Predictions for 2013: our young players

[jeemak]

Re: Predictions for 2013: our young players

I still think we were flat track bullies and more often than not couldn't defeat the very top teams each year.

Kind of like a team that finished third, rather than first in each of those years?

[GVGjr]

Re: Predictions for 2013: our young players

Pace is such a vexing question. Are we talking here acceleration, top speed, sustained speed, straight line or evasive speed. Then there is speed of mind, pace with hands or kicking, and the edge and time given to players who have elite peripheral vision.
Any one or two of these attributes can have a player seen as being "quick".

In reality there are very few true sprinters in our sport, as the other requirements of the game eliminate those who's only real attribute is speed. As I have said previously, if you had a team of 22 Usain Bolts, you would never win a match.
Yes I would love one or two of our players to have the pace of a Jetta or two. I cannot think of one of these greyhound types who performs in more than short bursts within games, but doesn't then disappear for prolonged periods.
Again, what sort of pace are we looking for? Some who are 'quick' are like a young Coons, and achieve top pace within their first handful of strides, but then motor on at a steady rate. Others can take 8-10 paces before they get close to their top speed. Some can sustain pace for a useful distance while others run out of steam pretty swiftly and then come back to the field.

As several posters have pointed out our players on the periphery of packs are frequently flat footed when the ball comes out from our extractors, and for mine that is a coaching/training issue. Shouldn't the in and under players within the pack at the moment of extraction move immediately to protect the receiver, giving him clear air to accelerate away, rather than standing about and watching him get tackled before he has a chance to move off. That is a structural problem, that can and should be fixed.

As for Geelong, I don't believe that they over their successful era have been especially fleet of foot. To me, their 'speed' came from rapid movement of the ball, and almost perpetual motion. This is something given our paying list, and the number of off field staff that came out of, and experienced the Geelong playing style and it's development, we should be trying to make the key to our game.
Once you have possession keep the ball in continual motion until it reaches a player in clear space. He will then have time to decide on his best available option for moving it on, and more time to exercise his skills to the best of his ability. HOPEFULLY !!

[Ghost Dog]

Re: Predictions for 2013: our young players

Pace is such a vexing question. Are we talking here acceleration, top speed, sustained speed, straight line or evasive speed. Then there is speed of mind, pace with hands or kicking, and the edge and time given to players who have elite peripheral vision.
Any one or two of these attributes can have a player seen as being "quick".

The biggest question mark is over our midfield. Being able to run means you're not always under pressure. Take Dahlhaus; he doesn't always have to dish it off, because he knows he can evade and usually burn off an opponent. It's all about options. Once your midfield is full of slow, in and under types, just limits what opportunities you can create.

[GVGjr]

Re: Predictions for 2013: our young players

The biggest question mark is over our midfield. Being able to run means you're not always under pressure. Take Dahlhaus; he doesn't always have to dish it off, because he knows he can evade and usually burn off an opponent. It's all about options. Once your midfield is full of slow, in and under types, just limits what opportunities you can create.

To a degree I concur, however to me the problem is not so much having 3 slower paced in and under types in the square, it lies in having more of the same then on the periphery.
Having say Smith, Wal and Boyd or Higgins inside is ok provided there are runner/distributors outside to capitalise on their work. That is simply not going to happen if you then put Howard and Crossy on the wings.
If you have only one runner outside [ eg Griff or Dal] the opposition coach hardly needs to be Einstein to figure if you put a stopper on that player, holding the ball up becomes a piece of cake.
If you are going to use that type of square/stoppage set up, then you need runners on the outside, and more than one.
I don't see the problem as the players we have, more how we use them.

[LongWait]

Re: Predictions for 2013: our young players

Kind of like a team that finished third, rather than first in each of those years?

It's more than that isn't it?

We looked great against teams who were not going to challenge for the flag. We rarely beat the premiership contending teams in the home and away season and never in finals. We failed in virtually every big game we played during this period.

That's the quintessential flat track bully for you.

[Bornadog]

Re: Predictions for 2013: our young players

It's more than that isn't it?

We looked great against teams who were not going to challenge for the flag. We rarely beat the premiership contending teams in the home and away season and never in finals. We failed in virtually every big game we played during this period.

That's the quintessential flat track bully for you.

Geelong and Collingwood last two rounds 2009. Prelim by a whisker. In the end its just luck, but we are going over old ground, when the discussion was on pace.

[Greystache]

Re: Predictions for 2013: our young players

Geelong and Collingwood last two rounds 2009. Prelim by a whisker. In the end its just luck, but we are going over old ground, when the discussion was on pace.

10 wins from 57 attempts (from memory) is a big enough sample size to rule out luck.

[Ghost Dog]

Re: Predictions for 2013: our young players

To a degree I concur, however to me the problem is not so much having 3 slower paced in and under types in the square, it lies in having more of the same then on the periphery.
Having say Smith, Wal and Boyd or Higgins inside is ok provided there are runner/distributors outside to capitalise on their work. That is simply not going to happen if you then put Howard and Crossy on the wings.
If you have only one runner outside [ eg Griff or Dal] the opposition coach hardly needs to be Einstein to figure if you put a stopper on that player, holding the ball up becomes a piece of cake.
If you are going to use that type of square/stoppage set up, then you need runners on the outside, and more than one.
I don't see the problem as the players we have, more how we use them.

Yeah fair comments. Anyway, one can't make silk out of burlap.We have the list we have. If anyone puts on the colors and plays with their heart, I'll cheer along. But the reality is we lack any real ' game winners' and that's what we need. Maybe Stringer will become one.

[Bornadog]

Re: Predictions for 2013: our young players

10 wins from 57 attempts (from memory) is a big enough sample size to rule out luck.

The luck I was talking about was the 2009 prelim

[jeemak]

Re: Predictions for 2013: our young players

It's more than that isn't it?

We looked great against teams who were not going to challenge for the flag. We rarely beat the premiership contending teams in the home and away season and never in finals. We failed in virtually every big game we played during this period.

That's the quintessential flat track bully for you.

No mate, not in my opinion. Apart from 2009 we weren't as good as the top two teams, and just because we made some seriously crap teams look silly over a three or four year period it doesn't make us flat track bullies.

It's an overly simple way to look at things, to be honest. I mean, how do you not be flat track bullies? By beating teams better than you and losing to teams worse than you?

Anyway, back on track!

I'm going to post on topic after Friday's game against the Faaawks. I haven't seen the Pups this season and I need to see how they're moving.

[Remi Moses]

Re: Predictions for 2013: our young players

Couple of young players at Melbourne looked good.
Hogan looked sensational ( better than Dawes!)and Toumpas also.

[The Pie Man]

Re: Predictions for 2013: our young players

Not sure if this is the right thread...this does discuss our youth policy though

http://theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/time-for-seasoned-to-be-jolly-20130222-2exec.html

The below is part of the article relevant to us.



If the Sydneys and Richmonds of the AFL are the obvious banner-wavers for needs-specific recruiting of experienced talent, the Bulldogs are towards the other end of the scale.

Essendon is the obvious stand-out, with just one player from another AFL club on its list this year, though that player – former St Kilda star Brendon Goddard – is a sizeable name indeed, but the Dogs have only five, three of whom – Koby Stevens, Tom Young and Nick Lower – have come aboard only this pre-season.

Coach Brendan McCartney is a feted developer of youngsters at AFL level, and the Dogs were burnt to a degree by their recent dabbles in trading, players such as Justin Sherman and Nathan Djerrkura having already come and gone.

But there remain plenty of raised eyebrows among the Dogs rivals about their relative reluctance to plunder the lists of other AFL clubs.
One official from a club which continues to do well out of rival lists said this week he was "staggered" by the extent to which the Bulldogs had remained content to develop from within. "I can't believe it. It's all well and good to say you're going to rebuild through the draft, but the way their list looks, I reckon that could take them up to six years."

[FrediKanoute]

Re: Predictions for 2013: our young players

Wow.....6 years. I think there is an element of truth in what has been said there. At our peak we should have topped up. We were gun-shy in chasing Bazza, who would probably have got us over the line in 09.

In terms of now though, its a little different. Would chasing a Cloke or a Pendlebury or a Tippet really have made a difference? Carlton 5 or 6 years ago chased Judd, arguably the best mid in the comp at the time. It hasn't really brought them a great deal of success. Maybe its accellerated Gibbs and Murphy's development, but in reality they had enough talent that they would probably have made it anyway.

I agree Sherman and Djkerra were mistakes.....again, probably 2 seasons to late for both of them. However, would our decline/development really have been hindered/hurried by their recruitment/non-recruitment. To me the problem is more one of selection and development as well as a complete change in philosophy.

Selection - the type of player we selected in the drafts has been a problem. The Everitt draft was a disaster - not one left on our list. The next draft not much better. The Howard/Tutt draft is not looking great. So arguably we haven't had a great drafting record and that's why we have toped up with Stevens and Lower.

Development - a constant complaint through the Eade era was just how little off filed support we had. Heck we had to ask supporters to put up the funds for a rookie one year. Given how rich the rookie draft has proven to be not having the full compliment leaves us behind other teams. That coupled with an underfunded footy department means our kids don't develop as quick as our opponents or worse develop bad habits which they can't shake.

Change in Philosophy - Eade and McCarthy are poles apart in they way they coach and they way they want to develop a team. McCarthy inheireted a series of drafts presided over by Eade where Eade type playes were taken, so it is going to take time for McCarthy type players to come through. Pulling in Lower, Stevens and Goodes is part of this process, part of the expediting of the process, buying some bigger bodies to soak up the punishment of what is a pretty physically demanding game plan.

[Bornadog]

Re: Predictions for 2013: our young players

Wow.....6 years. I think there is an element of truth in what has been said there. At our peak we should have topped up. We were gun-shy in chasing Bazza, who would probably have got us over the line in 09.

You don't think we chased Bazza in 2009? We tried but he was contracted and the Swans wanted to keep him.

In todays footy it could take 6 years but then again it could take another couple of seasons, you just don't know how players are going to develop. Harbrow and Ward in the team and the drafting looks much better as the whole team does and we wouldn't be talking about how badly we drafted in the last couple of years..

[LongWait]

Re: Predictions for 2013: our young players

The Connolly article is very poor journalism in my view.

On the one hand Connolly says we suffered from recruiting players from other clubs and yet he also claims we should recruit more players from other clubs. We have always recruited players from other clubs, as we did in the last trade/draft periods. You could argue we have made some poor selections, but to bag us and praise Melbourne for our recruiting last year is pretty poor form - especially in light of this weeks' events.