Ok, let's use your theory...

Collingwood's injury list is bigger than ours... didn't stop them making us look foolish

_________________
“I would rather have questions that can't be answered than answers that can't be questioned.” ― Richard Feynman

i think its our only choice ... we just simply cant replace another coach. it hasnt worked and it wont work this time.

Assitants need to be reviewed
Recruiting needs to be reviewed

I enjoy going to the MCG home games, same group of people for years so you start to get to know them ... talk about the game, talk about the club etc...

the theme was pretty consistent last night ... it has gone from Voss is done, to ... you know what, i dont think he has the cattle, voss cant kick it for them, voss cant make the on-field decision for them.

honestly, i think this falls on the players, and the recruitment of said players.

we just haven't got the return from any of our "recruits" .. not even close. look at the recruitment of all sides around us at the end of the year, they all got better, they all got players to suit their needs ... we got jagga.

we lost jagga, we lost newman, before a ball was bounced, so whilst every other side has recruited and improved, we started the season in deficit. is it really any surprise we have fallen away?

recruitment is key
development is key

and even then, its not 100% it equates to a premeriship, but you know what, without it, you have no hope. we could have the best coach to ever exist in the AFL, and i dont think it would matter with the way we turn the ball over.

Fair enough, agree with all the above.

I think you’re missing the point, our total list lacks depth so eight out all out.

Collingwood’s list does have depth so they can cope with many more injuries than we can.

I watched the Youtube channel Blue Abroad last night. Terry who hosts it brought up something similar. Said to have a good year we rely on our top 6 players to play well. These being Cripps, TDK, Walsh, Charlie, McKay and Docherty. Cripps has had a very ordinary year. Walsh and McKay have not played much due to injury and personal stuff. Charlie is playing like he doesn't give a stuff. TDK is playing with a massive weight on his shoulders and now likes he just wants to year over and Docherty is finished sadly.
When your best players are all struggling at the same time it is any wonder we are struggling as a team. Having said that the gameplan Voss wants is too taxing and has taken a toll on the group.

If Docherty is one of our top six then Voss deserves an OBE for keeping us above West Coast

By the way, I find this idea of "dependence on the top six" being some trap that only Carlton would fall into kind of unconvincing. If Naicos, Jaicos, Moore, Cameron, Elliott and Pendlebury were unavailable or serving up turds every week, where would Collingwood be? Probably better than us right now, but also nowhere near their current level, either. We haven't even mentioned Newman or E.Hollands, the former most definitely more of a top six player than Doc, the latter arguably in our top 8 on talent and importance. So add Sidebottom and, I dunno, Mihocek to the list of turd-servers. Reckon they'd be facing an uphill battle to make finals in that scenario. It's not just the length of the injury list, it's the stature and strategic importance or uniqueness of the names on the list. Closest parallel is Essendon* when they lost everyone over 6'2"... hey presto, they get smashed every week.

My bad, the other was Weitering not Docherty.
Weitering has had an okay year but not as good as his previous ones.

Like X said, it's who is injured rather than how many...

Pies depth players go ok playing their roles... they even have the luxury of resting 5 of the best v Freo away and still getting the job done... how would they go under Voss' bomb, bomb, bomb system? who knows...

Remember two years ago we had great depth, we were winning, Carlton supporters were happy... this year prior to round 1, with this list, some even predicted a top 4 finish, only to now have changed their tune. 2 years ago mad skillz... today no skills?

I'll give the coaches some credit as they identified that we can't go forward playing the way we did, so they tweaked things a bit and it worked to address a weakness, unfortunately it's created another weakness. We're better defensively but now struggle to kick a winning score. It's created uncertainty and confusion.

The game plan is unsustainable for this group...

_________________
“I would rather have questions that can't be answered than answers that can't be questioned.” ― Richard Feynman

Two years ago we had depth of middle aged players, but the depth players were too injury prone in the long run, so we got rid of them and replaced them with a bunch of youngsters. So we now have no depth. A dumbbell list with a big hole in the middle age bracket.

Not sure you can classify players that can't get on the park due to chronic injuries as depth... on paper maybe

What we did do is trade away scapegoats like Fisher, Dow and to a lesser extent, Owies...

Kennedy would've been handy this year... but he had poor skills... but not at the Dogs

_________________
“I would rather have questions that can't be answered than answers that can't be questioned.” ― Richard Feynman

We’re discussing list depth, if you’re on the list then you’re on the list and shape its depth and structure. Whether you’re injury prone or not is irrelevant to how deep your list is.

Yes it impacts the list, but that’s a different problem.

That’s not correct. Both teams had 10 out injured.IN FACT, THE POINT I’m making is at Carlton we have a tipping point, it seems, with 8 missing, which shows that we don’t bat as deep as Pies. That’s all I’m saying

Furthermore the players we have missing are more important to our chances of winning that those missing for Collingwood. Pies depth is about 10 goals better than ours. That’s what the numbers suggest.

It could be the coach and game plan, but Our basic skills compared to Pies is chalk and cheese. Anyone who watched the game could see that.

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue

Kennedy was a reliable mark and his foot skills really good. One of the most reliable shots at goal. Good skills.

The only negative with Kennedy is was one paced like Hewett and Cripps. He was told he not going to see the midfield time he craved.

Personally, I liked Kennedy more than Kemp as the 3rd tall. Despite being shorter, Kennedy was also better than kemp in the ruck, not saying either were standouts in the ruck

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue

Spot on.

Our top 6 are not deserving of their pay packet. That’s the salary issue we have. If our top 6 played to their potential, like Pies elder statesmen, we would have won 6 more games and be cemented in the top 8, if not top 4.

Players have given up, because a team requires more than 10 good players each week to win a game. They aren’t good enough, and we need to keep turning over the list and improving every time we do

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue

Bingo.

This idea that Kennedy couldn't kick is nonsense. He has a much better peg than George and Cripps, always did.

People used to pull out the stat that he had one of the worst I50 kicks in the comp, and whilst statistically that may have been true, the eye test told a different story. He was either snapping/bombing the ball I50 because he was under pressure, or because nobody was leading and a kick to a contest was the only option.

I'm not suggesting that keeping him would have made us win more games this year, but I reject the notion that he magically got better after he left. We didn't use him properly (or, he didn't fit our system), that was the issue.

Ignore my username.

I'm having a go at the game plan... especially the way we enter f50... Walsh was also in the top 5 for worst i50's iirc
You watch most games and see how many times we ignore leading targets and go to contests... like it's been drilled into them.

So is our entire list so poorly skilled as everyone now suggests... or is it a consequence of the way we structure up and/or play?

_________________
“I would rather have questions that can't be answered than answers that can't be questioned.” ― Richard Feynman

I don't think anyone here thought Kennedy was a bad kick; his "worst f50 entries" stat was more a source of amusement than anything

There was a bunch of fantastic forward 50 entries in the VFL last night. From AFL listed players too.