stevethemanjordan

Good post.I'm no expert, and I think everyone will have different reasons as to why it's been so hard for us to develop young players that come in. The most influential people at your club as you've pointed out are your leaders and best players. Having really professional, driven, competitive and smart leaders at your club plays such an important role in the development of youngsters coming through. Something that we haven't had. In my view, it started around 06-07 when Neita retired and when we moved junior on. Whilst neither of those players were considered superstars, they were definitely our most influential leaders at the club. Bruce, Green, Yze, White, Robbo and a handful of other senior players just didn't have the same effect and that's something that of great curiousity to me because Neitz and JM were fantastic leaders and teachers but clearly it didn't rub off on those guys coming through. Now whether or not that says something about who you draft, their mindset etc is a something we can talk about for hours and would absolutely have something to do with it. Nathan Jones is somebody who has been able to breakthrough this 'trend' that seems to have continued at Melbourne and you only have to look at his intensity to see that drafting players who are determined to succeed can be just as important as drafting silky outside players who ride the high wave well but go missing in stormy weather. Perhaps one could argue that our recruiting over the years has been too one-dimensional with the type of player they've gone after. Perhaps the approach hasn't been overly wholistic, and recruiting teams in the past may have overlooked the importance of the psyche of a player. Grimes, Trengove and Toumpas captained their under 18 sides and you can definitely see their desire to be the best they can. Had the been drafted to clubs with much stronger leadership and direction around them, they'd be contributing a lot more than what they are for us. It's something I always think about, but I reckon we've finally got it right with Roos and co at the helm. As I've recently said in another thread, it will be about future drafting and trading. We must get them right. Viney, Toumpas, Trengove, Grimes. They're all highly driven players. Jones and Cross are crucial for our senior leadership and Vince helps. At some point there'll be a flood of young star leaders for us. I'm sure of it.

We've seen so little from the other ruckmen because they've been injured... Gawn would be playing ahead of Spencer if he was fit. Same with Jamar. McKenzie wouldn't be getting a game for Hawthorn, Freo, Geelong etc etc.None of this is personal. So don't take it that way. I've never said we can't win games with them in the side. I don't understand what you disagree with. If we want to see sustained, significant and positive improvement of our team, list, gameplan and quality of football then we need to have 22 players who are capable of contributing in every way. You cannot achieve any of that with 6 + of your starting 22 not being able to get games at other clubs. I'm all for role players. Everybody bangs on about this. However, if you have a player who can play his role and then some, it makes sense to replace the player who can only 'play their role'. For example. If one day, Salem comes in and plays a defensive/negating role on an opposition player just as well as someone like McKenzie, but also uses his exquisite kicking skills to setup play a number of times, (something McKenzie will never be able to do), what will happen? Obviously Salem will take his spot, and our side will improve because of it. Master, we must over time, trade for more quality players and make sure we get our early draft picks bang on and develop them the right way for us to have any chance of serious and significant improvement as a club. All I've done is state the bleeding obvious. I don't know what you're disagreeing with?

Fitzpatrick is the perfect example of a speculative 'KPP lower end of the draft' pick. He cannot kick. He isn't a fantastic mark for a bloke of his size. I'm not being harsh. I'm being realistic. He wouldn't be getting a game if we had Hogan, Dawes and Clark playing. He is not a forward. He is what the industry would term an 'athletic tall who has elite speed and agility for a guy of his size.' He ain't a natural ruckman or forward. He's not a natural footballer. He has a few athletic attributes and does the occasional freakish thing.

All players will miss targets from time to time, but that list I provided, in my eyes, consists of players who consistently make errors and are not up to standard. Their skills will not improve enough. They will and absolutely need to be pushed out of our starting lineup. The point is that due to a number of reasons, we have wasted half a dozen more top end draft picks who really should be keeping those I mentioned out of the side. Morton, Gysberts, Cook, Bate etc etc. Players picked at the too end of the draft who - for a number of reasons - have all been moved on but should be some of our best and most influential players by now. Hawthorn are the prime example of a group of highly skilled and hard inside ball winning players. We can get there also. But not when we have guys like the ones I mentioned playing in our side It's going to take great recruiting and trading. Great development and nurturing. And great coaching and communication. 2- 3 years.

The indication as to whether we're improving consistently as a team is when the following happens. Matt Jones McKenzie Byrnes Bail Nicholson Jetta Pederson Spencer Fitzpatrick Evans No more than two of the above will ever be in the best 22. Most will either be playing at Casey or not on the list at all. The fact that these players are continuing to get games is having a direct impact on game day. I'm not going to bang on about the past. We know why they're still getting games. We have nobody else. But significant improvement as a side won't come until we add greater talent to the list and when these players are no longer regulars in our side. They are absolutely not AFL standard players and they're extremely limited in their abilities. I still think we'll improve this year thanks to the injection of mids we've had plus Paul Roos and the new coaches. However, the real improvement will come hopefully over the next two or three years with what will be 'hopefully' some more smart trading and good pickups in future drafts. I believe we've got the recruiting department right now. Roos understands the importance of developing and nurturing first year players. Guys like Salem, who off the back of a limited pre-season isn't getting a gig yet. Something we would not have seen in years gone by with a number 9 draft pick. I'm sure others share this view.

Perhaps, perhaps not.Look at what he's achieved. Why is he our Captain.

Yes, of course he has the right... I just wish he had the same mindset as Jones. We'd have a more valuable team member. Someone who would have more of an influence on the club. The bloke is a passenger, and we've had far too many of them over the years.

This is going to throw a spanner in the works.. But here goes. I read an article on Nick Riewoldt the other day about his loyalty to St Kilda and the fact that he's never considered leaving. Now of course people may argue that they've played in finals and Grand finals and he's their captain etc, but one of the things that struck me was when he mentioned that winning a grand final for another club wouldn't have the same effect. He has too many close mates at St Kilda. Now with Frawley, he keeps banging on about his mates at the club and his veins bleeding red and blue etc etc, yet he's waiting until the end of the season before he decides apparently. This post might be a tad premature but if he leaves, I will be glad. Football clubs and sustained success occurs when you have players who stick by the club, drag it out of the mud, and inspire a climb to the top. Nathan Jones has never once 'considered his options' and has been on the list longer than Frawley, has endured just as many losses and hardships, and has improved out of sight as an individual and team player. That's a telling sign. Whilst most seem to accept that Frawley is 'considering his options', in my eyes he knows very well that the club is now on the up. We've hit our lowest point. It's just $ signs that he's seeing. The guy is a beast of a human, the potential to be one of the best full backs. He's just not all there in the head I don't reckon. Completely different mindset to Jones, and I wish he'd take a leaf out of Nath's book. (Wrong thread, apologies. Just noticed someone talking about Frawley)

You'd think medical staff and fitness 'gurus' at an elite level would know not to rush a player back... Open your mind. All possibilities are there. We the supporters will never really know, and dazzle's comments about Dawes' knee hold just as much merit as yours do. None of us really know, and none of it would surprise me. We're just in a very unfortunate position where we have two tall forwards who are, for various reasons, injury prone.

Happy to wait until it's 'officially reported' but god I wish we had some more luck on our side. It's a big blow not to have any of our three power forwards up and and about.. Will be an even greater challenge for our mids now to defend fantastically well when we go forward. There are always positives when these things happen. Double edged sword.. Will fast track some of the midfield development I'm hoping... But really, I hope it's not as serious as the twitter world are making out..

Yes, nor am I claiming the opposite... I am just responding to posts that were to do with 'possession count' in a game. If you'd bothered to scroll up, you wouldn't have needed to post what you did.

Yes, most of the other stats were even, except for inside 50's which they dominated. The only way that the 'possession count' stat is a positive, is if we're dominating a team in every other stat including inside 50's!

Well, I'd argue that we could have managed those chains of possessions in years previous had our coach at the time shared a similar philosophy in game style/plan. Perhaps not as well, (due to some of the inclusions to our list), but still.

Also another thing to add to this 'higher possession count' talk. If you watch the game against Geelong, have a look at how much pressure they put us under when we have the ball. There are constant quick handballs, little chips, fumbles, more handballs, chips backwards etc etc by our players. This is bound to happen to a team who is not as skilled or solid in their game plan and don't share the same trust in one another. So in this particular context, it's not a 'positive' that we've got high possession numbers. When Geelong won the contested ball, they were clean and direct with their disposal and so their inside 50 count was much higher than ours. The 'holding of possession' in this context is more ambiguous and in that particular game, was due to a number of reasons. Not all being positive.

It's a highly misleading stat. Granted, we won our fair share of the ball but as Dunstall continued saying, we were making two or three kicks to reach a particular target when all we needed was one at times. There was also a lot of pointless sharing of the ball in the back half which clearly contributes to this stat. I am well aware we are still getting used to playing this way so these two practice games have been the first two where we've been testing it out. Not as much risk taking. Etc etc. It can be positive, and it has been a positive. But in isolation, that stat can be very misleading. Sure. But if you're chipping pointlessly back and fourth, you're not necessarily progressing anywhere and you'll rack up plenty of possessions.... I'm not saying that's how we are playing, because clearly we've been competitive in both games, however there have been passages where there have been too many disposals and possessions needed which as I've said, contributes to the high possession number.

We lost to Geelong, matched them in most areas of the game and outnumbered them by quite a margin with number of possessions, but did you see the inside 50 count?Stats stats stats. Champion data blah blah. While it's a positive thing that we're holding onto the ball and playing a holding of possession style game when it's needed, we still over-possessed the ball against Geelong. It'll take time, but we need to become a lot more efficient and direct with our kicks. I hope you realise this, and you that you don't actually believe that the outcome of round 1 will be based on whether or not we win the possession count overall...

Would have said the same last year... However with Tyson and Cross now in the midfield, Viney is not an auto lock for round 1 based on fitness. His form will dictate whether or not he plays round 1. Michie has impressed me enough already to earn a spot in round 1. Great pickup.

Positives - the four midfield inclusions. Vince, Cross, Tyson and Michie. - a more effective gameplan. - players starting to trust and back themselves and each other. - did well stopping what could have been a flood of goals a couple of times. No Frawley or Garland. Negatives - still far far far too many ridiculous skill errors that Melbourne players seem to make. Seriously. - The new mids MUST push these guys out for round 1. It's inexcusable at this level. I know there were a number of errors from different players. But the same guys too often turn the ball over. - not enough quality ball uses on the list, and that needs to improve over the next couple of years.

All thanks to a quality AFL coach. Looking forward to tonight.

You're stating the bleeding obvious as well as missing the point. A win in round 1 will do wonders for us, no matter who the team, no matter who the personnel. You can't underestimate the significance a win will have on the psyche of our players and it's especially important for us going into round two against west coast at the G. It will bring more supporters, we'll be on a high as a side and we all know how riding high on confidence can completely change how a sporting team plays. Look at the Aussies during the Ashes and even the first test against South Africa. Mitchell Johnson... He's invincible now. Obviously we'll have a better indication of where we're at when we come up against full strength top four sides, but if you think that winning in general isn't going to have some influence in being 'competitive' against full strength top 8/4 sides, then you need to have a look at the history of sport pal.

I'd rather a round 1 win from where we're coming from, regardless of the opposition and who they have in or out. We need to remember what it feels like to play well and win. It's a non-negotiable.

Of course I'm not celebrating this news, but it looks as if the stars are aligning for our first round 1 win in some time. Steven out for 6 or more weeks with a foot injury so that's another one down in their midfield. Steven Montagna Dal Santo - (north) Gilbert (backman) And an under-done Hayes and Riewoldt for the moment. Meanwhile, our injury list is as healthy as it's ever been. bitter/sweet news?

You do understand why he battled in a one on one dual in the ruck vs Richmond though don't you... ? He is a skinny kid who was rucking and body-ing against hardened senior men. What on earth did you expect? I don't know what you're seeing Master, he showed plenty of encouraging signs. He's skill set for a man of his height puts Spencer's to shame. Spencer has been on our list for how many years? And he still makes the most simple of errors which are detrimental at times. Max showed some fantastic signs. His hands below his feet, field kicking, and awareness for a ruckman were really promising. He needs at least 4 years in the gym before we see him being able to match it physically with the big boys..

All those ruckmen J-Viney mentioned have Spencer covered in most facets of the game. I think you're simplifyingthe role a 2014 ruckman needs to play.. Spencer is next to useless wen he goes forward, he can't mark for a giant, can't kick, can't handball, is still not aggressive enough. He competes in rucking contest and tries hard to apply pressure when in the vicinity of an opposition player with the ball. It's the bare minimum RP. Having two rotating ruckmen that have the ability to play a forward role is what most teams have. Spencer is filling in time while the other tall timber are injured.

I'm one of the people that will have a go at him because of his skills. It wasn't just kicks he missed. His marking for a bloke of his size is quite poor as is his positional work in marking contests. He tries his guts out and competes hard, there's no knock there. However, we will struggle against other teams if Spencer is our number 1 ruckman. Too many brain fades for me.