SurreyBlue wrote:
Media says our list isn't good enough to challenge, let alone play finals. I have not heard one person defend or challenge that thought.
Every time I look at our kids, I see high growth and real potential. An under 25's team has me drooling at the thought of what could be.
Are we as supporters blind sided by our draft picks and maybe we are just expecting too much from a team not good enough?
Under25’s (close enough)
Docherty Macreade/Marchbank/Goddard Plowman
Setterfield Weitering Williamson
Dow Cripps O’Brien
Petrovski-Seton CCurnow Fisher
JSoS McKay Martin
DeKoning/Pittonet Stocker Walsh
Cuningham Gibbons Kerr Philip
McGovern Kennedy Polson Lang (I've moved some non fan favourites to emeg)
A bit rough on Gov.
Doubt the following will make it: Macreadie, Goddard, Kerr, Polson, Kennedy, Lang
You've missed players who will probably feature for Carlton: B. Silvagni, Philp, Kemp, Honey, Ramsay
Maybe even those showing something: Cottrell, Philips, Owies and ODwyer showed something down back recently
Point is the pool of players U25 are greater than 22 and the word to describe the profile is "plethora".
Everyone agrees we wont challenge for finals, albeit a distant hope based on the Teague Train effect, but we were hoping for 8-10 wins in 22 rounds. Nothing new. But everyone agrees its a list full of youthful riches, and more to come in every year.
So what's the problem?
I just had lunch with a Sports Psych and I let it rip when he asked me what's up with carlton? They looked like they were going to win on Saturday.
Its all fixable, and maybe the coaches haven't acclimatised to the new game conditions as quickly as the others.
I pointed the finger at:
1.
List Manager: Types of characters. Too much of the same nice kids breast fed in the TAC or GPS environment with no idea of the real demands of footy.
2.
Sports psych: They obviously are not putting a fire in their belly, and the types we have drafted need sports psych to just front up.
3.
Coach: His job to generate a killer emotion before they run out to win, not to have fun and play.
4.
Development coaches: not teaching them to tackle and put their body in for their mates.
5.
Physical Development: are the kids still skinny and gutless for that reason because they haven't done weights?
6.
Performance Director: Maybe he has trained them to endure 30 minute quarters, not 16 minutes, and no weights to give them endurance.
7. Others: I'm sure other off field support can find shortfalls and reasons they contributed to a lack of **** whatever is missing.
Theses kids names were not pulled out of a hat. They deserved their selections. They were highly regarded by every recruiter from every club. It wasn't an accident. Sure there were some bolters as their were sliders. Point is they can all play footy at U18 level in the play ground.
Why are they a pack of intaverted, unmotivated, selfish players, who can't get themselves up for the first quarter? See list point 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 or maybe they just are.
There has to be at least half of them who can be
developed and motivated to be part of a successful Carlton team: that gives us 17 players who can. Bolt on the current seniors who can play the level, or the players we can bring in next year and the year after like Saints just did, and you know what can happen if......
we get in players who have the killer instinct
stop carrying players who are not physically or mentally up to playing finals footy let alone winning first quarters
change the off field influencers (1-7) modus operandi, and get real Aussie rules is not High school footy, TAC or for the faint hearted.
I still think we will work out what is needed, possibly doing a good job of it this week, and we should surprise all the knockers.
We have to come out the blocks prepared to win at all costs, like the other teams did against us in the last 13 matches, let alone last 2.
We might surprise a few, and I am in no doubt, anything can happen and change after 3-4 rounds of footy. History tells us its possible.
I'm not saying they will change. I'm saying we can.