Are Melbourne the Softest team in the AFL?

The Hulkster · Mar 14, 2006

I say yes. After watching their performance on Friday night when the pressure is really on their "better" players go to water, just as they did in the finals last year.

Of Melbournes so called top players i declare the following "soft as"

Brad Green
Adem Yze
Jeff White
Travis Johnstone
Cameron Bruce

These players are supposed to be amongst your best. So how come they are all soft as butter. To be a top side you best players and so called leaders need to be hard at it players. Look at the top teams and compare these 5 with say the Lions, Power, Sydney or Geelong. Thats why Melbourne will never win a flag when it's better players are this soft.

Now i am not saying the whole side are soft. Players such as McDonald, Sylvia, McLean, Brown, Whelan and a few others are hard at it. But when a game is up for grabs and the stakes are high it is your leaders such as the above mentioned that you look to and Melbournes are soft.

Now i am not trolling here just offering an opinion that i think is valid. Melbourne will not win a flag because their better players a soft.

rick James · Mar 14, 2006

I agree, the only player you mentioned who I would offer clemency to is Travis Johnstone based on his form last year.

However the problem is that the other 4 aren't really 'leaders' in the first place and should never have been touted as such. They're all awesomely skille,d outside players who play a role and can be devestating with their talent. Leaders they are not.

We just have to hope that the 5 you mentioned are still playing good footy when the younger brigade mature a bit more, as once we have Moloney, Sylvia, McLean, Jones, Bell and Bate as midfield staples we will hvae a very hard core that should produce at least one ro two quality leaders. In the true sense of the word.

The loss of Scott Thompson, and to a lesser extent Stephen Powell really hurt our midfield structure.

The Hulkster · Mar 14, 2006

I must say Travis Johnstone is the worst offender did you see his big pullout of a contest on Fri night, shocking. Yes admitadly he is skillful and creates a lot but unless he can get the ball himself sometimes opposition teams just need to smash him and he goes missing at the crucial stages.

Unfortunately his skill and smarts make him a good player. Still soft as though.

rick James · Mar 14, 2006

I must say you are incorrect in labelling him the worst offender. IN previous years that has been true, and it was on display again on Friday night, but in 205 he was in there tackling, winning his own ball, forcing the contest and pretty much trying to fulfil an inside role becuse we flat out didn't have anyone else who would do it.

When we went 7 losses straight, he was the only player in the side to consistently give his all each week.

I will have no further bagging of Travis on this site.

The Hulkster · Mar 14, 2006

rick James said:
I must say you are incorrect in labelling him the worst offender. IN previous years that has been true, and it was on display again on Friday night, but in 205 he was in there tackling, winning his own ball, forcing the contest and pretty much trying to fulfil an inside role becuse we flat out didn't have anyone else who would do it.

When we went 7 losses straight, he was the only player in the side to consistently give his all each week.

I will have no further bagging of Travis on this site.

Well you probably saw him play more than i did so i will give you that.

rick James · Mar 14, 2006

The Hulkster said:
Well you probably saw him play more than i did so i will give you that.

Certainly did, I've followed him closely since we drafted him, he's been my favourite player for a long time, in spite of how infuriating he was to watch in his down years. Have only really seen two good years from him so far, but for a guy who was drafted in 1997 he's still only 25 - he was always going to take a while and barring injury you can expect him to win our Best and Fairest again this year.

London-Tavern-Is-Filth · Mar 14, 2006

rick James said:
I agree, the only player you mentioned who I would offer clemency to is Travis Johnstone based on his form last year.

However the problem is that the other 4 aren't really 'leaders' in the first place and should never have been touted as such. They're all awesomely skille,d outside players who play a role and can be devestating with their talent. Leaders they are not.

We just have to hope that the 5 you mentioned are still playing good footy when the younger brigade mature a bit more, as once we have Moloney, Sylvia, McLean, Jones, Bell and Bate as midfield staples we will hvae a very hard core that should produce at least one ro two quality leaders. In the true sense of the word.

The loss of Scott Thompson, and to a lesser extent Stephen Powell really hurt our midfield structure.

You basically blow ya load everytime travvo gets the ball dont cha

Stiffy_18 · Mar 14, 2006

rick James · Mar 14, 2006

London-Tavern-Is-Filth said:
You basically blow ya load everytime travvo gets the ball dont cha

There's nothing basic about it.

Sort of how you blow your load everytiem you see me post.

The Fireman · Mar 14, 2006

Hmmm another "How soft is Melbourne thread" Where theres smoke ...

Lidge · Mar 14, 2006

Statistically, Port Adelaide were/are the softest team in the AFL (least amount of contested possessions, with a preference for cheap/soft uncontested pill).

But agree, that Melbourne have a soft underbelly along with a few other clubs.

Jarka · Mar 14, 2006

It's a well known fact that Melbourne has been soft, both mentally and physically, when pressure gets applied by good teams. I'm a bit surprised that the creator of this thread has only just realised it, you just have to look at our form over the last couple of seasons.

In saying that for the last 3 - 4 years the club has recruited players who will hopefully set a new standard. Players like Moloney, McLean, Sylvia, Jones, Bate, C.Johnson, Dunn, Bell, Jamar and Bartram are anything but soft and will be the future of our club.

cs61 · Mar 14, 2006

Jarka said:
It's a well known fact that Melbourne has been soft, both mentally and physically, when pressure gets applied by good teams. I'm a bit surprised that the creator of this thread has only just realised it, you just have to look at our form over the last couple of seasons.

In saying that for the last 3 - 4 years the club has recruited players who will hopefully set a new standard. Players like Moloney, McLean, Sylvia, Jones, Bate, C.Johnson, Dunn, Bell, Jamar and Bartram are anything but soft and will be the future of our club.

I agree that those guys mentioned will make a difference. This year a little, not a huge amount, but definately in a few years you might see Melbourne go from completely a running attacking side, with little inside presence, to a good balanced side with some hard nuts, and still have some outside finishers, which is the balance you need to win finals.

Melbourne were the example that you need more than just leg speed and outside players, which some posters have said is where the game is going. In finals its still still about inside ball winners and physical pressure, which Melbourne have realised, and have picked up just the players they needed in the last couple of trading periods and drafts.

demondavey · Mar 14, 2006

Melbourne do have a lot of receivers. Johnstone, yze, green etc. These guys are outside players who dont really get in and under for the footy. Personally i think this is a pretty outrageous thread considering we have the following players in our side who are hard players and who do go in hard for the ball;

sylvia
moloney
mclean
whelan
brown
mcdonald
robbo (yes he does go in hard for the ball)
nathan jones (who has a reputation as a hard nut so i will count him)

That is not a bad list really, Matthew Whelan and Nathan Brown are very underrated footballers who get no recognition whatsoever. They are awesome for the dees.

All teams have receivers and outside players, i just dont know why melbourne cop the flak. Can we make this the last thread about this topic by the way? Its wearing pretty thin. Everyone thinks there soft so everyone has to voice it. It will just stir a pot that does not need stirring

Jarka · Mar 14, 2006

cschreuder61 said:
I agree that those guys mentioned will make a difference. This year a little, not a huge amount, but definately in a few years you might see Melbourne go from completely a running attacking side, with little inside presence, to a good balanced side with some hard nuts, and still have some outside finishers, which is the balance you need to win finals.

Melbourne were the example that you need more than just leg speed and outside players, which some posters have said is where the game is going. In finals its still still about inside ball winners and physical pressure, which Melbourne have realised, and have picked up just the players they needed in the last couple of trading periods and drafts.

Our biggest problem is actually the thing that generally wins finals football, and that's leadership. In the last 3 years our leadreship group have been.....well......soft as butter. It's only going to be when the above mentioned group mature into leaders that we begin to show our true potential.

rick James · Mar 14, 2006

We cop the critcism because if we weren't so soft we could easily go all the way. noone cares if Carlton is soft, because they're crap.

the fact is we ARE soft, at least, our best players are. It's our only real weakness apart from our undersized backline (which gets put under massive pressure week in week out due to our midfield softness)

cs61 · Mar 14, 2006

demondavey said:
Melbourne do have a lot of receivers. Johnstone, yze, green etc. These guys are outside players who dont really get in and under for the footy. Personally i think this is a pretty outrageous thread considering we have the following players in our side who are hard players and who do go in hard for the ball;

sylvia
moloney
mclean
whelan
brown
mcdonald
robbo (yes he does go in hard for the ball)
nathan jones (who has a reputation as a hard nut so i will count him)

That is not a bad list really, Matthew Whelan and Nathan Brown are very underrated footballers who get no recognition whatsoever. They are awesome for the dees.

All teams have receivers and outside players, i just dont know why melbourne cop the flak. Can we make this the last thread about this topic by the way? Its wearing pretty thin. Everyone thinks there soft so everyone has to voice it. It will just stir a pot that does not need stirring

I agree you have some hard nuts, but the point was that when your team gets under pressure, its your best players, or leaders that need to step up.

What has been different about Melbourne than say to the Lions, is that alot of the Dees best players, Bruce, Yze, Green, Johnson, aren't very physical and seem not to be able to stop the run against them by using their physical pressence on the opposition.

cs61 · Mar 14, 2006

Jarka said:
Our biggest problem is actually the thing that generally wins finals football, and that's leadership. In the last 3 years our leadreship group have been.....well......soft as butter. It's only going to be when the above mentioned group mature into leaders that we begin to show our true potential.

Yeah that's why I think it may be a few years off, list is great, but you need your core of leaders be your toughest as well.

Definately a top 8 side, but to go the next step, need guys like Moloney, Bate and McLean to take over the leadership group IMO.

Jarka · Mar 14, 2006

cschreuder61 said:
I agree you have some hard nuts, but the point was that when your team gets under pressure, its your best players, or leaders that need to step up.

What has been different about Melbourne than say to the Lions, is that alot of the Dees best players, Bruce, Yze, Green, Johnson, aren't very physical and seem not to be able to stop the run against them by using their physical pressence on the opposition.

Correct, add also the fact that our captain is stuck at FF and unable to exert any influence on the game at all when things go bad.

Jimi · Mar 14, 2006

People get mixed up between 'skillful' and 'soft'. The players often featured in the discussions on softness are some of the most skillful players in the competition (Yze, Bruce, Green, Johnstone). While I wish that these players had the tackling prowess of other skilled players, Akermanis for example, and the ability to win clearances, like hodge, they don't (although Johnstone does win a fair bit of the contested ball).
Melbourne being physically weak is a fallacy, with the Dees ranking 5th for tackles in the comp for '05. Our young inside players continue to improve, and should disprove the softness myth over the next couple of years.

dread and might · Mar 14, 2006

rick James said:
We cop the critcism because if we weren't so soft we could easily go all the way. noone cares if Carlton is soft, because they're crap.

the fact is we ARE soft, at least, our best players are. It's our only real weakness apart from our undersized backline (which gets put under massive pressure week in week out due to our midfield softness)

Spot on. Why else would you recruit Pickett?

rick James · Mar 14, 2006

Jimi said:
People get mixed up between 'skillful' and 'soft'. The players often featured in the discussions on softness are some of the most skillful players in the competition (Yze, Bruce, Green, Johnstone). While I wish that these players had the tackling prowess of other skilled players, Akermanis for example, and the ability to win clearances, like hodge, they don't (although Johnstone does win a fair bit of the contested ball).
Melbourne being physically weak is a fallacy, with the Dees ranking 5th for tackles in the comp for '05. Our young inside players continue to improve, and should disprove the softness myth over the next couple of years.

But where will we be in a couple of years? Imo our midfield will be top notch. Johnstone will still only be 27 in two years time and at the height of his powers, Miller will be 24-25 and really hitting his straps if he continues to work hard. rivers will be 23-24 and doing the same provided he doesn't go back to Adelaide.

Yet still... who is at FF and FB? Without teh bookends we'll still be rooted.

teh problem is, we dont' reward genuine on field leadership. Sure, we may not see how much GReen and Bruce are respected at the club, but on the field, where it counts, they give NOTHING.

I maintain that Travis Johnstone is our only GUN midfielder that when teh chips are down will generally produce something. At the very least he is ALWAYS teh guy that rallies the troops at huddles, ALWAYS directs traffic through the middle, and MAKES forwards lead to space with his kicking. He's our only true on field leader. Miller does his best, but it will take time. Moloney, Sylvia and McLean will all be able to make claims at some stage, but until that happens we should be placing TJ in AT LEAST the Vice Captaincy.

rick James · Mar 14, 2006

dread and might said:
Spot on. Why else would you recruit Pickett?

I agree. And even if he's useless on field, his mentoring should be invaluable.

London-Tavern-Is-Filth · Mar 14, 2006

Only thing softer is that thing u buy at mcdonalds for around 50 cents

rick James · Mar 14, 2006

London-Tavern-Is-Filth said:
Only thing softer is that thing u buy at mcdonalds for around 50 cents

hookers?

Log In or Create New Account

Ashes: 5th Test: Jan 4-8, SCGDay 4

Are Melbourne the Softest team in the AFL?

Club Legend

Cancelled

Club Legend

Cancelled

Club Legend

Cancelled

Senior List

Hall of Famer

Cancelled

Brownlow Medallist

Brownlow Medallist

Club Legend

Norm Smith Medallist

Hall of Famer

Club Legend

Cancelled

Norm Smith Medallist

Norm Smith Medallist

Club Legend

Jimi

Draftee

Club Legend

Cancelled

Cancelled

Senior List

Cancelled

Are Melbourne the Softest team in the AFL?

Similar threads

Ashes: 5th Test: Jan 4-8, SCG
Day 4