Watson11

I can’t work out how we have the most difficult draw. Unless they count preseason intraclub scratch matches as then we play ourselves about 5 times. Will be interesting to see how the Cats go as they play us, the dogs, Brisbane, and Port in their 9 games at GMBH so they can’t lock in their usual 8 wins at the cattery. They have Sydney, North, West Coast, GWS, and Port interstate. May struggle to get to 12 wins for the season. But I feel like it’s a win win, as if they miss the 8 nothing would make me happier other than us playing them in another final.

Anyone know if 12 in a row has been kicked in a granny before.

His top 8 prediction is MFC, Port, Dogs, Lions, Cats, Bombers, Sydney, Tiges. So he is being bold this year and has GWS out and Tiges in. His 2021 top 8 prediction was just the 2020 top 8. No changes at all. A few other things from the article. He thinks if the dogs had a ruckman they would be premiers. That's laughable considering they had the 14th ranked defence and no premier has been that bad defensively since they started measuring these things. He thinks the cats will be contenders again based on their bad injury run last year. Fact: They had the second least games lost due to injury in 2021 behind us. He thinks West Coast will be coming for LJ with an $8m 7-year contract

I’ve got too much time now that I’ve overloaded on GF replays. You have contributed some great stuff on here. The stuff on loadings was gold. Burgos latest podcast with Choco is worth a listen as well https://brukieandburgo.podbean.com/e/brukie-and-burgo-with-choco-williams/

Max said much the same re analysis in his article today in the age. He bemoaned the lack of understanding the media have of the modern game and how he can’t watch afl because of it. I think Goody is different to the intellectually curious coaches and managers you allude to. I may be mistaken. In my view, Goody is more a “manager” type. I don’t see it in Hardwick either. But they both stuck with a sound basic strategy, built lists to execute it, and got the culture right to perform. It’s such a lesson for other clubs that it usually takes time for a list to develop to execute a strategy. What strategy works for list A won’t for list B. Burgo talks about this a lot in soccer on his podcasts where the difference between the physicality of the press strategy requires completely different players to the possession based strategy’s. There are similarities in AFL but not as pronounced. As Goody has the right people around him now it doesn’t matter if he is brilliant or not. His limitations showed when he stuck to some flawed tactics for long periods of time that other coaches could easily exploit, especially when the pressure was on, and he clearly didn’t have the right people around him to point out the issues. The entire thread about whether he was the right guy was after his experimental strategy was ripped apart by Clarko and Hawthorn. Richo was the master of exploiting the holes on Goodys gameplan and was a great addition for us, Yze fixed Goody’s “win contested ball at all cost” stoppage strategy, and Choco in my view likely kept coaches and players on their toes in a way that didn’t seem to happen from 2017-2020 when we always seemed to get ahead of ourselves or not handle expectations. 2021 was all about Goody managing all of these people and the players and making it work. I really don’t think Beveridge should be mentioned in that elite coaching group either. His “genius” to handball out of stoppages and hit form for 4 weeks in September 2016 has resulted in a 5 year leave pass and in him being credited as tactically brilliant whenever the dogs have success, but never criticised for their failures. And some of their failures are all on him, like their lack of midfield defensive running, flawed defensive work at stoppages, a defence that is terrible 1 on 1, and the result being a flawed strategy where they can leak goals (like 16 in 28 minutes of playing time in a GF). His strategy is flawed yet he is credited with being a genius. That makes no sense. The really elite coaches all have been first with a new point of strategic difference, and built unbelievable cultures and lists to execute it and created sustained success for long periods. Roos turned the game on its head tactically and won a flag that no one believed was possible, using systems imported from US basketball that even the AFL CEO didn’t understand. He broke a longer drought than ours, and put in place a bloods culture that still remains. Clarko moneyballed the AFL with elite kicks and got 4 flags from it in 8 years. But it wouldn’t have worked without the culture. Leigh Matthews was different in that it was more about culture and psychology. But he’s a 4 times premiership coach, and if you listen to him on dynasties it is no less impressive than what clarko did. Goody will be seen alongside these revered coaches if the culture and success is sustained. Worsfold built the Eagles from a rabble in 2000 and 2001 to a flag in 5 years, but their culture sucked and he didn’t get what he could of out of that list. I don’t think we will be a one hit wonder but only time will tell. If we only have 1 flag to show by 2025 Goody will always be respected for 2021 but seen more like a Worsfold or Chris Scott than Matthews or Clarko. I’d prefer he is a future AFL Hall of Fame legend alongside Norm Smith.

You’re confusing who you thought had more upside and who did have more upside. 5 All-Australians, All-Australian captain, premiership captain, 2x B&F etc makes it obvious who did have more upside. I can’t really critique what you thought though as in 2013 I didn’t see it either, but the original point was those within the club did see the potential.

I don’t think this is correct. Someone inside the club told me in 2013 that Max would be a star if he got a good run with injury. No way were they thinking about delisting him, and although Jamar was clearly number 1 at the time Max, at least internally, was rated really highly. The club was a shambles in 2012 and we got nothing for Martin in the trade, but there was a pretty high expectation on Max. I never heard the same said about Spencer or Fitzpatrick.

The bookies odds are probably a fair reflection. I would have Sydney above Geelong and Richmond though.

For those interested, the podcast where Burgo spoke about our output was this one https://brukieandburgo.podbean.com/e/series-2-episode-2-matthew-innes/ Matthew Innes is head of high performance at the Bulldogs, and it was not the most interesting podcast. Innes spoke about the finals and the travel and quarantine the dogs dealt with etc. Burgo slipped in the conversation that Round 20 against Gold Coast, despite spending the entire previous day sitting on a plane etc, then having the game scheduled early the following day the MFC players performance was off the charts and 15% higher than any other game this year. It was also the week after the wet slog against the dogs. You have to feel sorry for gold coast considering our performance after that game.

Yes they do https://support.catapultsports.com/hc/en-us/articles/360000648316-Volume-Metrics This looks like the super duper version. https://support.catapultsports.com/hc/en-us/articles/360001343976-What-is-Metabolic-Power- Burgo has a PhD so he worked it all out.

You would need to ask Burgo. I would assume they measure total energy for the game for every player using the GPS and efforts etc but don’t really know.

We played one game this season where our total physical output was 15% more than any other game. Can anyone guess which game it was? Source is Burgo's podcasts.

Except he was linked to Carlton so not sure about the success part!

If Sam W has a big preseason then TMac will need one as well.

I would have said yes except for the 2 weeks between the prelim and GF was plenty to recover. In that final 40 mins they also had a total of 13 minutes of recovery time between goals and 6 mins at 3/4 time. They were cooked upstairs but physically they had no excuses.

Yet statistically we had the best defence ever by a long way. Even so, I do agree with your assessment re ground balls, and if we do clean up that little thing, we will break the record for the best defensive team ever again.

It can improve. The sports scientists killed it based on the myth that if you kicked too much you would pull a hamstring. If anything, Burgo now thinks the opposite so hopefully that’s left a mark. It’s also interesting that Simpson did not believe that and allows his players at West Coast to practice as much as they want and their accuracy average has led the league for a number of years.

Sparrow Bowey Harmes Petty Spargo Hunt Rivers ANB Jordan Dunstan The bottom 6 and role players are what will allow the others to be AA again.

I’d say there is too little science. A sports scientist having an idea and trying it out isn’t science. If you listen to Burgo and Brukkies podcasts, you can safely assume that the entire sports world believed you needed to rest people if sore etc. At Arsenal Burgo had 7 years of detailed data and 70 staff and then hired in the rocket scientists and they could not find any correlation between player management and injury. Burgo also had Adam Coutts and a few other gurus on his podcasts. From what I can tell, the only 2 scientifically proven things that cause hamstrings etc is 1. variations in training loads, and 2. not stressing muscles at least once a week. So Burgo trained us hard all the time, and players had 1 training session a week where the GPS had to show a 100% sprint. The biggest frustration was the idea that sports scientists had that you can’t kick for goal 100x at training because it might cause a hamstring injury. What a load of crock that is!

Getting my Bailey Scotts and Zac Baileys mixed up.

I agree. The gap is never as large as it appears. This time last year we never imagined we would be so dominant. But the thing about AFL these days, is if you have a weakness it gets exploited badly come finals. Like the dogs defence. Our run on may have been stopped after the first Fritz goal if May was full back for the dogs. Until the GF their defence was saved by atrocious weather against Essendon, a depleted Brisbane forward line and poor umpiring, and an inept Port midfield. Brisbane have a lack of midfield and defensive leg speed. Rayner is needed in there for the explosiveness but is 2 or 3 years away from really impacting. Scott will spend more time there. Ironically, I think they are a more dangerous team without Lachie Neale. And in the first final our weakness was defensive ground balls and we probably had the wrong matchup with Smith. If Hibberd plays I suspect we win by a lot more. We have no apparent weaknesses at the moment. But a few injuries and weaknesses can appear and we will be challenged.

To be fair, if that’s the criteria for being prejudiced against the Dees then 99% of demonland was prejudiced against the Dees until recently.

Small sample, but the GF replay at r17 for the last 5 years would have seen 6th v 11th, 1st v 12th, 3rd v 4th, 3rd v 10th, and 3rd v 12th. So is pretty rare to even have a decent game by that round.

Mighty Demon. Great job on these highlight reels. But you’ve missed 3 of Traccs possessions and 2 more that probably should have been possessions except champion data are blind. And yes I’ve watched the GF replay far too many times :-)

I've got into listening to the Burgo podcasts. For those that are interested in the hard science this one has a lot of interesting info. Burgo and Coutts (Sports Scientist) It's a bit of a technical listen. The amount of stuff they measure is mind boggling. Burgo had 70 people reporting to him at Arsenal, so I guess that is what they do all day. Brukner mentioned that despite the science soft tissue injury rates have not changed in 30 years. So what they do with teams right now is a huge experiment based on experience, understanding the science that doesn't work, and theories they come up with. Burgo has a PhD and I suspect could go against the grain with MFC. We may have been an experiment based on what he has learnt over the years. A few interesting things from the podcast: 1. Burgo mentioned that Arsenal had 7 years of detailed player data (from 45 games per year) and the data scientists could not find any correlation between the data and injuries. This says to me that all the managing players, pulling from training when sore or tired etc etc didn't work. At MFC, Burgo trained players through soreness, fatigue, etc to build resilience. It may have been the first time he ever did that and may be his most important professional achievement. 2. Coutts talks about a few of the things they do know for sure. One is training variability leads to injury. This goes against what elite athletes have done for ever with hard weeks/easy weeks, and the AFL tendency to do super hard AFL preseasons then back off when the games start etc. At MFC Burgo seemed to take the attitude to just train hard all year, even in the lead up to the GF. The Burgo/Coutts theory seems to be that doing so reduces the risk of soft tissue injury. Listening to Burgo you just have to have a lot of respect for his appetite for the science, and how he used all the data and experience to put together the 2021 season. I hope a lot of this has rubbed off on Selwyn but he has giant boots to fill.