Mick has a lot ahead of him

AGRO · **Posted:** Wed Apr 10, 2013 4:33 pm

woof wrote:

AGRO wrote:

But how far off a premiership would we be if this week we added

- Trent Cotchin
- Josh Kennedy
- Sam Jacobs

To our side and took out:
Joseph is Sub - Yarran, McLean, Garlett on bench[/color] or Casboult

:wink:

What about Murdoch?

EFA

AGRO · **Posted:** Wed Apr 10, 2013 4:35 pm

woof wrote:

AGRO wrote:

But how far off a premiership would we be if this week we added

- Trent Cotchin
- Josh Kennedy
- Sam Jacobs

To our side and took out:

- Matthew Kreuzer
- Marcus Davies
And either Murdoch or Casboult

:wink:

What about Murdoch?

EFA

Blue Vain · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:35 am **Posts:** 17959

kezza wrote:

I was speaking to someone involved with the NB and according to them the old game plan went out the window at a meeting last week and a new one was introduced for last weekend. I noticed we didnt hug the boundary as much on Sunday so perhaps MM has realized his original gameplan wont work with this group.

We still went the boundary too often to our detriment.
One of the Fox programs showed instances this week where we had free options in the middle but instead went out wide to a contest.
Lunacy when theres a couple of minutes left and we're a goal or 2 down.

Unfortunately players react on instinct. We've been training and drilling them for 6 months to kick to defensive positions. Suddenly we throw that out the window?
It cant change like that. All we'll be doing is confusing them. Thats the problem with retrofitting a game style/coaching philosophy without considering the capacity and structure of the playing group to deliver it. When it doesnt work, you're left with a playing group that doesnt trust their instincts.
It happened with Carlton under Pagan and we'e seeing it at Melbourne now.

Curtley Ambrose · **Posted:** Thu Apr 11, 2013 6:50 pm

Yeah, Mick may have a lot ahead of him, but at least we're not a bunch of DRUG CHEATS or even DRUG MULES like Bombres.

Goltzenberg · **Posted:** Fri Apr 12, 2013 12:23 am

Synbad wrote:

The Rhino wrote:

You're saying that between 2002 to 2013 we would not have played a final without Judd?

Law of averages says that's highly unlikely. I mean, sure, Richmond are the exception to that rule, but....yeahnah, pointless to speculate, given that one finals win hardly makes or breaks the deal does it?

I agree.

Maybe we would have been a better all round footy club without Chris Judd.
3 extra players and a club not riding his back and doing little more would have meant more work.

We havent worked hard enough to place us in a position to win flags or even flag

Yeah we may of won 5 wooden spoons or not made the finals at all and without wins not many members or fans turn up to games and the club continues to go into more debt.
Getting judd acellerated the development of the younger players. When you have a superstar that comes to the club u generally learn the tricks of the trade and develop quicker.

Membership tallys have continued to go up since he has been at the club and merchandise has been excellent due to him.

Hindsight is a beautiful thing, but carlton is about winning flags, not sitting on bottom collecting draft picks that are hit and miss alot of the time. So if u can get a big fish go get him

Synbad · **Posted:** Fri Apr 12, 2013 12:28 am

Goltzenberg wrote:

Synbad wrote:

The Rhino wrote:

You're saying that between 2002 to 2013 we would not have played a final without Judd?

Law of averages says that's highly unlikely. I mean, sure, Richmond are the exception to that rule, but....yeahnah, pointless to speculate, given that one finals win hardly makes or breaks the deal does it?

I agree.

Maybe we would have been a better all round footy club without Chris Judd.
3 extra players and a club not riding his back and doing little more would have meant more work.

We havent worked hard enough to place us in a position to win flags or even flag

Yeah we may of won 5 wooden spoons or not made the finals at all and without wins not many members or fans turn up to games and the club continues to go into more debt.
Getting judd acellerated the development of the younger players. When you have a superstar that comes to the club u generally learn the tricks of the trade and develop quicker.

Membership tallys have continued to go up since he has been at the club and merchandise has been excellent due to him.

Hindsight is a beautiful thing, but carlton is about winning flags, not sitting on bottom collecting draft picks that are hit and miss alot of the time. So if u can get a big fish go get him

the AFLs memberships have been going up as is every clubs.

But we are getting pulled apart i the membership dept by many clubs..

yeah we were going up ... but so is everybody else and in alot of cases their graph is steeper up than ours.

its hardly a ringing endorsement.

we used to be great and now were average.

t put it into perspective Collingwood will go close to 80,000 members.. in 5 years theyre expecting 100 , 000
thats the whole MCG of just members.

Theyre doing something right

We obviously arent...

whats ours so far? 42 , 000 ?

Goltzenberg · **Posted:** Fri Apr 12, 2013 7:22 am

Synbad wrote:

Goltzenberg wrote:

Synbad wrote:

The Rhino wrote:

You're saying that between 2002 to 2013 we would not have played a final without Judd?

Law of averages says that's highly unlikely. I mean, sure, Richmond are the exception to that rule, but....yeahnah, pointless to speculate, given that one finals win hardly makes or breaks the deal does it?

I agree.

Maybe we would have been a better all round footy club without Chris Judd.
3 extra players and a club not riding his back and doing little more would have meant more work.

We havent worked hard enough to place us in a position to win flags or even flag

Yeah we may of won 5 wooden spoons or not made the finals at all and without wins not many members or fans turn up to games and the club continues to go into more debt.
Getting judd acellerated the development of the younger players. When you have a superstar that comes to the club u generally learn the tricks of the trade and develop quicker.

Membership tallys have continued to go up since he has been at the club and merchandise has been excellent due to him.

Hindsight is a beautiful thing, but carlton is about winning flags, not sitting on bottom collecting draft picks that are hit and miss alot of the time. So if u can get a big fish go get him

the AFLs memberships have been going up as is every clubs.

But we are getting pulled apart i the membership dept by many clubs..

yeah we were going up ... but so is everybody else and in alot of cases their graph is steeper up than ours.

its hardly a ringing endorsement.

we used to be great and now were average.

t put it into perspective Collingwood will go close to 80,000 members.. in 5 years theyre expecting 100 , 000
thats the whole MCG of just members.

Theyre doing something right

We obviously arent...

whats ours so far? 42 , 000 ?

80,000? Be good to see a breakdown of all the 3 game memberships.

I think you love collingwood synbad. Always praising. Maybe you should become the 80,001 member at pies. Carlton never does anything positive for you

Synbad · **Posted:** Fri Apr 12, 2013 7:29 am

Gol... break down on 3 game memberships?
Sounds like you believe were running at great capacity.. and the other clubs are all envious of us....
We are showing them a clean pair of heels.. and theyre trying to pinch our staff to be more like us.

Sticks is the envy of the AFL with what he has managed to achieve with Carlton ...This is a monemumental era in not only Carlton history but AFL history...
I am glad youre satisfied with it all..... :thumbsup:

Heavs · **Posted:** Fri Apr 12, 2013 7:31 am

I can't believe that people are knocking Chris Judd. He taught the younger players that they don't have chips with their lunch, they have to have salad. Great lesson right there.

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

....and the skin OFF the chicken.

Bloke should have his own goremey cookin' show with that Jamie Oliver poof.

Michael Jezz · **Joined:** Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:52 pm **Posts:** 2044

Blue vains post

I don't like this criticism of MM's boundary line plan. I am not sure it is the perfect model but Carlton's fundamental football fault is defensive pressure and locking the game down when the tide goes against us. Going the boundary should aid this, especially considering our lack of talent and toughness. If players don't raise their eyes or look inbound and have general awareness, that is not necessarily a game plan fault. An improvement in performance needs to be underpinned by a greater defensive mindset, what the plan and personnel required to realise a defensive mindset, I will leave to the experts. So I have no problem with 6 months of training to go the boundary because it is much easier to add the attacking elements once "defense first" is ingrained.

camel · **Posted:** Fri Apr 12, 2013 3:06 pm

STATS!

http://www.carltonfc.com.au/news/2013-0 ... mor=online

Megaman · **Posted:** Fri Apr 12, 2013 7:28 pm

Michael Jezz wrote:

Blue vains post

I don't like this criticism of MM's boundary line plan. I am not sure it is the perfect model but Carlton's fundamental football fault is defensive pressure and locking the game down when the tide goes against us. Going the boundary should aid this, especially considering our lack of talent and toughness. If players don't raise their eyes or look inbound and have general awareness, that is not necessarily a game plan fault. An improvement in performance needs to be underpinned by a greater defensive mindset, what the plan and personnel required to realise a defensive mindset, I will leave to the experts. So I have no problem with 6 months of training to go the boundary because it is much easier to add the attacking elements once "defense first" is ingrained.

Being more defensive would be great if only our attack didnt consist of long bombs to contests

Adam Chatfield · **Posted:** Fri Apr 12, 2013 9:53 pm

I think the game plan needs tweaking to work out what is best for this group.

We have do many one way players which makes it tough to implement a good structured game plan.

Bigredisback · **Joined:** Sun Jul 15, 2012 3:12 pm **Posts:** 942

Our small defenders and secondary mids need to find form

If they were playing half decent we would be 2 wins

Blue Vain · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:35 am **Posts:** 17959

Michael Jezz wrote:

Blue vains post

I don't like this criticism of MM's boundary line plan. I am not sure it is the perfect model but Carlton's fundamental football fault is defensive pressure and locking the game down when the tide goes against us. Going the boundary should aid this, especially considering our lack of talent and toughness. If players don't raise their eyes or look inbound and have general awareness, that is not necessarily a game plan fault. An improvement in performance needs to be underpinned by a greater defensive mindset, what the plan and personnel required to realise a defensive mindset, I will leave to the experts. So I have no problem with 6 months of training to go the boundary because it is much easier to add the attacking elements once "defense first" is ingrained.

Well, that makes sense.
We have less talent and toughness so we aim to create more contests where we'll be exposed for our deficiencies. :lol:

Get it through your head mate. A greater defensive mindset has nothing to do with going around the boundary. The most successful team of the past half dozen years (Geelong), took the game on through the corridor as much as anyone. Their defensive game was built around retaining possession, hardness at the contest and winning it back off the opposition. Clearances, contested ball, tackle pressure and one percenters.
We have been top 4 averages in the AFL 2 out the past 4 years for contested footy. 2 out of the past 3 years we've been top 4 averages in the AFL for 1 percenters.
The past 3 years we've been top 4 for average clearances per game. Top 4 for tackles!
So we're up with the best in winning the contested footy, winning the clearances, applying the one percenters and tackling pressure.

Yet according to you, we lack talent and toughness? :lol:

Stick to sniping Bryce Gibbs from the comfort of your couch. Theres no shortage of talent and tougness in our team. we just need a fit and healthy list and a gamestyle that caters to our strengths instead of our weaknesses.

Donstuie · **Posted:** Sat Apr 13, 2013 3:41 pm

The thing that galls me about our efforts/habits is seeing the way teams on the same level as us (Norf/Tigers/Brave) are taking the fight to the better teams in the comp, and moving ahead of us, while we're still "experimenting" and experiencing the same issues we have for years.

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

Blue Vain wrote:

Michael Jezz wrote:

Blue vains post

I don't like this criticism of MM's boundary line plan. I am not sure it is the perfect model but Carlton's fundamental football fault is defensive pressure and locking the game down when the tide goes against us. Going the boundary should aid this, especially considering our lack of talent and toughness. If players don't raise their eyes or look inbound and have general awareness, that is not necessarily a game plan fault. An improvement in performance needs to be underpinned by a greater defensive mindset, what the plan and personnel required to realise a defensive mindset, I will leave to the experts. So I have no problem with 6 months of training to go the boundary because it is much easier to add the attacking elements once "defense first" is ingrained.

Well, that makes sense.
We have less talent and toughness so we aim to create more contests where we'll be exposed for our deficiencies. :lol:

Get it through your head mate. A greater defensive mindset has nothing to do with going around the boundary. The most successful team of the past half dozen years (Geelong), took the game on through the corridor as much as anyone. Their defensive game was built around retaining possession, hardness at the contest and winning it back off the opposition. Clearances, contested ball, tackle pressure and one percenters.
We have been top 4 averages in the AFL 2 out the past 4 years for contested footy. 2 out of the past 3 years we've been top 4 averages in the AFL for 1 percenters.
The past 3 years we've been top 4 for average clearances per game. Top 4 for tackles!
So we're up with the best in winning the contested footy, winning the clearances, applying the one percenters and tackling pressure.

Yet according to you, we lack talent and toughness? :lol:

Stick to sniping Bryce Gibbs from the comfort of your couch. Theres no shortage of talent and tougness in our team. we just need a fit and healthy list and a gamestyle that caters to our strengths instead of our weaknesses.

Top 4 except for the ladder.

Blue Vain · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:35 am **Posts:** 17959

King Kenny wrote:

Blue Vain wrote:

Michael Jezz wrote:

Blue vains post

I don't like this criticism of MM's boundary line plan. I am not sure it is the perfect model but Carlton's fundamental football fault is defensive pressure and locking the game down when the tide goes against us. Going the boundary should aid this, especially considering our lack of talent and toughness. If players don't raise their eyes or look inbound and have general awareness, that is not necessarily a game plan fault. An improvement in performance needs to be underpinned by a greater defensive mindset, what the plan and personnel required to realise a defensive mindset, I will leave to the experts. So I have no problem with 6 months of training to go the boundary because it is much easier to add the attacking elements once "defense first" is ingrained.

Well, that makes sense.
We have less talent and toughness so we aim to create more contests where we'll be exposed for our deficiencies. :lol:

Get it through your head mate. A greater defensive mindset has nothing to do with going around the boundary. The most successful team of the past half dozen years (Geelong), took the game on through the corridor as much as anyone. Their defensive game was built around retaining possession, hardness at the contest and winning it back off the opposition. Clearances, contested ball, tackle pressure and one percenters.
We have been top 4 averages in the AFL 2 out the past 4 years for contested footy. 2 out of the past 3 years we've been top 4 averages in the AFL for 1 percenters.
The past 3 years we've been top 4 for average clearances per game. Top 4 for tackles!
So we're up with the best in winning the contested footy, winning the clearances, applying the one percenters and tackling pressure.

Yet according to you, we lack talent and toughness? :lol:

Stick to sniping Bryce Gibbs from the comfort of your couch. Theres no shortage of talent and tougness in our team. we just need a fit and healthy list and a gamestyle that caters to our strengths instead of our weaknesses.

Top 4 except for the ladder.

Did anyone say we finished top 4?
The point is we've got too many keyboard warriors having a go at the talent and toughness of our players when the reality is, their nonsensical rants aren't backed up by the facts.
We lack class key forwards to capitalise on our work. Apart from that, our list is in reasonable shape IMO.

Blueboy_Dan · **Joined:** Sun May 08, 2005 1:09 am **Posts:** 5245

Bloody hell Mick I hope you can turn this club around and win a flag, it would be your greatest acheivement!

Mick has a lot ahead of him

Who is online