Paul Roos - not the messiah

[WALDENPOND]

But but but...he won a premiership by a few points 10 years ago.









JK. He has a good record. But yeah, I'd be surprised if a non Melbourne or St Kilda fan bothered watching this. Last week against Brisbane was funny if wasn't so sad to watch.

 

[underthestars]

He's made Melbourne more competitive, and under two seasons has passed. If people mark him based on the hype he's failed - but no one really believed the hype did they! He's going slow and steady and improving the club.

 

[Xtreme]

Absolutely not the messiah

 

[SportsCentre]

The question I ask when we are seeing all of these garbage games:

Do the players really enjoy playing such negative, demotivating football?

 

[sonnywalters]

Did anyone really think that Melbourne could be turned around in 39 games?
Or was everyone a little more realistic in thinking this would be a 3-5 year fix?

We have improved since he has taken over.......not a great game today, but the signs are definitely there

Not turned around but you are awful and uncompetitive. He hasn't improved you at all. He had a bit of a placebo effect early, as all coaches do. But in reality he hasn't changed a single thing. He is dramatically over-rated. Ross Lyon invented the 2005 Swans game plan and Longmire proved Roos was no guru by winning another flag. Roos is like the wizard of Oz. When you pull back the curtain he has nothing and he is still coaching like it is 2005. He is way out of his depth in 2015.

 

[sonnywalters]

He's made Melbourne more competitive, and under two seasons has passed. If people mark him based on the hype he's failed - but no one really believed the hype did they! He's going slow and steady and improving the club.

Wishful thinking.
They are atrocious.

 

[Theprofessional]

The question I ask when we are seeing all of these garbage games:

Do the players really enjoy playing such negative, demotivating football?

Jack Watts is enjoying his footy now more than ever before.

Melbourne had 2 wins and a percentage of 54%.

Roos takes over:
Melbourne have 4 wins percentage of 68%
This year 16 games in
Melbourne have 5 wins and percentage of 77%

Looks to me like your on track for another year of 2 win improvement and 10% percentage improvement.

Averaging 70 points per game this year after averaging 60 last year under him, and 66 and 71 the years before he came in.

The team isn't that much lower scoring than the two years prior to him coming in, but the team is improving roughly 2 wins a year and improving 10% percentage.

I think it's sad that a few Melbourne supporters and supporters in general have somehow forgotten just how bad Melbourne were a couple years ago. Maybe a few games need to be rewatched from a few years ago.

 

[Kennedy Parker]

Does this thread really need to be bumped every second Melbourne loss?

When Roos first started, Melbourne were in a hopeless position, uncompetitive every week without any real indication that the club is heading in the right direction. Now after one and a half seasons Roos has now at least got Melbourne heading on the upward trajectory.

 

[Theprofessional]

Deserves to cop heat today. I've been a pretty staunch defender of him but he simply isn't coaching this group properly.

Lets look at the big picture. He comes to Melb in the 2013 offseason, obviously morale is really low so he employs a fairly defensive gameplan in 2014 to minimize beltings and slowly build confidence. We drastically reduce our average losing margin and increase our % by a bit over 10% (And double the win tally). After a smash and grab job against Essendon we are 4-8 and whilst this is pretty crap for most teams, this is far, far better than the Melbourne under Neeld. Just as we're thinking that, we lose 9 straight to finish 2014 and our stats drop dramatically (First half of the year we were top 8 for contested ball, we drop to 18th and also continue our garbage inside 50 counts).

2015 starts, we have what looks like a great win in round 1 vs the GC. Not only do we win in round 1 for the first time since 2005, but we score well over 100 points for the first time since 2013. Our form fluctuates a bit during the first half of the year but we have good wins against decent sides like the Tigers and Bulldogs, and have a huge win against Geelong.

This whole time our inside 50 counts fail to improve, as does our scoring (Despite scoring over 100 three times this year). I'd also wager our losing margin feels like it is higher this year than last year (Don't have the stat to confirm it for me). Our inside 50 count is still the worst, our tackle average is high but often we get out-tackled we just turn games into slogs so it is a bit deceiving.

Roos trying the defensive crap this year is not working whatsoever. I understood it in the first year, but now it is an outdated style of play that is hurting us more than it is helping. I'd much rather us take the game on and kick 12-14 goals every week and risk conceding 20+, instead we turn games into stoppage fests. Bit strange but it seems nearly 2 years on it still hasn't clicked that we aren't the Sydney team Roos has and I don't think it suits us playing this way. That Sydney team was the best tackling and clearance outfit (We are 14th for clearances this year) in the competition and had better footskills than people realized (They were very good at hitting targets inside 50, as for us LOL).

It is ******* frustrating watching how we played against the GC and Geelong (Took the game on) then we serve up that s**t today (No offence Saints, you're on the right track but you're not exactly leagues ahead of us and we shouldn't be playing like that). People say our list still sucks, but we should at least be learning the right way to play instead of this s**t.

You are talking about in the first paragraph the big picture; and the great improvements made in the first season. (doubling win count, improving percentage by 10%) but you are on track again to improve your win count again by 2, and again by 10%. If it was such a great first season why is it a dud one second time around? It's the same margin of improvement which if anything should be more impressive?

 

[BOMBERS 4 LIFE!!!!]

When does Goody take over?

 

[Sprout]

When does Goody take over?

2017

 

[bing181]

It is ******* frustrating watching how we played against the GC and Geelong (Took the game on) then we serve up that s**t today

Exactly. The way we played against GC and Geelong is how Roos is coaching us/them to play. What we're seeing at the moment is the players not doing (or not able to do) what they're supposed to/being coached to do.

 

[drviccles]

I forget, who's taking over after Roos?

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Did anyone really think that Melbourne could be turned around in 39 games?
Or was everyone a little more realistic in thinking this would be a 3-5 year fix?

We have improved since he has taken over.......not a great game today, but the signs are definitely there

I understand what you're saying about a quick fix, but then I look at the Bulldogs and the style of football they play and wonder if the expectation of Melbourne and its supporters is actually as high as it should be considering Roos is pumped up as being a great coach.

 

[EagleShore]

Did anyone really think that Melbourne could be turned around in 39 games?
Or was everyone a little more realistic in thinking this would be a 3-5 year fix?

We have improved since he has taken over.......not a great game today, but the signs are definitely there

Exactly. The hype around Roos "saving" Melbourne was over the top, and the world in general, let alone the environment of the AFL, is incredibly impatient. I always knew it would take longer for them to become upwardly mobile than the Dogs and St Kilda who were not at the bottom of the table when the AFL expanded with GWS and GC. This crippled Melbourne in terms of quality of draft picks.

The signs are there, and as I told my friend who is a Demons member, it will take a few years for them to become truly competitive, despite Roos' reputation.

 

[RUNVS]

Exactly. The hype around Roos "saving" Melbourne was over the top, and the world in general, let alone the environment of the AFL, is incredibly impatient. I always knew it would take longer for them to become upwardly mobile than the Dogs and St Kilda who were not at the bottom of the table when the AFL expanded with GWS and GC. This crippled Melbourne in terms of quality of draft picks.

The signs are there, and as I told my friend who is a Demons member, it will take a few years for them to become truly competitive, despite Roos' reputation.

and Roos has put in place players who can bring them out of the dungeon of the AFL ladder. Those players will not instantly come good though.

 

[00Stinger]

I understand what you're saying about a quick fix, but then I look at the Bulldogs and the style of football they play and wonder if the expectation of Melbourne and its supporters is actually as high as it should be considering Roos is pumped up as being a great coach.

I see what you are saying, the thing is neither the Saints or Bulldogs had been down the bottom as long as us. They still had quality older players who,had experienced some sort of success at the club, I think that helps a lot

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

I see what you are saying, the thing is neither the Saints or Bulldogs had been down the bottom as long as us. They still had quality older players who,had experienced some sort of success at the club, I think that helps a lot

No doubt it does, but I see players like Jones, Cross, Vince, Dunn, Dawes, Garland, Tyson, Viney etc, and think that the expectation of where this club should be, and what footy they should be producing is not high enough when you take into account the supposed expertise of the coach leading them.

 

[Ricmel]

Did anyone really think that Melbourne could be turned around in 39 games?
Or was everyone a little more realistic in thinking this would be a 3-5 year fix?

We have improved since he has taken over.......not a great game today, but the signs are definitely there

I have now seen Dees twice this year, both games versus Saints.

On paper, I would think Dees have a team as good as Saints. But in both games what they seemed to me to lack is a good coaching panel. In the first, there was that infamous 41 seconds but in truth had Melbourne won they would have stolen that game. They were outplayed most of the day. In the second, it just seems to me that from the fullback line to the centre they are reasonably structured. Forward of the centre is just dumb luck, the players don't no whether to go for it, sit on it, find a team mate.

One thing that really stood out for me is the role of Hogan. He seems very much stay at home. Not sure whether that is his style or that is what he is being told to do but on a day like yesterday he needed to present further up the ground and work harder when the ball hits the ground. It was quite noticeable that when he didn't mark it he just became a spare dick.

 

[Theprofessional]

No doubt it does, but I see players like Jones, Cross, Vince, Dunn, Dawes, Garland, Tyson, Viney etc, and think that the expectation of where this club should be, and what footy they should be producing is not high enough when you take into account the supposed expertise of the coach leading them.

I think the team improving wins every year for Paul Roos stint should almost be enough. They've got a half dozen decent-good players but their depth is still weak and a lot of passengers. Not to mention of those players you mentioned a couple were discards, who would've definitely gone to a club in premiership contention if any of those clubs thought the players were worth it.

No top club went near them- that should say that even their best players aren't good enough yet (with a couple exceptions).

 

[Topkent]

By put in place you mean added another group of top draft picks. Eventually even blind Freddy has to get some picks right.

Most of the better teams don't play with a designated tagger, Roos runs out two each week in Viney and Vince. They aren't playing modern footy

Wrong
We play with blokes who are instructed to beat their opponent
Viney Kept Stevens to 16 touches and got it 31 times himself, Vince has been racking up 25+ regularly while keeping his opponent down

 

[JackOutback]

I think he's clearly on the right path, he's increasing wins, increasing percentage. Sure, there will be occasional steps back, but overall, I think the foundation is there. Roos has done what he is being paid to do, even if it's not exactly what they hype suggested he should have done by now.

 

[Sprout]

One thing that really stood out for me is the role of Hogan. He seems very much stay at home. Not sure whether that is his style or that is what he is being told to do but on a day like yesterday he needed to present further up the ground and work harder when the ball hits the ground. It was quite noticeable that when he didn't mark it he just became a spare dick.

This isn't true. Hogan has been pushing up the ground on numerous occasions, including yesterday. In fact that was one of the things the SEN commentary were supposedly critical of was having Hogan collecting possession on the halfback line.

The problem is when Hogan does move around the ground, there are no reliable targets to kick to, which is the Roos way - bomb it in long to the big man and hope he can take a contested mark. Lord knows it ain't gonna be Dawesy.

The other aspects of his game can be worked upon given he's a first year player. On the list of problems, Hogan ranks last. Unless you include the possibility of him leaving.

In the first, there was that infamous 41 seconds but in truth had Melbourne won they would have stolen that game. They were outplayed most of the day.

Not that matters, but this also isn't true. Saints were the better side, but it's an overstatement to say they outplayed us in that game. Yesterday however we were totally outplayed. It was back to the worst of Melbourne. Stagnant and uncertain.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

I think the team improving wins every year for Paul Roos stint should almost be enough. They've got a half dozen decent-good players but their depth is still weak and a lot of passengers. Not to mention of those players you mentioned a couple were discards, who would've definitely gone to a club in premiership contention if any of those clubs thought the players were worth it.

No top club went near them- that should say that even their best players aren't good enough yet (with a couple exceptions).

Far too many excuses being made for and by Roos, for my liking, and I'm not sure how much more Dees fans will take.

 

[Bont2Bruce]

Far too many excuses being made for and by Roos, for my liking, and I'm not sure how much more Dees fans will take.

I saw a marked difference in the way Paul Roos and Nathan Buckley dealt with some pointy questions on AFL360 tonight.
Buckley spoke genuinely, used examples about his family and made "I" and "we" statements that were believable.
Roos spoke about himself in the second person, a bit like a politician trying to duck and weave and avoid the question, none of which was believable.

Most importantly.

Mark Robinson asked Roos if he still wanted to coach Melbourne the way he talked when first appointed. Roos choose to remark that he hadn't seen the question coming, before dodging it entirely, giving up an opportunity to convince the football public that he is anything other than in it for the money.

He failed to do so.