bing181

Just ridiculous and apart from anything else, nothing but hindsight bias. A few here are going on about how he was always injured at the Crows, but even without playing full seasons he was in their top 3 for goals in 21 and 22. It was absolutely worth taking a punt on a damaging forward and backing in the fitness staff to get him right.

Not at all.

Given the nature of contracts and the trade possibilities these days, we can hold doubts about the long term commitments of all players. Look at how long it took Angus Brayshaw to re-sign, yet it's obvious from hearing him speak since his retirement that he bleeds red and blue, and always did. All we can ask is that players do what they need to and are fully committed for the season at hand. Anything else is a bonus. i.e., Petracca doesn't have to justify himself.

The curse of winning a premiership, and the expectations that followed. 2024 was almost the year we had to have. Let it go, let it go, let it go.

All clubs keep the specifics of fitness programs close to their chests. If you can get 1% extra, why share it around?

Straight out of the Demonland playbook: Demonland: Goodwin's stubborn, he doesn't try different things. Goodwin tries different things. Demonland: Not like that.

Important to acknowledge all that, rather than start blaming the fitness team. Equally, there do seem to have been changes in that area this season - not that any of us would really know, and not to mention that it also comes down to the individual e.g. putting in the work when away from the club.

All-team fitness will be undone not just by a lack of fitness across the board, but by a lack of fitness in even a handful of players. If you're playing players without full pre-seasons (Petty and Oliver), younger players who don't have the fitness depth (as discussed already in this thread), and players who are kind of fit enough to be out there but are carrying injuries or coming back from injury (Lever, probably May, Bowie etc. etc.) ... it's enough to seriously compromise "all team" fitness.

Demonstrably untrue. He played quite a few VFL games across his first 2 seasons. Another good example is Josh Kennedy. Sure, he was playing a handful of games in the firsts each year, but it wasn't till his 5th year that he was able to hold down a regular spot in the firsts. Even in his 4th season he was still playing WAFL games. (and not kicking all that many goals either ...).

Bizarre. You're just confirming what many here are trying to point out - that key forwards take time. As 18 year-olds, the players you cited there weren't even good enough to be drafted, yet alone getting AFL matches.

In his 4th season. = 2026 for Jefferson. Though that ignores all the successful forwards who weren't doing anything like 78 goals/season at 21, which is most of them.

Some supporters understand that there are a range of factors at play and can assess players' development accordingly.

Confidence is a wonderful thing. Now just to hope he can find some of its bedfellow, continuity.

Yet. He wouldn't be the first to take a few seasons to find his feet at AFL level. Can only be a positive if he does.

Depends what you mean by hype. For me, he's the Cam Pedersen replacement - pinch hit in the ruck, bring the ball to ground and make a contest up forward, keep oppo players honest and take one of their defenders. If he can do that effectively at AFL level he's earned a place on the list, at least. Agree re Campbell, though mainly as a Max replacement. I can't see Campbell and Max in the same team, but could imagine AJ + Max.

He wasn't the subject of the review, and the review was conducted as much as anything by Shand. "The review of the men’s football department is focusing on the operations and overarching environment of the AFL program. This review is being conducted by President Brad Green, CEO Gary Pert and external consultant Darren Shand."

Interesting.

Injury-related e.g., even if they're able to play, players carrying/nursing/recovering from injury miss training or can't train fully. Also playing more younger players who don't have the fitness depth. In both cases fitness is compromised.

You have to ask yourself if the pressure (curse?) of following up on the premiership has finally been lifted. Perhaps last season was the season we had to have to finally bury it.

It's uncanny.

What's particularly encouraging, even exciting, is that those 4 could form the backbone of our talls (forward and elsewhere) for the next 10+ years. Even Johnson is "only" 24.

Essential to have a competitive Casey team, makes a real difference to our younger/developing/fringe players.

I don't question that it's going to be different. Just moving Windsor back will make it different by giving us more drive from the backline. No doubt there are other changes in the works. What I question though is whether it's going to be some kind of scorched earth, start from zero different.

I don't know that it'll be completely different. Time will tell, will probably have to wait for matches to start. What I've taken from training reports is that there seems to be more clarity about the game plan, about what's expected, and what people's roles are. With that comes more intent and better application. Feels like we lost our way a bit with all that last season - though equally, having key playmakers out/compromised through injury, plus paying a lot of kids, can't have helped.

While there's a whole debate about supported employment for people with disabilities, using "sheltered workshop" as a put-down is pretty low. Even for you.