stevethemanjordan

For an AFL footballer, you have got to be able to do more than win the ball in close dandeeman. He has quick hands yes, but he has below average kicking, defensive running, endurance, speed, strength, tackling, smothering etc etc. Potentially elite footballers do not possess many (if any) below average attributes.

Brock faded away after injuries unfortunately. In his earlier years, and especially 2006 he was a very valuable part of our midfield. For some reason people are claiming that 'sky is the limit for Gysberts. Claiming that he has the potential to be elite. I can't see anything elite about him apart from his ability to win the ball in close. How many players do we have on our list that also have the ability to win the ball in close? I'm not writing him off. But I think people have ridiculous expectations of this kid just because he managed to get high possession numbers in his first couple of games. It's absurd. He has so many weaknesses. We could have made a better choice at number 11.

Gysberts is unfortunately way overated on this forum. Reminds me of Dunn and Bate when they first started and how much hype there was around them both.

Nail on head. VFL? You are correct if that's the case. We would have full control of the way the club plays and developing our younger players in specific positions and roles. But it costs a lot.

Our leaders need to change the way they play. They need to become selfless. They need to block, tackle, pressure, smother, make second efforts, all the 'one percenters'. They need to do these things more and worry about them more than accumulating possessions or kicking goals. I'm sure we will continue to draft players who are already of this mindset also. As soon as this kind of play and attitude is instilled it will obviously rub off on young draftees that come to our club. We need a bigger emphasis on drafting players with above average kicking skills. It's an absolute joke how disgusting our kicking skills are sometimes. Our list still needs big changes made. Neeld is the man to take us there.

So I can only assume that means you are absolutely infuriated with our recruiting staff of the past from however many years. We have no stars. Are the recruiters entirely to blame? I would say it's a combination of poor recruiting, poor coaching, poor role models/team leaders, soft culture. That is what Melbourne was and mostly still is as a club. We will always hear the optimists on demonland go on and on and on about how this/that young player will develop into a star and it's so sad. The club is as far behind as it was when Bailey took over. Talking on field specifically here. Players, coaches, game plan, leaders, standards. Just out of interest, is there anyone who thinks that we lost to Hawthorn on the weekend because of 'inexperience'?

Culture change. Players change. Game Plan Change. Club change. After we tick those boxes, we can start talking finals.

Mick is 100 % correct in what he says.

Such a complex issue. Starting from colonisation right up until now. Our dominant culture could not care less about minorities and it's sickening.

Thanks for my mid-morning laugh Mono. Amazing.

It's not whether one team takes it seriously or not. Teams have seperate agendas and goals for the NAB cup. All are in-fact 'serious'. Ours happens to be a complete change in the way we play as a football team and so, as of Saturday night, playing against arguably the most organised group in the AFL, we did very well and we can take a lot from that game. Of course all teams will be blooding youngsters and some will have more than the opposition. Some teams will be trying to fine tune areas of their game, some making positional changes etc. Yes, yes we all know it's a bit of experimentation. However, every player that plays is still going at 100%. They wouldn't be playing if they weren't, because yes, it's only NAB cup! I'm with you Rolly. I think most within the football community knew we hadn't adopted a consistent press under Bailey. I think we became pretty lazy under him too. Don't think Neeld will stand for any form of laziness.

Mono, you need to get up from under that rock you're living under and do some learning. Ignorant, ignorant comment. Little Johnny's savings? Jeez. You and Mono better be world advocates of 'save the tax payers' if you're kicking up a fuss over this. Do some learning brother. Gain some insight into indigenous affairs and you might have a slightly different view...

I find it alarming when I continue to read comments that go a little something like, "It's only NAB cup so you can't take too much out of it." I have never really understood this kind of comment, nor do I really know what the poster means when they write it. For the people who are culprits of this kind of comment, I want to know what you look for and what you do take from a NAB cup game? In my eyes, after one dry game of football against the grand finalists of last year, I feel I can see a remarkable difference in the way we set up as a team and the positional movement of players. We are so much more organised out there as a team and it seems we have not only developed an effective forward press, but also an appetite for defensive running. Two words that were missing from the Bailey era. That's a huge amount that I took from one NAB cup game. Obviously there will be individual mistakes such as kicking errors, decision making errors, two players going for the same mark etc. They are the bumps you want to smooth out before the season proper, but maybe that's what people mean when they say, "you can't take too much out of a nab cup game.' Or maybe in the past, people have been looking for individual brilliance or dominance after a long pre-season? And that's what people mean by; "You can't take too much from a nab cup game." The two answers above are probably due to the last few years under Bailey's watch, where it seemed the common theme was about getting 'games into players.' Maybe people were assuming that once a player had reached x amount of games, they should be getting this amount of possessions or that amount of goals.... I am also a culprit of this kind of thought. Who knows... After one nab cup game I can see Neeld has instilled three goals : hardness, organisation (game plan) and defensive running. He clearly knows that we have the cattle to follow this kind of theme and as long as we continue to play in the manner we did, we will be in with a shot against most teams this year. As Bailey also alluded to and what most know, the more games our younger players play, the better they will become also. Now we have two things to look forward to. Can't wait for Saturday to see us at it again. Go you mighty dees!

For an elite midfielder 'elite' would be: A player that possesses a high to extremely high standard of several attributes. That's the common theme I see with all of the top mids. Obviously positionally, the word 'elite' has different characteristics.

I'll leave it. Apologies.

I think it's fair to judge a player's reaction/awareness levels after two games. Especially given that they have been playing AFL for 7-8 years.

"Bartel, Sewell, Montagna, Corey, and Selwood are there but not an Ablett or a Judd..." Comparing our midfield to those first five names. Do you 'hope' they are the players our current crop will become? Or are they 'there'? Which one is it RP?

I would argue that the reason 'elite midfielders' are labelled 'elite midfielders' is because most of them - (if not all) - are highly versatile footballers and excel in most areas of the game. We have three in my eyes who could potentially reach that status. Sylvia Trengove Grimes All three possess an all round game. They can all mark well, can kick well, can win the hard ball, have speed, awareness, agility, flexibility. Multiple attribute players they are. The higher one's skill level and attribute count is, the higher the chance he is of reaching 'elite'/'top class' status. Although Grimes hasn't played midfield much for us, he still possess's those attributes that could take him to 'elite mid' status. Moloney Jones Magner Couch Bate J Mac Collectively, they are all ball winners. None of them will ever reach elite status, simply because they are all too one dimensional. Some may argue that Moloney can reach it but again, I believe he is too one dimensional. He has an elite ball winning ability, but we will never see him go forward and take a match winning contested mark, kick amazing goals, deliver the ball with poise and finesse to a forward etc. Bail Nicholson These two are really our only two straight line runners, neither of them have great footskills, neither of them are all round players. In fact I played against young Nicholson not two years back so it's amazing he is even considered to be a top mid amongst a few on the forum. They're both elite runners. Bail seems to be improving every year, but again, while good support players, neither will reach a top level. Gysberts is the other who's name is thrown around as potentially becoming 'elite.' Again, he is not complete enough to make the Sylvia/Trengove/Grimes group. He doesn't possess the same footskills, contested marking ability, speed, running ability etc. He is a fantastic ball winner again, but I don't see him becoming the player many believe he will become. He just doesn't possess the same number of attributes. Just so people know, those potential three still haven't made it so obviously it's not as simple as it sounds. Sylvia still has his consistency/mentality issues, Trengove is still 20 and Grimes has to stay on the park. But they are the three in my eyes who are the most gifted in multiple areas of the game and I reckon we will need a couple more before we get to where we want.

Two contradictory sentences....

I thought Bate's ability to win the ball in tight was a highlight vs GC and Brissy. It did come as quite a surprised to me, so I must commend him for that. However, what I didn't like, was him aimlessly throwing the ball on the boot without thinking twice about giving off to a running player. It could have been because of the conditions and he was just trying to get the ball forward, which is fair enough in wet weather footy, so I'll hold my judgement till next week. Good on him for keeping his intensity up for most of the game. Saturday night in dry conditions will be an interesting story.

That was wet weather footy. Not our game plan.

Nail on head. Even though he is still developing his frame, he needs to learn how to attack the ball as if his life depends on it. I sure hope it comes soon.

P.S. Was great to see Brad Green go for that courageous mark in the middle of the ground. Shows he still wants to lead. Good on him. We will need his footskills in the middle of the ground if that's where he ends up playing this season. Back to 03, 04, 05 !

We seemed to be more desperate in both games which is the most important thing in wet weather footy. Hard to draw much else out of the game. If we are that desperate in dry weather and can also execute our skills more often than not, we are in with a shot against most teams this season. Magner, Couch, Beamer, Bate and Jones are all strong players and they set the tone. But it will be interesting to see who stays and who goes by round 1 because they are all big bodied straight line runners and none of them have elite footskills. I thought our physicality was our highlight overall last night.

I'm pretty sure they're shortened NION, yes. I'm glad we've got two of the stringer teams to play against in Collingwood and Hawthorn. Our youngsters vs theirs. Love Bail's hardness and gut running. If he can improve his kicking slightly he could be very handy.