Review 2016.

[Mr Blicavs]

A mix of unpredictable and predictable at different stages of the year.
At times I found myself pleasantly surprised only to often find myself predictably dissapointed by the same old issues.
A preliminary final is a pass by any measure, but to go out the way we did, by treating a Preliminary final against Sydney with such complacency ruined it for me. It reinforced that we have more than our fair share of passengers, and expectations aren't being put on individuals

 

[fpm84]

And yet, after all that, we were favourites to beat them.

We were favourites to beat them because of the circumstances - week off, home final etc.

 

[Willo_]

Pretty strange year when you jump from tenth to third but most of your players either go sideways or backwards.

I think that is why no one really backed us in, and why we all had the self doubts as well

 

[Cursed Cat]

Pretty strange year when you jump from tenth to third but most of your players either go sideways or backwards.

Hawkins, McCarthy, Kolo, Stanley (just) and Selwood probably the only real improvers from last year's standards. Mind you, what list turnover we had...

Getting Menzel, McCarthy and Cowan back in the side was an achievement of sorts, and all three played some good football at various times throughout the year - hopefully they can maintain that in 2017 without encountering any more disruptions through injury.

I thought Enright didn't exactly improve, but he was immense for much of the year - Lonergan did a really good job for the most part too...

The imports all chipped in and played their part; Henderson's late-season knee was a real blow, Smith's form slowly waned but I was happy with what he contributed. Scott Selwood; well I'm still not %100 sold on him tbh, goes hard no doubt, but I'm not sure as to his worth going forward. Menegola's 2017 will be interesting, played half a dozen excellent games and only put in his first sub-par effort in the PF loss, when most of the team was well down anyway.

I suppose a positive is that there is still room for improvement with the likes of Duncan, Caddy, Blicavs, Guthrie and Motlop if he stays.
A touch of 2006 about that group; they were making steady/slow progress and then suddenly went backwards when they were expected to step up.

 

[Hoooops]

We were favourites to beat them because of the circumstances - week off, home final etc.

Yep. Because we did something they couldn't, and won (albeit unconvincingly) a Qualifying Final.

 

[SJ]

Speaks volumes of how much we relied on Dangerfield and Selwood to carry this team but in the end they can only do so much.

Big improvements from the imports (Smith/Henderson/Dangerfield) to plug some holes. Not much else to write home about.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Big improvements from the imports (Smith/Henderson/Dangerfield) to plug some holes. Not much else to write home about.

I thought there were some. McCarthy was poor against Sydney (had a fair few mates there) but was excellent in the Hawthorn game and really took some steps forward this year, all of Bews senior games were better than the ones he played last year (not sure why he didn't play more this year), Menegola as a first year player outperformed the majority of our players once he came into the side, while he had a poor final Ruggles played 20 odd games and took real steps forward. Menzel had a 33 goal season which after 4 years of no footy is a very good return.

But I do agree we were too reliant on the recruits to star for us to win. The middle tier of Duncan Caddy Guthrie Motlop Blicavs really need to stand up (as does Stanley).

 

[SJ]

I thought there were some. McCarthy was poor against Sydney (had a fair few mates there) but was excellent in the Hawthorn game and really took some steps forward this year, all of Bews senior games were better than the ones he played last year (not sure why he didn't play more this year), Menegola as a first year player outperformed the majority of our players once he came into the side, while he had a poor final Ruggles played 20 odd games and took real steps forward. Menzel had a 33 goal season which after 4 years of no footy is a very good return.

But I do agree we were too reliant on the recruits to star for us to win. The middle tier of Duncan Caddy Guthrie Motlop Blicavs really need to stand up (as does Stanley).

Yes, the other shining light were the non-core players from 2015 (generally injury-restricted) - Menzel, McCarthy, Cowan, etc.

I just can't believe that basically the entire 2015 core, almost all of which should not be at their respective football peaks, either plateaued or went backwards. It shouldn't happen like that.

 

[fpm84]

Yes, the other shining light were the non-core players from 2015 (generally injury-restricted) - Menzel, McCarthy, Cowan, etc.

I just can't believe that basically the entire 2015 core, almost all of which should not be at their respective football peaks, either plateaued or went backwards. It shouldn't happen like that.

I think that a few midfielders struggled with Danger and Sel dominating so much. It sound silly but when the two of them are racking up 70+ touches and 20+ clearances a week (combined), there's less for the other mids to do.

For example Duncan had by default become our second best midfielder after the retirement of Corey/Chapman etc. He made steady progress each year to the point where his injury in 2015 was a massive blow. But his influence waned this year regardless of what his stats said.

Sydney is a great example of a team that has 2-3 AA level mids (Kennedy, Hanners, Parker) but the next tier in Jack, McVeigh, Mitchell etc pull their weight.

Something to aspire to.

 

[manboob]

But I do agree we were too reliant on the recruits to star for us to win. The middle tier of Duncan Caddy Guthrie Motlop Blicavs really need to stand up (as does Stanley).

They should be read the riot act!

And the more I think about it the more it burns. I'd give my left nut to be facing the Dogs in a Grand Final.

 

[catempire]

just can't believe that basically the entire 2015 core, almost all of which should not be at their respective football peaks, either plateaued or went backwards. It shouldn't happen like that.

I saw it a bit differently. The players who I think you would say plateaued or went backwards were simply overtaken by better players in the positions they played in 2015. That happening was why we climbed the ladder in 2016.

 

[Partridge]

I think that a few midfielders struggled with Danger and Sel dominating so much. It sound silly but when the two of them are racking up 70+ touches and 20+ clearances a week (combined), there's less for the other mids to do.

Maybe, I'm not sure. There were no shortage of games from 2007-2009 (especially) where Ablett and Bartel utterly dominated; Corey, Chapman, Kelly and co. didn't go backwards because of it.

 

[fpm84]

Maybe, I'm not sure. There were no shortage of games from 2007-2009 (especially) where Ablett and Bartel utterly dominated; Corey, Chapman, Kelly and co. didn't go backwards because of it.

Fair point.

The frustrating thing is that we *know* they can do it.

All of Duncan, Guthrie, Caddy and Motlop in particular have had BOG or close to BOG games in the past year.

It's not like we're expecting something we've never seen.

We're just expecting consistency.

 

[catempire]

Btw, the more I think about it the more I think we actually overachieved this year with the flaws we have. When you think we finished second after the h&a without a second tall forward, without an elite crumber, with an ageing backline that struggled to bring the ball quickly out of defence and with a midfield that whilst having two champions, dropped away significantly after that, then it's perhaps not a bad result.

But unfortunately the cracks, whilst showing on several occasions this year, really split open when finals pressure came upon us.

Wanted to address this point separately and the list management thread wasn't the right one to do it.

I'm still developing my thinking on what went wrong and will no doubt post more on it in the coming weeks and over summer.

But some initial thinking...

I don't think we "overachieved". I think we have a list that is around the mark but clearly not ahead of the pack but clearly ahead of the middle rung of the ladder. So I start from a point that if we were to win the whole thing this year a whole lot had to go right and evidently it didn't.

What needed to go right that didn't? Well, a few things come to mind:

1. This is the big one: our "brand" of footy had to stand up in finals footy and beat the brand of Sydney, GWS, Hawthorn and the Dogs. It did beat Hawthorn's but fell short (well short) of Sydney's brand. We built a system on getting numbers around the ball, trying to get high numbers of i50s, locking the ball inside 50, pressuring the opposition into high kicks inside our D50 and scoring through weight of possession and time in our forward half. We punted that we could move the ball slowly and deliberately and that we could slow the opposition down to play that way too. That brand didn't stack up.

2. We needed to not only overcome our ruck and midfield deficiencies that plagued us from 2012-2015 (which we largely did - 18th to 4th in clearances and 13th to 2nd in contested ball) but we needed to hurt the opposition through midfield break-even and ascendency. We just couldn't do that. This is where my still raw thinking about our season is at a preliminary stage, but I think we swung the pendulum too far in the direction of focus on clearances and contested ball in 2016, with not enough attention on how we move the ball once we win it, both from the stoppages and after turnovers. From the stoppages our 2nd possession from the clearance was rarely clean and decisive but often a handball or kick to a contest or player under pressure. Watching Sydney, GWS and the Dogs, this is where they break teams open - hitting targets on the outside or at least hitting the ball at speed so that the 3rd possession can be a decisive one. We must take more initiative in moving the ball from the back half. The slow build up does not work in the heat of finals. In 2017 we need to find a way to emulate and better those sides. It's a big ask.

3. We needed to win despite some structural deficiencies. No CHF. No Betts/Rioli like crumbling forward. Not one single rebounding running defender on the list. We know now that way lies madness. Time to recruit to address these issues.

That's some pretty sketchy initial thoughts.

 

[year of the cat]

Wanted to address this point separately and the list management thread wasn't the right one to do it.

I'm still developing my thinking on what went wrong and will no doubt post more on it in the coming weeks and over summer.

But some initial thinking...

I don't think we "overachieved". I think we have a list that is around the mark but clearly not ahead of the pack but clearly ahead of the middle rung of the ladder. So I start from a point that if we were to win the whole thing this year a whole lot had to go right and evidently it didn't.

What needed to go right that didn't? Well, a few things come to mind:

1. This is the big one: our "brand" of footy had to stand up in finals footy and beat the brand of Sydney, GWS, Hawthorn and the Dogs. It did beat Hawthorn's but fell short (well short) of Sydney's brand. We built a system on getting numbers around the ball, trying to get high numbers of i50s, locking the ball inside 50, pressuring the opposition into high kicks inside our D50 and scoring through weight of possession and time in our forward half. We punted that we could move the ball slowly and deliberately and that we could slow the opposition down to play that way too. That brand didn't stack up.

2. We needed to not only overcome our ruck and midfield deficiencies that plagued us from 2012-2015 (which we largely did - 18th to 4th in clearances and 13th to 2nd in contested ball) but we needed to hurt the opposition through midfield break-even and ascendency. We just couldn't do that. This is where my still raw thinking about our season is at a preliminary stage, but I think we swung the pendulum too far in the direction of focus on clearances and contested ball in 2016, with not enough attention on how we move the ball once we win it, both from the stoppages and after winning the ball. From the stoppages our 2nd possession from the clearance was rarely clean and decisive but often a handball or kick to a contest or player under pressure. Watching Sydney, GWS and the Dogs, this is where they break teams open - hitting targets on the outside or at least hitting the ball at speed so that the 3rd possession can be a decisive one. We must take more initiative in moving the ball from the back half. The slow build up does not work in the heat of finals. In 2017 we need to find a way to emulate and better those sides. It's a big ask.

3. We needed to win despite some structural deficiencies. No CHF. No Betts/Rioli like crumbling forward. Not one single rebounding running defender on the list. We know now that way lies madness. Time to recruit to address these issues.

That's some pretty sketchy initial thoughts.

Good points. The problem is that the remedies to these problems will require either a significant injection of new players that can fill the roles required and/or an ability to get more out of our current crop that we haven't been able to get so far.

To get a top shelf CHF alone will cost the earth. On top of that a crumber - probably a little easier, a running defender.....I look forward to seeing how Wells and co. address our obvious deficiencies this off season.

 

[catempire]

Good points. The problem is that the remedies to these problems will require either a significant injection of new players that can fill the roles required and/or an ability to get more out of our current crop that we haven't been able to get so far.

To get a top shelf CHF alone will cost the earth. On top of that a crumber - probably a little easier, a running defender.....I look forward to seeing how Wells and co. address our obvious deficiencies this off season.

Well if it is to happen it simply has to be the bolded because we don't have the currency to get it done by a significant new injection.

And I'm I think the underline is where I'm going to depart from a lot of Geelong faithful this summer. To me the "so far" is 2016 and 2016 alone. Until this season we had such structural deficiencies it was fantasy to think we could be in the position we are now. We have filled the biggest holes. A lot of the problems I see are fixable and gameplan related. I know people love to focus on individuals and how they play but I think that distracts from the problems of the Geelong system of 2016, as shown on Friday night.

 

[year of the cat]

Well if it is to happen it simply has to be the bolded because we don't have the currency to get it done by a significant new injection.

And I'm I think the underline is where I'm going to depart from a lot of Geelong faithful this summer. To me the "so far" is 2016 and 2016 alone. Until this season we had such structural deficiencies it was fantasy to think we could be in the position we are now. We have filled the biggest holes. A lot of the problems I see are fixable and gameplan related. I know people love to focus on individuals and how they play but I think that distracts from the problems of the Geelong system of 2016, as shown on Friday night.

Is that a thinly veiled criticism of Scott I detect there CE?

I think the problems lie in both game plan and some individuals. It has to. It's too easy to dismiss the lack of effort shown by many last Friday on a flawed system. Now that to may be due to an inability of the coaches to get the players "up" but surely the players also need to take ownership as well here.

 

[catempire]

Is that a thinly veiled criticism of Scott I detect there CE?

Not even thinly veiled. The coaching staff (Lloyd included ) must get both the plaudits for taking us from 10th to 2nd but also must wear the blame for the Prelim finals failure.

In saying that, I think the coaching staff deserve significant credit for the very fact they led us to 2nd with such structural flaws. They built a gameplan that allowed us to overcome those deficiencies 90% of the time. But when you fall down on the biggest stage there's nowhere to hide.

I think the problems lie in both game plan and some individuals. It has to. It's too easy to dismiss the lack of effort shown by many last Friday on a flawed system. Now that to may be due to an inability of the coaches to get the players "up" but surely the players also need to take ownership as well here.

I don't like the "effort" scapegoat. I think it is a too convenient arms-reach excuse for the fan. A flawed gameplan can very quickly leave individuals looking motionless and hapless. That's what I saw in Friday night. I didn't see a failure in effort.

That's not to say our list is perfect. As I said, I think we have numerous structural issues that we must seek to address but we also must seek to adjust our gameplan so that the flaws are not magnified.

 

[bloodygoose]

A lot of the problems I see are fixable and gameplan related. I know people love to focus on individuals and how they play but I think that distracts from the problems of the Geelong system of 2016, as shown on Friday night.

Yes. And some mongrel. No more pea-hearted efforts. The Dogs sent Stringer to the VFL but Motlop was untouchable all year. Send a message.

 

[year of the cat]

Not even thinly veiled. The coaching staff (Lloyd included ) must get both the plaudits for taking us from 10th to 2nd but also must wear the blame for the Prelim finals failure.

In saying that, I think the coaching staff deserve significant credit for the very fact they led us to 2nd with such structural flaws. They built a gameplan that allowed us to overcome those deficiencies 90% of the time. But when you fall down on the biggest stage there's nowhere to hide.


I don't like the "effort" scapegoat. I think it is a too convenient arms-reach excuse for the fan. A flawed gameplan can very quickly leave individuals looking motionless and hapless. That's what I saw in Friday night. I didn't see a failure in effort.

That's not to say our list is perfect. As I said, I think we have numerous structural issues that we must seek to address but we also must seek to adjust our gameplan so that the flaws are not magnified.

I don't think a criticism of lack of effort is a scapegoat. If you compared the effort shown by the Bulldogs against what we brought to the MCG on Friday night there was a chasm of difference. Sure, a lot of the goals we gave up were from poor decisions and execution probably due to poor systems but there can be little excuse for players baulking from contests.

With the Bulldogs, I saw a TEAM that willed itself to victory through desperation. The game wasn't pretty but they continued to dive into contest after contest or when not having the ball, smother and tackle with zest.

Either way the coaches need to work out why we failed on Friday night. Scott, again in his presser, failed to articulate the issues which is concerning.

 

[catempire]

I don't think a criticism of lack of effort is a scapegoat. If you compared the effort shown by the Bulldogs against what we brought to the MCG on Friday night there was a chasm of difference. Sure, a lot of the goals we gave up were from poor decisions and execution probably due to poor systems but there can be little excuse for players baulking from contests.

With the Bulldogs, I saw a TEAM that willed itself to victory through desperation. The game wasn't pretty but they continued to dive into contest after contest or when not having the ball, smother and tackle with zest.

But that's what I'm saying YOTC, you're saying you're comparing effort but I think that's a simplification and merely the observed symptom of more complex issues. I don't think it's a case of increasing effort to address our problems (or even contribute significantly to it). That's absurd when I even type that.

Either way the coaches need to work out why we failed on Friday night. Scott, again in his presser, failed to articulate the issues which is concerning.

Wouldn't be too worried about immediate reactions post game. He was smarting like 99% of the ill-informed comments that appeared on here after the game. Judge on changes implemented in 2017.

 

[year of the cat]

But that's what I'm saying YOTC, you're saying you're comparing effort but I think that's a simplification and merely the observed symptom of more complex issues. I don't think it's a case of increasing effort to address our problems (or even contribute significantly to it). That's absurd when I even type that.

I'd agree with your last sentence. And I'm certainly not saying that as well. An increased effort or consistency of effort is only a small part of the problem and wasn't a problem at all in the Hawks final. And it certainly won't be the difference between us winning a flag in 2017 and not.

Went off on a bit of a tangent.

 

[Footy Smarts]

I don't see how anybody could argue Guthrie either plateaued or went backwards this year.

 

[manboob]

I don't see how anybody could argue Guthrie either plateaued or went backwards this year.

Quite easily on raw numbers. He's gone from 19 to 22 touches per game in 3 seasons...

 

[year of the cat]

I don't see how anybody could argue Guthrie either plateaued or went backwards this year.

I thought he was generally better this year than last. He still needs to find better consistency but I reckon he influenced more games this year.