Analysis Making the Top 4 and building to a flag. 4TH is IRRELEVANT, MAKE IT TOP 3

[PAFC66]

13 years and no top 4. Minnow standards now

 

[Janus]

You love talking about the culture of the playing group and flatout refuse to acknowledge the wider club culture that drives that player culture.

The AFL doesn't care if we win, so David Koch doesn't prioritise winning, and doesn't hold his subordinates accountable for poor performance.

No playing group will foster a premiership culture while the club leadership don't drive that culture.

And you know this how exactly? Because we didn't play Lycett against North Melbourne? Because we dropped Howard? He proved why he was dropped when he requested a trade to St Kilda - too concerned about his own personal game than doing what it takes for the team.

What if we are actually doing everything that we can to win, and we are weeding out the players who don't want to be a part of that sort of culture - where they will sacrifice their own glory for that of the team?

Be honest with yourself and look at the performances of the players that have left - do you really think they were giving their very best every week in the role they were asked to play? That's not driven by club culture. That's driven by personal pride and love for your teammates.

“The work we do is a reflection of who we are. If we’re sloppy at it, it’s because we’re sloppy inside. If we’re late at it, it’s because we’re late inside. If we’re bored by it, it’s because we’re bored inside, with ourselves, not with the work. The most menial work can be a piece of art when done by an artist. So the job here is not outside of ourselves, but inside of ourselves. How we do our work becomes a mirror of how we are inside.”

Ergo, players who are only interested in personal accolades over team performance are players who will always elevate the standard of their work when they are placed in a position of preference - i.e Howard in defence, Ryder in ruck. Howard played great forward against St Kilda - charging into packs and marking everything - when he thought that he was only doing it until Dixon came back. It was when his performance as a forward was actually better than his performance as a defender and he was kicked out of his preferred position that his performance plummeted and he was eventually dropped.

He didn't want to do what it took for the team to succeed. So he's gone.

When someone who has no vested interest in seeing Port Adelaide succeed - a guy who has been around football his entire life - says that the issue is with the playing group and their want to sacrifice, isn't it time to actually think that maybe that's exactly what the problem is?

 

[El_Scorcho]

And you know this how exactly? Because we didn't play Lycett against North Melbourne? Because we dropped Howard? He proved why he was dropped when he requested a trade to St Kilda - too concerned about his own personal game than doing what it takes for the team.

What if we are actually doing everything that we can to win, and we are weeding out the players who don't want to be a part of that sort of culture - where they will sacrifice their own glory for that of the team?

Be honest with yourself and look at the performances of the players that have left - do you really think they were giving their very best every week in the role they were asked to play? That's not driven by club culture. That's driven by personal pride and love for your teammates.

“The work we do is a reflection of who we are. If we’re sloppy at it, it’s because we’re sloppy inside. If we’re late at it, it’s because we’re late inside. If we’re bored by it, it’s because we’re bored inside, with ourselves, not with the work. The most menial work can be a piece of art when done by an artist. So the job here is not outside of ourselves, but inside of ourselves. How we do our work becomes a mirror of how we are inside.”

Ergo, players who are only interested in personal accolades over team performance are players who will always elevate the standard of their work when they are placed in a position of preference - i.e Howard in defence, Ryder in ruck. Howard played great forward against St Kilda - charging into packs and marking everything - when he thought that he was only doing it until Dixon came back. It was when his performance as a forward was actually better than his performance as a defender and he was kicked out of his preferred position that his performance plummeted and he was eventually dropped.

He didn't want to do what it took for the team to succeed. So he's gone.

When someone who has no vested interest in seeing Port Adelaide succeed - a guy who has been around football his entire life - says that the issue is with the playing group and their want to sacrifice, isn't it time to actually think that maybe that's exactly what the problem is?

A whole post about effect without addressing cause. I'm not arguing that the playing list is great, I'm arguing that no playing list will ever achieve the sort of buy in that a premiership demands without a significant change in club leadership, whether it be attitude or personnel.

We are 7 years into the Koch, Thomas and Hinkley era. Only 6 players on our 2019 list were on the list prior to Hinkley's arrival.

We aren't just unlucky.

 

[Schulzenfest]

Janus, the whole 'Howard (and Wingard when he was in the same boat last year) isn't willing to do what it takes for the team to succeed' thing falls down at one very obvious hurdle. The roles they were unhappy at being asked to play weren't actually helping the team succeed.

 

[Janus]

A whole post about effect without addressing cause. I'm not arguing that the playing list is great, I'm arguing that no playing list will ever achieve the sort of buy in that a premiership demands without a significant change in club leadership, whether it be attitude or personnel.

We are 7 years into the Koch, Thomas and Hinkley era. Only 6 players on our 2019 list were on the list prior to Hinkley's arrival.

We aren't just unlucky.

How long do you think that change in attitude takes? Especially when you're dealing with a club that had its heart ripped out in 2007 when its head coach listened to his assistant about the spectacle of the grand final being more important than protecting the spirit of his own players? And then that same club being too gutless to get rid of this coach - who, despite his football acumen should never, EVER be allowed near an AFL head coaching role again for that call (I actually can't believe he hasn't figured this out himself) - effectively hamstringing the football department and setting the club on a path to self-destruction that was literally one AFL bailout away from taking place.

We're not 7 years into the Koch, Thomas and Hinkley era. We are 7 years into rebuilding a club psyche that was shattered beyond recognition - the years from 2008-2012 did nothing but pour salt into a wounded soul with the appointment of a coach that had no idea what he was doing. It's not like GWS who started from zero in 2012...we started from the negative at the end of 2012. You can pretend that this isn't the case all you like, but it's not the truth. And we had to do it with shit draft picks due to Gold Coast and GWS coming into the competition.

People act like these guys were handed the keys to a fully functional club with a decent scouting network, a shitload of talent, good development system and strong culture, when the reality is that they were handed to a dysfunctional mess with a scouting network that made error after error, players that held no value at the trade table due to poor development, a handful of talented players who yearned for being coached properly and a culture based around solipsism.

For us to turn that around in 7 years to the point where a Pick 54 can actually increase in value through 5 years in our development system says how much progress has been made. Because I remember when we delisted two first round draft picks in Butcher and Moore that had been on our list for ages because no one wanted to trade for them.

That's how you know your system is working. It's why Adelaide always gets something for their players - sometimes way over the odds. Other clubs rate their development system.

I know exactly what the cause is. And I know the club is doing everything it can to fix it. Winning a premiership is a by product of everything else being right. That means playing the best players regardless of age, whether they be young or old. It means giving young talent as much as they are able to cope with and then exposing them to a higher level of opponent and seeing if they can elevate to that level. It means everyone being on the same page both offensively and defensively.

When we make finals again next year, it won't be seen as an achievement, but a stepping stone on the way to the ultimate goal. Hinkley shifting from 'we want to play finals' to 'we want to win a premiership' is a significant shift in attitude for mine.

Janus, the whole 'Howard (and Wingard when he was in the same boat last year) isn't willing to do what it takes for the team to succeed' thing falls down at one very obvious hurdle. The roles they were unhappy at being asked to play weren't actually helping the team succeed.

Are you telling me that against GWS, Howard couldn't have made it more difficult for Davis and Haynes to take those intercept marks? Actually attempt to crash the pack and bring the ball to ground in that last quarter when we had all those inside 50s? Or was more important to sulk about the fact that he wasn't being played in defence? I mean, it wasn't like that was a high scoring game that we needed him back there anyway.

They weren't helping the team succeed because they made sure with their sulking attitude that they didn't help the team succeed. The team paid the price for their vanity and ego. If Howard was putting in max effort, doing what he could and he was just shit at being a forward, then sure, I'll buy that the role he was being asked to play wasn't helping the team succeed, and put it on the coaches for stupidly playing Howard (or Wingard last year) up forward. But if you left that game thinking 'Yeah, Howard tried his guts out against the GWS defence', you'd be lying to yourself.

It's like Wingard last year being a dickhead and passing off at every opportunity because he was chastised for being to greedy in front of goal. Don't be a knob about it, just bring your teammates into the play if they have a better angle and chance of kicking the goal. It's not hard.

 

[El_Scorcho]

How long do you think that change in attitude takes?

I've heard if they spend 2 hours a week studying hermetic philosophy we'll win the flag in 2020.

Especially when you're dealing with a club that had its heart ripped out in 2007 when its head coach listened to his assistant about the spectacle of the grand final being more important than protecting the spirit of his own players? And then that same club being too gutless to get rid of this coach - who, despite his football acumen should never, EVER be allowed near an AFL head coaching role again for that call (I actually can't believe he hasn't figured this out himself) - effectively hamstringing the football department and setting the club on a path to self-destruction that was literally one AFL bailout away from taking place.

We're not 7 years into the Koch, Thomas and Hinkley era. We are 7 years into rebuilding a club psyche that was shattered beyond recognition - the years from 2008-2012 did nothing but pour salt into a wounded soul with the appointment of a coach that had no idea what he was doing. It's not like GWS who started from zero in 2012...we started from the negative at the end of 2012. You can pretend that this isn't the case all you like, but it's not the truth. And we had to do it with shit draft picks due to Gold Coast and GWS coming into the competition.

People act like these guys were handed the keys to a fully functional club with a decent scouting network, a shitload of talent, good development system and strong culture, when the reality is that they were handed to a dysfunctional mess with a scouting network that made error after error, players that held no value at the trade table due to poor development, a handful of talented players who yearned for being coached properly and a culture based around solipsism.

For us to turn that around in 7 years to the point where a Pick 54 can actually increase in value through 5 years in our development system says how much progress has been made. Because I remember when we delisted two first round draft picks in Butcher and Moore that had been on our list for ages because no one wanted to trade for them.

That's how you know your system is working. It's why Adelaide always gets something for their players - sometimes way over the odds. Other clubs rate their development system.

I know exactly what the cause is. And I know the club is doing everything it can to fix it. Winning a premiership is a by product of everything else being right. That means playing the best players regardless of age, whether they be young or old. It means giving young talent as much as they are able to cope with and then exposing them to a higher level of opponent and seeing if they can elevate to that level. It means everyone being on the same page both offensively and defensively.

When we make finals again next year, it won't be seen as an achievement, but a stepping stone on the way to the ultimate goal. Hinkley shifting from 'we want to play finals' to 'we want to win a premiership' is a significant shift in attitude for mine.

Excusing our 2019 performance because of something that happened in 2007 is the kind of loser attitude that has seen us underachieve for half a decade.

You certainly weren't worried about 2007 when you predicted that we'd win the flag every year from 2015-2018. You were right to make those predictions as an optimist, we had everything we needed to be successful. A very average Bulldogs team won a flag from 7th ffs.

The only impact that 2007 has on us now is the impact that the club leadership allows it to have on us. Every time someone at the clubs talks about how bad we were in 2011-12, they invite that negativity back into our minds. They excuse poor performances, both on and off field. The bar we set for ourselves is one of a club at it's lowest ebb, who was full of mentally scarred players and was on the bones of it's arse financially. We set a low bar and we perform accordingly.

For someone who posts extensively about mindfulness and philosophy, your refusal to acknowledge the psychological impact on the players of the loser attitude of our current club leadership is mind numbing.

 

[Duck Farmer]

We're not 7 years into the Koch, Thomas and Hinkley era. We are 7 years into rebuilding a club psyche that was shattered beyond recognition - the years from 2008-2012 did nothing but pour salt into a wounded soul with the appointment of a coach that had no idea what he was doing. It's not like GWS who started from zero in 2012...we started from the negative at the end of 2012. You can pretend that this isn't the case all you like, but it's not the truth. And we had to do it with shit draft picks due to Gold Coast and GWS coming into the competition.

Yet, you predict that we will win the premiership every year. Go figure.

 

[MrChow]

In regards to ‘leadership’ - Ken is being hammered pretty hard atm, but let’s look at the playing performances of any of our leaders over 26 - pretty inconsistent bunch year to year. Name one player (except maybe Robbie), who is consistent year to year? Westhoff, Boak, Hartlett, Jonas, Ebert, Dixon, etc - they ain’t leading us to a flag. We lack elite midfielders in this age group.

The club knows this. The players know this (sometimes to their own detriment).

The club is simply trying to build value in its list, with trading Howard, Wingate, Polec And I don’t mind Janus’s culture argument. It can work along side this.

Keeping those older guys, and attracting free agents has helped build the capital. Bottoming out, and going hard at the draft like Brisbane - was never going to work for us - financially.

I don’t mind our long term trajectory. Our drafting and trading has been fairly sound over the past few years. It is a hard pill for fans to swallow, as fans are pretty short term in their thinking- just look at the week to week BigFooty trends.

With this strategy in mind, I wouldn’t be surprised if Port goes for Grundy (and Orazio) as free agents. And trades out either Hayes or Ladhams. Don’t think the club would have the balls for trading Lycett - This would also look bad.

Next year another player of note will go, could be Wines, SPP? Will be dependent on draft return, just like Howard

 

[PowerLil]

In regards to ‘leadership’ - Ken is being hammered pretty hard atm, but let’s look at the playing performances of any of our leaders over 26 - pretty inconsistent bunch year to year. Name one player (except maybe Robbie), who is consistent year to year? Westhoff, Boak, Hartlett, Jonas, Ebert, Dixon, etc - they ain’t leading us to a flag. We lack elite midfielders in this age group.

The club knows this. The players know this (sometimes to their own detriment).

The club is simply trying to build value in its list, with trading Howard, Wingate, Polec And I don’t mind Janus’s culture argument. It can work along side this.

Keeping those older guys, and attracting free agents has helped build the capital. Bottoming out, and going hard at the draft like Brisbane - was never going to work for us - financially.

I don’t mind our long term trajectory. Our drafting and trading has been fairly sound over the past few years. It is a hard pill for fans to swallow, as fans are pretty short term in their thinking- just look at the week to week BigFooty trends.

With this strategy in mind, I wouldn’t be surprised if Port goes for Grundy (and Orazio) as free agents. And trades out either Hayes or Ladhams. Don’t think the club would have the balls for trading Lycett - This would also look bad.

Next year another player of note will go, could be Wines, SPP? Will be dependent on draft return, just like Howard

Ken is being hammered pretty hard because he deserves it.

 

[charcolechaddy]

I’m sorry Janus our game plan is a train wreck ,our structures are non existent and our development of players is the laughing stock of the AFL.

Until we have change at the top we are destined for mediocrity.

 

[charcolechaddy]

In regards to ‘leadership’ - Ken is being hammered pretty hard atm, but let’s look at the playing performances of any of our leaders over 26 - pretty inconsistent bunch year to year. Name one player (except maybe Robbie), who is consistent year to year? Westhoff, Boak, Hartlett, Jonas, Ebert, Dixon, etc - they ain’t leading us to a flag. We lack elite midfielders in this age group.

The club knows this. The players know this (sometimes to their own detriment).

The club is simply trying to build value in its list, with trading Howard, Wingate, Polec And I don’t mind Janus’s culture argument. It can work along side this.

Keeping those older guys, and attracting free agents has helped build the capital. Bottoming out, and going hard at the draft like Brisbane - was never going to work for us - financially.

I don’t mind our long term trajectory. Our drafting and trading has been fairly sound over the past few years. It is a hard pill for fans to swallow, as fans are pretty short term in their thinking- just look at the week to week BigFooty trends.

With this strategy in mind, I wouldn’t be surprised if Port goes for Grundy (and Orazio) as free agents. And trades out either Hayes or Ladhams. Don’t think the club would have the balls for trading Lycett - This would also look bad.

Next year another player of note will go, could be Wines, SPP? Will be dependent on draft return, just like Howard

It is the clubs job to identify and produce leaders, name me one that you can bank on?

If we have decided to rebuild thru the draft why trade a 23 year old KP player to only have to replace him?

God help us if we trade for Grundy when rucks are the only area we have quality surplus in, id be happy to trade Wines for this reason.

Do you really think we are financially worse off than Brisbane, if so god help us.

 

[Schulzenfest]

Are you telling me that against GWS, Howard couldn't have made it more difficult for Davis and Haynes to take those intercept marks? Actually attempt to crash the pack and bring the ball to ground in that last quarter when we had all those inside 50s?

He possibly could have if he'd Dixon and/or Marshall up there to take some heat on him and wasn't being expected by our ******* coaches to carry the forward line by himself. Our coaches are asking Sisyphus to push a boulder up an endless hill, and you're blaming the lack of success on Sisyphus not having a positive attitude about boulder pushing.

I'll flip it around on you, do you honestly think that the forward line we put on the park that day while Dixon and Marshall played SANFL was the best forward line our coaches could've selected to allow us to win that game?

They weren't helping the team succeed because they made sure with their sulking attitude that they didn't help the team succeed.

I can't wait for us to chuck Zac Butters in the ruck next year and you to blame his failure in that role on his attitude.

 

[Harlott]

In regards to ‘leadership’ - Ken is being hammered pretty hard atm, but let’s look at the playing performances of any of our leaders over 26 - pretty inconsistent bunch year to year. Name one player (except maybe Robbie), who is consistent year to year? Westhoff, Boak, Hartlett, Jonas, Ebert, Dixon, etc - they ain’t leading us to a flag. We lack elite midfielders in this age group.

The club knows this. The players know this (sometimes to their own detriment).

The club is simply trying to build value in its list, with trading Howard, Wingate, Polec And I don’t mind Janus’s culture argument. It can work along side this.

Keeping those older guys, and attracting free agents has helped build the capital. Bottoming out, and going hard at the draft like Brisbane - was never going to work for us - financially.

I don’t mind our long term trajectory. Our drafting and trading has been fairly sound over the past few years. It is a hard pill for fans to swallow, as fans are pretty short term in their thinking- just look at the week to week BigFooty trends.

With this strategy in mind, I wouldn’t be surprised if Port goes for Grundy (and Orazio) as free agents. And trades out either Hayes or Ladhams. Don’t think the club would have the balls for trading Lycett - This would also look bad.

Next year another player of note will go, could be Wines, SPP? Will be dependent on draft return, just like Howard

Boak had been until sent off to Siberia.

 

[raptalia]

In regards to ‘leadership’ - Ken is being hammered pretty hard atm, but let’s look at the playing performances of any of our leaders over 26 - pretty inconsistent bunch year to year. Name one player (except maybe Robbie), who is consistent year to year? Westhoff, Boak, Hartlett, Jonas, Ebert, Dixon, etc - they ain’t leading us to a flag. We lack elite midfielders in this age group.

The club knows this. The players know this (sometimes to their own detriment).

The club is simply trying to build value in its list, with trading Howard, Wingate, Polec And I don’t mind Janus’s culture argument. It can work along side this.

Keeping those older guys, and attracting free agents has helped build the capital. Bottoming out, and going hard at the draft like Brisbane - was never going to work for us - financially.

I don’t mind our long term trajectory. Our drafting and trading has been fairly sound over the past few years. It is a hard pill for fans to swallow, as fans are pretty short term in their thinking- just look at the week to week BigFooty trends.

With this strategy in mind, I wouldn’t be surprised if Port goes for Grundy (and Orazio) as free agents. And trades out either Hayes or Ladhams. Don’t think the club would have the balls for trading Lycett - This would also look bad.

Next year another player of note will go, could be Wines, SPP? Will be dependent on draft return, just like Howard

You say our trading in recent years has something to do with a long term strategy. Recruiting players like Ryder, Dixon, Rockliff, Watts, Motlop probably had nothing to do with a 'long term look'. It was more likely based on the fact we made a Preliminary Final in 2014 and someone thought we only needed a couple of key players to go all the way. These players are all 28 plus next year so if they are part of any long term strategy it had better hurry up and provide results.

You want to build a list on a long term basis yet you are prepared to trade one or more of Wines, Ladhams, Powell-Pepper, Hayes and Lycett? How do you build a Premiership challenging list if you trade out your better performers in the hope of striking it rich in the lottery known as the National Draft?

There is nothing consistent with our list building as there has been a shift in strategy since 2018. While once we were drafting to top up our list and give us a shot at a flag we are now trading to maximise our Draft position in the hope of repeating the results of 2018. OK if it works for three or four years and if the cost is not too high. But what is the point in taking a player like Sam Powell Pepper at pick #18 in the 2016 Draft if you are going to trade him out in 2020? You are not gaining anything.

 

[FishingRick04]

Blight on his radio show when discussing the Crows said coach and senior players lead culture at the club.

To which I agree, this is why I’m so disappointed in our continued faith in our senior players. Maybe they are great players, but with 3 finals series in 12 years, let’s accept the fact they are not good leaders or developing a successful culture?

Are they selfish I. The ground or off it? Are they just mentally weak and don’t want winning enough? I don’t know, but for years we have lacked composure. Robbie has missed clutch moments, Westhoff has missed clutch moments. Everyone can I’m sure but they have repeatedly.

To me this little chinks fall under the radar to many. Of his not his fault we lost the game missing the winning goal kick at the end, it’s a team sport, ultimately if you want it enough you will take the opportunity, heaven help me, like Captain Selwood does. He’s clutch.

This is why we continue to have repeat failure. Choco was in bed with his weak senior leaders after 07, and Hinkley is too. What happen to Ken’s unrelenting pursuit to winning and hating loosing? He has seemed to roll over.

It’s the same old that keep being held accountable and getting chopped whilst the repeat offenders stay and we get the same results.

Jonas not swapping players with Ebert last year causing a late goal to West Coast, clutch mistake cost games.

I don’t think we train enough for end of game role play and if we do, our training clear sucks. Our close loss history is disturbing to the senses.

The more things change the more they stay the same.

 

[*PAF]

It wasnnnn't my fault.
I ran out of gas.
My tux didn't come back from the cleaners.
I didn't have money for a cab fare.
I had a flat tyre.
...

 

[Janus]

He possibly could have if he'd Dixon and/or Marshall up there to take some heat on him and wasn't being expected by our ******* coaches to carry the forward line by himself. Our coaches are asking Sisyphus to push a boulder up an endless hill, and you're blaming the lack of success on Sisyphus not having a positive attitude about boulder pushing.

I'll flip it around on you, do you honestly think that the forward line we put on the park that day while Dixon and Marshall played SANFL was the best forward line our coaches could've selected to allow us to win that game?



I can't wait for us to chuck Zac Butters in the ruck next year and you to blame his failure in that role on his attitude.

It’s easy to take the argument for the negative because you can always point to hypotheticals as being the correct path instead of dealing with what actually happened.

Would Dixon and Marshall have made it better? Maybe. It could have made it worse too.

I’m not interested in hypotheticals. I’m interested in what actually happened. And what happened was a player who quit on his teammates because he didn’t like what he was asked to do. It wasn’t an impossible task. Of course, it didn’t help that he was joined by another quitter in Ryder who displayed the same attitude.

If you’re playing Dixon and Marshall, you’re not playing Howard and Ryder. There’s a limit to how many talls you can play and still keep the ball locked inside the front half.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

I’m not interested in hypotheticals........

Yes you are. This whole thread is about hypothetical projecting forward, based on what has really happened.

 

[Janus]

I've heard if they spend 2 hours a week studying hermetic philosophy we'll win the flag in 2020.

Of course. But that’s esoteric knowledge only known by a few. I’m talking about how long it takes on the path they are on now.

Excusing our 2019 performance because of something that happened in 2007 is the kind of loser attitude that has seen us underachieve for half a decade.

Not an excuse. Cause and effect. I know you like to think that day didn’t happen, but it did. And it destroyed the club because the one person who should have protected the players didn’t do so.

You certainly weren't worried about 2007 when you predicted that we'd win the flag every year from 2015-2018. You were right to make those predictions as an optimist, we had everything we needed to be successful. A very average Bulldogs team won a flag from 7th ffs.

I am an outside observer. And I hadn’t studied Hermetic philosophy until this year.

We had everything we needed except the one thing that is missing. I recall a part in the gospels where a man asks Jesus what he must do to inherit everlasting life.

“You know the law,” he replied. “You must not steal. You must not commit adultery. Honour your father and your mother, and so on.”

“Lord, all these things I have been keeping from my youth.”

“One thing is missing about you. Go, sell what things you have and give the money to the poor, and come be my follower.”

And he goes away grieved, because he was very rich.

Now, I’m paraphrasing the account, but the point is sound, and it’s the point Buckenara is making - there comes a point where the players have to decide if a premiership is more important than their personal glory. Every single year I hope that this is the year they have that revelation, and every single year I’m disappointed with their response as they ‘go away grieved’ because they’d rather wakeboard, or go to nightclubs at 3am, or a myriad of other things in the pursuit of a work/life balance that is skewed too far in the life direction.

The only impact that 2007 has on us now is the impact that the club leadership allows it to have on us. Every time someone at the clubs talks about how bad we were in 2011-12, they invite that negativity back into our minds. They excuse poor performances, both on and off field. The bar we set for ourselves is one of a club at it's lowest ebb, who was full of mentally scarred players and was on the bones of it's arse financially. We set a low bar and we perform accordingly.

2011-12 weren’t phantasm years. They actually happened. If mentioning them results in a negative mindset from the players or somehow gives them an excuse to perform shit, the problem is still an internal one in the minds of the players. The Hermeticist accepts the role they have played in the outcome of their life and seeks to rectify it by becoming the alchemical Magus that can alter their reality.

Ignoring negative thoughts is what delusional people do. It’s about taking those negative thoughts and turning them into positive ones by disassociating yourself from them.

I’ll give you a classic example of this. 119 was the losing margin of the 2007 grand final. And I‘ve lost count of the amount of times an opposition supporter on BigFooty will use this as a definitive argument stopper to a Port supporter.

If someone tried that shit with me, I’d acknowledge that it was the losing margin, say that is what happens when you have a coach that is more worried about the spectacle than his own players, and then ask what that has to do with the point I was making...and if they had only mentioned it because they were desperate.

That’s how you turn a negative thought into a positive one.

For someone who posts extensively about mindfulness and philosophy, your refusal to acknowledge the psychological impact on the players of the loser attitude of our current club leadership is mind numbing.

Psychological impact only happens when you allow it. That’s the whole point of philosophy and mindfulness.

 

[Schulzenfest]

I’m not interested in hypotheticals. I’m interested in what actually happened. And what happened was a player who quit on his teammates because he didn’t like what he was asked to do. It wasn’t an impossible task. Of course, it didn’t help that he was joined by another quitter in Ryder who displayed the same attitude.

It was a forward line with zero natural key forwards up against the best intercept marking one two punch in the competition. It may not have been an 'impossible' task in the literal sense but in football terms it was about as close to one as you could get.

If you’re playing Dixon and Marshall, you’re not playing Howard and Ryder.

Or you're playing Howard in his actual position. And if that means Ken's mate Westhoff gets dropped and Ken has another public teary about it, so be it.

There’s a limit to how many talls you can play and still keep the ball locked inside the front half.

And here's the thing that neither you or our coach seem to be understand. There's also a limit on how few tall forwards you can play and still keep the ball locked inside the front half. Just ask Dylan Grimes, Alex Keath and Nick Haynes after their 3 vote games against us.

You're not allowed to tackle someone who's just taken a mark over your head because they're half a foot taller than you.

 

[GremioPower]

 

[Janus]

It was a forward line with zero natural key forwards up against the best intercept marking one two punch in the competition. It may not have been an 'impossible' task in the literal sense but in football terms it was about as close to one as you could get.

Eric Hipwood played an entire game hobbled against GWS away from home and helped Brisbane win the game. Are you saying a fully fit Howard is a worse forward than an injured Hipwood? I’m not expecting him to take marks. I’m expecting him to create a contest. That’s all.

Or you're playing Howard in his actual position. And if that means Ken's mate Westhoff gets dropped and Ken has another public teary about it, so be it.

You’ll find out soon enough why we were okay trading Howard and why we shifted him out of defence.

And here's the thing that neither you or our coach seem to be understand. There's also a limit on how few tall forwards you can play and still keep the ball locked inside the front half. Just ask Dylan Grimes, Alex Keath and Nick Haynes after their 3 vote games against us.

You're not allowed to tackle someone who's just taken a mark over your head because they're half a foot taller than you.

Okay. Go through the finalists this year and tell me how many talls they played in the forward line. Then come back to me about what I don't understand.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Blight on his radio show when discussing the Crows said coach and senior players lead culture at the club.

To which I agree, this is why I’m so disappointed in our continued faith in our senior players. Maybe they are great players, but with 3 finals series in 12 years, let’s accept the fact they are not good leaders or developing a successful culture?

Are they selfish I. The ground or off it? Are they just mentally weak and don’t want winning enough? I don’t know, but for years we have lacked composure. Robbie has missed clutch moments, Westhoff has missed clutch moments. Everyone can I’m sure but they have repeatedly.

To me this little chinks fall under the radar to many. Of his not his fault we lost the game missing the winning goal kick at the end, it’s a team sport, ultimately if you want it enough you will take the opportunity, heaven help me, like Captain Selwood does. He’s clutch.

This is why we continue to have repeat failure. Choco was in bed with his weak senior leaders after 07, and Hinkley is too. What happen to Ken’s unrelenting pursuit to winning and hating loosing? He has seemed to roll over.

It’s the same old that keep being held accountable and getting chopped whilst the repeat offenders stay and we get the same results.

Jonas not swapping players with Ebert last year causing a late goal to West Coast, clutch mistake cost games.

I don’t think we train enough for end of game role play and if we do, our training clear sucks. Our close loss history is disturbing to the senses.

The more things change the more they stay the same.

So will Ken, Cripps and Davies readily cut - Boak, Westhoff, Robbie, Ebo, Hartlett, Charlie, Jonas, Sam Gray etc, the perennial failures because they have failed again and again?? They try hard but they are failures when it counts.

No, because that list management team have a pay cheque to collect.

No, because Ken wants to boof the players. he loves them and he wants to be best mates with them. When someone like Lycett, a premiership player, something Ken never was, tells him the truth, some tough love, Ken drops him.

No, because we have 2 sometimes 3 against the big odds, miracle wins a year, in the first part of the season, maybe up to Rd 15 of the season, Ken forgives their past sins because he hopes we can still make finals, and he keeps his job.

The reality is that when the old guys play well the kids get to star and are the cream on top. They do it against cellar dwellers and middle class sides but don't do it often enough against the best sides.

But there should be a rule. If you are a senior player and you get ZERO coaches votes 3 games in a row, then you should get dropped for a couple of weeks, irrespective if you are getting paid $900,000 a year.

But no way could the 3 above stomach having $5 million of salaried players, over and above the players getting minimum chips or a bit more, playing in the Maggies for a few weeks a year. It would be proof they don't know how to built a list and offer over paid contracts to players who are not good enough.

 

[NoddyHolder]

Okay. Go through the finalists this year and tell me how many talls they played in the forward line.

The premiers played 2 genuine key tall forwards (plus Dusty Martin played most of the game as a traditional full forward), plus 2 ruckmen, both of whom spent time up forward.

It was an effective structure. We should try something similar

 

[Butters Made Me Do It]

The premiers played 2 genuine key tall forwards (plus Dusty Martin played most of the game as a traditional full forward), plus 2 ruckmen, both of whom spent time up forward.

It was an effective structure. We should try something similar

but but we only mimic richmond when it means we can pretend building the list the easy way is premiershipworthy