News Pies can be premiers: Elliott

[MyManLynch]

Puff piece. Not worth commenting. has no connection to anything real.

He's real


This club is real


This is also real


But I doubt 1+1+1 will equal 3 this year.

 

[DaicosianMarvels]

That is just a dumb comment from Elliot but the again that's the mindset that we want our players to have. However I don't think he believes what he said though.

Making the 8 is doubtful at the moment, should be worrying about beating Adelaide more than anything else and then after that it's Port Adelaide. However for me it's the attitude more than anything that is concerning me and then there are skills. The AFL could give us top spot after round 23, but there would be no use because we would go out in straight sets.

We are playing some awful football, 1 win in 5 weeks and we are talking about possibly winning the premiership.

In the last two seasons I would have said, if we get good towards the end of the season we can beat any team in the comp on our day. I don't think we can with this group of players anymore. The team we had in 2010/2011 was a team that was built over many years and they clicked in 2010/2011. We now have a fairly different group of players with some of them being the stars in those years. It's not fair on the younger players we have playing now to have the pressure on them like they are a premiership team and are expected to win the flag now.

As much as it hurts not being able to make the most of it with the players we had a few years ago, we have to be patient with this team now. We do not have a squad at the moment that is a premiership squad and they need two - three years of developing.

Having said all that it still doesn't make the loses any better and it certainly doesn't excuse the performances of some players.

 

[Starcevich90]

Geez Starc, you really do need to get down there and sort the boys all out...

We have a game plan, unfortunately it relies on certain guys (like Reid) being on the ground. Have the Hawks had to play for 18 rounds without one of their tall forwards...ummm no, in fact they've even used Ceglar as a replacement for McEvoy and Hale in that forward half whilst the other two have played seconds. (My point: they still have the important cattle)

"Look at Hawthorn; decimated by injury this year".... yep they've had a fair wack (this year) but our injury lag started in 2011 when Brown went down for the first time. Then Maxwell, Johnston, Jolly, Dawes, Thomas, and eventually Reid. 2012 saw us lose Caff, Ball and Krakour to ACL's as well as Jolly, Johnston and Thomas again. In 2013 it was Beams, Maxwell, Frost, Brown and Lynch and this year it's been Reid, Swan, Freeman, Scharenburg, Oxley, Seedsman, Sinclair, Fasolo, Maxwell, Karnesis, Broomhead.

We've been working our bums off for over three seasons trying to hold our own against teams playing at almost full strength. We're like the little boy with his finger in the dike, trying to plug holes only to see three others spring a leak. Now the young players are starting to feel the strain of another long season carrying the can.

If you say our medical and conditioning teams are incompetent then Hawthorn's and Port's are too because they've both started to feel the pinch of injuries. Geelong has had their share of ACL's and foot related problems so they must be incompetent as well??

Injuries are mainly bad luck. Whom they occur to and when they occur are even greater variables and ones that decide finals.
If you still want to question Buck's game plan or the competence of our trained professional staff then go ahead of course it's your prerogative but in the light of the sheer weight of our injuries over the past three seasons, it's an unfair conclusion.

Give a decent side a light run of injuries and a favourable draw and in all likelihood you'll see a final four finish. Give a young side a situation where 25% of the list is out injured for 2-3 years and the cracks will show.

Not sure why you need to be smart about it - I would have thought a footy forum is an ok place to exchange different views on different football topics without the old "why don't you get down there and sort it out".

I'd be more than happy NOT to try my hand at the Westpac Centre if someone could actually tell me what our gameplan IS. And if it is relying so heavily on certain players (eg. Reid CHF) to succeed, then it's clearly not very good - especially considering he's played a whole seven or eight games up front in the last five years. Our much-lauded on-ball divsion has actually been pretty stable this year, but is probably the worst performed of all three lines. Buckley, your responsibility.

And with the Hawks, I wouldn't agree that Mitchell, Rioli, Stratton, Gibson, Lake and Sewell are not important cattle in terms of their set up.

Look, I accept we've had an unusually poor run for quite a while with injuries, but the management and recurrance of these surely has to be questioned; particularly in the cases of Dale Thomas (ankle), Beams (quad), Reid (calf) and Freeman (hamstring). And you're also including a lot of players who are hardly crucial or haven't even played yet in your argument. I don't think Scharenberg (who we knew had issues), Freeeman, Oxley, Sinclair or arguably Karnezis and Broomhead were going to drive us into the top four this year.

 

[Kynge of Begrem]

A serious question to the people scoffing at Elliott's comments, do you want players going in to a game not believing they can win it?

By rejecting a comment by a player that the team can be premiers, that is effectively what you are indicating.

 

[The Magnificent Seven]

A serious question to the people scoffing at Elliott's comments, do you want players going in to a game not believing they can win it?

By rejecting a comment by a player that the team can be premiers, that is effectively what you are indicating.

+1

I'd rather the team was 'self-deluded' enough to believe that they can win every match from here to the podium starting this weekend. So that they do.

 

[didaksrightfoot]

Our best 22 can win a flag. Dont think bucks gameplan can though

I disagree on both counts.

Our best 22 currently, at these ages/experience, is not good enough to compete with the best consistently... it might be in a couple of years.

I think history has shown that gameplans that are defense-first generally tend to be succesful - that appears to be the focus of our gameplan currently, which is a good sign IMO (whether or not the players are able to follow it is another matter). Offensively - it is hard to see the gameplan currently, but we looked much better with Elliot alongside Cloke, and Reid will also change how it looks... but our poor kicking efficiency likely also throws away any actual plan that Bucks might have... and I don't think you can blame our consistent lack of intensity around the ball on the gameplan.
---

I would be worried if Elliot actually believed that we are a flag favourite, or that we are up with the top teams - but I would want every player to believe, that with the right level of effort/execution, we should still be able to beat anybody on our day, and that the players need to strive for that in every game.

 

[Utah]

Add ben reid, nathan brown, fasolo and it makes a hell of a difference structure wise. Especially the first two.

 

[rustyg70]

Does anyone know if the club has ramped up the training intensity between the two byes?

 

[THATSGOLD]

I would rather Elliott's view of the capabilities of the team than your's. Just quietly I think he may know a bit more about it.

Well it will be another thread we can all revisit in that case.

 

[Robroy22]

Not sure why you need to be smart about it - I would have thought a footy forum is an ok place to exchange different views on different football topics without the old "why don't you get down there and sort it out".

I'd be more than happy NOT to try my hand at the Westpac Centre if someone could actually tell me what our gameplan IS. And if it is relying so heavily on certain players (eg. Reid CHF) to succeed, then it's clearly not very good - especially considering he's played a whole seven or eight games up front in the last five years. Our much-lauded on-ball divsion has actually been pretty stable this year, but is probably the worst performed of all three lines. Buckley, your responsibility.

And with the Hawks, I wouldn't agree that Mitchell, Rioli, Stratton, Gibson, Lake and Sewell are not important cattle in terms of their set up.

Look, I accept we've had an unusually poor run for quite a while with injuries, but the management and recurrance of these surely has to be questioned; particularly in the cases of Dale Thomas (ankle), Beams (quad), Reid (calf) and Freeman (hamstring). And you're also including a lot of players who are hardly crucial or haven't even played yet in your argument. I don't think Scharenberg (who we knew had issues), Freeeman, Oxley, Sinclair or arguably Karnezis and Broomhead were going to drive us into the top four this year.

Starc: Thanks for getting back to me on this, and sorry for having to revert to the "old" Why don't you put your money where your mouth is....but maybe while you're thinking on it you could answer me these ones:
1. Is it easier to criticise than attempt to understand a problem? ( I know it is for me)

2. Undoubtedly the Hawks have missed players this year I accept that but:
(a) For them it's just been THIS year not the last three like we've had and
(b) For all their injuries they haven't missed a key forward, we've missed key midfielders too for entire seasons but it's the targets up front that spell disaster and render game plans inert. Goalkickers are the real "cattle" see Geelong last year without Hawkins, see who the Swans have been recruiting....it's all about having the best forwards and the Hawks have kept theirs (bar Rioli) all year.

3. "Management and re-occurance" can only be managed by taking an extraordinarily cautious approach to the problem. So our managers are damned if they call for longer recoveries and damned if they shorten them. The game has changed immeasurably in the past three seasons and lists are reflecting that change as more "aerobically gifted" athletes are finding their way onto AFL lists. The balance between aerobic capacity and AFL skill set is vast so our club has gone "young" in it's drafting and that would usually entail some extra soft tissue injuries (as young men develop the bodies necessary to play the game). Freeman and Scharenburg should both enter 2015 in excellent shape given that 2014 has effectively been their "pre-season" but the demands of the game and smaller senior lists mean that every player is now under more physical pressure than they have ever been.

Finally the young guys you've labelled as "not going to drive us into the top four this year" are the same sorts of guys that the Hawks and Swans (and Port) have been using to cover for their ageing or injured stars. Not only were our stars injured but the backups and relief players (role players who could cover for an injured Swan or an injured Reid) they've all been injured too.

The luck must change sometime, by the looks of the Hawks list, the ageing midfield will need some pretty stiff replacements in the next 12-18 months but whilst they have the firepower up front, a good side will beat most other sides simply because they can score. Nothing dents a young side more than not scoring. I hope we score a few this week. With 2 good forwards coming back it will certainly be a chance to improve.

 

[THATSGOLD]

Add ben reid, nathan brown, fasolo and it makes a hell of a difference structure wise. Especially the first two.

To quote dumb and dumber. "So you're telling me there's a chance?"

 

[Maggie5]

Not sure why you need to be smart about it - I would have thought a footy forum is an ok place to exchange different views on different football topics without the old "why don't you get down there and sort it out".

I'd be more than happy NOT to try my hand at the Westpac Centre if someone could actually tell me what our gameplan IS. And if it is relying so heavily on certain players (eg. Reid CHF) to succeed, then it's clearly not very good - especially considering he's played a whole seven or eight games up front in the last five years. Our much-lauded on-ball divsion has actually been pretty stable this year, but is probably the worst performed of all three lines. Buckley, your responsibility.

And with the Hawks, I wouldn't agree that Mitchell, Rioli, Stratton, Gibson, Lake and Sewell are not important cattle in terms of their set up.

Look, I accept we've had an unusually poor run for quite a while with injuries, but the management and recurrance of these surely has to be questioned; particularly in the cases of Dale Thomas (ankle), Beams (quad), Reid (calf) and Freeman (hamstring). And you're also including a lot of players who are hardly crucial or haven't even played yet in your argument. I don't think Scharenberg (who we knew had issues), Freeeman, Oxley, Sinclair or arguably Karnezis and Broomhead were going to drive us into the top four this year.

Game plan is to kick a higher score than your opposition.

 

[jmac70]

Well it will be another thread we can all revisit in that case.

Save us from your "clever" thread bumps.

 

[Leigh Lowther]

First people were questioning the confidence of the players at the club - Now after reading these comments I feel like its more the fans who dont have confidence in the players.

 

[THATSGOLD]

I would rather Elliott's view of the capabilities of the team than your's. Just quietly I think he may know a bit more about it.

Of course, if that's the case there wouldn't be a thread and everyone would just agree with Elliott.

 

[jmac70]

Of course, if that's the case there wouldn't be a thread and everyone would just agree with Elliott.

That's just my view TG. FWIW I think that his comment was not meant to be taken as a declaration that we will win the flag. I think he was simply saying that our best football is capable of beating the top sides. Cearly we have not been able to produce that standard on a consistent basis.

 

[Lefthanded]

I disagree on both counts.

Our best 22 currently, at these ages/experience, is not good enough to compete with the best consistently... it might be in a couple of years.

I think history has shown that gameplans that are defense-first generally tend to be succesful - that appears to be the focus of our gameplan currently, which is a good sign IMO (whether or not the players are able to follow it is another matter). Offensively - it is hard to see the gameplan currently, but we looked much better with Elliot alongside Cloke, and Reid will also change how it looks... but our poor kicking efficiency likely also throws away any actual plan that Bucks might have... and I don't think you can blame our consistent lack of intensity around the ball on the gameplan.
---

I would be worried if Elliot actually believed that we are a flag favourite, or that we are up with the top teams - but I would want every player to believe, that with the right level of effort/execution, we should still be able to beat anybody on our day, and that the players need to strive for that in every game.

Well said and I agree. Some don't understand the difference between being good enough to win consistently versus being able to beat the best on a given day. We might be able to do the latter but to win a flag means winning at least 3 games in a row against 3 of the other best 7 teams in the comp. (& it becomes 4 games in a row when outside the top 4 like we will be IF we make finals). Some of those games might be interstate.

So far this season we've won three games in a row on 2 occasions but neither of those streaks included beating current top 4 teams.
We've won 1 from 3 games interstate this year and would likely need to beat at least one of Swans, Freo & Port interstate.

No chance at a flag this year unless everything went right from here - Reid, Elliott, Fas, PK, Swan, Scharenburg would all need to get & stay healthy with no one significant who has been fit getting injured (Pendlebury, Cloke, Beams, Frost, Keeffe, Witts as a minimum can't be sufficiently replaced).

 

[Chilli Con Incarnate]

Well said and I agree. Some don't understand the difference between being good enough to win consistently versus being able to beat the best on a given day. We might be able to do the latter but to win a flag means winning at least 3 games in a row against 3 of the other best 7 teams in the comp. (& it becomes 4 games in a row when outside the top 4 like we will be IF we make finals). Some of those games might be interstate.

So far this season we've won three games in a row on 2 occasions but neither of those streaks included beating current top 4 teams.
We've won 1 from 3 games interstate this year and would likely need to beat at least one of Swans, Freo & Port interstate.

No chance at a flag this year unless everything went right from here - Reid, Elliott, Fas, PK, Swan, Scharenburg would all need to get & stay healthy with no one significant who has been fit getting injured (Pendlebury, Cloke, Beams, Frost, Keeffe, Witts as a minimum can't be sufficiently replaced).

To win a flag, or even play decent finals footy, you must be a good team. A good team has top line performances and consistency.

We only have top line performances occasionally, and it is rarely for a whole game. It is something we can build towards, but we don't have it this year.

 

[jmac70]

After listening to Elliott's comment on AFL 360 he actually said the group is capable of winning a premiership. He didn't say it would be this year.

 

[Travis bloke]

Yes Pies can be PREMIERS but not this year next two to three years we have a chance.
Lets be realistic people.

 

[Kynge of Begrem]

Before the Collingwood Board media training:
'If you talk to everyone we're capable of winning a premiership, but we've got to play very good football'

After the Collingwood Board media training:
'We should beat Brisbane and GWS, but we will struggle with the rest of the games. Realistically we won't make the eight. We've all pretty much given up for the season and are doing some solid drinking to hit peak form for Mad Monday.'

 

[jmac70]

Yes Pies can be PREMIERS but not this year next two to three years we have a chance.
Lets be realistic people.

Where's the fun in that?

 

[Markfs]

we should have known that Kmart was being upgraded when Elliot made the claim about winning the premiership.... obviously he had inside knowledge of the upgrade and the certainty of a premiership that comes with it...

 

[THATSGOLD]

After listening to Elliott's comment on AFL 360 he actually said the group is capable of winning a premiership. He didn't say it would be this year.

This group would need some bloody fair assistance. This group can not win a flag. In a few years this group won't be this group.

 

[Manic Magpie]

Puff piece. Not worth commenting. has no connection to anything real.

I agree. Does not deserve a thread of its own.