Jump to content


Life Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by binman

  1. When you say goody sticks with his structure, do you mean in terms of his selection policy? One of the criticisms he's faced is playing favourites with selection. And sticking with players who are out of form. From my perspective, assessing selection decisions is a bit like assessing the high performance program - there are so many variables and unknowns it's hard to make a balanced assessment. That said, there have been plenty of head scratchers over the journey. For example I was amazed laurie was selected ahead of spargo late last year. And selecting tmac was also baffling given he was clearly not fit and was still impacted by his foot issue. But like I said, there are unknowns- was Grundy invested, was spargo perhaps not meeting internal benchmarks, etc etc. One thing I do know about goody's selection policy is playing an assigned role is key to being selected week in week out. If a player in poor form stats wise keeps getting selected, fans can be pretty confident they are playing their assigned role and meeting the related KPIs (which could include indicators fans are unaware of, such as distance run, maintaing structure, following team rules, halving contests stc). All of which is a function of goody's coaching philosophy of being system focused. His critics often knock him for his game day coaching, the no blan b or c stuff. Go up to the box some say. Personally, I think those critisisms are unfair, and yet another Goodwin myth. I mean just this season he gave Mitchell and Scott, two coaches who are lauded for their game day coaching and tactical smarts, a tactical bath. But be that as it may, goody, like hardwick, longmuire, mcrae and longmire is a systems coach. Which is why he coaches from the bench (I know longmuire and Longmure dont) He does much of tactical work ahead of the game and relies on his players to follow and execute his pre game plans. He has his senior assistant in the box to give him in game tactical advice. Which doesn't mean he is inert. When watching our games on tv watch how often when showing a shot of goody how often he is getting info from the stats analyst who sits on the bench. It's constant. The idea that goody is stubborn, inflexible or predictable doesn't hold up to scrutiny. To be honest, if anything I think he can be too experimental. Just look at this year. He selected tmac and bbb at the start of the on the back of interrupted preseasons, and in tmacs case two weeks after surgery. BBB was probably a bust, but we did win games with him in the team. And tmac hasn't missed a game - or a beat. On tmac, despite us being desperate for key forwards, they instead play him as a defender (perhaps recognising how important having elite kicks down back is) - and almost a hb flanker at that. It's been a genius move as tmac has been terrific. After his out of the box selection of mvvee down back in 2023 and bowey in 2021 (few would argue both calls were winners) he selected another in Howes. Out of the side now, he was terrific in the first third of the season and will come back in I reckon. Amd this season he has selected a young defender, Turner, as a forward. Put Windsor straight into the ones from the get go. Blooded the kolt, woey, amw and pup. He has experimented with our centre square rotations (River, anb, salo and koz all getting a run) and used clarry in a defensive mid role. After largely eschewing using taggers, he tagged Stewart in our win over the cats, had nibbler shut down daicos and neale and used fritter to do the same to Andrews. He's played our best winger, Langdon, at half forward flank and not used sparrow as a mid until the last 2 weeks. And he's brought back players off long injury breaks straight back into the side - melk being the latest example All of that whilst experimenting with a game plan that has won us the flag and mutiple top 4 finishes. Predictable? Hardly. Far from being predicatable, you could mount a stronger case for goody being too UNPREDICTABLE.
  2. Fair points HD. I apologise for my snideness and any implication you don't turn up for games and support the club. At the risk of negating that apology, a frustration that informed the sentiment in that post is what I perceive, to be blunt, as a lack of perspective by many of goody's many critics on here. By that I mean, by any reasonable measure, goody's tenure as senior coach has been incredibly successful. It just has. Dees fans know better than most how hard it is to be successful in AFL footy - as a coach and for a team. But leaving aside our incredibly long, sustained period of being wildly unsuccessfully, goody's numbers stack up against the best coaches in AFL/VFL history. How many coaches in the 166 year history of the game that have coached more than a 150 games have a win loss % above 50% and have won a flag? I'd be guessing, but it can't be much more than 20 or 30 in 166 years. That's rarefied air. We were still rubbish when goody took over. In his first season we missed out on finals by 0.5 percent. In 2018, playing an exciting, unpredictable back half transition game with his flying v strategy (that was a major factor in the introduction of the 666 rule) we had an incredible run in the back half of the season, had probably the two greatest wins I've seen live in the finals and made it to a preliminary final, getting beaten by the flag winner. He took the opportunity mass injury afforded in 2019 to retool his method, introducing the contest and all team defence model. We stalled in 2020, but it was the covid year and we were unlucky that the shorter quarters negated our fitness advantage. We won the flag in 2021, playing a finals series that some described as the greatest ever. Our grand final win was ridiculously good. Exhilarating football. Bang. Bang. Bang. Starting with our incredible win over the cats in round 23 to secure top spot, that was the greatest 6 weeks of my football supporting life. We finished top 4 in 2022. Sure we went out in straight sets, but come finals we were completely banged up and were never in the hunt. In 2023 we again finished top 4, a remarkable performance given our injuries up forward, but unfortunately we also again went out in straight sets. How you see the loss to the pies depends a bit on your perspective. We came our a bit flat - cross. But soon after we lost gus and the first quarter was a write off - mitigating factor (as was nor having him foe basically an entire game) so a tick. We played brilliantly for the rest of the game, and really should have won. Tick. Again, remarkable given no Gus and really only playing 3 quarters. Why did we lose? Because we didn't take our chances. That's 100% on the players, not goody. His method and game day coaching stood up. We went into the blues game down our last surviving specialist KPF in JVR, and still reeling from Gus. Be that as it may, forever and a day, fans and the club will rue that loss. I think we win and we are a huge flag chance. We were by far the better team that day. We should have won. Why did we lose? Because we didn't take our chances. And, I also think we didn't handle the pressure - so many unforced errors. Many of which from our senior players, for example maxy x 3. And we handled the last 5 minutes woefully. Again, that's on the players, not goody. Sure, the non use of Schache as a sub, not selecting Grundy and Laurie's selection could all be questioned. But wouldn't have been if the players had sealed the deal like they should have. Goody's method and game day coaching stood up. Again. The players didn't. 2024? We already had a young list, but started the season down two of our starting 22, two fit, seasoned players in Smith and Gus. We could not replace either, so effectively the list is 42. Other senior players in Petty, bb, tmac, hunter, McAdam and clarry all have very interrupted preseasons. And another best 22 senior player in melk is out till well past the half way point of the season. The first third of the season we are given an insane schedule with lots of travel, two byes and two 5 day breaks. We lost more senior games when bb is a bust fitness wise, Hunter ditto, may gets his ribs broken, salo out for 5 weeks, clarry had hand surgery and Lever out for 5 weeks. We lose our best, most dynamic player for the rest of the season after another sickening contact injury. We are regularly forced to select very young inexperienced teams, teams more akin to teams who are a rebuilding phase. All the while trying to implement a new method. Which is ironic given the inane OP accusing goody of being too predictable. We had the off season from hell, mutiple senior players injured, down two of our starting 22 and down 2 on our list. And with a two thirds of the season gone we are only 2 points out of the top 8 and still in the hunt. Objectively that is bloody impressive. As is goody's overall coachimg record. Facts are facts.
  3. The other thing I'd add, is the calls for Jeffo to be selected are in stark contrast to what seemed to be the consensus on this thread only a couple of months ago thst he wasn't going to make it at AFL level. And I'd also note that selecting melk, a senior, seasoned AFL player, first up after nearly 12 months out, rather than Jefferson cuts against the idea that goody had given up on this years and planning for 2025 (eg by 'playing the kids').
  4. He's been miles off AFL ready to relatively recently, particularly in terms of fitness and second efforts. And he's still a mile off.
  5. Please upload your medical certificate.
  6. My load of old cobblers gauge just blew up. What's predictable is the coach of a side who broke a 57 year drought and has a win loss record better that any other dees coach since norm smith getting bagged by dees 'supporters'. Equally predictable is the dees 'supporters' who complain about how we are treated by the AFL, umpires, our fixture and how loud and engaged our fans are etc etc not bothering to turn up on Sunday and supporting the team and club. Much better to pot us from the cheapest seat - the couch at home. Not referring to you HD, but if the couch fits..... By the by, this is the first time we play the Eagles at the MCG since 2014, when they flogged us by 90 odd points. Yet, I think I'm right in saying we have played them in Perth every year since then. A big factor is crowd size. So I hope any fan who can get to the G on Sunday, but chooses not, doesn't whinge when we only play the Eagles once next season and that game is at Optus oval.
  7. Am i right in saying fritter was our leading goal kicker for the last four seasons? I wonder how dees many players could match that achievement in our 166 history? In my time of following us maybe Neita, Mark Jackson, Robbie (but only because we were so bad), Jakovich and then I'm drawing blanks. And of that lot I'd only be confident of Neita.
  8. It makes sense. The NT is most def north of Melbourne.
  9. From this article (my bolded bit) First to worst: Fitness no factor, so what's causing Dees' final-term fades? https://www.afl.com.au/news/1162860 'It's led to some queries around Melbourne's fitness and the side's ability to run out games, but that's a theory that's quickly dispelled by the numbers. On Friday night, the Telstra Tracker shows the Demons ran a total distance of 297km. It was the most covered by any side across the entire round, and 9km more than the Lions during the game. The Telstra Tracker also shows Melbourne ran 43km at high speed, 6km more than Brisbane. It completed 272 total sprints, 50 more than Brisbane, and it ran 21 repeat sprints, four more than Brisbane. The Demons' average speed in defence – a number closely tracked by clubs as it displays the side's work rate without the ball – was 8.3km p/h. It was significantly higher than the Lions at 7.4km p/h and the fifth best of any side across the round'
  10. Different programs, differenent stage of development and different goals is the short answer. But looking at 2 games in isolation gives a very skewed assessment. The hawks couldn't go with us when we played them. And we almost ran a 40 point lead down against the blues. Not sure where the hawks ranked, but we were number 1 in the afl for scores in the last quarter after 10 rounds. Doesn't sound like a team struggling for fitness to me.
  11. Spot on. And the other factor is the age of the current best 22. Coming into the season the high performance program and planning would have been informed by an assumption that we Gus and Smith both available, and that we would get games from senior, seasoned players like Billings, Hunter, mcadam and to a lesser extent Ben Brown. That largely hasn't happened, forcing us to play way more kids than they would have planned to - a situation exacerbated by Lever and sako missing games and now tracc out for the season.
  12. That's true, though I was only referencing the reason we might have tired, not making a comparison to the lions (who also flagged, as evidenced by some of their funky skill errors) But if i were i making a comparison id note they had their bye in round 12 , almost a full month ago so they are out the other side of bye related fatigue (ie from increased loads). And perhaps more critically, fielded a much more seasoned team in terms of age, experience and number of preseasons.
  13. Great post. It points to two interconnected issues with cornes take, well three actually. One, fitness is probably the wrong word in the context of load management and the high performance program. At least in the context cornes is discussing our fade outs in the last six weeks. I'm not sure what the right term is. I mean they are all fit of course, it's more about fatigue levels. Or conversely, freshness. I'm going with dynamic, or optimal shape/readiness - unless someone has a better term. Two, cornes notes we have been the worst last quarter team in terms of scoring in the last six weeks. Suggests that is evidence we are not fit enough. Questions why we might not be, suggesting motivation and how we are rehabbing might be factors. But, here's the rub. The whole data set is we were also the best last quarter team for the first 10 weeks. So, by corne's logic, that means we were a very fit team in that period, perhaps the fittest. So, there is a logical inconsistency. I mean, what's he saying? We were fit, meaning we were motivated and worked super hard etc in the preseason, but six weeks later we're not? That our fitness could completey drop off a cliff in just six weeks? I mean, it doesn't make sense - in of itself. And the third issue is cornes' diagnosis of why he thinks we are not fit - which basically boils down blaming the players (though he does mention the youth of the team). Just asking questions. It's great they are discussing fitness as a factor, but it's a joke they don't discuss the high performance aspect. I mean cornes played AFL, and as I understand it is a high level distance runner. He knows what is going on. But it is still seemingly taboo to discuss load management. In this example, at least suggest it as a possible factor - particularly given there is four years of evidence of a clear pattern of an almost identical six week drop off in form and last quarter scores (after having dominated that same stat for the first 10 rounds or so) around the pre bye and bye period (by the by, it's no coincidence the crows had a a spike - we're more dynamic- this week). If it's not even discussed, then what are you left with? The players are soft and not working hard enough. Or the high performance program is nor working. Or both. It's stupid. And doesn't help people try and understand what's going on.
  14. The last six weeks is the key here. We have struggled for that exact block of time in and around the bye since 2021. My explanation as to why is well documented. To that I'd add nearly half the team are kids. Two of the starting 22 against lions are in their first season of AFL season, meaning the kolt and Windsor as draftees, have not even completed a full AFL preseason. And we lost salo and bowey ahead of the game, one a senior seasoned AFL player, the other young but has 50 plus games and 3 AFL preseasons under his belt. AND we were coming off a six day break, and had to travel. Is it any wonder we flagged a bit in rhe last quarter?
  15. Fair dinkum, that's just plain silly. Not that we would look to trade him. But that salo would be some sort of sought after 'trade bait', implying we would could put him up for a trade and get some sort of windfall in return. I mean, the first two posts in this thread both make good points. Points other clubs thinking of chasing him would well and truly agree with. As if another club would give up anything valuable, either a yrade or picks, for a player in the back half of his career with a history of a thyroid issue and various injuries. What did we got for jordon, a young player, albeit probably not in salo's class, with no injury issues who has been able to slot into the best 22 of the team on top of the ladder?
  16. You could build a side around him.
  • Create New...