Fat Tony

Draft well.

RE: Cheney – It is easy to play reasonable footy in a top side. He will never be a world beater and it was no mistake to let him go. Our main long-term issue has been recruiting. Nevertheless, Neeld is chiefly responsible for our recent underperformance. We are playing without system or confidence and our team selection has sought to over correct our deficiencies from last year. (i.e. winning the contested ball and contested marking). This has come at the expense of speed and skill and we are a 10 goal side worse as a result.

Poor message or not, we have been killed "going with grunt" because we lack the pace to impact the contest. Possessions in the VFL are not always a good indicator of success at AFL level.

Neeld entered the club like John Wayne and it clearly hasn’t worked. Trying to toughen us up has been counterproductive (lowering the players’ confidence) and he is wasting his time. Building a tougher club comes at the draft table not from the coach. “Going with grunt” and a defensive mindset has resulted in three hidings. He won’t last long if he can’t adjust and build a modern game plan around our strengths.

We desperately need to inject some pace into the side, particularly to the midfield. At present our midfield mix consists of slow inside players (Jones, Magner, Trengove, Bate and McKenzie) and very outside receivers (Watts, Howe and Davey). The mix is wrong and we need to try and get some inside/outside players around the ball. Bartram, Bail and Frawley should all be played through the midfield as they can win their own ball (and possibly break away from the stoppage when they do) and apply pressure when we don’t have it. Our backline includes one (or perhaps two) too many talls and lacks kicking skill and run. Bartram’s lack of kicking stagnates our offensive transition and he needs to find another spot. I would run him as a tagger every week. Tapscott doesn’t have the tricks to play forward at AFL level or the engine to play in the midfield. He should be played in the backline on the opposition’s slowest small forward. If he is going to make it this will need to be his role. (Grimes is in a similar predicament.) I doubt if Tom McDonald has the skill level required for AFL. Despite being out of form, Green is still one of our better players and needs to come back in. If Moloney is fit he must play. Unfortunately he doesn’t help the lack of pace problem, so I think Magner or Bate need to be the one to make way. Martin is not a KPF and he is badly out of form. He is either a ruckman or a defender. (Although I am not sure his ball use is good enough to be played in the backline with the press.) Despite Couch’s good VFL form, he is another plodder. His inclusion would only add to our problem. In: Green, Moloney, Petterd, Nicholson, Blease Out: Grimes (inj.), Martin, Magner, McDonald, Bate Nicholson, Rivers, Frawley Tapscott, Garland, Morton Watts, Jones, Trengove Howe, Clark, Petterd Davey, Green, Dunn Jamar, Moloney, Bartram Sellar, Bail, McKenzie Blease

Four ruckmen in the 22. Four key defenders. A midfield full of plodders. (But with grunt!) An ultra defensive game plan. I think Neeld can take some of the blame. Hardest team to play against in the AFL. What a joke!

St Kilda's list was so strong that they should have performed better than they did in Lyon's early years. Moreover, St Kilda changed their gameplan significantly over Lyon's tenure, eventually copying 'Clarko's Cluster' to develop the modern press. Our lack of teamwork and ability to retain possession are deeply concerning. We should look at the way Hird was able to turn Essendon around last year. He has injected confidence into the playing group and instilled a defensive mindset.

Excellent post GNF

Recruiting is far and away our biggest problem. We have drafted numerous players with some excellent strengths but also some clear weaknesses. The weaknesses are now getting exposed by the pace and intensity of AFL football. Going forward at draft time, we need to stop getting lured in by a player’s strengths and look more closely at any material weaknesses they may have. IMO there also needs to be a renewed focus on drafting the best available. It appears as though we have segregated our picks into inside mids, outside mids and key position players. This approach has come unstuck by the way the game is played today. There are times when every player has to win the ball and also times when he has to run to receive. We need to be looking for inside/outside types and avoiding the only outside or only inside types unless they are absolutely elite in that area. Moreover, we should not be scared away from picking up bad eggs. Ablett Snr, Lockett, Carey, Fevola and Swan all caused trouble for their clubs but were mostly worth it. While this strategy will see you blow up a pick with a Laurence Angwin every now and then, players like Jack Darling can slip down the draft and mean the strategy will ultimately win over the long term. (We have been blowing up too many of our safe ‘strong character’ selections anyway.) IMO all AFL clubs are now professional enough to get the most out of most of their players physically. The better coaches are not going to make players much faster, fitter or more highly skilled. While they may assist a player’s knowledge of where to run and decision making, there is a lot of luck involved in being in the right spot at the right time and these skills are mostly innate/developed in junior football. The only player on our list that I feel has under achieved their maximum potential in recent years is Colin Sylvia and he is still a very good AFL player. (Jack Watts is close to being on this list but is still has time on his side and was always going to be a slow developer.) Our current playing stocks are being made to look bad by lack of teamwork and system.

Great post. At the moment Mark Neeld is like a cheapskate hypnotist in his dealings with the media. He is just a populist and the Demonland mob applauds him for it. It appears that Neeld has put the fear of god into the players and, when combined with a defensive boundary orientated game plan, this has resulted in a kick it long down the line style. His rantings will only decrease the players’ confidence to take the game on. The modern AFL game is so quick to change that it is difficult to predict where it will head. IMO implementing a game plan that will take years to learn and adjust to is nonsensical. We need a game plan that makes the most of our strengths and conceals our weaknesses so we can compete here and now.

Bail is a definate starter IMO, particularly given the slow pace of our midfield. He also has the flexibility to play back and forward. I thought he had a good start to 2011 before being injured.

Garland - Rivers (Longer/Leuenberger) - Bennell Grimes - Frawley - Bail Watts - Jones (Rich) - Trengove (Rockliff) Howe – Clark - Petterd Dunn - Green - Davey Jamar – Moloney - Bartram (Black) Magner – Martin - McKenzie Tynan Notes: I wouldn’t take too many underdone players into the game. Grimes would be the only one I would risk and I would also play Tynan as sub as insurance. I think we are already too slow in the midfield with Moloney, Magner, Jones, Trengove and McKenzie. For this reason Couch, Bate and Gysberts miss out and Davey will have to spend time in the midfield. Bartram’s kicking in the backline slows our transition into attack. I would play him as a hard tag on Black. Dunn is fit and played ok against Hawthorn. I would give him a chance to recapture his 2010 form given that Sylvia and Jurrah out. Three tall defenders are enough and four leaves us too slow on the rebound. Seller unlucky to miss. We are weak in the small backs department. Hopefully Bennell can improve and make the role his this year. Watts should be played on the wing until he gets strong enough to play KPF. Blease hasn’t done enough to earn a spot. Nicholson was a bit disappointing in the preseason, but I think he will be better on the bigger grounds. Not sure of his fitness.

Another Demonland thread criticising our loyal senior players that have been hung out to dry by the MFC youth policy. What a surprise!

RIP Jim. A champion in every aspect.

We might not be able to successfully execute the short kicking game yet, but I would prefer we implemented a game style that is likely to be successful in 2-3 years. Soccer has had over 30 years of trying to navigate past formation defences and it is clear that short possession play is the best method.

IMO the preseason has been disappointing and if we don’t beat Brisbane without Brown the alarm bells will be ringing. Three points: The MFC is misguided if it thinks the reason we are where we are is because of player development. We have drafted poorly with our high picks. Going forward, given our limited resources we should be investing more heavily into: 1) paying 100% of the salary cap by frontloading the contracts of our best young players; and 2) boosting our recruiting department. (IMO the most valuable people in football are the best recruiters.) Players make coaches, not the other way around. IMO, given our limited budget, we should cut back on the resources applied to assistant coaching and fitness science and spend the money elsewhere. I don’t believe Neeld’s ‘kick it long down the line’ game plan is the most effective method to beat the press. IMO the best method is the one Clarkson is adopting. Play on immediately upon gaining possession if you have the chance. Otherwise, if forced into a slow play, use short kicks to maintain possession and avoid getting too close to the boundary. The reason for avoiding the boundary is that it makes the press more effective and limits your options to kicking long down the line. (So you need to win three one on one contests to kick a goal.) One thing Neeld is right about is the importance of getting some size and grunt into the midfield. Demonlanders (and now the coach it seems) love getting into our senior players undeservedly. It’s not their fault they were drafted to the MFC. Players like Green, Bruce and Davey have never had the ability to be an Ablett, Judd or a Swan. They have each had good careers for us and it is not their fault they haven’t delivered team success. They just haven’t had the support around them (because we have drafted so poorly).

We broke even in the contested ball count and lost by 79. My thoughts: Neeld’s kick it long and wide game plan will be obsolete by the time we have the talent to challenge for a flag. We need to get of our some better kicks playing in the back half and pinpoint our way through the press. Davey and Watts should also be played more on the wings so their kicking skills can be used to navigate through the press. By contrast, Bartram should not be played in the backline anymore and should be used in the midfield as a tagger. Our backline needs more run and we should play only three KPD. There wasn’t a lot fundamentally wrong with Bailey’s game plan, we just did not have the skills to execute. Mitch Clark looks a great pick up. I think he needs to be used a bit higher up the ground to help combat the press and better utilise his running ability. Despite his good preseason Bate is still too slow and one sided and isn’t in our best 22. Dunn has lost weight and looks like he will play more games than most on Demonland expect.

Anything that opens up the game and reduces flooding/pressing/zoning is a good thing. But I would prefer to see a cap on the number of interchanges per game or fewer players on the field than subs as I feel sorry for the sub.

I am not sure we have any player on our list who is capable of being an elite mid. Viney excluded, IMO Sylvia and Frawley are the best chances. Trengove will be a top liner, but I think he lacks a bit of pace. Bail is exciting but lacks a little polish. Martin is a pipe dreama and is better being led to the ball. Watts is too outside. Moloney has peaked IMO. Tapscott can't get fit enough and is not overly quick. Gysberts lacks polish and size.

Stef should play on the oppositions second ruckman all day. IMO he could do OK as a forward but looks better as a defender.

I think Bartram needs to be played mostly in the midfield for this reason. When he plays in the backline he picks the easy target too often and this slows our transition from defence to attack. He should only play back on specific match ups (i.e. Rioli).

It would be hard to go past activating both picks given the expected quality of the draft. However, we should hold off on a decision until other clubs with similar picks have stated their position. The mid round pick is the one you may want to hold back, as it could be well down the draft this year.

He is extremely one eyed.

1. I did say trial it in the preseason, so if we lose the clearances in a preseason game it doesn't really matter. (IMO Frawley would be excellent in the clearances, so I disagree.) 2. The chance of injury is similar in the midfield to down back, so I see that as a silly argument. He may need more bench time as a mid. 3. 193cm is not that tall for a midfielder these days. Pendlebury, Kouta, Hird and Judd. All have been/are bigger than average mids and excellent clearance players. Even NIcNat gets a run with Cox in the ruck these day. 4. While we lose our best defender, the hope is that we don't have the ball in the backline as often. The press killed us last year. Having the ball in our forward line means we can impart our own press. Martin will only play up to 30% of game time in the ruck and needs to play 50% either back or forward. I prefer him back as he is a great athlete but not a great mark. It does mean we lose some run from defence, but our forward line looks better with other options. Clarke can also be used in the ruck if the changeover between Jamar and Clarke does not workout perfectly.

I hope you are right, but I would still trade Strauss for Zaharikis in a heart beat.