After every loss it seems we get the same ranting - that our playing list is crap. However, most would agree that its not as bad as some of our on field performances have shown.

I think its a major concern though that after 3 years under the pagan system, the majority of our list does not perform anywhere near its potential consistently. For this season, waite, fev, french, kouta would probably be the ONLY players in the team atm that have been performing near their best more than 50% of the time - Of the entire list of 38, only 6 players (waite, fev, kouta, french, carazzo, livingston) could be said to be having 'good' years - and the quality of Fev's year is very much debatable -if u include bowyer/clarke (who arent getting games in the 1sts) it only makes 8 players. If we exclude 1st year 17/18yos (5 - betts, russell, raso, hartlett, blackwell) and injuries (2- longmuir, fisher) that still leaves 31 players on the senior list.

I dont think ANY team would perform well if only 25% (8/31) of its players were having half decent years. In fact, this figure is actually closer to 16% (5/31) as livingston, bowyer,clarke should be excluded as they havent played in the 1s during the premiership season. Translate those %s to a team of 22 and that is only 3.5-5.5 players playing well per game. Pick any team in the comp and they would ALL struggle if only 3-5 players played well each game (with an additional player doing well for a half).

Without trying to start rumours/innuendo, are the systems that we have in place working? Why are so many players performing so poorly? and does pagan have the full support of the playing list? The answer to the first question appears no, and as for the latter questions, only time will tell.

Btw, as an aside - pagan and his coaching ability - I was thinking of the roos premiership sides and I think its interesting that the roos team of the century contained 4 players from the 90s (stevens, archer, carey, martyn) as well as having 3 players listed in the emergencies (out of 4) - schwass, blakey, king). Another 3 long term players in Longmire, simpson, laidley were all fairly decent players as well. I've probably missed a couple but I've just listed ten 10-year (at a guess) players that you can build a premiership side around. Try putting together the spine and midfield of the team - its not bad at all. Hard to know whether the players were good because they were developed by pagan or if he was fortunate to have the quality of players come through the system at north at the one time (probably a combination of the 2).

Thinly veiled 4th

I have held a suspicion over the last few weeks, actually, that there is some form of dissent within the ranks. The way the senior players are playing versus the way the juniors are playing - for some unknown reason - "the vibe" - I see 2 leadership groups out there and a couple of players are torn between the two.

I'm not saying this is the case (my theory is purely circumstantial) and I'm happy to be proved wrong - but I see the senior players left from Parkin days (like Whitnall, Camporeale, Koutoufides) as still not toeing the Pagan line as the younger players seem to be.

This time though, I think, it's more insidious - there are no senior players to replace Camporeale, Koutoufides etc. with in the 1sts, so Denis has no choice but to play them and if he doesn't, he'll be accused of tanking. But simply by being there, the Big 3 (Campo, Whits and Kouta) are having a negative influence.

Is this a reason why Brendan didn't want in on the leadership group?

It is well reported that Fev and Denis enjoy a decent relationship, one with its ups and downs, but just like any good marriage, a marriage without a few emotional moments is indicative of both sides not caring and that's not the case here. Why did Fev not want to join the leadership group? He's the star player, he seems to enjoy respect from his teammates (with his better body language). Make him concentrate on his football? Well, Fev should be sharing pointers with his teammates on the track, that's what leaders do don't they? Or did he not want to get caught up in his turmoil?

Wizard Cup - they all gelled you say. Doesn't this blow your theory out of the water? No. I would argue that mentally our players are weak - they'll turn it on when they want and it's not happening, even after getting pasted by Richmond, they decided to get pasted by Geelong the next week. And it seems to me that the senior players don't seem to want to put in. Camporeale did so, but apparently after he knocked back an offer of 300K from the club.

The reason these 3 are still around is because of the contracts signed under the previous regime. Without them, they would have been pissed off when Pagan started his cleanout IMO.

Shoot me down if you want, call me a conspiracy theorist - but there's a vibe that doesn't sit right with me. And unfortunately, it's hitting other senior players as well. If I was Denis, and if this was happening, I'd drop one of them to prove a point that the buck stops with me and you can toe the line or else you are GAWN.

_________________
"A good composer does not initiate. He steals."

- Igor Stravinsky

I dont think the leaders of the club have anything against Pagan I just dont think he might be the right man for the job. I hope I am wrong. I no it might sound stupid but the best thing that could happen to this playing group is to string a couple of good wins together. It looks to me as if they have fogotten how to win. After watching fridays game three times now (Iknow Im mad) I thought for the first 15mins of the first 1/4 and the entire second quarter we were all over the cats we just didn't take our chances when they presented themselves. As pagan said we butchered it. the last quarter they just drop there bundle when they knew they were going to loose. Just look at the shots we missed on goal
Waite over the shoulder snap
Walker bannana kick
Betts running in to open goal
Kouta off the ground
Fevola set shots
Fevola giving off to Lappin

there are at leat 8 gettable goals there missed and it could have changed the whole game.
We just need a ounce of luck and a bit of confidence and we will be in the mix again

Game Link mms://wmt.streaming.telstra.com/wh_afl0 ... /1-560.wmv

_________________
If you allow the Government to change the Laws in an emergency
They will create an Emergency to change the Laws

Carlton Clem

Good post!

I think you have brought up some interesting points.

Did Fev actually say outright that he wasn't interested in being a part of the leadership group? My understanding was that the players voted on who they thought should be in it?

The quality of our list is an interesting debate. It seems to me that the most obvious reason we 'lack' quality is because of the draft penalties imposed on that horrible Black Friday. The development of our younger players has been stalled as a result as we have had to rely on the 'senior' players. This is clearly evidenced by the fact that when a young developing player is actually given a taste of the bigtime, they get rewarded with a handful of minutes gametime (read: bentick, o'hailpin, simpson).

Couple this with the injuries we have had this year to our short supply of 'key position players', and it is very much a case of "shifting deck chairs on the titanic"

Also of some relevance is the fact that our core senior group will not be a part of our next premiership team. Kouta, Campo, & Whits (probably) do not have age on their side. One could be excused to feel that these players to some respect are just playing out their time. I dont necessarily believe that, but given some of their performances you could be excused for having doubts.

I wish people could forget the wizard cup..its mickey mouse football designed for TV with different rules....a different comp in which different teams have different aims and goals.

Our list is not capable of playing consistent win every week football, we dont have enough matchwinners, not enough depth to cover injuries and suspensions, and too many average players who would be worth nothing on the trade market.

We have bogans like Norman who dont appreciate how good they have it, some overpaid fading stars still milking excessive contracts and a bunch of kids who get no leadership,guidance,and have to find their own way.
Having worked with the partner of a ex Roo player I know how it worked at the Kangaroos and the system they had their wont work at Carlton becuase we dont have a Wayne Carey who controlled the player group.

The Pagan/Carey relationship was the key to the Roos success and it wasnt just about Careys playing ability...

Denis game plan isnt about skill.. lets face it we dont have any.
what we need to do however to win more than we lose is sacrifice the body and run harder.
they wont do it..
People think Denis gameplan doesnt work... i want to know when that game plan has been played!!

When have our players had enough confidence in their team mates around them doing their job to run the ball????Who is blocking?Who is shepherding??
going the other way who is fair dinkum tackling and manning up??
theyre simple things but because theyre not being done theyre eroding the confidence,

I want to know who is setting the example out in the middle for the Walkers, Wiggins etc???

Were not doing the basics that we train for people.. so were falling apart at the seams.

_________________
Due to recent budget cuts and the rising cost of electricity, gas, and oil....... the Light at the End of the Tunnel has been turned off. We apologize for the inconvenience.

I know you'll say that is the players fault Synbad, and it is to an extent, but surely the primary skill of a coach is to devise plans that suit the talents of his side and then ensure they are carried out. If the coach has a gameplan that the players can't, or won'r carry out then we are totally stuffed. We can't keep making 19 changes to our list. One problem is a lack of talent, another a lack of confidence. Is Dennis flexible enough to generate self confidence and are our players physically capable of carrying out the game plan. I guess another question is whether DP has the capability to insert subtlety into setplays etc. like Eade and other younger coaches do.

Would be interesting if Woosher had of hung around for an extra year at Carlton and been named coach ahead of Britts.....

Anyway at present the players confidence looks totally shot, and you pay big money to coaches to take responsibility to restore that confidence.

Great post Clem.

I've had the same inkling and wrote about it a couple of weeks ago.

This side is nowhere near as poor as some people would like to make out. It ain't no Brisbane 2001-2003 but there's certainly enough going for it when it's switched on to avoid performances like the last couple of weeks.

I agree about the lack of leadership and the apparent division within the playing group with one qualifier; Kouta was excellent against Geelong - best game I've seen from him for a couple of years I think. I didn't want him as captain initially as I've never felt he was much of a leader. That said, there just weren't any other options and he's done a fair job considering his limitations.

Campo and Whitnall on the other hand have a combined "leadership quotient" that would fit inside a very small thimble and still leave room for Robert Dipierdomenico.

Obviously there aren't any other options at the moment other than to stick it out for the season but come Xmas time I think we'll see a changing of the guard in the minor leadership posts.

For mine, Kouta for his final year to stay on as captain (reward for at least giving it a fair crack) and Thornton and Waite as VC and DVC. I've been a Teague fan for a leadership role but I think it's worth throwing the other two in there sooner rather than later as one of them is likely to lead the club in 2007. Stevens and Teague to remain part of the wider leadership group and Fev to join (fingers crossed that the responsibility might jolt him out of his brain-fades ).

Gerry, a man after my own heart....an excellent post

...shared responsibility here - players and Denis's

When you are talking about the VIBE are you talking about Denis Pagan or Denis Denuto???

_________________
"Hence you will not say that Greeks fight like heroes but that heroes fight like Greeks"?

Winston Churchill

I'm with Carlton Clem.

I've had a feeling the dissent may be back.

Like a cancer, the thing wasn't completely cut out, and may be growing again.

Surely, we can't be THAT bad.

But the Richmond and Geelong games made it look like the players don't give a fu ck.

Before it poisons the rest of the team, every effort must be made to eradicate it. It really can't happen until the end of the year, but you know what I'm talking about.

_________________

************************************************************
NOW YOU'RE JUST SOME CLUB THAT I USED TO KNOW.

Fev said he was not interested in being considered.

At the senior end of your list 28+yo you have Kouta, Campo, Lappin and French, it's not great on numbers, talent or leadership.

At the young end of your list less than 23yo there is a sprinkling of genuine talent Waite, Thornton, Walker, Russell? and of course how much better would it look if you had Goddard, Wells and McLean in there.

It's the middle age of your list 23-28 that is truly flower. In there you have only Lance and Fev (and maybe Houla) as genuine Carlton grown talent. To them you have been able to add Stevens (who if Collingwood were not completely incompetent would not be there), Teague and maybe Scotland. You have no players at all aged 27 or 28 on your list. This is an indictment on the late Parkin years, whoever is responsible should be drawn and quartered.

This is not easy to fix and Pagan has done a great job under the circumstances. The problem is you are going to have to wait longer than normal for this black hole to grow out because you have another smaller one immediately following because of the lost draft picks.

That's why I say trade Campo, Lappin and Lance at the end of this year for as early as possible picks, finish in the bottom 4, grab a 23-25yo uncontracted player with class, and hang in there for 3-5 years.

CC- thinly veiled? at what lol

The main reason for the post was to have people consider the quality of our list - the fact that we have lost often this year isnt because all the players are shit, but rather most of them are playing shit - there is a small but significant difference there

Confidence is a wonderful thing and for some reason the entire team has lost most of it's swagger (since the preseason cup). The reason for that is anyone's guess however I dont think it is good enough to just blame the 'senior players' in campo, whitnall and kouta. Kouta has had a very good year, Whitnall's and campo's (aside from the suspension) have been reasonable - if u ignore the wages they are on then they are performing a LOT better than most of the other players on the list. In contrast, other players are vastly down on last year - scotland, prendergast (lack of opportunity it seems), stevens, teague, morell, lappin (huge drop), houlahan etc - its clearly not limited to the highly paid players.

Given that the loss of form appears to be virtually across the entire playing list its not unreasonable to question why.

In a few previous threads I've posted that a large part of our poor performances this year have been due to the entire team and coaching panel being overly defensive and reactive due to the loss of thornton/livingston since the WC (due to the lack of depth in KP down back). I still think this is a major reason and would fully expect a significant turnaround of the teams fortunes within a month of both players being back. Unfortunately though the season will have been half over by then.

However there are probably other contributing factors to this
1. mental weakness has been highlighted numerous times. It begs the question whether the club is doing anything to try to improve in this area. Perhaps a few sessions with a sport pyschologist, a few tales to inspire them, more effort from the coaching staff to improve confidence in younger players - regardless of how they do it, they need to be seen to be doing something. Given that I dont go to training and have no indication of the inner workings of the club, I'm happy to be corrected if things are being done
2. Secondary coaching staff - are they the right selections? Madden seems to have improved french's performances so thats a tick there. What has libba achieved thus far? elshaugh? mitchell?
3. Kouta/campo/whitnall playing on borrowed time - I've posted in another thread that I feel that we are 2 years behind geelong in terms of on field performance. Structurally we are 3-4 players away from being being a top side (that and depth) - If the younger players can develop there is no reason why we couldnt cover the weaknesses from within. Aside from contracts, there is no reason why the evil 3 cant play on for another 2-3 years. They would still be better than the bottom 3 in our best 22. Some might disagree but I think all 3 could easily slot into any team in the comp (not saying as first choice in their respective positions, but as depth and as team options).
4. The pagan game plan - I've never said that it doesnt work, but rather that our team as it stands atm is NOT suited to playing to the style of play atm. It will take a LOT of time to acquire and develop the players for the pagan paddock (think of the number of years pagan had at the North under 19s to basically select players which went on to become premiership players in the ones (largely in a system without a pure draft as today). It would be better if the gameplan was continually evolving based on what we have at our disposal whilst acquiring the particular type of players that pagan has in mind (ie starting with a hybrid gameplan and gradually building to the gold standard). It happens with a lot of teams in the AFL however I see little evidence of that at carlton atm (again feel free to correct me if I'm wrong)

btw, re:Fev - my understanding was that players who wanted to be part of the group volunteered to give a presentation (to the playing group?) and were selected from there. Fev chose not to do the presentation and is thus not part of the leadership group. Only he would know why he chose not to be part of the group.

Certainly agree with your thoughts RE: The Parkin years. Too many supporters blame the "Black Friday" decision as being the reason we're so slow to recover, its the drafts from 1997-2002 that are really hurting us now. Go check out our performance during this time versus the better clubs over the last 3 years and you'll see why we are where we are. Make no mistake the draft penalities hurt us but that's not the reason we don't have quality 25+ year olds to take on leadership roles within the side. We were extremely lucky to get Stevens and you could almost class him as getting a priority pick back in 1998 because it's the top talent from this era we don't possess. Stevens means as much to us as a priority pick from then but after this there's precious little else. We need players like Scotland and Chambers to stand up for us and become genuine leaders and consistent performers and given our dire circumstances regarding the recent drafts what other option did Pagan have with trying to build a competive club?

Also given our problems with recruitment 2002-2004 drafts it surprises me that we let Blake Campbell go when we did. I would have thought that considering he was draft in 2000 (same as Sporn and Wiggins) he would have been worth persisting with for this year - going on the fact that many draftee's take 3-5 years to mature I would have thought this would have been the make or break year. I can only guess that there was something about him that the club thought wasn't up to scratch (injured too often?) or not hard enough at the footy that the club cut him. Still ancient history now.

_________________
The great are great to us only because we are on our knees. Let us arise.
--Robert Collier

Maybe he really hates public speaking.

Old55 - with all due respect I'm going to have to disagree somewhat...

1. Mental maturity for most people SHOULD come when people are in their early 20s. At a guess 22-25 is the range where the majority of the population has developed some mental toughness, advanced thought processes - Last I checked you dont have to be 23-28 to show mental maturity and toughness. IF players cant achieve some semblence of that then we shouldnt have them on our list at all due to the influence that they can have on younger players (read 18yo 'adults') on the list. Hence until Fev can demonstrate consistent mental application, I would always be open to trading him. Aside from trade value, campo and whitnall are no different in this respect (Fev would be a better option for trading as he is going to be more overpriced market wise).
2. Physical development of players - Most players should be physically developed by the time they are 22-23 (stopped growing, 4-5 preseasons to put on weight). Again you dont need to be 24-28 for that.
3. Patience - A large proportion of our list are underperforming (relative to previously shown ability) and most of our young players have a good deal of improvement in them. I'd be more than happy to sit on most of young players and whilst bringing in structural changes (a 3rd key back, backup ruckman, inside midfielder) for the couple of years that I think we are away from being a good chance of a strong finals showing (ie prelim). However, this requires players be given the opportunity to develop - which means we should not be sitting young players on the bench for most of the game (ie simpson), we shouldnt be bringing in young players that appear to have plataeud in ability (johnson) and recognising what players actually need ie a showing of faith from the coaching staff (prendergast - game time, wiggins/sporn - less defensive roles, livingston - not drafting martyn because the coach didnt think he was up to it yet).

In summary, yes we are young but it shouldnt be necessary to overreact as you are suggesting. All that is needed is a little patience, a bit of recruitment/player development for team structure, and an improvement in list depth.

Whilst the loss of the draft picks/salary cap fiasco has severly impacted our list, there can be no denying of the long lasting damage caused by the pitiful selections/trades during the 1996-2000 seasons.

I would argue that without exception only Fevola/Houla/Lappo are the only walk up starts at our club (and at other AFL clubs) from these LOST years. Players selected during this period who would of had 4-6 years experience and cemented a spot in the team are not there - they have all gone!! All flops.

It's all about players that "could" win you a flag, and surrounding them with reliable players. We dont have enough players who could win us a flag.

Could - Stevens, Fevola,
Might - Waite, Whitnall, Walker, Betts, Thornton.

Thats about it Campo,is a bit player, Kouta is well past prime he get sthe footy but doesnt hurt the opposition with it.

Guys like Chambers, Teague, Digby, Johnson, Scotland will never win us a flag, when they are in our top 18.

Sad but true.

_________________
Oompa loompa doompety dee
If you are wise you'll listen to me

Actually I blame the my way or the highway transition between coaching styles (ie the coaching change). We HAD players within the magical age groups (24-28) but rather than trying to change their attitudes, playing style, etc gradually we just got rid of them and left an enourmous vacuum on the list. As I elude to in other posts - the pagan v brittain/parkin approaches to coaching can be likened to top down vs empowerment forms of management. BOTH can work effectively.

Having said that though, the transition from one style to another (ie the coaching change) has to be gradual - you wont get an overnight shift in attitudes, work ethics etc unless you bring in a completely new workforce (and even then there is no guarantee that all will perform as required - ie Mott!).

If you were previously given a lot of encouragement to develop initiative and self regulate yourself at work, most people wouldnt be able to cope if they were suddenly (ie overnight) told exactly what they were required to do and could do.
By the same token, people who have worked for years under explicit instructions etc would be at a loss of what to do if they were suddenly given the freedom and encouragement to develop their thinking and initiative in the workplace.