Jump to content

Dr. Gonzo

Members
  • Posts

    13,690
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    14

Everything posted by Dr. Gonzo

  1. They are. Bailey had no idea about, or didn't care about them. You dont think Geelong implements any of the tactics of the modern game (both offensive and defensive) which require top level fitness? If you believe that you've got no idea about how footy is played these days. Fitness is not open to interpretation, it is cut & dry. You said as much initially when you said "stats show we were fitter under Bailey and have gone backwards under Neeld." Just admit you were wrong and get over it, it doesn't necessarily mean you're wrong about Neeld being the right man as coach only that you're wrong about this particular aspect.
  2. Elite skills and elite fitness are clearly not just desirable but required to be successful in the modern game. One without the other is pointless. If I referred to "game plan" earlier I was wrong - as I said in my last post think more about Neeld trying to implement modern tactics requiring greater fitness. Of course the Geelong side has great skills but they also have and require top level fitness to succeed. All of this is a bit of a sidetrack to the initial point though, which was that you said "stats show we were clearly fitter under Bailey and have gone backwards under Neeld". I disputed this and still do. Our fitness under Bailey was atrocious.
  3. So that's the sum of your "proof" that we were fitter under Bailey than under Neeld? That we averaged higher last quarter scores? Its laughable, of course I dismiss it unless you're willing to consider other factors then it is irrelevant. I already outlined what some of those other factors are for you but you appear incapable of applying reason to this subject as it may contradict some of your pre-conceived beliefs. I don't necessarily believe Neeld is the right man for the job (though I would argue for giving him more time) but if he goes down it should at least be on his own merits and not due to false accusations backed by no evidence.
  4. You compared the fitness levels under Bailey to those under Neeld. You stated that "stats clearly showed we were fitter under Bailey an went backwards under Neeld". I have no desire to go sifting through pages of posts to look for something that may not exist. You made the assertion, you back it up or I'll just assume you're being deceitful. The only post I read in this thread which indicated this may be the case used a simplistic method of comparing our average last quarter scores which is ridiculous considering so many other factors would be impacting this. If you have data relating to training time trials or game day GPS data you may have some evidence but short of this I fail to see what specific "stats" you could be referring to. The conversation was all about fitness - it was simplistic because that's all it required. I was t talking about game plans but rather tactics such as the forward press, spreading from contests, defensive zones, getting to stoppages and outnumbering opponents around the ball etc. eivery team tries to do this but due to our poor fitness base when Neeld took over we are behind the 8 ball and will be until Misson has completed his program to get us up to speed. The lack of fitness of our players is self-evident particularly in Baileys last two years when the players could not or would not run hard to create options for their teammates, spread from contests, could not go with their opponents running back to defend or chasing etc All I want you to provide in response to this is the "stats" you referred to in your original post which stated "stats clearly showed we were fitter under Bailey and went backwards under Neeld."
  5. The post of yours I responded to was comparing the players fitness under Bailey to the players under fitness Neeld so there's no point saying don't bring up Bailey - you're the one that did so in the first place. I already explained how he's trying to implement a modern game style - at its very basic it's having every player on the ground able to run hard in 5 minute bursts up and down the field, coming off for a minute or two, then going back out to do the same again. Yes every team is doing it but as our fitness base was so poor when Neeld inherited the side we are finding it difficult to maintain/keep up. The rest of your post indicates either you have no idea or you're being purposefully obtuse (I'll give you the benfit of the doubt and assume it's the latter). Now, you previously said "stats clearly showed the players were fitter under Bailey and went backwards under Neeld" - what stats were you referring to?
  6. I dunno - I can understand what those who want Neeld gonna are saying; on the other hand I don't think you can get a guy in and give him a mandate to change the entire culture of the club/FD and then sack him 18 months later after a couple of uncompetitive losses. I think we'd be better served by honouring our contract with Neeld or at least waiting until the end of the year to determine whether we think he's the guy to go forward with or not. Look at the list he took over, how it had been developed, how he's changed it and invested in the future (Hogan) - he's made mistakes, sure, but you can't expect him to have fixed the club in a little over one season.
  7. What stats? Training time-trial records? GPS data? Or was it just a basic "we scored more in the last quarter under Bailey therefore fitter"? Neeld is trying to implement a modern game style which requires far more running at higher speeds for longer periods. This means that the players may appear to tire quicker but that is only because they are being forced to run both ways, to run back to set up defensive structures, to run forward to create options and to spread when we have the ball. Under Bailey all we really did was sit across full-back/half-back and burst-run forward of the ball when we won possession across the backline. When we had the ball via a mark/free kick there was virtually no run to create options whatsoever and when we had the ball on the run everyone ran to the same spots in straight lines instead of spreading to create options and spread the defense. Now clearly we are not on top of this yet and not able to implement the game style completely yet which means there is still plenty of occasions where you'll see the entire team stagnant with only one player moving to create an option however overall if you were able to analyse the teams GPS data I think you'd find they were certainly running further during games and at greater speed for longer periods than they were previously under Bailey.
  8. Can't believe no-one has raised the issue of the MFC not having a boot room yet!! No wonder this club can't win games, what an absolute disgrace!
  9. Yeah but when you think this is the same mob that writes cheques to Andrew Bolt; yeah quite fathomable. They know who their audience are.
  10. Just like Eddie used to hey? Hypocrite.
  11. Wouldn't this be reason to give Neeld MORE time, not sack him now?
  12. Perhaps after constantly hearing they're not good or fit enough they started to believe it?
  13. Same here - I couldn't get into it even when we hit the front because really we should never have been in that position in the first place and it was only against GWS. But as the quarter went on and we began slamming home goals from everywhere (especially as they were kicked by Big Maxy, Evans, Howe & Flash) I got back into it. The players and coaches deserve to hear the cheers after all the rubbish they've been under, most of them for their whole careers.
  14. Off-field is worse than on-field for them. They made 3 consecutive prelims not too long ago whereas off-field they're $10M in the hole.
  15. Doesn't matter what you think when you hear his name just watch him play. He doesn't have to be like Joel Selwood in his frenetic intensity on the ball - I'm just talking about the basics that is expected of any AFL level footballer when it comes to urgency and intensity, attack on the ball and doing the team thing.
  16. These three posts sum it all up, might as well end the thread now.
  17. Could play an Andrew Embley type role IF he decides to pull his finger out and show some intensity and urgency. I think it's not a matter of being soft but a matter of trying to overthink the game. He needs to take a leaf out of John Kennedy's book and don't think just do and attack the game on instinct. Just hunt the ball and do the team thing and work for your teammates it's not rocket science.
  18. It's not about bagging him its about discussing areas that our team can improve.
  19. I'm from the Barassi school of thought where you go harder on the players with talent because its no great feat to be born with talent it's how hard you work to use it which is what matters. Watts has all the ability in the world but needs to realise talent without urgency and intensity for the full 120 minutes is pointless.
  20. Outs: Jetta, Viney & Clark Ins: McKenzie, Blease & J MacDonald It's hard trying to pick players to come in. Would like to see Taggert, Tynan & Kent get a run at some stage but unsure how they've been travelling in the reserves. I'd also put Sylvia in the centre, Watts up forward next to Gawn/Jamar/Pedersen and Blease on a forward flank. I'd put J Mac on the back flank to replace Watts. Jamar doesn really fit as he is too one dimensional but with Clark out and Spencer/Fitzpatrick not offering much more as a second ruck at this stage I'd keep Jamar as the no. 1 ruck and Gawn as his back-up. I'd like them to set up as B: Garland Frawley Terlich HB: MacDonald McDonald Grimes C: Evans Sylvia M. Jones HF: Byrnes Howe Blease F: Davey Gawn Watts R: Jamar N. Jones Trengove I/C: Pedersen Bail McKenzie Sub: Tapscott
  21. I wouldn't hold your breath on that. Interestingly Neeld indicated in one of the papers today that he felt we were going too wide in the first 3 quarters and reminded the players to bring it through the middle a bit more. We still had too many shots from the pockets in the last quarter but it's hard to say if this was due to the mids kicking it there or the forwards leading there. I said to my brother yesterday during the 3rd quarter that our structures and set-ups were non-existant compared to GWS who had started to run rings around us at that stage. I commented that it felt like we had no real "plan" other than play the percentages wide and bang it on the foot and hope someone gets it upfield. He commented that he felt we were trying to move the ball down the field in a "wave" just through sheer weight of numbers around the ball but more often than not it was not coming off as we had men out of position leading to handballing in circles or to someone in trouble and/or flatfooted. Either way to that point we agreed that most of our goals had come through "luck" or just bashing it forward rather than any real structure. It's one thing I've been trying to get my head around and is difficult when we get belted out of the middle and on the scoreboard but I'd like to see others comments on what our "game plan", structures and tactics/strategy is. The lazy media just keep spewing out the "Neeld follows Malthouse's around the boundary style" which is far too simplistic and more akin to an under 15 game plan.
  22. He may be a successful businessman but as an AFL club President he is a dismal failure. Don't blame your failures on others Don, it's unbecoming.
  23. Don't get me wrong I love the guy too and think he'll be a gun - he is playing better this year compared to last despite having limited to no preseason. His pace is a concern though I acknowledge this ccould be due to his lack of conditioning.
  24. Agreed - he was outrun by Cox last week chasing a loose ball.
  25. I think he can still make it but he needs to go back to Casey and and stay there until he demands a recall - not after 2-3 weeks but 6-10. Look at McLean when he went to Carlton. Was not gifted games and was sent to the VFL to the point where some thought his career was over. Then when he did get his next chance he took it with both hands as be knew be may not get another. There's no point dropping Watts for 1 or 2 weeks he needs to find form and confidence and learn you need to earn games (by putting your body on the line) and not just be gifted them. Goes for a few other players on our list as well only problem is not sure how many players we have to come in for them all. Watts would be one of my first on this list though.
×
×
  • Create New...