Mick has a lot ahead of him

moshe25 · **Joined:** Wed May 11, 2005 1:23 am **Posts:** 11671

Just repeating in case it was missed.

moshe25 wrote:

Blue Vain wrote:

aboynamedsue wrote:

You're being very selective with your facts BV. There's plenty of examples of teams that have not followed the 'incremental improvement' theory (eg. Haw make Semi Finals in 2000 and then Prelim in 2001 and then don't play finals again until 2007; Freo make the Prelim in 2006 and then don't play finals again until 2010; St K lose a preliminary final by a kick in 2004 and don't make the GF until 2009; WB play in successive Prelims in 2008-2010 and go no further...the point is you can pull historical examples out to support almost any argument).

I agree. And thats what I'm asking others to do ABNS. Be selective with the facts.
Look at the injury correlation between Carlton in 2012, West Coast in 2010 and Collingwood in 2005. They didnt throw the baby out with the bathwater and demand a rebuild. They realised the impact injury had on their list and had the courage to stick fat. They were rewarded with instant improvement the following year.

We on the other hand caved in to the hysteria, sacked the coaching group and have radically revamped the playing style.

Yet 12 months earlier with a reasonable injury toll, we were 5 points off a prelim with a team that was 3rd youngest in the finals race from memory.

This team has the structure, ability and talent base to have success IMO. We just need an administration with half the courage and decision making skills we expect of the players.

I agree with most things you say BV, even in this thread. The only hole in your analysis is there is no explanation for the Port Adelaide and Gold Coast losses imo, and very little accounting for the Essendon* and St. Kilda ones either. I don't think injuries give the whole picture there.

Wojee · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 8:17 am **Posts:** 35135

moshe25 wrote:

Just repeating in case it was missed.

moshe25 wrote:

Blue Vain wrote:

aboynamedsue wrote:

You're being very selective with your facts BV. There's plenty of examples of teams that have not followed the 'incremental improvement' theory (eg. Haw make Semi Finals in 2000 and then Prelim in 2001 and then don't play finals again until 2007; Freo make the Prelim in 2006 and then don't play finals again until 2010; St K lose a preliminary final by a kick in 2004 and don't make the GF until 2009; WB play in successive Prelims in 2008-2010 and go no further...the point is you can pull historical examples out to support almost any argument).

I agree. And thats what I'm asking others to do ABNS. Be selective with the facts.
Look at the injury correlation between Carlton in 2012, West Coast in 2010 and Collingwood in 2005. They didnt throw the baby out with the bathwater and demand a rebuild. They realised the impact injury had on their list and had the courage to stick fat. They were rewarded with instant improvement the following year.

We on the other hand caved in to the hysteria, sacked the coaching group and have radically revamped the playing style.

Yet 12 months earlier with a reasonable injury toll, we were 5 points off a prelim with a team that was 3rd youngest in the finals race from memory.

This team has the structure, ability and talent base to have success IMO. We just need an administration with half the courage and decision making skills we expect of the players.

I agree with most things you say BV, even in this thread. The only hole in your analysis is there is no explanation for the Port Adelaide and Gold Coast losses imo, and very little accounting for the Essendon* and St. Kilda ones either. I don't think injuries give the whole picture there.

The team looked like it collectively couldn't give a crap for the GC and Port games.

Steve_C7 · **Joined:** Tue Mar 27, 2007 1:39 pm **Posts:** 1002

aramari wrote:

We have a middle of the road list that is mature enough to do well if everything goes our way.

Unfortunately, there are a lot more clubs with mature lists this year than in 2011, for example.

Malthouse needs to work a miracle in getting the team to master a new game plan, and for that game plan to be suitable to handle the best that some very smart coaches will throw at it, all while requiring the players to develop the steel and culture to perform as a team at a high level consistently.

That is a very tall order. And it requires a healthy list and significant improvement in output from most of our senior players - Kreuzer, Hampson, Warnock, Yarran, Garlett, Judd, Gibbs, Jamison, Henderson, Waite, Laidler, Simpson, Walker; plus half a dozen young players need to make big strides, notably Lucas, Tuohy, Casboult, Bell, Watson.

It can be done and it has been done, but it's a long shot. And to say that we're due or "it's our time" or look at history and project from that is probably kidding oneself.

I would argue that talent wise our list is not dissimilar to that of the swans, where we suffer is that we don't have the culture that Sydney has worked so hard to develop.

The embarrassing thing is that they looked for a long time at our arrogant culture where success was a given and that we were expected to win every game we went into, now we are the ones to hope that we can sneak a win against the good sides and they expect to win every game they play.

The Normal One · **Joined:** Mon Apr 06, 2009 8:35 pm **Posts:** 20076

club29 wrote:

Sydney Blue wrote:

Didnt see the game I only watched wookies replay- But if that is Micks Game plan we better start looking for a replacement now. dominated the first 15 minutes and the entire 2nd quarter should have been 40-50 points up at half time and the game should have been all over .
If we keep bombing it long down the line and into the forward 50 we are going to get smashed week in week out . Its the dumbest game plane there is going . I'm hoping its not what we are going to see in the season proper it will be devistating to watch they ball rebound out of the forward 50 over are heads time and time again

I felt sick watching it too. It can't be the plan. Surely we were foxing. It looked like an old pagan plan where we kick long to a contest where we are outnumbered and the opposition spoil then run off with it and score easily on the counter. So Pagan. Very predictable.

Surely there is more to it. I am hoping we are just in a hard training phase and and could not run the plan properly so devised something else that was simple but not effective. More important to be fit as fiddles for the first month.

If you listen to Mick's pressed he states we were top heavy and the crumbers couldn't get to the fall of the ball. In other words he was trying a different structure.

The only concern was the lack of effort/legs in the second half, but again who knows what loads we've had at training.

billc3 · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 2:41 pm **Posts:** 4623

club29 wrote:

Sydney Blue wrote:

Didnt see the game I only watched wookies replay- But if that is Micks Game plan we better start looking for a replacement now. dominated the first 15 minutes and the entire 2nd quarter should have been 40-50 points up at half time and the game should have been all over .
If we keep bombing it long down the line and into the forward 50 we are going to get smashed week in week out . Its the dumbest game plane there is going . I'm hoping its not what we are going to see in the season proper it will be devistating to watch they ball rebound out of the forward 50 over are heads time and time again

I felt sick watching it too. It can't be the plan. Surely we were foxing. It looked like an old pagan plan where we kick long to a contest where we are outnumbered and the opposition spoil then run off with it and score easily on the counter. So Pagan. Very predictable.

Surely there is more to it. I am hoping we are just in a hard training phase and and could not run the plan properly so devised something else that was simple but not effective. More important to be fit as fiddles for the first month.

This is all I could think of at the game on Friday.... Like there was $50 for every contested mark for the marker and kicker.
Gee I hops so ...we'll know soon enough...if not foxing....it's going to be a long 2005 all over again.

Blue Vain · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:35 am **Posts:** 17954

moshe25 wrote:

Just repeating in case it was missed.

moshe25 wrote:

Blue Vain wrote:

aboynamedsue wrote:

You're being very selective with your facts BV. There's plenty of examples of teams that have not followed the 'incremental improvement' theory (eg. Haw make Semi Finals in 2000 and then Prelim in 2001 and then don't play finals again until 2007; Freo make the Prelim in 2006 and then don't play finals again until 2010; St K lose a preliminary final by a kick in 2004 and don't make the GF until 2009; WB play in successive Prelims in 2008-2010 and go no further...the point is you can pull historical examples out to support almost any argument).

I agree. And thats what I'm asking others to do ABNS. Be selective with the facts.
Look at the injury correlation between Carlton in 2012, West Coast in 2010 and Collingwood in 2005. They didnt throw the baby out with the bathwater and demand a rebuild. They realised the impact injury had on their list and had the courage to stick fat. They were rewarded with instant improvement the following year.

We on the other hand caved in to the hysteria, sacked the coaching group and have radically revamped the playing style.

Yet 12 months earlier with a reasonable injury toll, we were 5 points off a prelim with a team that was 3rd youngest in the finals race from memory.

This team has the structure, ability and talent base to have success IMO. We just need an administration with half the courage and decision making skills we expect of the players.

I agree with most things you say BV, even in this thread. The only hole in your analysis is there is no explanation for the Port Adelaide and Gold Coast losses imo, and very little accounting for the Essendon* and St. Kilda ones either. I don't think injuries give the whole picture there.

I dont have the answers Moshe. The same as I dont have the answers how a depleted Carlton beat Fremantle in Fremantle and how we beat Collingwood. It shows that if teams are not switched on mentally, they are vulnerable to lesser quality opposition. But we're not Robinson Crusoe there.
As I said, the players had lost all faith in their ability to perform well. They were severely undermanned and lets face it, when players returned to the side, they were severely underprepared.
Casboult is a perfect example. He came straight into the side after a 12 week lay off!

Were the players playing for Ratten? Probably not. But I'm amused at the theories of some of our fellow posters. They wanted Ratten sacked because he failed to deliver on our potential but suddenly we're a middle of the road team. :lol:

Which is it? Did Ratten get a middle of the road team to overperform for 3 of the past 4 years or are we an improving finals team with a bit of luck with injuries?
If as some suggest Ratten couldnt realise our potential as a top 4 team, surely the pressure is on the highest paid coach to realise that potential. Or have we hired a 60 year old to rebuild and start again. If so, someone better tell Malthouse because at the start of the season, he stated was happy with the composition of our list.

moshe25 · **Joined:** Wed May 11, 2005 1:23 am **Posts:** 11671

Fair enough. We'll just sit back and see. The next two years will be tres interesting.......

Synbad · **Posted:** Tue Mar 19, 2013 10:08 am

I think we needed Ratts sacked because we were still a middle of the road side after 5 plus years.

No leaders were identified.
The gameplan was Juddcentric.. and unsustainable in pressure situations.
We won precious few big games.
We stumbled in big games.
We have a shocking record against a few teams.
And the inroads were minimal.

This is still Rattens playing list.

three changes to the list.. and a chocka block salary cap suggests that.

Alot of players know nothing but Ratten.

No easy task!!!.. and will take time to fine tune going forward.

Big Kahuna Boot · **Posted:** Tue Mar 19, 2013 10:11 am

..agreed, will take months to reprogram the playing styles and attitudes of the players, gameplan and structures will come a bit before that but won't "click" until the players become capable of carrying them out.. ..actual list inbalances however will take a few years to iron out..

padre · **Joined:** Mon Jan 05, 2009 7:56 pm **Posts:** 934

I dont take too much away from our second half. The teams were restricted to the new interchange rules ie 80 that all others were not. Added to that they have a shorter break. Mick was mindful of not overloading our players, look at how judd strolled through the game.
To mick he real game is round1 not the NAB gf.
I think the plan was to try to win it in the first half then cruise home. But we were not in a position to cruise home, as we were only 2 goals up at half time. Mick was testing structures and giving players like judd a run before round 1.
Round 1 shapes up as even more important this year as a loss to the tigers would be disastrous given our draw...

Rd 2 collingwood
Rd 3 geelong
Rd 4 west coast
Rd 5 adelaide.

If we are not on our game we could easily be 5 zip.

ThePsychologist · **Joined:** Sun May 03, 2009 9:52 am **Posts:** 7893

Won't be playing anywhere near our best football until atleast mid year. If we can reach half way at 7-5 we are in a very good position. Injuries aside I expect us to be playing Top 4 footy come August/September. Then anything can happen.

aramari · **Posted:** Tue Mar 19, 2013 1:21 pm

Blue Vain wrote:

aramari wrote:

We have a middle of the road list that is mature enough to do well if everything goes our way.

Unfortunately, there are a lot more clubs with mature lists this year than in 2011, for example.

Malthouse needs to work a miracle in getting the team to master a new game plan, and for that game plan to be suitable to handle the best that some very smart coaches will throw at it, all while requiring the players to develop the steel and culture to perform as a team at a high level consistently.

That is a very tall order. And it requires a healthy list and significant improvement in output from most of our senior players - Kreuzer, Hampson, Warnock, Yarran, Garlett, Judd, Gibbs, Jamison, Henderson, Waite, Laidler, Simpson, Walker; plus half a dozen young players need to make big strides, notably Lucas, Tuohy, Casboult, Bell, Watson.

It can be done and it has been done, but it's a long shot. And to say that we're due or "it's our time" or look at history and project from that is probably kidding oneself.

Yes. Its far easier for one to claim "we're a middle of the road list" and back it up with jack shit

What do you want me to back it up with? Hmmm...... By Jah I've got it!

11th, 7th, 8th, 5th, 10th

Middle of the Mother-Flowering road.

Previous coach couldn't get the most out of the list. The team never really came together into a cohesive unit greater than the sum of it's parts. That is part of MM's challenge.

Regardless of the performance of the last coach, this list, (which has been turned over very slowly in recent years), has achieved nothing of substance that serves as proof that they are anything more than middle of the road with a quarter chance of success if they do everything right.

tommi · **Posted:** Tue Mar 19, 2013 1:23 pm

I LIKE them odds.......!

kindest regards tommi

aramari · **Posted:** Tue Mar 19, 2013 1:30 pm

tommi wrote:

I LIKE them odds.......!

kindest regards tommi

They might only have a quarter chance of doing everything right though....

Which means a 1/16th chance of success.

tommi · **Posted:** Tue Mar 19, 2013 1:33 pm

Even BETTER..........!

kindest regards tommi

aramari · **Posted:** Tue Mar 19, 2013 1:37 pm

tommi wrote:

Even BETTER..........!

kindest regards tommi

camel · **Posted:** Tue Mar 19, 2013 1:51 pm

West Coast 2010 and Collingwood 2005 were coached by blokes who had already proven they had the nous to win a flag. I suspect if Ratts had those sort of credits in the bank he wouldn't have been sakced.

aramari · **Posted:** Tue Mar 19, 2013 1:57 pm

camelboy wrote:

West Coast 2010 and Collingwood 2005 were coached by blokes who had already proven they had the nous to win a flag. I suspect if Ratts had those sort of credits in the bank he wouldn't have been sakced.

That's probably true. Doesn't mean Ratts shouldn't have been sacked though, does it? Malthouse and Worsfold had proved they could coach. If Ratten hadn't proved that he couldn't coach, he certainly hadn't proved that he could.

mikkey · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 6:27 pm **Posts:** 4129

aramari wrote:

camelboy wrote:

West Coast 2010 and Collingwood 2005 were coached by blokes who had already proven they had the nous to win a flag. I suspect if Ratts had those sort of credits in the bank he wouldn't have been sakced.

That's probably true. Doesn't mean Ratts shouldn't have been sacked though, does it? Malthouse and Worsfold had proved they could coach. If Ratten hadn't proved that he couldn't coach, he certainly hadn't proved that he could.

He did not get a senior gig but an assistant coach job. Says it all.

The Rhino · **Joined:** Tue Feb 08, 2011 3:20 pm **Posts:** 6923

I'm reminded of what David Parkin said in his Open Mike interview last year, about Elliott sacking him, but prefacing it with "You might not be the bloke to coach this side at the moment, but I'm convinced you will be later on down the track".

A team less Judd-centric, and one that weren't so individually interested may have been different for Ratten, rather than constantly losing players zoning out listening to the latest statistic in a statistic.

A team that was predominately working class like the Bulldogs of 07-09 would have been interesting under Ratten. Similar issue with the players eventually losing any interest in the fire and brimestone sprays of Eade, would they have responded to a more cerebral approach to their footy?

I reckon he'll get another crack at it if he can maintain Hawthorn in the 8 over the next two years, if only for the lack of standout next-in-line appointments going around at the moment.

Mick has a lot ahead of him

Who is online