binman

Great call - i completely overlooked that. Having Koz in particular, but also Mcvee, Lever and Windsor back in the team, and having so few injuries atm, is probably the single biggest factor in both our capacity to implement our method and our improved performance. Rome wasn't built with second string architects and engineers.

100% agree about our recruitment - and we probably still need to bring in at least one more gun runner with elite foot skills (trade one in?). And as you suggest, the improved ability to implement the game plan is also a function of time and practice. Rome wasn't built in a day.

Ta. On a semi related topic, that article comes close to echoing an irritating narrative that some in the media are running with, one i hope dees fans push back on when it's parroted to them by football nuffies. Sure, we've made some tweaks, most notably with selection, and we have adapted our tactics in individual games to negate oppo strengths (something goody has been criticised in the past for NOT doing yet is getting zero kudos for doing so this season). But we didn't change our method after our first 5 losses. I mean, that's just dumb - as if we are going to change a game plan and method that has been 2 years in the making (I maintain we began the process of moving to a more transition based game plan in the 2024 preseason) five games into a season. What we've done is improved how well we are implementing the game plan, and key to that has been two interrelated factors: Improved capacity to run out quarters and games Massive increase in our pressure and contest (which has driven an increase in scores from turnover, particularly forward half turnovers which in turn has driven higher scoring)

Would you believe.... home away

Never made enough scoreboard pressure? You're a hard marker given the 131 points we put past the Swans is our highest score since 2018.

I think I heard that in the last six weeks we are top 3 for scores per inside 50.

Two weeks ia a long time in football.

True story. One of the very first game I went to was dees v pies at Victoria park with an adult cousin. I was 9 or 10 , so perhaps it 1976 or 1977. I was sitting, so not in the outer I can't remember much about the game, including whether we won or lost. But i vividly remember an older lady sitting in front of me turning around and telling me to tone down my language. Haven't sworn at the footy since.

As ive said, I'm happy for AJ to get a block of games in the ones, and like everyone i love his energy and competitiveness. But let's not carried away - it's a big stretch, even with his energy, to say he is playing better than JVR has this season. Take the game just gone. Let's accept AJ played his role, but it's hard to argue he had anywhere near a good game. These were his numbers: Six pressure acts and 13 pressure points (against his average of 30) - only Sharp (who was sub) and May applied less pressure on a day our pressure was through the roof He had 15 ruck contests and had the grand total of 1 hit out (not to advantage) 6 disposals - 5 handballs and 1 kick I tackle 0 marks 5 contested possessions (Fritter had more!) 2 score involvements 2 goal assists (his best comparative number as 2 assists was an equal game high) The lowest player rating of any player on the ground with -2.7 (i know that doesn't tell the whole story)

I actually agree with you SB - ultimately JVR comes back in. Kid is a total gun whose numbers in his first two seasons stack up to the very best tall forwards in the modern era, and better than his peers in the AFL (eg JUH, Amiss, Amartey, Logan McDonald, Cadman). I have zero doubt he will make it. But like you I'm happy for JVR to cool his jets at Casey for say 2 to 3 weeks and allow AJ to play a block of games so he can settle and play with some freedom (so perhaps I'm catching the Picket train for one stop). A benefit of taking that approach is it helps fast track AJ's development, which in addition to improving his game will help ensure he's better prepared if he gets a call up at future point and will give the coaching staff a better sense of where his ceiling is.

I really think a challenge for JVR had been adapting to this shift for our key forwards towards being more focused, as a starting point, on ensuring their direct opponent does not intercept mark. I wonder if that helps explain why he kept on getting in wrestling matches with his opponent, something that must be a real challenge for a 22 year old key forward battling with bigger, stronger opponents. And for a bloke that has played all his footy as a pure key forward (I think that's right) it's probably counter intuitive and unatural to be defence first, not to mention frustrating. If I'm correct and goody is implementing a method that involves denying oppo intercept marks combined with manic inside 50 pressure (as evidenced by our off the charts inside 50 tackle differentials in the last six weeks - with an increased average pressure rating arguably the most dramatic statistical change since our first 5 losses) the key metrics for tall forwards are not goals and contested marks they are things like one percenters, spoils, pressure, tackles and above all denying intercept marks and bringing the ball to ground. All of which points to one of things I most love about footy - the speed at which the game evolves tactically. Having gone out ans targeted Lever to play the intercept role, we won a flag in large part because of ability to pressure the ball carrier to dump kick and then take intercept marks (a strategy we adapted from Hardwick's tigers and to a lesser eectent the crows) All teams subsequently implemented variationa of that method to maximise intercept marks in the back half and use them to launch attacks. Alir, Sicily, McGovern x 2, Vlaustin, Mcartin, Andrews etc etc etc all teams now have the equivalent of a Lever. So now all teams are going to work on limiting such player's influence - which would in part explain why so few contested marks are being taken by forwards inside 50 atm. It feels like goody might be going next level with denying intercept marks.

In another thread @DEE fence noted Chandler's use of low flat passes. I responded with this post, which i reckon fits in this thread given it's about tactics: Its interesting you should note that. It's clearly something they have been working on, ie low, flat passes inside 50 -often from near the boundary and kicked into the corridor on the 45. Langdon does several each game, ditto melk. And its more than just kicking back into the corridor - the kicks are being kept deliberately low, are often scrappy (particularly langdons) and often bounce before getting to the target. I'm guessing the idea is four fold: Get it to the hotspot quickly, ie not floaters to reduce the time for the oppo to get numbers to the target and by doing Ideally hit a target dead in front of the goal, 20-25 metres out. But if not marked, either because it's spoiled or because it bounces, it becomes a predictable ground ball which we fight to win or tackle the oppo if they win it. Reducing intercept marks In regard to the last point, all teams look to reduce oppo intercept marks inside D50, but we look hyper focused on doing so. Watching petty on Sunday from ground level in the pocket you could see his sole focus was blunting mcartin. Barely left his side or looked to get separation. AJ was similarly defensive. Even Friiter was pretty defensive- am I right in thinking he waxed with melksham to defend Blakley? Ironically, of our medium and tall forwards, Melksham who has been playing the defensive forward role, was probably our most offensive forward (McCartin too big for melk I reckon).

Its interesting you should note that. It's clearly something they have been working on, ie low, flat passes inside 50 -often from near the boundary and kicked into the corridor on the 45. Langdon does several each game, ditto melk. And its more than just kicking back into the corridor - the kicks are being kept deliberately low, are often scrappy (particularly langdons) and often bounce before getting to the target. I'm guessing the idea is four fold: Get it to the hotspot quickly, ie not floaters to reduce the time for the oppo to get numbers to the target and by doing Ideally hit a target dead in front of the goal, 20-25 metres out. But if not marked, either because it's spoiled or because it bounces, it becomes a predictable ground ball which we fight to win or tackle the oppo if they win it. Reducing intercept marks In regard to the last point, all teams look to reduce oppo intercept marks inside D50, but we look hyper focused on doing so. Watching petty on Sunday from ground level in the pocket you could see his sole focus was blunting mcartin. Barely left his side or looked to get separation. AJ was similarly defensive. Even Friiter was pretty defensive- am I right in thinking he waxed with melksham to defend Blakley? Ironically, of our medium and tall forwards, Melksham who has been playing the defensive forward role, was probably our most offensive forward (McCartin too big fir melk I reckon).

Picket, I think your train left long ago - and there's no one else on board but you.

Sure, but they have to drop someone. Tmac has arguably been our best tall defender tgus year, certainly the most consistent and he got dropped.

Good question. Probably sharp or spargo.

Still a chance apparently.

You should of arrested him for crimes against coiffure.

Brilliant wheelo - just in time for the pod (and now I feel complete)

So your evidence supporting your assertion 'our pressure had not even come close to that what Collingwood brings' is your personal observations. Seriously, that's it? To be honest I'm really struggling to avoid responding with sarcasm or irony. I'll resist that urge and simply say that your argument is, on many levels, unpersuasive- not least because of the high likelihood of confirmation bias given your well documented opinion of where we are at as a team. Why don't you at least do some research to check if the data begween roundv6 and 11 supports your vibe? If you are right the data will support your assertion, not contradict it. By the by, stats aren't 'my thing'. My thing is trying to understand the game, and I find a combination of observation, looking at the data, curiosity and taking on board the many smart, well considered opinions of many posters on Demonland is really helpful.

Not sure what you mean OD. The comparison to nibbla is spargs preparedness to play a distinct role, one that is wholly team first and completey underappreciated by most fans - but 100% appreciated by teamates because they understand what the role is and how hard it is. You might remember that for several seasons nibbla was the demonland whipping boy for much the same reason spargs is now- because his value to the team is difficult to identify in 1995 stats like disposals and goals. It still amuses me how when announcing he was leaving it was as if we were losing Nick Daicos.

True - needs to bulk up a bit.still though hecwants to be a gorilla hunter.

No t sure about the end of 2025, but agree May's pace is a worry. That said every team needs a gorilla defender to take the oppo gorilla forward, which most teams have at least one of. And May is our gorilla down back, with no obvious replacement, which i think means his best 22 spot is safe this year.

I suspect from round 6 on that is categorically not true - our pressure has been off the charts in that period. I suspect that from round 6-11 we would be top 3 or 4 in the AFL for pressure rating and pressure rating differential. And i think we are number one in that period for contested possession differential. But feel free to post data that supports your assertion that 'our pressure had not even come close to that what Collingwood brings'.

2025 says hi