List Mgmt. Have the Cats redefined how to build a Premiership side?

[FromOldFitzroy]

I’m not on the Cat’s bandwagon.
Let’s not forget they lost a Prelim to Melbourne last year by 80 points.
First week of the finals, they trailed Collingwood for the majority of the game, only for Rohan (???) to step up.
Yes, they dominated after that first week, but I won’t be putting any hard-earned on them going back to back.

 

[briztoon]

Yeah, one easy takeaway for us would be rotate / rest the older / heavy workload players against the easier opponents. Allows them to be managed to hit their peak at the right time(s) of the year

Would mean the younger brigade get more opportunities too and more of a taste of it and keeps everyone hungry and competing in the first 22

I know we’ll probably be accused of disrespecting weaker opponents etc but we have to plan around what’s best for our playing group as a whole for the whole year

Geelong rested Selwood against us in round 4.

I don’t believe reputation of opponents impacted their rest and rotation policy.

 

[golions]

Geelong rested Selwood against us in round 4.

I don’t believe reputation of opponents impacted their rest and rotation policy.

Fair point. It’s just that we don’t want to be dropping games against fellow top 4/8 contenders because they are essentially 8 point games (especially seeing how close the teams were this year) - especially if they are tight game and we have a youngster in the headlights as opposed an battle hardened experienced player to get us over the line in a close game

 

[Grasshopper17]

Interesting list build information re the Cats 23 that won the flag on Saturday.

1- Only 2 players drafted by the Cats in the first round ie. Selwood and De Koning.
2- 6 rookies.
3- The bulk traded in.
4- Oldest side in AFL history.

Throws up some questions.

1- Are high draft selections overrated? Or at least the obsession with them as the primary tool to win a flag/rebuild?
2- Are players approaching/over 30 years of age underrated and put on the scrapheap too early?

I think that as much as the list build, and possibly even more so, it's been Geelong's last 2 Grand Finals that have been fascinating "referendums" into successful playing styles.

If we recall the 2020 Grand Final, Geelong went into that game with that very controlled style of game, switching the ball from one side of the ground to the other with kicks and marks, waiting for holes in the defence to open up. This worked a treat for a half, but as fatigue emerged, errors crept into their game, and Richmond's chaos-based territory game came out on top.

What surprised me a bit was that Geelong took 2 summers to learn from that. They trotted out the same stuff in 2021, with arguably a worse result. Then they finally took their medicine, reaped the rewards, and I take my hat off to them for doing so (much in the same way I did to Port Adelaide in 2004, begrudgingly).

So if 2020 was a vote on attacking styles, 2022 was all about defensive styles. Sydney's out and out pressure vs Geelong's structure behind the ball. And the result there wasn't even up for debate. In fairness to Geelong, they do pressure to an extent, but only for as long as is needed for them to get organised behind the ball. Once that's done, the result of the contest is kind of irrelevant to them; they know they're getting the ball back in a few seconds anyway. Watching them do that against us live at the G last week was fascinating in that respect. At stages they'd even give us easy lateral marks.

Meanwhile, we are still playing that control style of game with the ball, and we still rely on manic pressure at the contest. So we're basically 2 years behind the competition's benchmark, the complete opposite in both attack and defence - indeed, our structure behind the ball is completely non-existent at times.

I appreciate there's a good chance we'll have some form of personnel issues with our coaching staff for much of the preseason at least, but the fact that much of our strategy involves, at best, "follow the leader", is frustrating to say the least.

What I would most like to know is how they get their older players up and about, playing such good footy. Compare that to our veterans this year who fell off a cliff. Further they must be doing something exceptional in their strength and conditioning. So physically strong across the board and it has no impact in their ability to run and compete for 4 quarters.

I think briztoon touched on this, resting players as needed, which we definitely should be doing. In fact I think not doing so is a bit of an insult to guys like Mitch Hahn, who from all impressions has done a remarkable job considering all the Queensland teams were expected to struggle in the VFL this year. Our young players have, by and large, come in with the best attitudes out of anyone in the team when they've been elevated, and none of them have really looked out of place, perhaps excepting Tunstill on debut. Would love to see these guys given more of a crack in-season as the likes of Zorko and Rich are rested.

The other thing Geelong did was ramp up their training for a few weeks mid-season, which is something that according to Mike Whiting, not many teams do and has limited effect. He may be correct but on face value, Geelong didn't lose a last quarter after Round 6(ish), so I struggle to believe that this didn't play some part. Geelong didn't so much follow the trend this year, but Melbourne certainly did last year: start off like a tracer bullet, tread water in the middle of the season, then come home like a freight train. I feel like if you look at our win-loss record this year, we actually followed a similar pattern, although I think that was completely by chance and had no planning behind it whatsoever. Which, to me, comes back to the football manager as much as the coach (but I'd be guessing as I have little idea as to the role the footy manager even plays at an AFL club).

Heard David King say the first choice Cats mids - the older players - averaged 80% game time. The norm is 90+. They get 2 rests a quarter, not 1. When you add that to games off (which gives the next generation time to develop), no wonder they can still produce into September.

And this. Really interesting how Geelong seem to be following the NRL's lead, where you have X number of interchanges allowed (12 I think?) but all your backs are going to play 100% game time and usually your hooker will too. So your bench players are all forwards, as they do more of the grunt work - "crunching" tackles, big runs with 3 or 4 men hanging off them in the middle of sets etc.

I guess I'm surprised more than anything it's taken 15 years of limited interchange for at least one AFL club to figure this out. Meanwhile we had Harris Andrews covering our most distance against Melbourne or Richmond (I forget which game), which again is mind boggling, and again speaks to our defence being completely overworked and let down by those further afield.



A lot of this was originally intended for the "season in review" thread but it's ended up here. Apologies if I've derailed anything.

 

[Grasshopper17]

Oh, the other thing Geelong changed is with the line coaches: they don't have them any more.

This is something I've often wondered about, why do clubs have "backline", "midfield" and "forward" coaches? Given the way all parts of the game need to work in unison, wouldn't it make more sense to have an attack coach, a defence coach and a contest coach? All 3 coaches are responsible for all players, but only that particular aspect of their play. Just a suggestion - I don't know how, but Geelong did not have line coaches per se this year.

 

[Mr Ripper]

Oh, the other thing Geelong changed is with the line coaches: they don't have them any more.

This is something I've often wondered about, why do clubs have "backline", "midfield" and "forward" coaches? Given the way all parts of the game need to work in unison, wouldn't it make more sense to have an attack coach, a defence coach and a contest coach? All 3 coaches are responsible for all players, but only that particular aspect of their play. Just a suggestion - I don't know how, but Geelong did not have line coaches per se this year.

Only eleven years behind The Oracle, but nice to see some folk catching on.

Yours truly has been spruiking this concept for a couple years (and never been taken seriously ). Should go with a "we've got it" coach, a "they've got it" coach and a "ball is in dispute" coach.

 

[dlanod]

Only eleven years behind The Oracle, but nice to see some folk catching on.

The problem with your suggestion is that everyone wanted to be "we've got it", because if you don't have it you don't have it.

 

[Mr Ripper]

The problem with your suggestion is that everyone wanted to be "we've got it", because if you don't have it you don't have it.

 

[Nuggo]

I think sometime too much emphasis is on style. No matter what style you need to be the best at the fundamentals - Contest and work rate, creating turnovers and stopping turnovers from occurring. Skilled passing (foot and hand) and marking under pressure helps with stopping turnovers.

 

[Sanchez365]

I think that as much as the list build, and possibly even more so, it's been Geelong's last 2 Grand Finals that have been fascinating "referendums" into successful playing styles.

If we recall the 2020 Grand Final, Geelong went into that game with that very controlled style of game, switching the ball from one side of the ground to the other with kicks and marks, waiting for holes in the defence to open up. This worked a treat for a half, but as fatigue emerged, errors crept into their game, and Richmond's chaos-based territory game came out on top.

What surprised me a bit was that Geelong took 2 summers to learn from that. They trotted out the same stuff in 2021, with arguably a worse result. Then they finally took their medicine, reaped the rewards, and I take my hat off to them for doing so (much in the same way I did to Port Adelaide in 2004, begrudgingly).

So if 2020 was a vote on attacking styles, 2022 was all about defensive styles. Sydney's out and out pressure vs Geelong's structure behind the ball. And the result there wasn't even up for debate. In fairness to Geelong, they do pressure to an extent, but only for as long as is needed for them to get organised behind the ball. Once that's done, the result of the contest is kind of irrelevant to them; they know they're getting the ball back in a few seconds anyway. Watching them do that against us live at the G last week was fascinating in that respect. At stages they'd even give us easy lateral marks.

Meanwhile, we are still playing that control style of game with the ball, and we still rely on manic pressure at the contest. So we're basically 2 years behind the competition's benchmark, the complete opposite in both attack and defence - indeed, our structure behind the ball is completely non-existent at times.

I appreciate there's a good chance we'll have some form of personnel issues with our coaching staff for much of the preseason at least, but the fact that much of our strategy involves, at best, "follow the leader", is frustrating to say the least.



I think briztoon touched on this, resting players as needed, which we definitely should be doing. In fact I think not doing so is a bit of an insult to guys like Mitch Hahn, who from all impressions has done a remarkable job considering all the Queensland teams were expected to struggle in the VFL this year. Our young players have, by and large, come in with the best attitudes out of anyone in the team when they've been elevated, and none of them have really looked out of place, perhaps excepting Tunstill on debut. Would love to see these guys given more of a crack in-season as the likes of Zorko and Rich are rested.

The other thing Geelong did was ramp up their training for a few weeks mid-season, which is something that according to Mike Whiting, not many teams do and has limited effect. He may be correct but on face value, Geelong didn't lose a last quarter after Round 6(ish), so I struggle to believe that this didn't play some part. Geelong didn't so much follow the trend this year, but Melbourne certainly did last year: start off like a tracer bullet, tread water in the middle of the season, then come home like a freight train. I feel like if you look at our win-loss record this year, we actually followed a similar pattern, although I think that was completely by chance and had no planning behind it whatsoever. Which, to me, comes back to the football manager as much as the coach (but I'd be guessing as I have little idea as to the role the footy manager even plays at an AFL club).



And this. Really interesting how Geelong seem to be following the NRL's lead, where you have X number of interchanges allowed (12 I think?) but all your backs are going to play 100% game time and usually your hooker will too. So your bench players are all forwards, as they do more of the grunt work - "crunching" tackles, big runs with 3 or 4 men hanging off them in the middle of sets etc.

I guess I'm surprised more than anything it's taken 15 years of limited interchange for at least one AFL club to figure this out. Meanwhile we had Harris Andrews covering our most distance against Melbourne or Richmond (I forget which game), which again is mind boggling, and again speaks to our defence being completely overworked and let down by those further afield.



A lot of this was originally intended for the "season in review" thread but it's ended up here. Apologies if I've derailed anything.

This is a super interesting read and some great insight, love the analysis.

I will say I thought that Geelong in the game against us and against the Swans did much better at the coal face, winning the midfield battle (at least when the game was well and truly in the line in the first quarters). Us and the Swans probably have the weakest midfields in the top 8, so I'm not surprised Geelong managed to take advantage of that, allowing them to setup behind the ball with good field position.

Still, we were completely out coached and had a useless spare sitting in defence the entire game getting the ball kicked over his head. There was a plethora of things we could of done with that player to change the outcome, but Ah Chee just isn't one of those natural defenders that can read the play that well to be in the right spots.

 

[briztoon]

This is a super interesting read and some great insight, love the analysis.

I will say I thought that Geelong in the game against us and against the Swans did much better at the coal face, winning the midfield battle (at least when the game was well and truly in the line in the first quarters). Us and the Swans probably have the weakest midfields in the top 8, so I'm not surprised Geelong managed to take advantage of that, allowing them to setup behind the ball with good field position.

Still, we were completely out coached and had a useless spare sitting in defence the entire game getting the ball kicked over his head. There was a plethora of things we could of done with that player to change the outcome, but Ah Chee just isn't one of those natural defenders that can read the play that well to be in the right spots.

There was analysis of where we set up our spare and Geelong set up their spare.

We set up ours on the skinny side, 20 meters behind play, where as Geelong set theirs up 50 meters behind play.

Our spare was always caught in no man’s land, as once Geelong won possession, they looked to move the ball in to the corridor and to the fat side, where there were even numbers, or they had a plus one, because their small forwards had pushed up, but our defender either, didn’t follow them, or did follow, but left too big of a gap to be effective.

Geelong’s spare sat a kick behind play, where we invariably kicked to an uncontested Geelong defender, or they had a two on one advantage. And then they moved to ball in to the corridor, and ran past us with overlapping runners creating an out number, and kicked to a leading forward who had gapped their defender.

They definitely out worked us, and often it looked liked they played a full ground team game, while we played a 3 zone game, where it looked like our players were reluctant to push out of their zone.


I’ve mentioned it all season, we struggle to defend against opposition run from defence, but we also struggle to run with the ball. It genuinely looks like we don’t practice this. Yes it helps to have players who can run, but so often we would stuff up what looked like what should have been an easy ball movement through hand balling chains.

 

[Gadzorks]

Fair point. It’s just that we don’t want to be dropping games against fellow top 4/8 contenders because they are essentially 8 point games (especially seeing how close the teams were this year) - especially if they are tight game and we have a youngster in the headlights as opposed an battle hardened experienced player to get us over the line in a close game

Rotation should build capability across the group. If resting one player at a time is the difference between winning and losing a game we are in trouble anyway.

and yes lachie is irreplaceable, but we have to be able to manage if he gets injured. So we need to address the team and make sure he isn’t carrying the team. Remember we lost clearances with Lachie before we bought Matho in.

 

[Sanchez365]

There was analysis of where we set up our spare and Geelong set up their spare.

We set up ours on the skinny side, 20 meters behind play, where as Geelong set theirs up 50 meters behind play.

Our spare was always caught in no man’s land, as once Geelong won possession, they looked to move the ball in to the corridor and to the fat side, where there were even numbers, or they had a plus one, because their small forwards had pushed up, but our defender either, didn’t follow them, or did follow, but left too big of a gap to be effective.

Geelong’s spare sat a kick behind play, where we invariably kicked to an uncontested Geelong defender, or they had a two on one advantage. And then they moved to ball in to the corridor, and ran past us with overlapping runners creating an out number, and kicked to a leading forward who had gapped their defender.

They definitely out worked us, and often it looked liked they played a full ground team game, while we played a 3 zone game, where it looked like our players were reluctant to push out of their zone.


I’ve mentioned it all season, we struggle to defend against opposition run from defence, but we also struggle to run with the ball. It genuinely looks like we don’t practice this. Yes it helps to have players who can run, but so often we would stuff up what looked like what should have been an easy ball movement through hand balling chains.

Yeah this exactly what I saw at the ground.

I feel like we have mostly looked better this year when we have been able to run forward from the contest on the wings, either from a long kick that the talls bring to ground for our smalls (like Bailey or Rayner) to work through the traffic, or from a stoppage in a similar position running through that part of the ground.

Personally I'm not sure why we didn't bring that spare player up to the back of the stoppage and try to create some run forward, rather then station them where we did.

We were throughly outworked from the start of the game as you mentioned though so it could have just been the petrol tickets were spent the previous weeks.

 

[Grasshopper17]

They definitely out worked us, and often it looked liked they played a full ground team game, while we played a 3 zone game, where it looked like our players were reluctant to push out of their zone.


I’ve mentioned it all season, we struggle to defend against opposition run from defence, but we also struggle to run with the ball. It genuinely looks like we don’t practice this. Yes it helps to have players who can run, but so often we would stuff up what looked like what should have been an easy ball movement through hand balling chains.

1st para - wonder if this is a byproduct of Geelong's coaching setup vs ours and others...

2nd para - perhaps this comes back our perceived fitness issues that Browny went to town on. I remember posting a year ago something about how I thought midway through last season we (perhaps subconsciously) began to realise we could coast through on talent a bit rather than relying on hard work to get us wins, which we'd needed during 2019 and 2020. If this is the case we need to knock it on the head and hope it's not too late to do so, as we've seen with West Coast what happens when you don't.

 

[briztoon]

1st para - wonder if this is a byproduct of Geelong's coaching setup vs ours and others...

2nd para - perhaps this comes back our perceived fitness issues that Browny went to town on. I remember posting a year ago something about how I thought midway through last season we (perhaps subconsciously) began to realise we could coast through on talent a bit rather than relying on hard work to get us wins, which we'd needed during 2019 and 2020. If this is the case we need to knock it on the head and hope it's not too late to do so, as we've seen with West Coast what happens when you don't.

After our final loss, Hodge said we rely on talent over system to win games.

You can see this, when we’re on the back foot. If we can’t slow the game down and arrest control, our structures fall apart, we go in to our shells, and suffer a blowout.

 

[trikster]

Geelong's biggest advantage is they can offer country living while playing AFL. Nobody else can offer that, so players will take unders to enjoy that quality of life. It's an advantage they have absolutely exploited.

 

[Mr Ripper]

Geelong's biggest advantage is they can offer country living while playing AFL. Nobody else can offer that, so players will take unders to enjoy that quality of life. It's an advantage they have absolutely exploited.

Hello Springfield!

 

[dlanod]

Hello Springfield!

My first thought was staying in the hinterland and playing at the Suns.

My second thought was playing and living in Adelaide.

 

[martinson]

Geelong's biggest advantage is they can offer country living while playing AFL. Nobody else can offer that, so players will take unders to enjoy that quality of life. It's an advantage they have absolutely exploited.

There's truth in that but the key issue is that they top up the contracts with so many ongoing business contacts and jobs and opportunities for partners and family that from a financial perspective it's a no brainer.

A basic football head with not many other skills like Bomber Thompson was able to get instantly wealthy just by rubbing shoulders with the right people. As for what happened after that , well that's life .

 

[mpal6]

Young Pies forward wants move to Cats

Collingwood forward Ollie Henry has made a call on his future

www.afl.com.au

Tanner Bruhn - pick 12 2020
Oliver Henry - pick 17 2020
(potentially) Jack Bowes

12

Jack Bowes

Age

26

Ht

189cm

Wt

85kg

Pos.

D/M

Career

Season

Last 5

D

16.3

4star

K

9.7

4star

HB

6.6

4star

M

3.9

4star

T

2.5

4star

MG

318.1

4star

D

18.0

4star

K

11.8

5star

HB

6.3

4star

M

5.4

5star

T

1.1

2star

MG

318.1

4star

D

11.6

3star

K

6.4

3star

HB

5.2

4star

M

2.8

3star

T

2.4

4star

- pick 10 2016
pick 7 2022

If we keep getting picks and players like this, we can keep re-generating too.

 

[Nathan Barley]

Young Pies forward wants move to Cats

Collingwood forward Ollie Henry has made a call on his future

www.afl.com.au

Tanner Bruhn - pick 12 2020
Oliver Henry - pick 17 2020
(potentially) Jack Bowes - pick 10 2016
pick 7 2022

If we keep getting picks and players like this, we can keep re-generating too.

Don't think original pick means much. We have Ah Chee and Cockatoo who have fallen short of their draft rating

 

[briztoon]

Young Pies forward wants move to Cats

Collingwood forward Ollie Henry has made a call on his future

www.afl.com.au

Tanner Bruhn - pick 12 2020
Oliver Henry - pick 17 2020
(potentially) Jack Bowes - pick 10 2016
pick 7 2022

If we keep getting picks and players like this, we can keep re-generating too.

Was going to post something similar, without where they were drafted.

Pretty quick reload of the midfield. Especially if they get pick 7, and pick up Geelong Falcon Jhye Clark.

 

[Pavlovs Cat]

I’m not on the Cat’s bandwagon.
Let’s not forget they lost a Prelim to Melbourne last year by 80 points.
First week of the finals, they trailed Collingwood for the majority of the game, only for Rohan (???) to step up.
Yes, they dominated after that first week, but I won’t be putting any hard-earned on them going back to back.

Can't blame you. We only won 16 games in a row. We came from behind twice to beat Collingwood this year, it matters not that you're trailing it's what the score says at the end. I wouldn't be putting any hard-earned on Collingwood backing that up next season. We will finish ahead of them, but maybe not your guys.

 

[morsie]

Repeating the mantra, team defence and two way running.Hopefully Dunkley and Ashcroft can assist with both of these.
Great analysis upthread of how the "spares' were used or not used in our case.

 

[FromOldFitzroy]

Can't blame you. We only won 16 games in a row. We came from behind twice to beat Collingwood this year, it matters not that you're trailing it's what the score says at the end. I wouldn't be putting any hard-earned on Collingwood backing that up next season. We will finish ahead of them, but maybe not your guys.

Yes, a great achievement.
However, you’d have to admit that you were fortunate to beat Richmond during your run.
I fear that the tigers are mentally tougher than all of us, per Kennett.