rpfc

I was more looking at year to year improvement but here they are: 2012 Differentials Clearances: -6.2 Inside 50s: -11 CPs: -12.1 UPs: -41 Margin: -34.6 2011 Differentials Clearances: -2.3 Inside 50s: -6.1 CPs: -5.5 UPs: -10.8 Margin: -15.5 In 2012, we won 23 quarters and in 2011 we won 30 quarters.

Those of you who have been here a while would remember my old KPI threads... Well, I could do them until the reading was too depressing. Anyway, I thought I would add a differential comparison thread for prosterity after Roos' first season; on margin, clearances, I50s, Contested Possies, and Uncontested Possies. In no way does data give you a full picture of what is happening, but it can illuminate and educate. 2013 Differentials Clearances: -9.7 Inside 50s: -18 UPs: -56.7 CPs: -23.5 Margin: -56.2 2014 Differentials Clearances: -4.8 Inside 50s: -11.6 UPs: -6.5 CPs: -1.5 Margin: -28.1 Now these numbers are still pathetic, but the levels have risen across the board to these pathetic levels; the club is coming from that far back... I was interested to know what has improved other than what my eyes are telling me. We also won 10 more quarters (30) than in 2013. The last few games were not great, but the improvement was palpable and hopefully it continues into 2015.

Garlett, Dawes, and Hogan can all kick 30 goals. But let's get the ball in the 50 more times than 40.5 times a game - that is 10 less than an average team...

Could you please run through what went wrong here? I think you will find nothing went wrong, people overreacted, the thread derailed and here we are. Onto the next training thread!

Oh FFS, get your hand off of it. The players can take the [censored] but we can't? We will be here a lot longer than the players you talk to.

How/when was he 'diabolical'? A tad hyperbolic... Grimes is losing his spot in the backline because he can't take one of the three talls, Jetta locks down the small dangerous bloke, and Dunn and Lumumba are far better HBFs with more reliable skills in a position where reliable skills is paramount. The midfield is not an easier position but the list of capable mids is still thin. If Grimes was to enter there he would find himself behind only Jones, Tyson, Cross, Viney, Vince, and Bail. Whether you think the midfield platoon is 9 or 12 deep - Grimes would be up against teenagers and Michie, Riley, Newton, McKenzie, and Toumpas.

If DA, McQueen, DD and myself are snipers waiting in the shadows - we were playing cards when TDI came out and shot himself in the foot... Training threads have a shelf life of two/three days - until the next one arrives - it is the only new threads we are all in during the offseason, unless Essendope and a Masturbatory Dom Tyson thread floats peoples boats. Training thread starts, information gleaned, overreactions made, comment jumped on, thread derailed. Rinse, repeat.

You are upping the intrigue trying to mitigate it...

I think Garland is too handy to have down there, releasing Lumumba and/or Dunn, but Grimes was a centreman in his youth - I think he should go for a role in the midfield. Crying out for older heads in there and he is being pushed out of that defence. If Roos is think of Lumumba as a wingman, I think that experiment will last three weeks - he is good at running off and providing spark, I think he will struggle with having to play up the field and run back into the backline...

Nah, felt like I have heard it all before...

Not only that, there was more vitriolic nonsense than your "dead set tool douch (sic)" accusation. Have a read through, then have a shower...

I understand what you are saying, but I would stop at the 'failure is a failure' point. I think the whole 'we picked who others said we should pick' is a bit of a comforting blanket we hide under to make the noise go away...

I vaguely recall the Crows getting a few whacks for selecting a teenager still in school from Victoria in 2007, instead of Brad Ebert.. Was that a failure? No, because they selected Dangerfield.

Yeah, I think that is a bias view of a lot of churn of players and staff. I think we will be bottom 4 again...

What every other person does is irrelevant to one's mistake. As everyone's mum used to say "if [insert name here] were to jump off a cliff, would you follow them?" The mistakes we made may have been the ones everyone else would have made, but that doesn't make them any less of a mistake... We jumped off that cliff ourselves with our drafting over the last decade. No-one followed us over that precipice and fell as hard as we did. So how we can 'explain away' the fact that we took 'the teenagers we were supposed to' is beyond me.

Has it? Or is it the 'future midfield' that has been (possibly) strengthened? We still go into 2015 with N Jones, Tyson, Cross, Vince, Viney, and a milieu of M Jones, Bail, Newton, Michie, Riley, McKenzie, Grimes (?) and youngsters Toumpas, Salem, JKH, Kent, Brayshaw, Petracca, Neal-Bullen, and Stretch pushing for roles their bodies will allow them to fulfil. Roos has seen 12 of the 20 above arrive in his tenure but the fruits won't come, if they do come, for a few years. I think we will remain if not the worst, then in the bottom four, for key midfield metrics in 2015.

Because he spends 80-85% of his time doing something other than rucking? I like your thinking... I would prefer to have a battler for those 15-20 minutes in the ruck if he is more than useful elsewhere than another lumberer to go along with a primary lumberer. Unless Gawn can clunk 7-10 marks a game as a forward and kick 2-3 goals on regular occasions, I don't think he should be backing up Jamar. He should be gunning for his job really...

Really? His tongue is coming through his cheek. He is being hospitalised right now with a cheek puncture and you are standing next to the gurney, giving him an earful...

So a genuine forward who can ruck? Or a ruckman who is useful forward?

What is the definition of 'genuine back-up ruckman?'

The players choose their leaders, I would be staggered if it was any different 12 months ago. The captains we have had have been installed but that is not a major concern if you choose from the LG in my experience. Sometimes, the quality isn't there and we have had a dearth of; - leaders who have - experience, that are - playing consistently, and are - in good form.

Well, just like the definition of a mythical creature living under a bridge was hijacked to define an internet troll, so it has been again... Language is interesting like that - the same word completely different meanings in different scenarios. Take 'hijacked' for example; "The training thread was hijacked by emotion and self-righteousness" is troublesome, but if I was on a plane and said "the plane was hijacked by Ishmael and Queequeg," then that would be cause for more alarm (and surprise)... If you are on a forum and you are trying to get a rise out of people purely for your Ss and Gs - you are a troll. This isn't something to continue to argue about - it's just a fact.

Being a tad unfair here. Ablett is telling you what you don't know, that he experienced. No vocation is like that of an athlete that is in a well known sport - it is not for everybody, it is not all that it promises to be, and it is still a pedestal on which we place these people and tell them to look happy being up there. I have seen teenagers cry at their first training, I have seen intimidation from 'senior' players at the club, I have heard awful vulgarities, I know that the 'Hollywood Blvd' exists at all clubs and that the life we think is the norm for an AFL is the life of maybe a quarter of those that our on the lists we dissect. I would have loved to have had a chance to give this life a go, but don't tell me they can't whinge. So if all you got from that was a whinge - then that is fine, but I got other insights from it.

'Good for him'? What about the club? And is being articulate the 2nd quality a leader should have, behind respected? We don't need eloquence, we need intensity. Intensity around contests, around the club, I would love Watts to be a part of that, but I know he isn't going to lead it.