TalkingCarlton :: View topic - Difference between our development program?

That article is the biggest load of crap I have ever read. Why not just title it Collingwood Infomercial!!!

Let's get some thing straight.
1) their only regular young players to play at an above average level is Thomas and Pendulbury - one a priority pick the other a number 5 pick. Not hard picking a winner there.

2) The so called fast tracked players have a good game or 2 and then fall off the pace at a rapid rate of knots. Usually the time it takes for opposition to work them out.

3) their strike rate is no better than anyone elses in the league.

4) They have won nuttin, so what makes them some kind of leader?

5) They have been overtaken during since their last GF appearance by Geelong, Port, Hawthorn, North, Eagles, Swans and now likely to fall behind the Dogs and Carlton.

So tell me again, what are they actually leaders in????

difference is our development programme is not designed to reach finals - particularly Grand Finals, but to win them! tommi: (boom tish)

I tommi.................

I agree introducing new players into a well performing teams is a lot easier than playing for Carlton of the past few years. I think we'll see this as the team improves new recruits will step up a lot quicker.

what would grant thomas know? what did he achieve exactly?

How many extra sessions a week do the young guys do minus set training, weights sessions etc?

To me that's where development comes, doing things repetitively, over and over again until they become natural.

I know its quite a simplistic way of looking at it but in the end practise makes perfect. Some people make out development coaches as some kind of geniuses, they're not.

Its all about how one wants to go the extra mile to better themselves.

Author:	kaxsta [ Mon Apr 21, 2008 1:31 pm ]
Post subject:	Difference between our development program?
On Saturday there was an article in the Herald-Sun about Collingwoods development program and how comprehensive it was. Magpies do their homework Anyone in the know have any idea how comprehensive our development program is and how we are going about coming level to and surpassing Collingwoods program? I think we should initially be looking to emulating their program as much as possible. After this we should be looking outside the box to go beyond their program if possible. I think a development program will pay dividends when we are closer to a premiership. I don't want to open up the development/recruitment debate but I believe the cream will always rise to the top. And the baptism of fire Gibbs, Murphy and Walker, etc have gone through will put them in good stead in the future. But fast tracking some young guns in a top-four year could make the difference between premiership glory and failure.

Author:	dannyboy [ Mon Apr 21, 2008 4:00 pm ]
Post subject:
difference is our development programme is not designed to reach finals - particularly Grand Finals, but to win them! tommi: (boom tish)

Author:	Elwood Blues1 [ Mon Apr 21, 2008 4:18 pm ]
Post subject:
Grant Thomas was on SEN this morning and virtually said you should be playing your early draftees and giving them games straight away regardless of form etc....the sink or swim method. I think all players are different and some need a season or more in the two's having a look and getting a feel for the game yet some can step straight in... Collingwood look to be leaders in developing young players due to some of their kids having nice starts to their careers but I'll be interested to see how well they develop long term. Does a naturally talented kid like Pendlebury need much coaching or development and will he get any better or is the sign of really good development being able to turn a no name rookie like Michael Jamison into a very good footballer....

Author:	Crusader [ Mon Apr 21, 2008 4:26 pm ]
Post subject:
If its just Collingwood that we're looking at, I think the quality of footballers down at Williamstown needs to be considered when looking at their development... Although its a different story this year.

Author:	Steve_C7 [ Mon Apr 21, 2008 4:43 pm ]
Post subject:
That article is the biggest load of crap I have ever read. Why not just title it Collingwood Infomercial!!! Let's get some thing straight. 1) their only regular young players to play at an above average level is Thomas and Pendulbury - one a priority pick the other a number 5 pick. Not hard picking a winner there. 2) The so called fast tracked players have a good game or 2 and then fall off the pace at a rapid rate of knots. Usually the time it takes for opposition to work them out. 3) their strike rate is no better than anyone elses in the league. 4) They have won nuttin, so what makes them some kind of leader? 5) They have been overtaken during since their last GF appearance by Geelong, Port, Hawthorn, North, Eagles, Swans and now likely to fall behind the Dogs and Carlton. So tell me again, what are they actually leaders in????

TalkingCarlton http://www.talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/

Difference between our development program? http://www.talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=20919	Page 1 of 2

Author:	Crusader [ Mon Apr 21, 2008 4:53 pm ]
Post subject:
Fair comment re Daisy and The Basketballer.... but I'm not so sure that ALL of the others are worthless. I wouldn't piss on Swann, Cox or Reid... but Goldsack, Dick, Toovey, Brown - they would all get a game with us.

Author:	Melvey [ Mon Apr 21, 2008 4:56 pm ]
Post subject:
they are quick to get there youngsters playing at AFL level where as most teams would have to put in 3-4 years development into these players. The question is are these guys ay good, yeah they might get up to AFL level quicker than others but will they get any better

Author:	SurreyBlue [ Mon Apr 21, 2008 5:00 pm ]
Post subject:
Is this the same Collingwood youngsters that the Carlton youngsters took to the cleaners last week. Typical MagpieSun paper ..... I suppose they had to get some positive news in the paper after their loss to Carlton! Their youngsters did lose to Carlton's youngsters right? Did I mention our youngsters beat theirs.

Author:	mjonc [ Mon Apr 21, 2008 5:19 pm ]
Post subject:
Steve_C7 wrote: That article is the biggest load of crap I have ever read. Why not just title it Collingwood Infomercial!!! Let's get some thing straight. 1) their only regular young players to play at an above average level is Thomas and Pendulbury - one a priority pick the other a number 5 pick. Not hard picking a winner there. 2) The so called fast tracked players have a good game or 2 and then fall off the pace at a rapid rate of knots. Usually the time it takes for opposition to work them out. 3) their strike rate is no better than anyone elses in the league. 4) They have won nuttin, so what makes them some kind of leader? 5) They have been overtaken during since their last GF appearance by Geelong, Port, Hawthorn, North, Eagles, Swans and now likely to fall behind the Dogs and Carlton. So tell me again, what are they actually leaders in???? QFT

Author:	Blues2005 [ Mon Apr 21, 2008 7:11 pm ]
Post subject:
I am a firm believer that players in general will look better in good sides than they do in ordinary ones. It's no surprise to me that people on Carlton boards especially but also even in amongst the wider footballing public are starting to recognize blokes like Jamison, Bower and even Russell. Winning games helps young players because it instills confidence in them to try things. When you are introduced into a 'losing' culture you will, at least to a certain extant, and despite your best efforts, inevitably be dragged down into it. In such an environment it is hard for young players to succeed, though there are exceptions. Carlton as we all know has been struggling for quite some time now. And what makes the whole situation worse is that such a malaise is not conducive to fast-tracking of player development. But the last 3 weeks we've shown signs that we might be turning things around. Of course, our better players (like Fev and Judd) have featured prominently in our wins. But all of a sudden Jamison looks very promising. Bower is improving rapidly. Grigg has played a part, as has Gibbs, Murphy has arguably gone up a level and even the much-criticised Russell is showing signs. None of these players, IMO, were ever 'bad' footballers. And just because they are doing better now doesn't mean they will become 'stars'. It's just that when you start to play better, and then win some games, all of a sudden people realise that perhaps these players aren't so bad after all. Simply put, you look better in a better side. As I've said, there are exceptions, players who will perform regardless of the ability of the side around them. But even these players' full ability cannot fully be exploited in a side which routinely struggles. The above is also not meant to suggest that having a proper youth development program in place is an unimportant or overrated ideal. Collingwood has done well in this regard in that the players they bring into the team seem able to quickly adapt, at least initially, to the rigours of AFL footy. But, it also needs to be remembered that in recent times, Collingwood has been relatively successful, at least compared to us. And it is also a fair point that of the young players they have introduced into their senior side, only Thomas and Pendlebury (picks 2 and 5 respectively in the 2005 National Draft) regularly perform at an above-average AFL level. They have also done particularly well with Martin Clarke and look to have found a late steal with Tyson Goldsack. But then there is Egan, Toovey, Stanley, Cox, Cook and Reid among others who are yet to really impress. Nathan Brown looks good now but had the luxury of spending a whole year in the VFL. This is nothing against any of these players. It just shows that like any club, the Pies have had some success stories but the jury is still out on many others, as it is with us and players like Austin, Edwards, Benjamin, Anderson, Grigg etc. So I'm not sure, despite what some would have you believe, that Collingwood are miles ahead of everyone else in this area.

Author:	tommi [ Mon Apr 21, 2008 7:18 pm ]
Post subject:
dannyboy wrote: difference is our development programme is not designed to reach finals - particularly Grand Finals, but to win them! tommi: (boom tish) I tommi................. distance myself from the above comment completely...............! wouldn't give it the shavings off my drumsticks.........! kindest regards tommi

Author:	wasthesonofapreacherman [ Mon Apr 21, 2008 7:27 pm ]
Post subject:
Blues2006 and C7 exactly my sentiments. Collingwood supporters were talking up their defence and midfield last year, how good Goldsack would be, Toovey, Swan etc etc. They said Rocca was still a gun and Cloke was the next big thing, they even said there's no chance they'd trade him for Fev! Look how the tables are turning. Without Buckley, Clement, Presti (injured), Licuria, Burns (injured) all these senior players Collingwood look very bare, and the talent seems far less impressive. I genuinely believe our window is opening and we will get the spur on with the new facilities and the excitment that will bring to the current young crop - you cannot discount the effects of a brand new positive environment on people, it creates genuine and lasting excitement. Young players walk into Collingwood in pristine conditions with a host of quality leaders. Now as it starts dwindling somewhat let's see how good these youngsters really are, and how well they'll cope with added pressure of not being so successful and taking on more responsibility. The only way is up for Carlton, and the players there now will only have it easier in the future.

Author:	Buzza4 [ Mon Apr 21, 2008 7:31 pm ]
Post subject:
what would grant thomas know? what did he achieve exactly?

Author:	kaxsta [ Mon Apr 21, 2008 8:23 pm ]
Post subject:
I agree introducing new players into a well performing teams is a lot easier than playing for Carlton of the past few years. I think we'll see this as the team improves new recruits will step up a lot quicker. I still think there is some merit to having a separate development program which could pay dividends. I'm curious to know what we are doing to make our program the best in the league... if anything at all.

Page 1 of 2	All times are UTC + 10 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	dannyboy [ Mon Apr 21, 2008 8:25 pm ]
Post subject:
tommi wrote: I tommi.................

Author:	anfield [ Mon Apr 21, 2008 9:09 pm ]
Post subject:
Probably wont see the fruits of our development for a few years and this year is the first year big money has been invested. We also need those facilities built asap, they must be completed this year or we are further off the pace. Its not so much the development in gibbs, murphy, and kreuzers as they have all the building blocks to be great footballers-its the others like hampson, griggs, benjamin, austin, bower, anderson, jacko etc who will hopefully come on leaps and bounds.

Author:	Melvey [ Tue Apr 22, 2008 10:37 am ]
Post subject:
kaxsta wrote: I agree introducing new players into a well performing teams is a lot easier than playing for Carlton of the past few years. I think we'll see this as the team improves new recruits will step up a lot quicker. Spot on. For example how good of a player would Matthew Stokes be if he was playing for us in 06 & 07 Even i would get a game in the cats forward line with a bung knee.

Author:	SparkyBlue [ Tue Apr 22, 2008 11:20 am ]
Post subject:
Buzza4 wrote: what would grant thomas know? what did he achieve exactly? Grant Thomas is a muppet.

Author:	teagueyubeauty [ Tue Apr 22, 2008 11:24 am ]
Post subject:
How many extra sessions a week do the young guys do minus set training, weights sessions etc? To me that's where development comes, doing things repetitively, over and over again until they become natural. I know its quite a simplistic way of looking at it but in the end practise makes perfect. Some people make out development coaches as some kind of geniuses, they're not. Its all about how one wants to go the extra mile to better themselves.

Author:	Wangers [ Tue Apr 22, 2008 7:59 pm ]
Post subject:
teagueyubeauty wrote: How many extra sessions a week do the young guys do minus set training, weights sessions etc? To me that's where development comes, doing things repetitively, over and over again until they become natural. I know its quite a simplistic way of looking at it but in the end practise makes perfect. Some people make out development coaches as some kind of geniuses, they're not. Its all about how one wants to go the extra mile to better themselves. What he said - great post.