have draft concessions, they'll also have access to uncontracted players. That's why it's a ludicrous time to be bottoming out, and rebuilding. And I don't think it was Bailey's intention to rebuild when he took on the coaching job.

It's a sad state of affairs when after round 4, we're talking about the draft and delistings. We've injected some promising youngsters in Morton and Aussie, and hopefully more to come in Maric and Grimes. Usually youthful exuberance rubs off on the other players, and gets the fans excited. Not this year. What's even more disheartening is the way Neitz is ending his career.

Bazza, I'd be curious to know whether Sandy's game style has changed this year.

Then define competitive and accountable specifically in a "game plan" sense?

Summed it up perfectly Hards. And Rhino, in regards to West Coast, you need players of the ilk of Judd and Cousins to make their game plan work. They're generational players, and you're not going to find replacements for them in the next 20 years. So what do you do? Based on your theory, you persist with the game plan until someone comes along that can emulate Judd and Cousins. My theory is that you work with what you've got, and try to make improvements by enhancing your list. In regards to leadership, everyone was saying that Geelong lacked leadership prior to 2007. Their best player in the GF is also their most ill disciplined player. For mine, leadership is not the biggest issue. The game plan is. The game has changed, and by the time Bailey get's his playing list to suit his game plan, it will be outdated, because the game is constantly changing.

1) Ability and skills - If Bailey doesn't believe that he has the players with the ability and skills to carry out his plan, how many drafts does he think it will take until he does? 2) Fitness is a given. Can't be used an excuse. 3) Commitment and competitiveness comes with belief. Without belief in what you're doing, comes frustration (refer MFC players).

Well if the game plan is to be competitive, it's not working. And if you run and carry via handball, the greater the opportunity for the opposition to dispossess you via pressure. The turnover causes your teammates to be out of position, and be seen to be unaccountable. So unless you have super-skilled elusive midfielders, you are kidding yourself if you think it can work. The Eagles are a case in point. Without Judd and Cousins, how well does their run and carry game plan hold up?

I'll answer that for him. None.

Ok I'll answer it. 25, there happy? If freewheeling football is the best way for our players to kick a winning score, then that's the way we should play. Give the players license to be attacking, rather than having the mindset of negative accountability. As i've written ad nauseum, the players appear to be focussing too much on doing the "Bailey thing", rather than playing instinctively. In turn, their confidence is shot. If Moloney was dropped after round 1 for his lack of accountability, it was a disgrace. It's probably lost on you Rhino that a team actually has to kick goals to win a match. But that's not important to you, as long as the players are accountable.

I was going to reply in depth, but quite frankly, anyone who raises this old chestnut of "how many players would get a game with blah, blah, blah" is not worth the effort.

So what's your solution Jaded? We remain winless and uncompetitive for the next 5 years, which is how long it will take to totally regenerate a list capable of following Bailey's game plan. The list is not that bad. The players are playing reactive rather than instinctive football, and the coach is to blame. Everything that Hards has written is spot on. Most of you are delusional about Bailey's game plan being the answer to success.

Exactly right paddo. Gone are the days when forwards can rely on being spoon fed on the lead. You can afford to have 1 one trick pony in your forward line, but not 3. Our forward set up is non-productive, and needs to be changed. If we persist with Miller at CHF, Robertson has to go. I'd like to see Dunn given extended time in the forward line.

And I suppose you think that the timber will just fall from the trees!

Every time we discuss the issue of 'game plan' you raise disciplines that I consider to be the basics of footy, and should be adhered to, regardless of game style. Basics such as head over the ball, pressure, tackling, chasing, blocking etc, are all areas that we needed to improve post Daniher. I'm yet to see any results of this changing under Bailey. The area of Bailey's 'run and carry' game style that I despise is using handball to a stationary teammate as the 'get-out' option. This only works if your teammate has great evasive skills. We have very few players with evasive skills. If our 'get-out' option was a 30-40 metre kick to 3 or 4 designated areas, at least the players up the ground know where to position themselves. A quote from Cam Bruce in today's Age "we want to get to that stage where we just know where the ball's going and can get there". For mine, this is an indictment on the coach, not the players. BTW, how are the West Coast going with their 'run and carry' style without Cousins and Judd?

No, to be competitive, you build your game plan around your players' strengths, not weaknesses. But that doesn't excuse the players from not doing the basics (the 1%ers). Over a period of drafts, you develop your list and game plan to a level that is achievable. Also, our selection policy of cumbersome tall forwards and non-contributors (Garland and Weetra) defies his own game plan.

No, what pisses me off is that many on this forum believe that Bailey's new game plan is faultless, and that a review of our list will be the cure to all our woes. Our list has some shortcomings, but is not that bad. The nature of the draft and trade week means that there are no guarantees that our list will get dramatically better over the next 2 seasons. If we cull talented players unable to grasp Bailey's game plan, who do we replace them with? BTW, I'd like someone to ask him why Moloney, Newton and Petterd didn't play for Sandy last week.

If Holland is the best credentialled player on our list to handle a particular player, of course it's going to improve our chances of winning a game. Who do you have in mind as someone who can handle the gorillas?

I hope you're not referring to Meesen? He will turn out to be Craig Cameron's greatest blunder. Yes, worse than drafting Luke Molan.