Bevo out

[Fossie 32]

Indian Glaeken

 

[dogwatch]

Some of our losses have been disappointing in their magnitude (particularly Carlton, St Kilda and Collingwood) but we’ve actually been quite consistent in terms of results: we’ve only lost to one team currently out of the eight and have beaten two teams in the eight.

Basically we are the 7-9th best team and we’ve beaten and lost to the teams we should have.

...

With respect, you could say this wherever we were on the ladder. In fact you could say it about most sides wherever they sit on the ladder.

As you also said:

At the start of the year, I would have said at best we were 5-6th, so it’s not unexpected. With a bit more luck and composure we would have knocked off Geelong and/or Port too.

If we'd beaten them both we'd be around 5th on 10 wins, equal with Geelong and West Coast and only one game away from the ladder leader (but with a percentage deficit of course). Basically, we'd be in with a great chance at the top 4 since we have two easier games in the run home. We'd all be very bullish about our chances of making another GF.

Conversely we only just scraped home against the two Coast sides (WC & GC). Lose those and we'd now be around 12th and saying what an ordinary side we are and what a disappointing season etc.

As with most years it's pretty even between about 3rd and 13th and a bit of fortune (injuries, umpiring, scheduling, even the odd bounce of the ball) can take you a long way up or down the ladder.

In the end it is what it is and we just have to wear it. It's the old "if my granny had wheels (or balls)" argument. But knowing what I know now about the relative strengths of sides I'd say we should have beaten at least two out of Collingwood, Geelong and Carlton. When the club reviews the season I think it's those losses that should have the most scrutiny.

 

[Footscrazy]

On 18 September 2014 Goodwin signed a five-year contract with Melbourne inheriting a Roos built list. On 14 November 2014 Bevo joined us as head coach amid "crisis".

Remember where we came from people. Bevo is our savior.

 

[Fossie 32]

On 18 September 2014 Goodwin signed a five-year contract with Melbourne inheriting a Roos built list. On 14 November 2014 Bevo joined us as head coach amid "crisis".

Remember where we came from people. Bevo is our savior.

post #254

 

[Deadly Darcy]

The cats game made me break the screen on my phone. Having said that, I’m a Bevoliever still. I get annoyed as hell at some of his love affairs, the Gowers thing, the Gardiner thing (which makes slightly more sense now he’s stopped shitting himself every game) and now the Bruce thing (how is he still getting a game this season???!!)

Conversely, English is getting the opportunity to learn his strengths and is coming along beautifully as a ruck/backman. If we could trade in a 1st ruck and rotate him through he’d be an even bigger asset than he is already.

Plus we will play finals.

Clarkson used to be a coaching god and now he’s a goat. He doesn’t have the cattle and arguably Bevo doesn’t yet either but I think we are getting there. He gets three more years grace from me and I think we could see another flag or two if we hold the course.

 

[Jeff 1975]

Best coach David Parkin
4 Premierships at 2 different clubs and at least 3 different teams

 

[Anja_Nees]

With respect, you could say this wherever we were on the ladder. In fact you could say it about most sides wherever they sit on the ladder.

As you also said:



If we'd beaten them both we'd be around 5th on 10 wins, equal with Geelong and West Coast and only one game away from the ladder leader (but with a percentage deficit of course). Basically, we'd be in with a great chance at the top 4 since we have two easier games in the run home. We'd all be very bullish about our chances of making another GF.

Conversely we only just scraped home against the two Coast sides (WC & GC). Lose those and we'd now be around 12th and saying what an ordinary side we are and what a disappointing season etc.

As with most years it's pretty even between about 3rd and 13th and a bit of fortune (injuries, umpiring, scheduling, even the odd bounce of the ball) can take you a long way up or down the ladder.

In the end it is what it is and we just have to wear it. It's the old "if my granny had wheels (or balls)" argument. But knowing what I know now about the relative strengths of sides I'd say we should have beaten at least two out of Collingwood, Geelong and Carlton. When the club reviews the season I think it's those losses that should have the most scrutiny.

I’m sorry but your understanding of what I wrote just isn’t right. It does not apply in any situation.

On talent at the start of the year I would have said we are a top eight side, perhaps fifth or sixth at best. As it happens we have quite consistently beaten sides out of the eight and lost to sides entrenched in the top four.

What would infuriate me, and might cause me to doubt Bevo more, is if we knocked off sides like Richmond, Brisbane and Port but dropped a few to teams like Adelaide or North. That would indicate he was wasting a talented list. If we were bottom four, I would be getting worried.

Yes, we could have lost to GC, but we didn’t. Yes, we could have beaten Geelong, but we didn’t. The results over the season are more or less what I’d expect. Clearly I would like a few top four scalps, but I think they will come next year.

Bevo does things that frustrate me at selection, and we had some unacceptable blowouts. He deserves scrutiny for that. I think though we are more or less where our list should see us being this year, so the meltdowns seen on this board in recent weeks are over the top.

I do not think we could beat three top four sides in a month and win it this year. We aren’t that good yet. If we were top four I’d expect we’d go about as well as Brisbane did last year. In ‘16 we beat every team at some point bar Geelong. We aren’t at that level.

Anyone that thinks we should axe Bevo over a few frustrating losses in a bizarro mini season is nuts.

 

[josh the gent]

It's pretty simple. The current list is not that good and has several holes in it. You can't blame the coach for that.

Some of our losses have been disappointing in their magnitude (particularly Carlton, St Kilda and Collingwood) but we’ve actually been quite consistent in terms of results: we’ve only lost to one team currently out of the eight and have beaten two teams in the eight.

Basically we are the 7-9th best team and we’ve beaten and lost to the teams we should have.

At the start of the year, I would have said at best we were 5-6th, so it’s not unexpected. With a bit more luck and composure we would have knocked off Geelong and/or Port too.

We obviously need to be going somewhere, so Richards, Lipinski, West, Weightman, Vandermeer, English and Naughton need to keep improving. Some have stalled, which annoys me, but the trajectory is ok.

My biggest issue is the way we lose sometimes, but honestly aside from Richmond we have not been disgraced for a while now. Some things haven’t worked and it’s probably hard to correct them mid season, but there’s not reason to be pessimistic.

Interesting posts.

I don’t believe our list has major issues. We have talent on every line, and high quality talent in all the spots that are the hardest to get talent in.

We’re not inexperienced anymore, maybe we don’t have any 250+ game players, but most of our best players are at or over 100 games now.

Inconsistency is the hallmark of an inexperienced team - but we’re not that at all. We are a consistent mid-table performing team. Beat the teams below us, lose to those above us. Consistent performance also indicates a ceiling may have been reached.

2016 was completely different - lost to cellar dweller Saints, but also beat very good Swans away. A young, exciting, and bloody inconsistent team that blossomed in September.

I think the list build is A+, but our ceiling right now looks like a B...

 

[Anja_Nees]

Interesting posts.

I don’t believe our list has major issues. We have talent on every line, and high quality talent in all the spots that are the hardest to get talent in.

We’re not inexperienced anymore, maybe we don’t have any 250+ game players, but most of our best players are at or over 100 games now.

Inconsistency is the hallmark of an inexperienced team - but we’re not that at all. We are a consistent mid-table performing team. Beat the teams below us, lose to those above us. Consistent performance also indicates a ceiling may have been reached.

2016 was completely different - lost to cellar dweller Saints, but also beat very good Swans away. A young, exciting, and bloody inconsistent team that blossomed in September.

I think the list build is A+, but our ceiling right now looks like a B...

Yes that’s what I was getting at - we’ve mostly beaten who we should beat, which is a contrast with many other seasons we’ve had. The frustration this year has been we’ve had opportunities to pinch a few against better sides but haven’t followed through.

The upside is that our older players are either not that old or aren’t best 22 and likely to come off the list this year or next (Lloyd, Suckers, Dicko, Trengove).

I think our improvement will come from incremental gains and improved consistency out of Naughton, Richards, English, Smith etc.

I’m reasonably bullish. We have a great spread of players in the 20-25 bracket who will come into their best years together.

 

[Boyd oh Boyd]

Interesting posts.

I don’t believe our list has major issues. We have talent on every line, and high quality talent in all the spots that are the hardest to get talent in.

We’re not inexperienced anymore, maybe we don’t have any 250+ game players, but most of our best players are at or over 100 games now.

Inconsistency is the hallmark of an inexperienced team - but we’re not that at all. We are a consistent mid-table performing team. Beat the teams below us, lose to those above us. Consistent performance also indicates a ceiling may have been reached.

2016 was completely different - lost to cellar dweller Saints, but also beat very good Swans away. A young, exciting, and bloody inconsistent team that blossomed in September.

I think the list build is A+, but our ceiling right now looks like a B...

We have 14 players in a list of 44 that are over 100 games played. Of those 10 play most weeks, and 7 are our top of the line players. They're the ones players that are in that range and play most weeks that are bringing us consistency but it's been the 12 that are below that 100 game mark that are stopping us taking the next step. You take out all of Cordy, Dunkley, Williams, Richards, Naughton, English, Bailey Smith, and Vandermeer and replace them with versions that are 5 years older and we would skyrocket up the ladder. That's a lot of growth we just need to wait on.

 

[dogwatch]

I’m sorry but your understanding of what I wrote just isn’t right. It does not apply in any situation.

On talent at the start of the year I would have said we are a top eight side, perhaps fifth or sixth at best. As it happens we have quite consistently beaten sides out of the eight and lost to sides entrenched in the top four.

What would infuriate me, and might cause me to doubt Bevo more, is if we knocked off sides like Richmond, Brisbane and Port but dropped a few to teams like Adelaide or North. That would indicate he was wasting a talented list. If we were bottom four, I would be getting worried.

Yes, we could have lost to GC, but we didn’t. Yes, we could have beaten Geelong, but we didn’t. The results over the season are more or less what I’d expect. Clearly I would like a few top four scalps, but I think they will come next year.

Bevo does things that frustrate me at selection, and we had some unacceptable blowouts. He deserves scrutiny for that. I think though we are more or less where our list should see us being this year, so the meltdowns seen on this board in recent weeks are over the top.

I do not think we could beat three top four sides in a month and win it this year. We aren’t that good yet. If we were top four I’d expect we’d go about as well as Brisbane did last year. In ‘16 we beat every team at some point bar Geelong. We aren’t at that level.

Anyone that thinks we should axe Bevo over a few frustrating losses in a bizarro mini season is nuts.

Yes maybe we're talking at cross-purposes. No biggy.

But just to be clear I'm not in the sack Bevo camp. I'm in the camp that says we should have an external review and - pending the findings of that review - make a few changes around him in the footy dept. Anecdotally such reviews have been quite productive at certain other AFL clubs in recent years and it strikes me as sound practice to do some sort of review each year (we probably do that anyway) as well as an independent review every few years, or when the progress of the side seems to have stalled. This year would be a good time for that.

Lots of us have been critical of Bevo but as far as I can see only a very few are suggesting we tear up his contract and pay him out this year.

 

[Next Waiting]

Yes maybe we're talking at cross-purposes. No biggy.

But just to be clear I'm not in the sack Bevo camp. I'm in the camp that says we should have an external review and - pending the findings of that review - make a few changes around him in the footy dept. Anecdotally such reviews have been quite productive at certain other AFL clubs in recent years and it strikes me as sound practice to do some sort of review each year (we probably do that anyway) as well as an independent review every few years, or when the progress of the side seems to have stalled. This year would be a good time for that.

Lots of us have been critical of Bevo but as far as I can see only a very few are suggesting we tear up his contract and pay him out this year.

What if, right, what if we won the flag. Seems unlikely but what if...

Under what circumstance would we not review...or is there no circumstance in which we wouldn't/or shouldn't?

 

[Charlie Bucket]

Interesting posts.

I don’t believe our list has major issues. We have talent on every line, and high quality talent in all the spots that are the hardest to get talent in.

We’re not inexperienced anymore, maybe we don’t have any 250+ game players, but most of our best players are at or over 100 games now.

Inconsistency is the hallmark of an inexperienced team - but we’re not that at all. We are a consistent mid-table performing team. Beat the teams below us, lose to those above us. Consistent performance also indicates a ceiling may have been reached.

2016 was completely different - lost to cellar dweller Saints, but also beat very good Swans away. A young, exciting, and bloody inconsistent team that blossomed in September.

I think the list build is A+, but our ceiling right now looks like a B...

Sorry Josh, your a fair way off the mark. A team that lacks any 200+ gamers besides Wood and Suckers. A handful around the 100-150 and the majority of our 22-26 starters less than 100 games. That’s miles off what a balanced contending team looks like. Forget our win in 2016, teams rarely contend without older experienced heads leading across all lines.
The facts are that our age demographic isn’t at the point where we should be worrying our time is now, or running out as some doomsayers suggest.

Also, last year our form against teams above us was far better than of those below us. There’s no common theme since 2016.
Pure fugazi.

 

[dogwatch]

What if, right, what if we won the flag. Seems unlikely but what if...

Under what circumstance would we not review...or is there no circumstance in which we wouldn't/or shouldn't?

I think there should be a review every year but for all I know we might already be doing that internally. It’s something that could be done collaboratively for instance, perhaps led by Bains.

I presume your question relates to an independent review (greater cost, rigour etc). If we actually won the flag it might still be worthwhile (“if you’re not improving you’re going backwards”) but it would be quite understandable if they held it over for a year.

 

[Charlie Bucket]

Correction, Zero 200+ game players. And our next closest few will be goneski in the next couple of years.

Thinking our list is more than experienced enough to be contenting for a flag right now and both players and coach have no excuses is quiet ridiculous.

 

[Next Waiting]

I think there should be a review every year but for all I know we might already be doing that internally. It’s something that could be done collaboratively for instance, perhaps led by Bains.

I presume your question relates to an independent review (greater cost, rigour etc). If we actually won the flag it might still be worthwhile (“if you’re not improving you’re going backwards”) but it would be quite understandable if they held it over for a year.

Do you think we need an independent review? What sort of person/background is desirable to conduct such a review? Should a knowledge of football or process carry more weight? Will the Crows hang on and will the sun rise tomorrow?

 

[josh the gent]

Sorry Josh, your a fair way off the mark. A team that lacks any 200+ gamers besides Wood and Suckers. A handful around the 100-150 and the majority of our 22-26 starters less than 100 games. That’s miles off what a balanced contending team looks like. Forget our win in 2016, teams rarely contend without older experienced heads leading across all lines.
The facts are that our age demographic isn’t at the point where we should be worrying our time is now, or running out as some doomsayers suggest.

Also, last year our form against teams above us was far better than of those below us. There’s no common theme since 2016.
Pure fugazi.

I agree that contending teams need experience. No argument there.

I just don’t think we’re that inexperienced anymore.

Looking at round 14 (most recent we played in on afl tables):
- WC, 11 players
- Geelong, 13
- Richmond, 9
- Port, 13
- BL, 11
....

We also fielded 11 players over 100 games. No doubt there is an issue, but for me it is only minor.

Our issue is first and foremost gameplan - and for that I think Bevo is 100% accountable. Can’t see it getting better, hope i’m wrong!

Btw I know that no WB over 200 games in rd 14, but remember that most players over 250 games are past their peak...

 

[Charlie Bucket]

I agree that contending teams need experience. No argument there.

I just don’t think we’re that inexperienced anymore.

Looking at round 14 (most recent we played in on afl tables):
- WC, 11 players
- Geelong, 13
- Richmond, 9
- Port, 13
- BL, 11
....

We also fielded 11 players over 100 games. No doubt there is an issue, but for me it is only minor.

Our issue is first and foremost gameplan - and for that I think Bevo is 100% accountable. Can’t see it getting better, hope i’m wrong!

Btw I know that no WB over 200 games in rd 14, but remember that most players over 250 games are past their peak...

Go and have a look at all the premiership teams over the list 10-15 years. All had 200-300 game players that were the main contributors to their form. We just don’t have any. Bont, Macrae, Libba, Hunter and Co will eventually be those players but unfortunately they aren’t their yet.
Balance that out with our Younger crew that’ll be around the 100+ game mark and that’s where we need to be.

I think we over performed last year and the expectation from most, including myself was that we’d just on in with it. Unfortunately, we haven’t, but it doesn’t take much to realise as a list demographic we aren’t around the mark yet.

As for our game plan, I see a lot of people bringing up their concerns. I have no issue with our game plan. The issue I have is that we don’t execute for long enough and get punished accordingly. A contributing factor this year has been that we drop our bundle when teams get on top and apply a bit of pressure. Another tell tail sign that our 22 each week is t mature enough to combatant what the oppo teams offer coming the other way.
I’m yet to see us get beaten comfortably when we’ve Stuck to our game plan for majority of games. In fact I can’t recall us getting beaten at all over the last 12-18mths when we’ve executed our game plan well for the majority of games. .
That tells me it’s not a game plan issue, it’s an issue with our lack of implementation.

If a theatre actor goes out on stage and butchers Macbeth, you don’t lay blame on Shakespeare for writing a rubbish play do you?
Not suggesting Bevo is the sporting version of Shakespeare , but that’s what it seems like when I consistently read the anti game plan posts.

Edit: I certainly don’t believe our game doesn’t need any tweaks, there’s not a game plan in the history of the game that didn’t need tightening up. But as a whole, when nailed, it holds up really well imo.

 

[Boyd oh Boyd]

I agree that contending teams need experience. No argument there.

I just don’t think we’re that inexperienced anymore.

Looking at round 14 (most recent we played in on afl tables):
- WC, 11 players
- Geelong, 13
- Richmond, 9
- Port, 13
- BL, 11
....

We also fielded 11 players over 100 games. No doubt there is an issue, but for me it is only minor.

Our issue is first and foremost gameplan - and for that I think Bevo is 100% accountable. Can’t see it getting better, hope i’m wrong!

Btw I know that no WB over 200 games in rd 14, but remember that most players over 250 games are past their peak...

On the lists

WC: 7 over 200, 12 over 150
Geelong: 6 over 200, 12 over 150
Richmond: 5 over 200, 10 over 150
Port: 5 over 200, 10 over 150
Brisbane: 3 over 200, 6 over 150

And Bulldogs: 0 over 200, 4 over 150

Can't agree with you that 250+ gamers aren't important. On those lists Hurn, Kennedy, Ablett, Selwood, Taylor, Hawkins, Dangerfield, Riewoldt, Edwards and Boak are all some of their most important players. Bring is down to 200 and you add Redden, Shuey, Gaff, Darling, Duncan, Cotchin, Martin, Houli, Gray, Rich and Robinson. In every one of those teams there are a significant amount of 200+ players that change the lineup of those sides significantly.

 

[hutchy31]

This list profile discussion is interesting, but the issues I have with Bevo aren’t really list-related.

I don’t want him out, but he and the match Committee do appear to be stubborn and a bit arrogant. It’s difficult to swallow some of the team selection and positioning decisions - for all the Gardner and Gowers issues, seeing Suckling play in the forward line might have been the most baffling. Turning circle of a cruise liner and completely slow, plus it negated his only selling point of kicking lasers from half back or the wing.

But the main issue is the ruck. Of course it is. To pick English when he consistently gets thumped in the ruck is one thing, to pick him and not play him in there and waste one of your best mids is ludicrous. Trengove and Sweet might not be world beaters, but at least they’re actual rucks. I’m not happy that neither of them are getting a run, but if you are going to play only English then ffs play him there. Even when he gets smashed I suppose it aids his development, we’re not even getting that benefit if he languishes in the forward line butchering set shots.

For those of you who don’t think it matters much rewatch the whole Geelong game again and see how many times the ball walks out of the ruck contest towards their goal. It is a genuine problem that Bevo and others in our club are treating a critical position on the field with complete disdain.

We shouldn’t be sacking him, quite the contrary. But there needs to be some other voices in there who are not afraid to contradict what is a confusing approach.

Even taking away the actual on field impact, imagine how long you’d want to stay at a footy club if you were a young, gun midfielder who was consistently being told to ruck against man mountains every week. Any chance you’d call your agent and ask what’s out there?

 

[bresker]

I don't think we should axe Bevo, but I'm increasingly convinced this will be his last contract. If he doesn't deliver a flag, or at least a deep finals run, I will consider 2017 - 2022 years of lost opportunities.

I'm fed up with 'potential.'
He has many good points, but he's a strange cat who thinks he can revolutionise aspects of the game despite evidence to the contrary.

 

[VogonProsthetnic]

We have the most talented list of players we have ever had but are still struggling to even make the eight.

We should be performing much better imo, especially as we added a good KPD and a potentially good KPF to a team that was probably top 6 last year.

Our glaring weaknesses which we haven’t addressed are-

1. Strong ruckman at clearances
2. Forward line and conversion.
3. Transition defence at turn over.

These are not new problems. I see no strategy to address these problems either. Maybe some here may disagree.

Hopefully the coaching and recruiting staff can finally sort these issues out.

I would add another recurring problem which is no less worrying. Our horrible season starts.

Our games against Collingwood and the Saints were embarrassing. In 2019 we lost to GC and Carlton in rounds 2 and 3 and in 2018 lost our first two games by over 50 points.

Question needs to be asked- why are we preparing so badly to start the season.

Every year we finally get it together about round 16 or 17 finish the year solidly but are never a threat to the top teams.

Bevo obviously can coach but I’m not convinced the Coaching panel,look after the basics well enough to become a top 4 side.

 

[bobs head soup]

With the win on Sunday, Bevo (54.96%) went past Rocket (54.94%) as our best ever percentage winning coach (minimum 100 games).

 

[bresker]

.

I would add another recurring problem which is no less worrying. Our horrible season starts.

Complete brain fades during quarters is another problem. He can turn things around sometimes, but often the damage is already done.

 

[VogonProsthetnic]

Complete brain fades during quarters is another problem. He can turn things around sometimes, but often the damage is already done.

That’s a result of factors 1 and 3. Seems like when a good opposition crank up the pressure our pretty handball game gets exposed. Then the ball gets back to the middle and our ruck issues become apparent.

Personally Inwould be happy for us to revert to contested down the line play when things are against us. But that does not seem to be the response.