Big game exposure - does it matter?

[1eyedog]

Does anyone think that not having access to blockbuster games could have an affect on a team's ability under pressure, and to close games out? I was thinking about this on the way home from the game against the Hawks. Clearly their ability to close the game out came down to poise under extreme pressure. They've been there before, a number of times, and aside from their exposure to important finals get crowds of 50k+ to their games when they play the G. There must be a crowd / atmosphere factor that can influence a player's actions in those critical seconds in those critical games, a Lachie Hunter handball, a Matthew Boyd tackle...

While getting access to big games and getting big game experience into our players strikes at the heart of the broader equalisation debate, that's not really my intention here. What I am interested in is getting your thoughts on developing experience in front of big crowds in important matches, its something we haven't had exposure to, ever, and I wonder whether it has more of an effect on our inability to close games out, with examples against the Crows last year and the Hawks last week a case in point.

Fortunately our home game averages are way up in the two games this year so here's hoping we get some exposure to the atmosphere a big crowd brings. It will stand us in good stead if we play a Victorian club in any of the finals at the end of the year.

[jeemak]

Re: Big game exposure - does it matter?

Interesting, not sure if there's been a study on it........might be worth a look.

In the heat of the moment of general play I'm pretty confident it's easily zoned out. At stoppages too. Goal kicking might be one area where it makes a difference, or slowly moving the ball out of the defencive area.

Getting used to big moments in big games is a part of a team developing. As you get better, you open up a broader range of competitors against whom you're likely to be in a winning position. The teams that go on to win premierships win the close games.

Richmond and EFC have had ample opportunity to play in big games in front of big crowds and they're shite in finals when and if they make them.

[Eastdog]

Re: Big game exposure - does it matter?

While as Bulldog supporters we like and are used to Etihad ultimately that is not where the finals are played. I can't blame us last year for petitioning week 1 to have the EF at Etihad but in the end we embraced the MCG, got a great crowd in and nearly won.

I do think all Victorian clubs should at least get 1 home game at the G each year. It would be good to play more Victorian away games at the MCG for experience.

[SonofScray]

Re: Big game exposure - does it matter?

Blockbuster games are an interesting concept. The bigger clubs and the league have sort of co-opted the term to reflect manufactured rivalries and monopolised fixtures, ie ANZAC Day, Dreamtime at the G, season opener.

Any game can be a blockbuster, Hawks v Dogs last week was huge. North v Dogs in 98 was bigger. We'll get plenty of opportunities for similar outings this year and beyond, but I doubt we'll ever be afforded the AFL approved and marketed Blockbuster fixture.

I think it does have an impact. But not too big an impact. Just things like the change in routine for the build up (more media work etc) and the noise levels in the stadium etc.

[1eyedog]

Re: Big game exposure - does it matter?

Would be difficult to quantify whether it does have an effect. Richmond have had a perennial crap list so that doesn't help. I've sometimes wondered how successful Collingwood would be with 30,000 members and small crowds. One thing is for sure, big crowds and big games is important to a young list on the cusp of an extended run at the finals.

I'd love to have an opportunity to play a Richmond / Collingwood or Geelong at the MCG on Friday / Saturday night to get some big game experience into our group. It can only bode well for the pointy end of the season.

[Nuggety Back Pocket]

Re: Big game exposure - does it matter?

While as Bulldog supporters we like and are used to Etihad ultimately that is not where the finals are played. I can't blame us last year for petitioning week 1 to have the EF at Etihad but in the end we embraced the MCG, got a great crowd in and nearly won.

I do think all Victorian clubs should at least get 1 home game at the G each year. It would be good to play more Victorian away games at the MCG for experience.

We as a priority need to play more home and away games at the MCG. Playing home games at the "G" against strong drawing Clubs like Hawthorn Collingwood and Richmond would be a far better finals preparation for the MCG apart from the enormous financial boost we would gain in playing these blockbuster games away from Etihad.
Hawthorn was smarter enough to position its home games at the MCG.
Contrast that with former powerful clubs in Carlton and Essendon in locking themselves into Etihad Stadium with all its limitations, have gone backwards by comparison.

[comrade]

Re: Big game exposure - does it matter?

We as a priority need to play more home and away games at the MCG. Playing home games at the "G" against strong drawing Clubs like Hawthorn Collingwood and Richmond would be a far better finals preparation for the MCG apart from the enormous financial boost we would gain in playing these blockbuster games away from Etihad.
Hawthorn was smarter enough to position its home games at the MCG.
Contrast that with former powerful clubs in Carlton and Essendon in locking themselves into Etihad Stadium with all its limitations, have gone backwards by comparison.

Hawks made the decision to play at the G rather than Etihad as the board believed their fans would prefer it after being used to turning up to Waverley and easily getting a seat. They were concerned that it wouldn't be the case at Etihad.

Ended up working out for them, but it had nothing to do with honing their skills to suit the MCG on GF day.

[Nuggety Back Pocket]

Re: Big game exposure - does it matter?

Hawks made the decision to play at the G rather than Etihad as the board believed their fans would prefer it after being used to turning up to Waverley and easily getting a seat. They were concerned that it wouldn't be the case at Etihad.

Ended up working out for them, but it had nothing to do with honing their skills to suit the MCG on GF day.

The Hawthorn administration just continues to make good decisions be it the Tasmanian experiment which includes a $3 million windfall from the Tasmanian Government plus 10,000 additional members, it's ability to recruit 7 premiership players from other Clubs plus a superb membership drive that has now netted it 70,000 plus members. It has arguably the best Coach in the AFL plus playing its home games at the best Stadium in Australia.

[jeemak]

Re: Big game exposure - does it matter?

It's amazing what you can achieve when you're gifted a home ground and training base over a decade or so, a subsequent supporter base, and don't get forced at gunpoint to play at a home ground you can't make money from.

Obviously they've hit a vein of good fortune in that their administrators aren't dimwits, but they've had a serious leg-up that most teams don't benefit from.

Geelong are in the same boat, but they made a shocking loss last year apparently because football socialism means they can't continue to be inefficient and it's everyone else's fault. I'd love for our club to be afforded the level of hubris they enjoy.

[F'scary]

Re: Big game exposure - does it matter?

I think there is additional match pressure that comes with big crowds and hype. Clubs languishing down the ladder don't get this exposure and consequently are further off the pace.