Toast Pods

[Team DJ]

Smith is our loose man, he rarely plays on a dangerous forward. if he does, close your eyes and pray

Im pretty sure Jaensch is the one that Zones off. But what ever. Either way, he would have done better than Thompson, and you are severely under selling what he has down in the past few seasons when he has been able to shutdown and still use his skills out of the back lines.

 

[BobaFett]

I may as well bang my head against the wall.
Well if thats the case and we cant change it, why have we persisted with it?
Is that JPods fault or the Coaches?

Im sure JPod doesnt write his name on the team sheet every week and cross someone else's out.

Our coaches clearly think its the best game plan moving forward, and can't adapt to changing personal

 

[Team DJ]

Our coaches clearly think its the best game plan moving forward, and can't adapt to changing personal

So i repeat.
Is that JPods fault or the Coaches?

If its the Coaches, then why all the hate for JPod?

 

[BobaFett]

So i repeat.
Is that JPods fault or the Coaches?

If its the Coaches, then why all the hate for JPod?

Because i don't agree with you that the game plan isn't suited to our forward line. The problem is our best forward having his position taken by a 33 year old, whilst we aren't a finals team, and whilst we could be developing others

 

[Team DJ]

Because i don't agree with you that the game plan isn't suited to our forward line. The problem is our best forward having his position taken by a 33 year old, whilst we aren't a finals team, and whilst we could be developing others

So who is this forward that could slip into the Lynch role allowing Tex to play deeper? Meaning that we could play the same gamestyle?
Your issue is sounding more and more like a Coaching issue rather then a JPod issue

 

[1970crow]

Oh FFS.
Yes thats exactly what i am saying. The three of them dont work with that game plan.
Its either one plays SANFL and you go two big blokes with mobility around. Or change the game plan to be more direct and give the 3 big guys the best opportunity to mark the ball playing one out.

Tex is a lock, and i think Jenkins is too because of his ability to Ruck. So through no fault of his own JPod misses through structural reasons. Otherwise if you want to play all 3, go with what works long and direct.

Tex moving into Lynch's role doesnt work either. You dont need to be Dean Bailey to work that out. Our own coach should be able to see that without being tapped on the shoulder. He is one of the best 3 forwards in the league inside 50. We dont want him working up and back like Lynch does.

So you basically agree. Based on our game plan and best structure to suit, pods should not be selected as a 3rd tall. One discussion point is why does this continue to happen now and even worse, why did it when lynch was fit and selected as well. Pods has done as well as could be expected from a bloke his age in out team. But the fact that sando cannot see past selecting him ahead of what makes us a better side is a significant issue. Trying to change a game plan or expect delivery to magically improve to suit a redundant 33yo 3rd tall is ludicrous.

Smack and LJ were both the equal of pods in the early rounds, they potentially have a future and yet they were cast aside in favour of a player who has none. Something that Boba Fett has mentioned surprised me when I ventured into a pub in goolwa in June. A big poster of pods which made me thing wtf, how is this guy the face of any crows marketing campaign. He's as hard to drop as Mackay with his newly stamped 4 year extension.

 

[King Elvis]

He's on the big screens at games as the face of our website as well - crazy stuff.

 

[Mr_Moogle]

He's on the big screens at games as the face of our website as well - crazy stuff.

This is pretty frustrating. He's not a game breaker anymore. They knew this when they signed him. He doesn't need the spotlight or extra attention. He's a second-tier player but the club seems to think he's some sort of football messiah.

With that being said, I don't think Pods has been nearly as bad as some people seem to think. The only thing that has disappointed me about him is his kicking. He is great at taking contested grabs but hasn't converted nearly enough. He could have easily had a few 4 or 5 goal games if he just kicked straight. Aside from that, he's performed at the exact level I thought he would.

 

[Golumless]

He'll play all matches next year by the looks of it, they are keen to trade Lynch

I can actually understand the rationale from this.

Right now Lynch's value is around the 15-21 pick mark, now this either buys us into the first round of the draft.. or gives us a first rounder to potentially get a silky player in a position of need... either KPD or outside mid, if we could use Lynch to get us a potential elite outside midfielder, i would seriously consider it.

Now, a left field decision here... do we need to go with three talls, could we potentially go with two and a tallish midfielder being a "psuedo third tall"...the midfielder i am thinking here, is of course, Dangerfield.

My rationale behind this, Dangerfield is a damaging beast, can still get midfield time, can be rotated outside to prolong his career and also creates an interesting dilemma with other coaches... does he get tagged and of course, he is a more then handy forward. He is a ridiculously awkward match up due to physical traits.

Now of course, i accept taking Dangerfield out of the center square weakens us in the clearance department, however if need be, we can rotate him in with him being less battered and someone like Kerridge/Lyons/Grigg should be able to pick up a proportion of that slack.

Thoughts?

 

[crowded house]

I can actually understand the rationale from this.

Right now Lynch's value is around the 15-21 pick mark, now this either buys us into the first round of the draft.. or gives us a first rounder to potentially get a silky player in a position of need... either KPD or outside mid, if we could use Lynch to get us a potential elite outside midfielder, i would seriously consider it.

Now, a left field decision here... do we need to go with three talls, could we potentially go with two and a tallish midfielder being a "psuedo third tall"...the midfielder i am thinking here, is of course, Dangerfield.

My rationale behind this, Dangerfield is a damaging beast, can still get midfield time, can be rotated outside to prolong his career and also creates an interesting dilemma with other coaches... does he get tagged and of course, he is a more then handy forward. He is a ridiculously awkward match up due to physical traits.

Now of course, i accept taking Dangerfield out of the center square weakens us in the clearance department, however if need be, we can rotate him in with him being less battered and someone like Kerridge/Lyons/Grigg should be able to pick up a proportion of that slack.

Thoughts?

I think our perfect forward line set up is Lynch, Jenkins and Walker. Plays tall enough to stretch short defences, but with speed and endurance to spare. Lynch can also play high. I would still rotate Kerridge, Lyons and Danger through the forward line with Betts and Cameron with the crumbs.

Trading Lynch, while netting us a neat pick, limits our flexibility, and makes us easier to match up on. No amount of outside class is going to be effective with the way we set up around stoppages. Until we fix that, all our outside players net us are short footsteps and broken tackles as they get brought into the contest (see Mackay and Hendo).

Smith is our loose man, he rarely plays on a dangerous forward. if he does, close your eyes and pray

I wouldn't put him in the close your eyes and pray box, but his defensive abilities are somewhere between Jaensch 2013 and Jaensch 2014. I think the problems are mainly with the areal ball and when his man's on the lead.

Our expectations of him are really high because of how well he's performed so far, but at the end of the day, he's a young defender. Many better players have been towelled by Deledio. It's like saying that someone is s**t because Dangerfield got 30 touches and kicked 2 goals on them. No, Dangerfield was just awesome. The same view needs to be taken when looking at opposition stars. They're stars for a reason.

 

[crowded house]

He's on the big screens at games as the face of our website as well - crazy stuff.

At his best Pods was a second tier forward in a great side. It's quite ridiculous the amount of promotion he does.

That said, it depends how importantly you rate these crappy promotional tid bits. I mean the fact that Pods does them means that others don't have to do them and can concentrate on more important stuff.

 

[Golumless]

At his best Pods was a second tier forward in a great side. It's quite ridiculous the amount of promotion he does.

That said, it depends how importantly you rate these crappy promotional tid bits. I mean the fact that Pods does them means that others don't have to do them and can concentrate on more important stuff.

Well that's the ideal goal, and of course, you could fool people into believing we are a top club, attracting talent like that as Pods is a well known player from a premiership side.

That said, Danger/Tex/Sloane should do all our marketing.

 

[BobaFett]

I can actually understand the rationale from this.

Right now Lynch's value is around the 15-21 pick mark, now this either buys us into the first round of the draft.. or gives us a first rounder to potentially get a silky player in a position of need... either KPD or outside mid, if we could use Lynch to get us a potential elite outside midfielder, i would seriously consider it.

Now, a left field decision here... do we need to go with three talls, could we potentially go with two and a tallish midfielder being a "psuedo third tall"...the midfielder i am thinking here, is of course, Dangerfield.

My rationale behind this, Dangerfield is a damaging beast, can still get midfield time, can be rotated outside to prolong his career and also creates an interesting dilemma with other coaches... does he get tagged and of course, he is a more then handy forward. He is a ridiculously awkward match up due to physical traits.

Now of course, i accept taking Dangerfield out of the center square weakens us in the clearance department, however if need be, we can rotate him in with him being less battered and someone like Kerridge/Lyons/Grigg should be able to pick up a proportion of that slack.

Thoughts?

Sounds outstanding.

Trade our second best forward, move our best midfielder into the forward line, and hope we pick up a gun in the draft with a late first rounder.

The club would never trade lynch willingly, it would be that lynch would walk, which would mean the club that he goes to would lowball us because they know he wants out.

But all in all, this sounds like a move our football club would do. They would pair it with an announcement that we are bringing in Quentin lynch after he was let go from collingwood lol

He's on the big screens at games as the face of our website as well - crazy stuff.

It's what I have been telling people all year, he is the only player in out history where his performance does not impact his selection. He could have zero touches, and his selection would be justified by Sanderson. It's negated our development of other players, and essentially, it's put us backwards

 

[spenze]

At his best Pods was a second tier forward in a great side. It's quite ridiculous the amount of promotion he does.

That said, it depends how importantly you rate these crappy promotional tid bits. I mean the fact that Pods does them means that others don't have to do them and can concentrate on more important stuff.

Shanking kicks, missing tackles?

 

[Golumless]

I think our perfect forward line set up is Lynch, Jenkins and Walker. Plays tall enough to stretch short defences, but with speed and endurance to spare. Lynch can also play high. I would still rotate Kerridge, Lyons and Danger through the forward line with Betts and Cameron with the crumbs.

Trading Lynch, while netting us a neat pick, limits our flexibility, and makes us easier to match up on. No amount of outside class is going to be effective with the way we set up around stoppages. Until we fix that, all our outside players net us are short footsteps and broken tackles as they get brought into the contest (see Mackay and Hendo).

Right now, i do agree that is our most powerful forward line in all of these scenarios, however a 3rd tall isn't a difficult position to replace and arguably, this is trying to fix two birds with one stone kind of thing. I do agree that we should be rotating through the midfield more and having a couple of taller mids can create flexibility as well... it's kind of the question do we want a dedicated third tall or another mid.. both have upsides and downsides in this equation.

But picture Dangerfield allowed to hover at free will between the midfield and the forward line, whilst you say Lynch gives flexibility, if that works, i'd be more worried about Dangerfield being able to consistently get in dangerous positions, then i'd ever worry about Lynch. In a lot of ways, i'm thinking of him being, to use a soccer term, a false number 9.

Also, we can actually compensate by carrying another defensive minded midfielder in the middle, which could actually help our structure which a very glaring problem we have is how we set up and that is a fair point that we aren't setting up our outside players to have much success.

 

[1970crow]

What a great recruit he has been!!!
Am I right????

No. We haven't made the 8 and either of smack or LJ could have provided his 14 possessions per game. In fact they both did.

 

[Bailey01]

No. We haven't made the 8 and either of smack or LJ could have provided his 14 possessions per game. In fact they both did.

Should I get a sarcasm sign? I was just trying to stir up Bobafett.

 

[1970crow]

Should I get a sarcasm sign? I was just trying to stir up Bobafett.

Apologies, but I am boba's more reasonable 2ic. At least most of the time. A couple of rums in and I just noticed the wink. Carry on my friend with a thousand apologies from myself.

 

[AFC979810]

Sounds outstanding.

Trade our second best forward, move our best midfielder into the forward line, and hope we pick up a gun in the draft with a late first rounder.

The club would never trade lynch willingly, it would be that lynch would walk, which would mean the club that he goes to would lowball us because they know he wants out.

On what planet is Lynch our second best forward. Easily Walker, Betts, Jenkins...

Lynch has played 31 games across 3 seasons with us and kicked 47 goals - these are pretty heavily padded stats since over 1/5th of his goals came in one game against one of the worst AFL sides to take the park.

 

[AFC979810]

No. We haven't made the 8 and either of smack or LJ could have provided his 14 possessions per game. In fact they both did.

Could they have provided the Marks Inside 50 and Contested Marks that Pods has?

 

[AFC979810]

Because i don't agree with you that the game plan isn't suited to our forward line. The problem is our best forward having his position taken by a 33 year old, whilst we aren't a finals team, and whilst we could be developing others

In all honesty though what players do we have who are contested marks inside 50 in our team?

For me our forward line depth looks like this:

#1 Key Forward - Walker, Jenkins, Johnston.
#2 Key Forward Contested Mark - Podsiadly, McKernan
#3 Third leading forward - Lynch, Porps
#4 Small Attacking Forward - Betts, Nobody
#5 Small Defensive Forward - Cameron, Petrenko.

I think our side would have looked a lot more dangerous if we acknowledged that Jenkins isn't a contested marking forward and swapped him and Pods around.
Heading into 2015 - I would love us to trade Jenkins in order to get a true contested marking forward who can set up our structure properly.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Could they have provided the Marks Inside 50 and Contested Marks that Pods has?

What's the point of marks inside 50? Why is it a key stat?

 

[AFC979810]

What's the point of marks inside 50? Why is it a key stat?

Marks inside 50 are one step below goals for key forwards. Its a hugely important stat because its an uncontested shot at goal. Its the #1 focus of forward lines.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Marks inside 50 are one step below goals for key forwards. Its a hugely important stat because its an uncontested shot at goal. Its the #1 focus of forward lines.

And ultimately it has delivered 25 goals in a full season. I'm not a Johnston fan by any stretch but I'm confident he would have kicked more than that. Heck Lyons would have kicked that many playing as a forward.

 

[AFC979810]

And ultimately it has delivered 25 goals in a full season. I'm not a Johnston fan by any stretch but I'm confident he would have kicked more than that. Heck Lyons would have kicked that many playing as a forward.

But how much time has he spent as a pure forward? I think he has been played up the ground and as a loose man in defense far too much this year.

He is a very good as a contested mark when played out of the goal square. Stop using him as a stop gap and send Jenkins further up the ground where he can use his pace and lead to his hearts content.

The issue is we have seen Eddie Betts one out inside 50 and we kick long on top of his head. Why not just put Pods next to him - rather than have him being the target of our kickins?