News New CEO - Andrew Fagan

Remove this Banner Ad

Just in case you were thinking the Crows were mediocre this season --- they weren’t.

Have a look at a few key statistics:

• Scoring: Position 2 in the league, only behind Hawthorn

• Centre clearances: Position 1 in the league

• Contested possessions: Position 2 in the league

That’s a pretty powerful team. So why aren’t they in the finals? Two main reasons: when they turned the ball over to the other team, the other team scored a lot more often than they should (even though the Crows turned over the ball no more often than the higher ranked teams), and when the game was close, we only won one and lost six (by less than 2 goals).

So, if we tidy up how we ‘flick the switch’ from attackers to defenders when we turn over the ball, we are already good enough at getting the ball, and winning the ball, and scoring with the ball, to move up the ladder.

In fact, this year we won (52) and lost (35) the same number of quarters as Geelong, who finished in 3rd position with 17 wins and 5 losses. We finished in 10th with 11 and 11.

Plenty to look forward to!

Our alleged scoring prowess is significantly skewed by our high scores against s**t sides (GWS x2, St Kilda x2 and Brisbane). I don't care what our stats say because one only needs to watch us live to see it, our forward entries and ball movement into the F50 are woeful. The over-reliance on winning contested ball, lack of spread/run from the contest and our insistence on constantly bombing it long to forwards standing next to each other is the cause of our mediocrity. It's precisely the reason our club is able to dominate long periods of the game without that dominance translating on the scoreboard.

Again, that contested possession stat is useless too. Yeah, we win the ball a whole heap in the packs, but we consistently get smashed by sides who spread harder, run fast, flick it around with speed, lower the eyes and hit hard leading forwards compared to when we do get it vs. good sides, we'll over-handball, slow it down, kick sideways then we'll finally bomb it long to a crowded forward line. How many times this year did we see 3-4 Adelaide players vs. 1-2 opposition players go stacks on for the contested ball, the outnumbered opposition get the footy, flick it out to their team mates and suddenly they have 4-5 options on the outside while we've got 4 blokes stuffed and picking themselves up off the ground?
 
But hey let's continue talking about stats because they are the only indication of progress...right, champ?
no, of course not, they're AN indication of where we ARE so that we can work out WHERE we need to improve IN ORDER to progress.

simples! :drunk:

that, or they're just completely irrelevant, and all of our results and statistics for 2014 should be thrown in the bin.:rolleyes:
 
no, of course not, they're AN indication of where we ARE so that we can work out WHERE we need to improve in order TO progress.

simples! :drunk:

that, or they're just completely irrelevant, and all of our results and statistics for 2014 should be thrown in the bin.:rolleyes:

Spot on. You need to look at what when wrong but also where to improve. Part of that is looking at what you did right as well and then thinking about why those things worked and did you teach that differently in any way? If you don't also look at what went right, you can't get the accurate overall picture to try and improve overall on all fronts.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Just in case you were thinking the Crows were mediocre this season --- they weren’t.

Have a look at a few key statistics:

• Scoring: Position 2 in the league, only behind Hawthorn

• Centre clearances: Position 1 in the league

• Contested possessions: Position 2 in the league

That’s a pretty powerful team. So why aren’t they in the finals? Two main reasons: when they turned the ball over to the other team, the other team scored a lot more often than they should (even though the Crows turned over the ball no more often than the higher ranked teams), and when the game was close, we only won one and lost six (by less than 2 goals).

So, if we tidy up how we ‘flick the switch’ from attackers to defenders when we turn over the ball, we are already good enough at getting the ball, and winning the ball, and scoring with the ball, to move up the ladder.

In fact, this year we won (52) and lost (35) the same number of quarters as Geelong, who finished in 3rd position with 17 wins and 5 losses. We finished in 10th with 11 and 11.

Plenty to look forward to!

Those stats say 2 glaring things,

1)Why don't we win more games - we score more and go hard at the ball so our opposition must be getting to many easy entries in to the forward 50.
2)Why don't we win more games - we obviously have the talent so our coaching must be instructing them wrong.

I still say our setups are wrong at the clearances, we get too many players at the ball. yes we win the contested position but all our runners are covered because the opposition wait for us to clear it and hit our players on the outside. They then dispose under pressure which eventually causes a turn over. because the opposition kept the extra player on the outside the have a free runner and get easy entry forward. where as if we do get the ball clear it is under pressure and is more of a chaos ball.

Keep the numbers at the ball even, we might not make number 2 in contes5ted possession but we will reduce the oppositions easy ball in to their 50 and increase our easy ball into the 50.

point 2.5 it also says we should have the all Australian Ruckman in the side next year!
 
I'm not wallowing in self pity. I feel pretty optimistic about the club right now. I just don't like it when people roll out the statistics to defend a team that finished 10th.
see my follow-up points.

he's not trying to sugar coat a turd, just pointing out the foundation we've got for Fagan to build a successful team on and highlighting the fact that we're hopefully not far off becoming that (after some big changes, of course).
 
I honestly believe he's secure in his position as chairman and that isn't a concern to him. I think it's his brand and perception that is a concern and he's insecure about it. Who wants to be thought of and recorded as a dud Chairman and public failure? I think he'll be doing all he can to save his public perception more than his ass.

But hey, we're all speculating.
I think his position as Chairman and his brand perception as a person goes hand in hand.

He didn't return from Sydney in a blaze of glory, after making a show of being accountable to the fans once the heat was put on he ducked for cover and hoped it would blow over, he felt enough heat from Roo to appoint him to the board to try to limit outside voices of reason damaging the brand, his co heat taker moves possibly from the frying pan into the fire and his replacement instead of being a like for like replacement labels his club as underachieving.

Might be speculating that he has been put on notice that things need to improve for him to keep his high profile position, it may be the board/sponsors or the great unwashed agitators getting to him.

Winning games does paper over all his public perception issues but the club has underachieved in that the last 2 years.
 
I think his position as Chairman and his brand perception as a person goes hand in hand.

He didn't return from Sydney in a blaze of glory, after making a show of being accountable to the fans once the heat was put on he ducked for cover and hoped it would blow over, he felt enough heat from Roo to appoint him to the board to try to limit outside voices of reason damaging the brand, his co heat taker moves possibly from the frying pan into the fire and his replacement instead of being a like for like replacement labels his club as underachieving.

Might be speculating that he has been put on notice that things need to improve for him to keep his high profile position, it may be the board/sponsors or the great unwashed agitators getting to him.

Winning games does paper over all his public perception issues but the club has underachieved in that the last 2 years.

I agree. They go hand in hand which is why he hasn't stepped down. He can't fix his perception unless he recovers ground in the role.
 
Those statistics only highlight how mediocre we we're this season. All those dominant areas and we only got 11 wins/ 11 losses including losses to Melbourne at home and an absolutely woeful Carlton. If that isn't the definition of mediocre, what is?
It could be immaturity
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Surely the greatest thing that's happened to the club since we traded for the opportunity to pick Brad Crouch.

Best of luck to Andrew in taking the club onwards and upwards :thumbsu:
 
I'm not wallowing in self pity. I feel pretty optimistic about the club right now. I just don't like it when people roll out the statistics to defend a team that finished 10th.

I don't believe that teams are 'overall' their ladder position. You can be a very average team overall and finish 10th, true, or you can be a very good team that has a couple of flaws that can be coached out, and finish 10th. The Roos were last year a good team with a flaw in their inability to close down a game late and hold onto a lead. The coaches specifically fixed that in the off season.
 
I don't believe that teams are 'overall' their ladder position. You can be a very average team overall and finish 10th, true, or you can be a very good team that has a couple of flaws that can be coached out, and finish 10th. The Roos were last year a good team with a flaw in their inability to close down a game late and hold onto a lead. The coaches specifically fixed that in the off season.

Ladder don't lie

#truth
 
Its perfect time for the appointment. He has plenty of time to review everything at the club.

There were plenty calling for an external review of our club. This is exactly what will happen over the next month.

We will have a complete shakedown of every single department.

I also don't think that this will be a long term appointment He will most likely stay 4 years and move on to another role / challenge.
 
Its perfect time for the appointment. He has plenty of time to review everything at the club.

There were plenty calling for an external review of our club. This is exactly what will happen over the next month.

We will have a complete shakedown of every single department.

I also don't think that this will be a long term appointment He will most likely stay 4 years and move on to another role / challenge.

Big call so early in his tenure, what makes you believe this?
 
Big call so early in his tenure, what makes you believe this?

Gut feel based on talking to some people who have worked closely with him at the Brumbies.

From what I understand he loves a challenge and is motivated by big projects.

He signed a contract renewal as CEO with the Brumbies in early 2013 but then quit in November 2013 when his big projects had been completed before moving on to Australian Rugby where he stayed for 6 months and obviously didn't like it. He knew he had set up the Brumbies to be commercially viable for 40 years and all the systems were in place for continued success. He did not want to stay to see his plans come to fruition with a premiership.

The way I see it is that we don't really have the huge challenges ahead of us that the Brumbies did when he was there first as GM then as CEO. We have a top 3 membership and supporter base, a brand new stadium that is packed every week and are financially sound with longterm existing sponsors.

Of course he can improve on these, however I feel his 3 main goals at the club will be the following:

1. Overhaul the existing organisational chart at the AFC. Completely re-structure all departments and replace personnel who need replacing. After 14 years of being under one CEO - things have understandably become stale. He will have 2 years to put the admin / coaching group in place and has the perfect amount of time to decide whether Sando is the man for 2016 and beyond. Would not be surprised if he made the tough call if we struggle in 2015. Would imagine that its top 4 in 2016 or bust for Sando.

2. Reposition the brand. I think our neighbours revival has woken us up. I really think that we have been treading carefully and pandering to our older membership base. He will need to lead the revival of our brand so that we are more attractive to a younger base, whilst not alienating our existing older membership that has kept us financially sound.

3. Oversee a move to the city for new world class facilities and cut ties with West Lakes.

I truly believe that these 3 objectives will not take more than 3-4 years at which stage - Fages will be off to something bigger and better.
 
Excellent summation there DJ. :thumbsu:

Like you, this is the most optimistic I have been for years that the right building blocks for a successful future will be put in place.

The old boy's network is about to be smashed. Bye bye nepotism. I love his comment re putting the right people in the right seats.

It'll be interesting to see who's left and in what role in 12 months time. :)


:thumbsu:

I like your enthusiasm but after a decade of neglect its going to take more than a few nice words at a press cofnerence to convince me.
 
no, of course not, they're AN indication of where we ARE so that we can work out WHERE we need to improve IN ORDER to progress.

simples! :drunk:

that, or they're just completely irrelevant, and all of our results and statistics for 2014 should be thrown in the bin.:rolleyes:

Wouldn't be too smug regarding your last sentence. One of our issues is over-resourcing at contested ball. This causes our inability to spread effectively when we win the contest and defend the oppositions spread when we don't. That is a stat that needs to be looked at more as to what it cost us rather than what we gained.
 
Ladder don't lie

#truth

Yep, You are only as good as your ladder position. At the end of the day teams at the top have the whole package, teams in the middle of table have half the package while teams in the bottom half are still waiting for delivery!

Think about this
A team is #1 ranked in all key stats; contested ball, inside 50s, defensive scores against, uncontested ball etc but cant kick straight at goal and loses 50% of its games as a result, Does that mean they are the best team in the league but finished mid table?

My Answer

No, kicking goals is a fundamental skill and if they fail to perform a skill that costs them 50% of games they are not the best team in the competition.
 
Totally agree. Never said otherwise.

What I am saying, is that two teams might be in the middle of the ladder, one is doing nothing wrong but is playing to their limited ability, the other is a top notch team that is doing something wrong and needs a tidy up, then will climb the ladder. Which are the Crows, team 1 or team 2?

Richmond after 13 games was, what, 16th? 17th? The ladder never lies? They won the next 9 straight.

The ladder doesn't lie about what you've been doing, but it can lie about what you are about to do.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top