Jaded No More

Thank god Dean Bailey doesn't have your shortsighted vision. We are not building a team from ground zero. Had you actually bothered reading some of the replies to this topic you would realise that we are trying to build a team around our kids. The same thing was done by a lot of successful teams. Who gives a flying fudge about what you want to see when you go to the footy. There is no such thing as sustained success in AFL football. Everyone hits the bottom at some stage, only some teams actually win a premiership along the way. You can moan and cry that we are the worst team in history, and bla bla bla, but at the end of the day you are thinking about yourself and not about what is best for this team and for our club. Yes we're struggling, yes we've lost 5 in a row. It was harder watching us lose 5 in a row in 2004 and nearly miss the finals after we were on top at Round 18. It was harder watching us get smashed by Geelong in 2005. Stop thinking about how much it sucks being a Melbourne supporter right now and start thinking about what it will take for us to win a premiership. We need to change the way we play, because the way we have played up until now has not been successful. We need to clear our list of a lot of deadwood, because the list we've had for 10 years hasn't been successful either. If that means that you have to suffer in the meantime than boo friggidy hoo. Get in line buddy, nobody is enjoying this.

Wait so you think with a different game plan we would have a chance of winning a premiership? We haven't gotten close to success since 2002. The 04-06 era saw us fall down when it counted the most, leading up to and during the finals. We all felt great about it and are now shocked to realise that we were as far away from a flag then as we are now. You can only keep finishing in the bottom half of the eight for so long before realising that you just ain't go what it takes to take it any further. Why did Grant Thomas get sacked if being a competitive team is all it really takes? Finals are fun, but if you keep finishing 8th you get neither a premiership nor good draft picks. It's fools paradise.

Exactly. I don't want to play finals, I want a premiership. It's been a long, LONG time since we've tasted real success and anything in between just won't do. The nature of this competition dictates that if you don't come first, you should come last and benefit from early draft picks. It worked for Hawthorn, and it's going to help Carlton and Richmond enormously. Luckily for Geelong they managed to grab Scarlett, Ablett x 2 and Hawkins under the F/S rules and they still bottomed out in 2003. It took them 4 years to win a flag. We also bottomed out in 2003 and look at the difference between us and Geelong after 4 seasons. They recruited to suit their needs (Ottens) and they developed a game plan which they believed would bring them success. In 2006 they struggled, but when things clicked they were unstoppable. If they were stubborn and didn't believe it was time for a change all those years ago, we'd both still be suffering from long premiership droughts. This notion that it will take us years to be successful again is crazy. Look at the sort of players we have to build around... Rivers, Jones, McLean, Morton, Bartram, Frawley, Maric and the list goes on and on. All of these players suit the game plan that Bailey is trying to implement. They are accountable, but they can also attack a contest. They'll go in hard when it's their turn, but they can also use the footy by hand/foot (those who can't have plenty of time to learn). Are we crazy that we're going to implement a game plan which suits the likes of Robbo, Junior, Green, Bruce, White, Whelan and Neita when these guys are not going to be around in 2-3 years, let alone when a premiership is on the cards? We have to build around the players who will be there to see us succeed. Our senior players have failed time and time again and we can no longer gear a game plan to their needs. If some younger players happen to fall down as well because they lack basic accountability and a football brain, than they were never going to make it anyway. I'm confident that the players I've mentioned above will not struggle (and have not struggled thus far) with Bailey's style. It is our youngest players who have adapted best and have really shown the way. Sadly, they are getting little support at the moment and it cannot be expected of them to win us games when we've played the best sides in the competition thus far. Today was a real opportunity for us to get the four points, but skill errors and kicking in-front of goals killed us. Replace Robbo/Neita with Fevola and we probably would have won.

Run and carry does not eliminate the need for contested ball winners. McLean and Jones are needed and will continue to be needed in order to win the ball in the midfield. Sylvia, unless he improves dramatically won't be needed regardless of which game plan we employ. I don't think it will take 5-7 years for us to reach some level of success, football turnarounds are hardly ever that long. But yes, I am happy to struggle for a couple of seasons if it means we develop a team capable of bringing us the ultimate success. We have some very capable young kids who we can build around, but we also have a huge amount of deadwood on our list which we will need to clear out before we can become really successful. Do you honestly believe that our list at the moment is good enough to win a premiership? Are we honestly capable of competing with Geelong, Hawthorn etc...?

I didn't remove it, I merged it with the other game plan thread.

And how well were they going before Judd came along to take the heat away from them? At least they have Stevens and Judd in there helping them along, as well as Scottland. Besides, Murphy and Gibbs hardly play at the bounce for the whole match and they are not the main ball winners.

Maybe we didn't recruit the right coach, maybe we did. One way or the other, we cannot make a judgement on 5 games. Bottom line is, if you thought Daniher's time was up, and a change was on the cards, then it was inevitable that a new coach will bring a new game plan. A smooth transition is a lot to ask. Look at St.Kilda last year, how many people were calling for Lyon's head? Plenty. I'm not going to support Bailey to the bitter end, just as I didn't support Daniher in his last few seasons. But I can see what he is trying to achieve and I can also see why he would want to implement a complete change. Yes we made finals in 04, 05 and 06, but we won a combined total of 1 final in that time. Our game plan was not suitable for winning finals, and we were incredibly predictable. We played well on the MCG, but incredibly poorly anywhere else. The game plan may have suited our players, but the players didn't and aren't up to standards in finals. I believe that Bailey's game plan is in essence quite basic, but it is also difficult for our players to implement because most of our players are really uncomfortable with accountability and contested footy. So the question is, do we adapt the game plan to suit our players and hope they are good enough to win us a premiership, or do we implement a game plan that can stand up in finals, and watch many on our list fall over trying to catch up? As far as I'm concerned our playing list is not good enough to win us finals, so I'm happy to adapt the list according to the game plan and not the other way around.

I said it about 10 times already, but if you're happy being a mediocre side which makes finals but doesn't actually win anything, then good on you. Daniher's multiple game plans since 2003 got us donuts. Move on.

Can you tell us what the go with Matty Bate is?

Nice one. And which stupid club will give us pick 2 if Rich is as good as you say he is? I'm glad I didn't read past "Trade Brock McLean".

Read this thread: http://demonland.ugbox.net/forum/index.php...mp;#entry139372 I can't be bothered having the same argument over and over again. I appreciate that maybe you didn't read the other 58 threads we've had on the same topic since the start of the pre-season. Now is your chance.

Why am I getting singled out? Plenty other people gave him 6. Besides, if you think McLean got destroyed by Judd, you have obviously never seen Judd on fire. Faster, more experienced players have suffered much worse at the hands of Chris Judd. His 3 goals were very influential, as was some of his forward delivery, but he certainly didn't rip us apart like I have seen him rip us apart before. McLean had a huge job to do. To his credit he didn't go too defensive, and still got plenty of his own ball, while at the same time limiting Judd to the best of his ability. McLean more than held his own in the clearances, but obviously struggled for pace in the one on one situations. Very few, if any, can stop Judd, and not many find themselves amongst the top possession winners while playing against him.

I stopped reading when you said we should trade Brock McLean. Lets get rid of our best contested ball winner and become even more useless. Do you understand that once we get a decent team around him, McLean's ball-winning ability will become invaluable? Can you think of even one premiership side that had no contested ball winners and couldn't win the clearances? :rolleyes:

Amen! What a surprise, another loss resulting directly from our misuse of the footy, another 'hilarious' thread taking cheap shots at the game plan and Dean Bailey. Where were you all in the last 5 years when Daniher tried failed game plan after failed game plan, instead of realising that our players were not up to it and getting rid of them. But lets blame Bailey, it is totally his fault that Mark Jamar feels the need to trip over his own legs, Bruce and Green can't kick goals from short distances, Moloney decides to give away two idiotic 50m penalties and PJ and Bate are injured. Lets just burn down the MCG and be done with the overreaction.

Well he was a Melbourne supporter growing up

1) Let Fevola kick 14, sure, great idea. Besides, if Ratten dropped a loose man in defence, it's hardly a clever solution to crowd the forwardline even further by bringing another useless forward in there to man him up. 2) Melbourne players follow their opponent up the ground, if 5 forwards have 5 defenders who are running the other way, then the 5 forwards need to go with them, or the opposition will kick 100 unanswered goals. There was never a situation where 6 Carlton defenders stood in our forwardline with one of Robbo or Neita. Our forwards were trying to stop their opponent from getting a kick up the field and so they should. The same situation happened at the end of the last quarter, when Fevola and Carroll were the only two players in Carlton's attacking 50. It's a tactic, some teams play it well, we don't. 3) Robbo, Neita, Jamar, Dunn, Aussie, Green/Davey ... that's 5/6 not 3.

Oh god, where did I say that turning the ball over with silly handballs was better? But you realise that both options are as bad as each other. Just because Moloney bombs it long, does not mean it's ok for him to turn it over 98% of the time. Even though you love long kicking to leading forwards (who doesn't?), what Moloney does is neither effective nor helpful.

Yeah I love it when he bombs in into our forward line, and the opposition defenders clear the ball out with ease. FFS, long kicking is useless if you can't hit a target. To just bomb it without looking is dumb football. When Moloney actually kicked around the body and delivered the ball 30m to Robbo's chest, then he was useful. Not when he kicked it 100m in the air to nobody.

First of all, each team had an extra player in defence, so already you are more than likely going to have a 2-on-1 situation if you take twenty seven minutes to move the ball forward. There were a few frustrating moments when we really didn't have anyone to kick to, but do you understand that our forwards (everyone actually) are instructed to follow their opponent up the ground? It's a poor effort on our behalf that the forwards didn't work hard enough to run back into the forward line and provide an option when we won the ball. It's not as if we had a one man forwardline at the centre bounce. If the players are not willing to work hard going both ways, we won't kick goals. It's not that difficult to understand.

Delist/ Trade at year's end. He doesn't fit the game plan, he is very one-dimensional, he has injury problems and he lacks football smarts. His lack of discipline today completely robbed us of any momentum. While the first 50 he gave away was weak, he should have known better and just got on with it instead of giving Carlton an easy shot at goal.

6- McLean 5- Green 4- Rivers 3- Sylvia 2- Whelan 1- McDonald

McLean was very good today against a much faster opponent, but to expect a 21 year old and a 19 year old to hold their own at every single bounce against bigger and more exprienced players is just crazy. Three weeks ago supporters were calling for McLean to be traded, because oh no he can't win every single clearance on his own. Our ruckmen don't even use their big bodies to sheppard the other players off the ball (mostly because our ruckmen are terrible). Eventually both McLean and Jones will get sick of being on the bottom of every single pack. Even one big strong body in there would help. Junior tries hard but he's on his last leg. The rest of the midfielders are simply not contested ball winners.

Frawley did some nice things and HE CAN HIT A TARGET OMG! I felt so sorry for him when he outplayed Fevola only for Fevola to kick a miracle goal off the ground. Poor kid. He has to stay in the side without a doubt. Reminds me a bit of Rivers with some of his spoils. Assuming that come Round 7 we drop Robbo & Neita, and bring in a wooden log to replace Mark Jamar, which other senior player would you get rid of in order to play the likes of Buckley and Maric? All that's left is Junior, Bruce, Green and Wheatley. Maybe White, but only if PJ and Meesen are both fit. We pretty much are playing a large chuck of young players, some are struggling (Moloney comes to mind), other need more time (Morton), while the rest just really need some help from the senior players (McLean and Jones getting polaxed at every centre bounce).

Yeah, but how good was our backline with 15 Melbourne players trying to block Fevola? The problem is that we are really struggling to deliver the ball to our forwards, and the opposition rebounds so quickly that half the forward line ends up chasing their opponent into the backline (at least they are sort of chasing now... small victory?). When we do finally deliver the ball with purpose, our forwards can't mark, or worse still, can't kick from 10m out (Jamar, Bruce, Green, Robbo). And laugh at me all you want, but we missed Miller today. At least he provides a lead between midfield and the forward line. Half the time players would just stand there, instead of providing a real lead. With no CHF, our FF alternating between slow (Neita), crap (Jamar) or both (Robbo?), and Davey playing up the field, we really have no forwards left to experiment with. At a stretch we could get Green as a permanent forward pocket, Bate to CHF and play White/PJ at FF with Aussie/Davey/Maric as their shadow.

ARGHHHHHHHHHH! Bate is a must inclusion, and Miller will be back next week too (get over it ). Time for Green to stand up and deliver. He was good up forward today and this is where he must stay. It seems that for the first time in many years, our forward line is our biggest weakness. Sadly, we have nobody waiting in the wings to fill Neita's shoes at FF. A smaller forward line could work if, like Bailey wants us to, we move the ball quickly (quickly does not equal "round and around until we see an opponent and [censored] ourselves).