Kong
Hall of Famer
- Oct 11, 2007
- 31,685
- 15,627
- AFL Club
- Essendon
I think it was, but all coaches make mistakes.
-
LIVE: Richmond v Melbourne - 7:25PM Wed
Squiggle tips Demons at 77% chance -- What's your tip? -- Team line-ups »
Has Hird erred ?
- Thread starter windyhill
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Status
In what way, whomb?
Kong
Hall of Famer
- Oct 11, 2007
- 31,685
- 15,627
- AFL Club
- Essendon
Forward setup, kicking inside fifty, three ruckmen, press failure.
All things that have been an issue since ANZAC Day, and now we're starting to get caught out.
All things that have been an issue since ANZAC Day, and now we're starting to get caught out.
Actually, FFS sums it up better. We can't very well cover the loss of Watson, Hocking and Hurley. When they resume playing the wins will start coming and Hirdy will look good again. At 5-1-4, we're better off than a lot of people thought we'd be.
What should be done with the ruckmen? Rotate one through the VFL each week?
- Thread starter
- #31
Trust me jimi, if i could be bothered I`d bring up the posts. Do you think I`m lying ? Why the **** would I bother doing that ?
Kong
Hall of Famer
- Oct 11, 2007
- 31,685
- 15,627
- AFL Club
- Essendon
I liked that they tried it, but yeah, three is too many.
It not only stuffs up team balance, but Ryder and Hille have both suffered poor form since Belly came in, being forced to spend far less time in the middle.
It not only stuffs up team balance, but Ryder and Hille have both suffered poor form since Belly came in, being forced to spend far less time in the middle.
Yeah I was thinking selection played a part, for sure. I don't think it is our structures so much but no having the right personnel at this point in time to implement it effectively.
Bellchambers or Hille have to make way, play Colyer as a small forward. Probably Davey also. Hurley and Ryder the key targets up forward.
Press isn't really failing from what I saw at the game. It's more so the tackling has been very poor.
Think he is doing a terrific job at the moment. The players have improved immensely. The only thing I think the coaching panel need to look at is removing preconceived notions of players and assessing them equally. Whilst I believe Neagle should be in, a more glaring ommission is Reimers who seems to be judged to a different standard that the likes of Monfries, Melksham and Hurley are judged. The only slight concern I have with the coaching department is that there may be too many "yes men" as they are all mates but I think they are working out well and my concerns are unfounded.
The test will come next year after the players have had time to learn a gameplan but as of now Hird is doing a brilliant job and surrounding himself with a brilliant coaching panel was a terrific move.
The test will come next year after the players have had time to learn a gameplan but as of now Hird is doing a brilliant job and surrounding himself with a brilliant coaching panel was a terrific move.
Rack Watts
Here's MASON
Wow..
never coming on Bigfooty after a loss again.
never coming on Bigfooty after a loss again.
My God.
What a ridiculous OP.
Having Hird as coach right now is absolutely fantastic for the club; he is doing a sensational job with a list that was bungled (like everything else) by Knights; and there's no-one we could have picked who would have been a better fit.
What a ridiculous OP.
Having Hird as coach right now is absolutely fantastic for the club; he is doing a sensational job with a list that was bungled (like everything else) by Knights; and there's no-one we could have picked who would have been a better fit.
Oh Tayteridge
Club Legend
- Oct 8, 2009
- 1,142
- 802
- AFL Club
- Essendon
Press is severely faulted from what I saw. Melbourne's ability to penetrate by switching until a gap emerged has us absolutely dumfounded for most of the game. We had no answer to it, and it's not an overly advanced means of counteraction.
Instead, it reflects holes in the zone, and a lack of forward pressure. The term "frontal pressure" has been bandied around a lot in the media since Collingwood has implemented the forward press, and it was a key to Hirdy's early success.
Recently, it's notably fallen down. Watch the replay, and see two of Bellchambers, Ryder, Hille and Crameri playing that role of pressuring their defenders in our forward 50- full marks for effort, but the efficiency wasn't there.
Our forward entry approach has changed to a bomb it as long as you can tactic, and doesn't consider kicking to advantage. We never looked like tacking a mark inside our forward 50 last night, when we did it was almost invariably contested, and the fact that Melbourne's woeful forward line took 17 marks i50 to better the 8 that the likes of Ryder, Bellchambers, Hille and Crameri could produce (off the top of my head) is damning.
We stall when we get possession of the ball, too. This may be a result of losing the likes of Dempsey and Winderlich, although you'd hope we weren't so reliant on such relatively unimpressive (for lack of a better word) names. Our initial strengths in the press lay with an ability to not only apply immense pressure when the opposition had the ball, but transition with break neck speed and accuracy as soon as we inevitably stole the ball.
There's a lot that's lacking, and I agree with Whomb in that our performance last night seemed to be indicative of coaching rather than player commitment.
Don't cite the contested possession count or similar statistics, because ultimately the most poignant number is 13; the number of inside 50's we had in excess of Melbourne.
This suggests faulted tactics and a poor set up, rather than poor execution. It's the same story repeated into our forward 50, and bombing it long, inconsiderate of advantage to our forwards, has been shown to be ineffective.
yaco55
Hall of Famer
Agree with SJ about the PRESS - The whole idea is to lock the ball up in the forward and reduce the oppositions inside 50's.
Have conceded an average of 42 inside 50's in the last 3 games - Probably need a bit more pressure in the midfield.
Melbourne play high risk footy - moving the ball by hands through the middle - Which is not a long term winning strategy - hence their inconsistency.
Have conceded an average of 42 inside 50's in the last 3 games - Probably need a bit more pressure in the midfield.
Melbourne play high risk footy - moving the ball by hands through the middle - Which is not a long term winning strategy - hence their inconsistency.
Coach and coaching panel have been fixed. Game plan is good.
Key players need to be playing (Watson, Hurley, Gumbleton)
Rest of list needs to be improved/have depth added.
Success will then follow.
Simple.
Rest of discussion is (dare I say) BS......
Key players need to be playing (Watson, Hurley, Gumbleton)
Rest of list needs to be improved/have depth added.
Success will then follow.
Simple.
Rest of discussion is (dare I say) BS......
No I dont think Hird has erred, Essendon have the best coaching group in the AFL.
They need to follow Collingwood and trheir training programmes and upgrade the facilities at Essendon.
This year is a test year, who to keep who to trade, who has potential, and who to hunt for key spots.
Clearly 8 or so players in the senior team are at the end of the road, age, lack of motivation, declining skills, or just not quite good enough, and while we have some good young talent, next year we will add and trade to change the face of the team.
I think the past two weeks will have shown Hird and Thompson what players are finished, who are not good enough, and who are the tired or out of touch little darlings.
I think there will be some big changes at years end, and 212 Essendon will be top 4.
This year is a sort out year.
They need to follow Collingwood and trheir training programmes and upgrade the facilities at Essendon.
This year is a test year, who to keep who to trade, who has potential, and who to hunt for key spots.
Clearly 8 or so players in the senior team are at the end of the road, age, lack of motivation, declining skills, or just not quite good enough, and while we have some good young talent, next year we will add and trade to change the face of the team.
I think the past two weeks will have shown Hird and Thompson what players are finished, who are not good enough, and who are the tired or out of touch little darlings.
I think there will be some big changes at years end, and 212 Essendon will be top 4.
This year is a sort out year.
84859300
Norm Smith Medallist
- Nov 5, 2010
- 5,043
- 6,309
- AFL Club
- Essendon
- Other Teams
- Packers, Bucks, Pens, M's, Chelsea
To the OP, I'd say ask the same question round 11 2012 to be more fair on the assessment.
Hird inherited a list that he knew about from his media commitments, but not much more.
He needed this year at least to asses where we were at post Knights and I would guess that the board were only ever looking at improving the coaching levels this year once Hird was appointed, as opposed to the playing list.
Get to the NAB cup and we have a great run to reach the GF and finish runners up. Great result and it seems that Hird gets some great results from the core 22 and some juice from the 2010 draft selections.
Come the season proper, with basically the same list as 2010, we get a great start. Our form continues on from the NAB cup and new additions to the team are doing their job and we score a few wins. We hold some great teams for most of the game with game plans and strategies until we hit rounds 9, bye and 11 where we have some less than favorable results.
Up until now, I am wrapt with the progress, even if we didn't win another game for the rest of the year. Nothing of the magnitude was expected to be achieved by anyone (scribes, TV, past players, experts etc) until we progressed through the first few rounds of the NAB cup, when all of their thoughts changed.
As for Hird, this year was to be a learning on the job year and nothing more. The great names assembled around him were to assist and guide, in setting him in the right direction. I think you'd find that if we couldn't have got the caliber of Thompson, McCartney, Goodwin etc that Knights still may well have been the senior coach for 2011, as you wouldn't appoint a caretaker for a year to hold the reigns for the chance of disaster to happen.
The next year or two will tell a tale for the EFC as a whole, let alone James Hird. 12 months of list management, assessment of deficiencies and tinkering of the game plan to suit our playing staff will direct our future.
Hird inherited a list that he knew about from his media commitments, but not much more.
He needed this year at least to asses where we were at post Knights and I would guess that the board were only ever looking at improving the coaching levels this year once Hird was appointed, as opposed to the playing list.
Get to the NAB cup and we have a great run to reach the GF and finish runners up. Great result and it seems that Hird gets some great results from the core 22 and some juice from the 2010 draft selections.
Come the season proper, with basically the same list as 2010, we get a great start. Our form continues on from the NAB cup and new additions to the team are doing their job and we score a few wins. We hold some great teams for most of the game with game plans and strategies until we hit rounds 9, bye and 11 where we have some less than favorable results.
Up until now, I am wrapt with the progress, even if we didn't win another game for the rest of the year. Nothing of the magnitude was expected to be achieved by anyone (scribes, TV, past players, experts etc) until we progressed through the first few rounds of the NAB cup, when all of their thoughts changed.
As for Hird, this year was to be a learning on the job year and nothing more. The great names assembled around him were to assist and guide, in setting him in the right direction. I think you'd find that if we couldn't have got the caliber of Thompson, McCartney, Goodwin etc that Knights still may well have been the senior coach for 2011, as you wouldn't appoint a caretaker for a year to hold the reigns for the chance of disaster to happen.
The next year or two will tell a tale for the EFC as a whole, let alone James Hird. 12 months of list management, assessment of deficiencies and tinkering of the game plan to suit our playing staff will direct our future.
Exactly.
Where's captain hindsight when you need him?
- Feb 12, 2010
- 15,452
- 20,695
- AFL Club
- Essendon
- Other Teams
- Central Districts, Detroit Pistons
Hirdy is doing fine.
Seriously, who knew our best 22, in name and position, at the end of the Knightmare? Hird is sorting out the list this season in the best possible way, in match situations. In doing this he is sorting out the dead wood and the trade bait from those that will take us forward.
This season is about improvement, seeing defensive aspects that have been sorely lacking, seeing players in their best positions. Wow, exactly what Hird said 2011 would be about. It is the media and bandwagoners that have pumped us up with unrealistic expectations for this season.
For what it's worth, originally I thought we'd finish between 6th and 11th this season and I still think that now.
2012 is where real expectation begins, but those expectations can only be based on what we've seen, and are yet to see, this year.
I'll start judging Hird on results somewhat next season, definitely in 2013.
Seriously, who knew our best 22, in name and position, at the end of the Knightmare? Hird is sorting out the list this season in the best possible way, in match situations. In doing this he is sorting out the dead wood and the trade bait from those that will take us forward.
This season is about improvement, seeing defensive aspects that have been sorely lacking, seeing players in their best positions. Wow, exactly what Hird said 2011 would be about. It is the media and bandwagoners that have pumped us up with unrealistic expectations for this season.
For what it's worth, originally I thought we'd finish between 6th and 11th this season and I still think that now.
2012 is where real expectation begins, but those expectations can only be based on what we've seen, and are yet to see, this year.
I'll start judging Hird on results somewhat next season, definitely in 2013.
Done a lot of things right and a couple of things wrong... durr... welcome to the real world!
If we keep playing 10 ish young blokes, and play even one final, I think we're in pretty good shape long term.
If we keep playing 10 ish young blokes, and play even one final, I think we're in pretty good shape long term.
John,
I think you put too much emphasis on the next two drafts. It doesn't matter if Gold Coast and GWS pick the hell out of them.
Being a good team is not about getting a couple of good top-5 picks (look at Geelong).
It's about turning pick 33 into a good player. Pick 46, pick 57 etc. It's about elevating players off the rookie list, and making them regular senior players. It's about finding that mature age 22 year old in the VFL/WAFL/SANFL (i.e Curnow, Duigan, Hibberd Barlow.) How many rookies did Collingwood have in last years Grand Final winning side? Lots. The top ten picks are givens. We know that. It's the gems that you find in pick 30 and lower (including rookies) that really determine the depth of a list.
You're right about recruiters being vitally important. I would argue the only part of a footy club more important than a recruiter is the "development" of the players. Notice how Richmond havn't been good for 28 years? It surely can't be because of 28 years of bad recriting. It's because the players there don't reach their potential because they don't become the best they can be, because Richmond can't develop their players (maybe they are starting to change, finally.)
But the actual order of the draft picks I would say is not that important.
Discounting Brad Ottens, who was traded to Geelong because he was underperforming at "a club" that can't develop players, kindly tell me how many top-5 picks are in the current Geelong side.
As for Hird, he has B.Thompson, and some good assistants. Coaching is not a one man job. It used to be. But these days it is more about a coaching team than ever before.
One thing you have totally convined me about on BigFooty is that all coaches are overrated (except Brian Goorjian.)
I reckon you're a bit more stubborn though. You're pretty steadfast with what you beleive in. If I can convince you that the draft order barely matters, and it makes no difference if GWS and G.C pick the eyes out of the draft, I'll be happy.
I think you put too much emphasis on the next two drafts. It doesn't matter if Gold Coast and GWS pick the hell out of them.
Being a good team is not about getting a couple of good top-5 picks (look at Geelong).
It's about turning pick 33 into a good player. Pick 46, pick 57 etc. It's about elevating players off the rookie list, and making them regular senior players. It's about finding that mature age 22 year old in the VFL/WAFL/SANFL (i.e Curnow, Duigan, Hibberd Barlow.) How many rookies did Collingwood have in last years Grand Final winning side? Lots. The top ten picks are givens. We know that. It's the gems that you find in pick 30 and lower (including rookies) that really determine the depth of a list.
You're right about recruiters being vitally important. I would argue the only part of a footy club more important than a recruiter is the "development" of the players. Notice how Richmond havn't been good for 28 years? It surely can't be because of 28 years of bad recriting. It's because the players there don't reach their potential because they don't become the best they can be, because Richmond can't develop their players (maybe they are starting to change, finally.)
But the actual order of the draft picks I would say is not that important.
Discounting Brad Ottens, who was traded to Geelong because he was underperforming at "a club" that can't develop players, kindly tell me how many top-5 picks are in the current Geelong side.
As for Hird, he has B.Thompson, and some good assistants. Coaching is not a one man job. It used to be. But these days it is more about a coaching team than ever before.
One thing you have totally convined me about on BigFooty is that all coaches are overrated (except Brian Goorjian.)
I reckon you're a bit more stubborn though. You're pretty steadfast with what you beleive in. If I can convince you that the draft order barely matters, and it makes no difference if GWS and G.C pick the eyes out of the draft, I'll be happy.
Done a great job to date.
1, list. Easy thing to do would have been a Voss style cull and swap. It wasn't the right time for that. The improvement we've got out of Lonnergan, Hocking, Howlett, Bellchambers, Hardingham, Crameri, Zaharakis, Jetta etc is testiment to what quality coaching and player development can do.
2, If not for being smashed by injuries we'd be top 4 right now. We are building the nucleus of a very good side.
3, Not many teams go from 14th to Premiers in 1 year. To play finals this year would be a massive leap forward.
4, This year will no doubt bring with it some player turnover. The likes of Welsh, Dyson, Prismall, Neagle, NLM, Davey & Daniher must all be walking the line in terms of retaining a spot on the list.
1, list. Easy thing to do would have been a Voss style cull and swap. It wasn't the right time for that. The improvement we've got out of Lonnergan, Hocking, Howlett, Bellchambers, Hardingham, Crameri, Zaharakis, Jetta etc is testiment to what quality coaching and player development can do.
2, If not for being smashed by injuries we'd be top 4 right now. We are building the nucleus of a very good side.
3, Not many teams go from 14th to Premiers in 1 year. To play finals this year would be a massive leap forward.
4, This year will no doubt bring with it some player turnover. The likes of Welsh, Dyson, Prismall, Neagle, NLM, Davey & Daniher must all be walking the line in terms of retaining a spot on the list.
hammer nail head
Windy has a point.
This time last year, we sat 5-5 and had just come off a 3 game winning streak (St. Kilda, Richmond, Footscray).
To think that on performance just 12 months later we'd be half a game better than that shows a lot and that Knights wasn't to blame for what happened next.
Johnny to his credit has always made the point that coaches really don't make a lot of difference and that it is the blokes on the park who do.
The points about development aren't valid - if it wasn't for Knights playing the blokes mentioned over the last 3 years, they would not be in a position now to have an impact. If anything, Hird and co owe Knights a huge debt as it was Knights who took the punt to play the likes of Hocking and co, when Sheedy didn't necessarily do that previously.
I agree that James probably needed to spend time at another club as an assistant coach before taking the big job on - but, the likes of Thompson and co mitigate that problem in part.
This time last year, we sat 5-5 and had just come off a 3 game winning streak (St. Kilda, Richmond, Footscray).
To think that on performance just 12 months later we'd be half a game better than that shows a lot and that Knights wasn't to blame for what happened next.
Johnny to his credit has always made the point that coaches really don't make a lot of difference and that it is the blokes on the park who do.
The points about development aren't valid - if it wasn't for Knights playing the blokes mentioned over the last 3 years, they would not be in a position now to have an impact. If anything, Hird and co owe Knights a huge debt as it was Knights who took the punt to play the likes of Hocking and co, when Sheedy didn't necessarily do that previously.
I agree that James probably needed to spend time at another club as an assistant coach before taking the big job on - but, the likes of Thompson and co mitigate that problem in part.
What a ****ing s**t thread 
- Status
