bing181

And speaking of fantasyland, the idea that we would have won the premiership by bringing in the likes of Weideman, Mitch Brown or Baker is just that.

I know this is Demonland, a fantasyland where reality doesn't count and there are no consequences, but go ahead: with hindsight we know the players who were available as trades last year, who would you have brought in? And how would you have got them without giving up Van Rooyen, Howes etc., i.e., you have no draft swaps available for compensation. (And let's stay in fantasyland and ignore that at least some of the players available might not have wanted to come to the Demons.) As for Norm Smith, apart from the fact that he didn't have to deal with salary caps, drafts (at all), bidding, points, father-sons, academies and the whole heavily regulated palaver, he was at the club when training was Tuesday and Thursday nights after work but heh, let's run the club the way it was run in the fifties. Back in Norm's day, you would pick up some kid up from the country, give them a month of training, a few matches in the under-nineteens and they'd be ready to park down on the HFF in the firsts. Yes, he was bringing players in but in those days, bringing players in meant the equivalent of drafting. Which we were very proactive in, so rest in peace Norm, we're following your guidelines. In any case if we're talking about trading as opposed to drafting, the "if you want to go back to back you have to bring new players in the year after a premiership" is demonstrably untrue. e.g., the last team to win back-to-back was Richmond in 2019 and 2020, and outside of the draft they didn't bring in any new players in either of those years.

You're not only making assumptions as to the attitude of the coaches/club, but ignoring history yourself: for a club coming off a premiership and with very few picks in hand, we were very proactive in the draft and brought in Luke Dunstan who is more than capable of filling a role in the first 22. But have a look at the players who were available and changed clubs in 2021 and let us know who we should have picked up to "improve the list". Mabior Chol?

Agree with the post, but Sydney have enough players coming through thanks to their Academy etc to keep themselves relevant. Geelong on the other hand ... that was their last hurrah with this group. 12 players over 29 I think it was, the only way now is down. Demons v Pies GF for me, Freo could be thereabouts depending who they lose/keep/gain, and don't feel you can rule out the Dogs, strange as that might seem. They've had the same post-GF hangover as us this year, but will start afresh in 2023. But ... very even comp and if a team can make it deep into the finals and keep most of their players on the park (injuries) anything's possible.

"We were a little bit banged up at the end of the year." Simon Goodwin (He also reinforced what Gawn said, that it felt like two continuous years, that the players didn't get much of a break last year.)

Or perhaps not. Perhaps the long double season with a minimal break, a non-existant bye (10 days as opposed to 2 weeks), travel and 6-day breaks, and having to knock ourselves out against the best teams in the comp week in week out all got a bit much.

Perhaps. But AFL players are monitored to within an inch of their lives with any amount of fitness technology, and signs of over-training are pretty easy to pick up. More likely it's because of what Gawn spoke about post-elimination, that 2021 just rolled into 2022 without much of a break. This started to catch up with the players mid-season. Even seeing more injuries is an indication that the players were just cooked. (OK, not impact injuries ...) One of the reasons winning back-to-back premierships is so hard to do.

Perhaps. All clubs employ opposition analysts, I don't know that there are that many unknowns apart from specific match-day preparation - who's playing on who, who's carrying an injury, rotation strategies etc.

They had a 2 week block of increased training loads around the bye, like a lot of clubs, and Scott mentioned that they'd gone a bit harder across this 2 week period. (Helped no doubt by the easy draw they had immediately after it.) Burgess' mantra was train hard all year round, or just train hard, period. Perhaps Shannon Byrnes had a part in bringing this to Geelong's attention, but it wasn't exactly a secret.

Say what you like about the coaches, the players, the game plan, the fitness, we never lost a one-sided match like this - including against both these teams.

Not to be confused with The Felonious Monks. (I'll let myself out.)

Because even an underperforming Gawn is streets ahead of *checks notes* Sam Weideman. Same goes for the likes of Petracca and Lever and their likely replacements. There's also the question of structure and team balance: everyone on the field knew how to setup around Max, Lever etc. Not saying it's an ideal solution either, but with the likes of Tom McDonald and Joel Smith injured and Daw retiring, the cupboard was bare. Just not our year.

I lay the blame for the second half of the year squarely on the players. I thought they gave their absolute all and admirably left nothing in the tank, but they were cooked and/or carrying injuries.

This whole thread is premised on the fact that lower draft picks are less likely to become decent players, a likelihood that really drops away after the second round. https://www.draftguru.com.au/analysis/pick-value-comparison

As for Daisy, fantastic. Singlehandedly shaking up the football commentary old boys'' club. She also had some great comments a month or so back when she responded to the put-down from Brereton and the like in regards to her doing Friday night football. Her point about people being able to recognise themselves in what they see and there not being a single, canonical POV was both insightful and spot on. Long may she reign.

When you look through some of the comments here you see the need for indigenous round in the first place - though clearly, the message is taking a bit of time to sink in for some.

On the back of no break and a long, intense 2021, we were cooked before the season even started, which only got worse as it wore on.

"We've got a fair bit of homework to do ... hopefully Goody will look at a bit of that and we'll come back fresh and ready to go" ...

"We need a break, we've been going literally since day 1 2021. It's been a two-year campaign." Max Gawn

"We need a break, we've been going literally since day 1 2021. It's been a two-year campaign." Max Gawn

Interesting interview summing up the season with Max on the MFC site. He twice mentions that they'd had a very short break at the end of 2021: "we didn't really stop, we went straight into another pre-season". We were kicking into the wind from that point on, and it eventually caught up with us. No real surprises, and not the first team to have a bit of a slump after a "first" premiership, even from teams who had the capability and did go on to win more. The toll it takes to win one is enormous, to win back to back ... Everest.

Some great points raised by Nathan Jones regarding fitness, that Melbourne expend a lot of energy playing a very physical, bullish kind of game but then have to constantly bat up again and run the other way as the result of turnovers. He made the point that the teams that looks the fittest are the ones that are most efficient. Though equally, efficiency and accuracy drop off with tiredness, so carts and horses?

Not backing up a premiership after winning one following a long period of not doing so isn't an exception, it's the norm. Taking all the "first-time" premiership winners for the last 20 odd years, not one has gone back-to-back following a "first" premiership. People talk about the Hawks: won in 2008 but then not again till 2013. Geelong: won in 2007 then went on/off for the next 4 seasons. Richmond won in 2017, then missed out in 2018. It's not just about last season and this season but this period of 5 years or so, 2021 - 2025. Fingers crossed that we don't lose the likes of Gawn, May or Oliver to long-term injuries for any of those.

This is one of the main points that Goodwin made in his presser. He also spoke about not executing the fundamentals. Also re kicking, that includes goal-kicking out of general play.

Neither you nor any of us know whether or not Neale wouldn't have got 18 possessions in any case - he's not a Brownlow favourite for nothing and usually gets off the chain sooner or later. Secondly, if Sparrow hadn't been generating much drive (which was the case?) it makes sense to give him a more defensive role and free up Brayshaw. Angus's team-lifting goal in the 4th that put us within 2 points is perhaps an example of what they were looking for more of. Finally, the mids are Adam Yze's area, so ...