Do you have a non-negotiable for this week (R#2)??

[mjp]

Here's what I'm thinking.

There were a couple of less than ideal numbers coming out of last weeks game.

1/. Low tackle count.
2/. High Oppo UM count
3/. Low kick count (vs Oppo) - #1 stat for winning games of footy.
4/. Something else??

Clearly we have to defend better. But what is it?

Simple - Just tackle more? (Keep in mind we were involved in a basketball game and Melbourne didn't tackle either).
Simple - Locate better. Take away those hit-ups.
Simple - Stop handballing so much (but the two teams who had more than us - GWS and FD) both won and Melbourne were right behind us?
Something else?

If you were the coaches, what simple target would you give the players this week??

[Grantysghost]

Re: Do you have a non-negotiable for this week (R#2)??

Pressure acts.

I want at least 5 of the top 10 as Dog's players.

image upload site

[mjp]

Re: Do you have a non-negotiable for this week (R#2)??

Pressure acts.

Target??

[jazzadogs]

Re: Do you have a non-negotiable for this week (R#2)??

Without looking at specific numbers:

Gold Coast are a high clearance team. We need to win/break even at clearances. (we did this last week anyway, but I still think it's important).

Naughton needs to take at least 1 mark per quarter on the wing. Get out of the goalsquare and impact the game. Collins is too clever to give him a run at a high ball.

Sprint efforts, for our mids in particular, need to be high (we don't get this data, but my eyes tell me it was low). Pushing hard to defend, and pushing hard to create easy options offensively.

McNeill <5 clangers.

[bulldogsthru&thru]

Re: Do you have a non-negotiable for this week (R#2)??

Pressure acts.

I want at least 5 of the top 10 as Dog's players.

image upload site

Good god.

2 of our top 3 are a guy on the fringe and an off season recruit from the club that demolished us.

Bont must be bloody sick of his teammates lazy bs. Our Lamborghini is doing all the grunt work as well.

[Grantysghost]

Re: Do you have a non-negotiable for this week (R#2)??

Target??

I've updated my post

[Grantysghost]

Re: Do you have a non-negotiable for this week (R#2)??

Good god.

2 of our top 3 are a guy on the fringe and an off season recruit from the club that demolished us.

Bont must be bloody sick of his teammates lazy bs. Our Lamborghini is doing all the grunt work as well.

Yes I was surprised with Harmes' high numbers.

It's a fair indication of work rate isn't it.

[mjp]

Re: Do you have a non-negotiable for this week (R#2)??

Yes I was surprised with Harmes' high numbers.

It's a fair indication of work rate isn't it.

Maybe it's a sign of being second to the ball?

[mjp]

Re: Do you have a non-negotiable for this week (R#2)??

I'm always fascinated by tackle targets and pressure targets.

I get they are an 'outcome'...but one thing they are an outcome of is the oppo having the ball. I think you need to define what you want to see a little more "definitively"...what pressure do you want to see? How should it LOOK??

[Bornadog]

Re: Do you have a non-negotiable for this week (R#2)??

1. I want to see the ball moved faster from defence to forwards as we have been practicing in the preseason. JJ didn't bounce the ball once last week, Dale and Ed were statues as well, although ED did try and move the ball quickly on occasions.

2. I want to see the forwards moving more with leads, and the ball coming into the forward line hitting a chest, not a pack.

[bulldogsthru&thru]

Re: Do you have a non-negotiable for this week (R#2)??

I'm always fascinated by tackle targets and pressure targets.

I get they are an 'outcome'...but one thing they are an outcome of is the oppo having the ball. I think you need to define what you want to see a little more "definitively"...what pressure do you want to see? How should it LOOK??

To me it should look like the opposition barely have time to make a decision when they have the ball and when they get rid of it, we have a player ready to pounce on the oppo player receiving the ball. This is what effort and discipline looks like to me.

Not, oppo players receives ball with barely a dogs player around him. Dogs player guards space and oppo player loops a kick or handball over his head to next oppo player who also has heaps of space and time to move the ball forward and make his decision.

You watch the best teams. They barely ever give the oppo time or space to do anything. This is what we should be doing most of the game. Not just a 5 or 10 minute patch.

[Axe Man]

Re: Do you have a non-negotiable for this week (R#2)??

2. I want to see the forwards moving more with leads, and the ball coming into the forward line hitting a chest, not a pack.

We had 13 marks inside 50 last week, that would have put us around top 5-6 in the league last season (we averaged 12, 9th in the league). I'm not sure it was one of our more pressing issues.

[Boots]

Re: Do you have a non-negotiable for this week (R#2)??

I want more tackles and lower % broken tackles.

Is a team average of 0.66 tackles per player per quarter outlandish? Gives you like 60 tackles per game. And I’d want to see maybe 60% tackle efficiency. Is that too high? I’m making this up.

[Grantysghost]

Re: Do you have a non-negotiable for this week (R#2)??

I'm always fascinated by tackle targets and pressure targets.

I get they are an 'outcome'...but one thing they are an outcome of is the oppo having the ball. I think you need to define what you want to see a little more "definitively"...what pressure do you want to see? How should it LOOK??

Good point.

No clean possession, force the oppo to kick the ball to a contest.
Ground balls, no easy gets just harrass every ground ball by getting numbers "on the screen", half contests... The old Dale Morris mantra, if you can't win it; don't lose it.

[Axe Man]

Re: Do you have a non-negotiable for this week (R#2)??

I want more tackles and lower % broken tackles.

Is a team average of 0.66 tackles per player per quarter outlandish? Gives you like 60 tackles per game. And I’d want to see maybe 60% tackle efficiency. Is that too high? I’m making this up.

We averaged 65.4 tackles a game last season (3rd in league) so we should be getting over 60 most weeks. Not sure about efficiency.