Can we bounce back in 2011?

[Mismatched]

you have omitted one level; Elite eg G Ablett or going back Rehn D Jarman. Without a few of these, middle of the road it is Currently we have none and nowadays they usually come in the first half a dozen picks Hence the rise of Carlton and Melbourne and soon GC and GWS It is possible to fluke one with a high pick but bottoming out is the only way to collected several (Geelong F|S aside)

Give Porplyzia a proper preseason and there's one IMO, I'd rate Dangerfield, Tippett and Mackay as potentially elite players in the next year or so, not there yet, but gee they can play. Vince is already an elite ball winner, currently learning how to deal with the hard tag, but IMO if he can learn to win more of his ball in the forward half, instead of chasing cheap kicks in the back half, he would be an elite midfielder.

So I think there's potential there in this respect beagle2, currently I'd agree with you that we don't have that elite talent, but I'm certainly confident that some can be found within our list.

One of the big criticisms I remember being leveled at Geelong in '06 was that they didn't have any elite talent, it was said "maybe G. Ablett", but at that stage he was little more than a flashy small forward who did the odd freakish thing but was far too inconsistent.

I think there's a good chance that we could rebound and rebound well, as long as we do, as Geelong did in '07 and learn from our mistakes. Otherwise we could very easily go down the path Hawthorn are currently treading.

As a club, in the past year or so I think we've gotten rather arrogant, which has led to complacency. I don't mind a little arrogance, but I think we've believed the media/supporter, and in a way our own, hype a little too much and just thought we could rock up and dominate. I think a little time down the bottom of the ladder could serve us well, remind us that we do actually need to be prepared to do the hard stuff on the field.

At this stage, I'll back Craigy in to get us right back up there for next year. I can forgive one bad year, how he responds to it though will be the true test. His position is safe for next year, but should we pull out another average year like this one, I think its pretty safe to say he's gonesky.

 

[WALL-e]

*If* that were true, that would reflect very poorly on whoever gave him the 2 year contract.

I think that 2 year contact reflects poorly no matter what the issues are. Was no need to give 2 years.

I think the hope is the light will switch on.

 

[WALL-e]

This is Armstrong, Cook & Jacky's 3rd year on the list, next year is their 4th.

that's a long time to be given.

Yeah it is, but the time frame you'd provide a player isn't always the same, know what I mean?

Cooks starting to show, and has the raw tools to do something, Armstrong has a couple of question marks, but shows promise at the SANFL level, and Jacky......hasn't shown much.

 

[Crow-mo]

Yeah it is, but the time frame you'd provide a player isn't always the same, know what I mean?

no. that's not relevant across that sort of time frame.

maybe at the beginning, but it wears off quickly.

 

[amer]

no. that's not relevant across that sort of time frame.

maybe at the beginning, but it wears off quickly.

It's a case by case situation. Clubs will regularly make decisions based on investment time versus gain, but if you're suggesting that a club wouldn't apply varying time frames to the myriad different individuals they work to develop, you're demonstrating a total lack of understanding of, and feel for, human nature. Something the clubs themselves (thankfully) do not demonstrate.

These footballers are sentient, they're human, understand? They're not commodities with interest rates slapped on them that you just send on their way after a predetermined time; they're kids who will react to and development within elite environments at greatly varying rates. They require a breed of attention tailored to the individual. Now on the same token (as noted in the paragraph previous), clubs will at times make economic decisions regarding the cattle they've got, but they don't look at a talented player and say after a regulation three or four year period that you must shape up or it's time to go without exception. It doesn't work like this at all. It can appear that way from the outside to a stats-obsessed professor like yourself, who thinks primarily in terms of mechanics, figures and rules (most of which seem to be invented by you and then bent without warning as you see fit ), but it's not the case.

 

[WALL-e]

no. that's not relevant across that sort of time frame.

maybe at the beginning, but it wears off quickly.

If that were the case a guy like Jordan Russell may have been delisted or traded by Carlton.

You have to judge each player on their merrits.

 

[jackster83]

Yeah it is, but the time frame you'd provide a player isn't always the same, know what I mean?

Cooks starting to show, and has the raw tools to do something, Armstrong has a couple of question marks, but shows promise at the SANFL level, and Jacky......hasn't shown much.

Comparing the three:

Cook - injured for most of 2008, played a few games late in the year. Solid 2009 in the SANFL with a handful of AFL matches to his name. Been an AFL regular in 2010. I'm still undecided on him - love his sidestep and agility but has a seriously shocking football brain.

Armstrong - spent 2008 in the ressies. Improved in 2009 and played reasonable league footy and was a regular on the emergencies list. 2010 saw him make his AFL debut and despite being dropped immediately after, is still on the cusp of being recalled. Appears to be McLeod's replacement.

Jacky - impressed in early 2008 and played a handful of AFL games. Was emergency several times IIRC. 2009 he started well enough playing league for WWT but quickly fell away and ended up injured/playing reserves for the remainder of the year. 2010 appears to be a repeat of 2009. Not sure what has gone wrong here?

 

[The Sloane Ranger]

Ultimately it will depend on 2 key factors

1. New Leadership Strength
Van Berlo, Knights, Dangerfield, Thompson, Stiffy, Bock, Porplyzia and Rutten need to be the next core of players that takes this club forward, time for a new era and to pass the baton to a new group to enable them to put their footprint on the AFC

2. Development of Tier Two players
Walker, Tippett, Smack, Danger, D-Mac, Davis, Otten and Sloane all need to be striving to be "A Grade" level players within the next 2-3 years

The likes of Douglas, Symes, Jaensch, Henderson, Petrenko, Cook, Young and Sellar all need to become consistent "B Grade" level footballers

Gunston, Shaw and Talia are the unknowns at this stage

The 2011 season should start NOW and bringing in Walker, Young and SMACK for Burton, Doughty and Stevens is a step in the right direction.

It is important to note that at this point last year Fremantle made a concious decision to go with more Yoth and now it is paying dividends.

 

[cmndstab]

Far too early to say.

We have failed this year in a dramatic way. Without understanding all the reasons for this and required actions to address this I feel its too hard to comment.

This is how I see it too. Last year I saw some signs that told me we should be right in contention this year - our senior players were doing well, our youth looked strong, we had plenty of performing SANFL players ready to step up as necessary, and we had an absolute gun player in each position on the ground (other than ruck) in Bock, Vince and Tippett. Yet this year, we've been abominable. Even if the win against Richmond, other than a couple of passages of quick play to Tippett, I didn't see anything to fill me with any sort of confidence that we'll beat anyone else.


Until I can see some signs that tell me we'll be alot better next year, I have difficulty thinking about us even making the 8 in 2011, let alone pushing for a flag. Bottom 8 sides often climb the ladder in the following season, but when that happens some signs should be seen in the previous year. So far this year we've seen nothing whatsoever to give us hope for 2011 yet, and the good signs from previous seasons we're all holding onto are becoming less and less relevant by the week.

 

[The Sloane Ranger]

This is how I see it too. Last year I saw some signs that told me we should be right in contention this year - our senior players were doing well, our youth looked strong, we had plenty of performing SANFL players ready to step up as necessary, and we had an absolute gun player in each position on the ground (other than ruck) in Bock, Vince and Tippett. Yet this year, we've been abominable. Even if the win against Richmond, other than a couple of passages of quick play to Tippett, I didn't see anything to fill me with any sort of confidence that we'll beat anyone else.


Until I can see some signs that tell me we'll be alot better next year, I have difficulty thinking about us even making the 8 in 2011, let alone pushing for a flag. Bottom 8 sides often climb the ladder in the following season, but when that happens some signs should be seen in the previous year. So far this year we've seen nothing whatsoever to give us hope for 2011 yet, and the good signs from previous seasons we're all holding onto are becoming less and less relevant by the week.

at the end of 1996 we were a debarcle as a club and no one in the football community would have predicted at the end of 96 for us to win back to back flags in 97 / 98

at the end of 2006 Geelong were a debarcle and the entire Geelong community wanted Bombers head, again no one at this point of time would have predicted Geelong to win back to back flags in 07 and 08

there were not too many signs in 1996 and 2006 that would have encouraged Crows and Geelong supporters to believe that they were on the verge of greatness

History does have a way of repeating itself

 

[writeoff]

at the end of 1996 we were a debarcle as a club and no one in the football community would have predicted at the end of 96 for us to win back to back flags in 97 / 98

at the end of 2006 Geelong were a debarcle and the entire Geelong community wanted Bombers head, again no one at this point of time would have predicted Geelong to win back to back flags in 07 and 08

there were not too many signs in 1996 and 2006 that would have encouraged Crows and Geelong supporters to believe that they were on the verge of greatness

History does have a way of repeating itself

Geelong lost the 2008 Grand Final to Hawthorne, only their 2nd loss for the year. However they did win the 2009 premiership. Whilst I agree in principle that history does repeat itself it didn't quite in the example you provided.

 

[Crow-mo]

It's a case by case situation. Clubs will regularly make decisions based on investment time versus gain, but if you're suggesting that a club wouldn't apply varying time frames to the myriad different individuals they work to develop, you're demonstrating a total lack of understanding of, and feel for, human nature. Something the clubs themselves (thankfully) do not demonstrate.

These footballers are sentient, they're human, understand? They're not commodities with interest rates slapped on them that you just send on their way after a predetermined time; they're kids who will react to and development within elite environments at greatly varying rates. They require a breed of attention tailored to the individual. Now on the same token (as noted in the paragraph previous), clubs will at times make economic decisions regarding the cattle they've got, but they don't look at a talented player and say after a regulation three or four year period that you must shape up or it's time to go without exception. It doesn't work like this at all. It can appear that way from the outside to a stats-obsessed professor like yourself, who thinks primarily in terms of mechanics, figures and rules (most of which seem to be invented by you and then bent without warning as you see fit ), but it's not the case.

what a load of, erm, "indulgent nonsense".

we live in an era very tight list management, you cannot afford to carry people beyond a certain time.

very few people get carried into their 4th year without having established their abilities at the top level.

 

[Crow-mo]

If that were the case a guy like Jordan Russell may have been delisted or traded by Carlton.

You have to judge each player on their merrits.

FFS.

Jordan Russell had played 30 games by the end of his 3rd year, and 21 games in his 4th.

in what world is that even a vaguely applicable example huh?

 

[amer]

what a load of, erm, "indulgent nonsense".

we live in an era very tight list management, you cannot afford to carry people beyond a certain time.

very few people get carried into their 4th year without having established their abilities at the top level.

We could condense this post of yours into one line: "I've got nothing. "

 

[Crow-mo]

at the end of 1996 we were a debarcle as a club and no one in the football community would have predicted at the end of 96 for us to win back to back flags in 97 / 98

at the end of 2006 Geelong were a debarcle and the entire Geelong community wanted Bombers head, again no one at this point of time would have predicted Geelong to win back to back flags in 07 and 08

there were not too many signs in 1996 and 2006 that would have encouraged Crows and Geelong supporters to believe that they were on the verge of greatness

History does have a way of repeating itself

Actually that's not really true.

Shaw was let go because of the talent of the list vs. results.
as for Geelong, you need to look back on 2004 & 2005 to get a sense for where they really were.

there were plenty of people arguing that they were a prime bounceback candidate (including yours truly, vehmently) in 2007.

you only had to look at the quality they had, and their campaigns in the previous 2 years to see they were contenders.

I'll say it again, not only was Geelong not a random event in 2007 but it is not an excuse for every under performing side and coach to flag up the potential for why randomly things will get better.

Geelong didn't magically get better, and neither will anyone else.

 

[amer]

This is Armstrong, Cook & Jacky's 3rd year on the list, next year is their 4th.

that's a long time to be given.

You're talking about three guys who have had significant portions of their careers wiped out by injury and/or off-field trouble.

Cook is following the same development path as a huge number of quality footballers have - reaching the stage where he's playing a good number of games in his third year, after not a great deal in the first two. His entire first year was a write off due to a persistent hamstring issue. Remove him from this discussion, he's not relevant.

Armstrong's first year was marred by homesickness, and he copped a broken arm which saw him leave the state. He was robbed of his debut in 2009 thanks to the flu quarantine situation. The potential for a typical two or three games in the first/second year was taken away.

Jacky is in a whole other basket, not the issue you think it is. Leave it at that.

Collingwood has waited it out with Ben Reid. What of Port Adelaide with Matthew Lobbe? There are many examples out there, and with our trio it's not a case of them having three years of relatively uninterrupted football to prove themselves. It's a case by case basis.

 

[amer]

Actually that's not really true.

Shaw was let go because of the talent of the list vs. results.
as for Geelong, you need to look back on 2004 & 2005 to get a sense for where they really were.

there were plenty of people arguing that they were a prime bounceback candidate (including yours truly, vehmently) in 2007.

you only had to look at the quality they had, and their campaigns in the previous 2 years to see they were contenders.

I'll say it again, not only was Geelong not a random event in 2007 but it is not an excuse for every under performing side and coach to flag up the potential for why randomly things will get better.

Geelong didn't magically get better, and neither will anyone else.

We've got quality as well, and don't kid yourself. You never called them top two at 2006's conclusion, as the -good- judges did. Blind Freddy could see that they could play finals again.

 

[Crow-mo]

We've got quality as well, and don't kid yourself. You never called them top two at 2006's conclusion, as the -good- judges did. Blind Freddy could see that they could play finals again.

actually I called them top 4.

 

[kulak]

Generally the contenders have a core of elite players in their prime, 100 games plus. (But not too old.)

Currently our key players are either too young, to old, or not (yet) elite. I can't see that changing next year. We might come back to 6-10 again, but 1-4 seems unlikely.

Therefore we will only be a contender once more when those who are currently too young get their 100 games, and only if they prove to be elite.

Hopeful candiates:
Tippett - 50 games, 23 yo
Mackay - 43 games, 21 yo
Dangerfield - 28 games, 20 yo
Otten - 26 games, 20 yo
Davis - 4 games, 19 yo

At least two seasons until those guys (or whichever other youngsters kick in) can really drive us.

So we're looking at 2013 earliest.

Likely contributors who will still be around:
Maric - 56 games, 24 yo
Vince - 62 games so hopefully still has room to improve, but already 24
Douglas - 63 games, 23 yo
Knights - 73 games, 23 yo
Porplyzia - 74 games, 25 yo
van Berlo - 101 games, 23 yo
Reilly - 120 games, 26 yo
Thompson - 162 games, 27 yo
Johncock - 173 games, 27 yo

Assume the likely retention of a few others from that age group like Bock, Rutten, Stevens, and Symes. Maybe even Doughty

We've then got about 6 or so spots to be filled by any of Martin, Walker, McKernan, Young, Petrenko, Cook, Sloane, Armstrong, Jaensch, Schmidt, Sellar, Henderson, etc.

Example side:
FB: Symes, Young, Johncock
HB: Otten, Bock, Davis
C: Mackay, van Berlo, Douglas
HF: Knights, Walker, Dangerfield
FF: Petrenko, Tippett, Porplyzia
R: Maric, Vince, Thompson
IC: Reilly, Martin, McKernan, Sloane

So we should be focusing this year, and maybe the next couple, on preparing for that time, however we perceive that to be.

 

[PCORF]

After years of sub par Finals performances and poor performance in close games. Having a bad year or two could be the best thing that has happned to us. Remember we had the 2nd best record last decade of all sides and only missed the finals twice all decade but we are responisble for many of our finals meltdowns. Its a new decade. We had an average record in the 1990s but a few good years got us the results so I doubt we will be top 2 this decade.

But look at 2004, we started that year terribly, suffered our worst ever defeat (141 points to Brisbane) but finished it off strongly. If we can play spoiler and finish off this season strongly who knows about 2011. But the Team could still struggle for a few more years. But we had many chances last decade, you don't take those chances and you pay for them.

 

[Schulzycrow]

From these posts it seems that all our vets are getting the boot....

Birdman - already there
Edwards - seems to be gone
Goody - playing a role but not burning it up like last year - another season
Doughty - seems to be gone, but may keep his poss.
Rowdy - sadly time has come to cut losses
Bunji - playing the best of all and could play role up forward or HBF and should be given another year.

That gives us plenty in the salary cap, heard that GC is trying big time for Bryce Gibbs. Crows should go in a big way to get him. Future midfield star and captain.

We need a clean out at years end, but can we cut as deep as everyone seems to be demanding?

 

[Crow-mo]

Therefore we will only be a contender once more when those who are currently too young get their 100 games, and only if they prove to be elite.

I think this is exactly right.

its not enough to just mature, they need to be of a certain quality as well. which is harder to predict.

 

[arrowman]

I think this is exactly right.

its not enough to just mature, they need to be of a certain quality as well. which is harder to predict.

Yes, indeed.

I'd like to take a "broad brush" approach, rather than try to pick which individual players will come on and which ones won't - and admittedly making the assumption that we do get some genuine improvement (in younger players, and in the performance of the team as a whole.

I know what follows is a bit "hand waving" and "broad brush" and I'll probably be criticised for being vague and not predicting exactly which players / teams will move forward and which won't - but that's the point: you CAN'T predict which ones, you can only use the example of history to make guesses about how many out of a given group will move up/down, and therefore try to work out how realistic it is to move how far up the ladder - if you know what I mean.

And admittedly this is an optimistic scenario...

First, on players:
- Of the old guard: Burton, Hentschel & Doughty will retire / be delisted. Goody and Macca to play on. And with all due respect to the Burton, Hentschel and Doughty, I don't think that leaves a huge deficit overall.
- Reilly, Thompson, Johncock & Bock to hold their ground vs 2009-2010 form; Douglas to maintain his improved form in 2010. Not sure about Rutten.
- Dangerfield, Mackay, Vince, Porps, Walker should be expected to improve over 2010 (to date) and more than cover for the "old guard" losses along with some or all of the new guys we've seen this year.
- Otten back.
- 2010 New kids such as Henderson, Davis, Young, Jaensch, Cooke, Armstrong - at least 2-3 of them to step up.

On balance, and assuming we have a decent preseason and a better run with injuries, there's nothing too terrible about the playing stocks in 2011-2012 and beyond.

Now let's look at where we stand in relation to the other clubs.

- Right now, on revealed form there are 7 clubs who are clearly better than us - in no particular order:
Fremantle, Port, Sydney, Geelong, St Kilda, Bulldogs, Collingwood.

- We are "on par" one way or another, with:
Essendon, Carlton, Hawthorn, Brisbane - and possibly Melbourne

- We are, or should be, better than:
Richmond, West Coast, North Melbourne

Which places us about 10-12th in 2010 and that's probably where we'll finish.

So to improve to finalists, and about 5th-6th, say, in 2011, we have to improve (duh) and also rely on some of the first 7 to fall back, and some of the middle pack to not improve as people might expect.

That sounds like wishful thinking, but history tells us there's no way the first 7 will stay there AND the next 5 (Essendon etc) will also step up - that would give us 12 "top tier" teams in a single season, and that just doesn't happen. Unexpected things will happen, as they have for Adelaide and Freo (e.g.) in 2010.

Of the "first 7", I think Geelong and Sydney are vulnerable, and maybe one other will unexpectedly fall back.

Of the "next 5", I wonder if Brisbane will move ahead, and there'll be some doubts about Essendon as well. Personally I don't rate Carlton either.

In short, of the 12 teams "above" or "equal with" us, it's reasonable to hope/expect that 4-5 places will open up just through other teams falling back, and another 2-3 places might be open to us through our own improvement. Which means we could even move up 5-8 places - i.e. from 12th to knocking on the top 4.

Yeah - OK, reality check says that's overly optimistic, but it does mean that finals in 2010 is a realistic goal.

Conclusion: We've screwed a chance to go top 4 and be genuine contenders in 2010. We'll probably have to make 2011 a "recovery" year and look to be a contender in 2012. I'd want to see us playing finals in 2011, top 4 or close to it in 2012 (i.e. 2012 is the new 2009).

Not all doom and gloom. Whether we can achieve this improvement is another thing - but on a broad brush assessment as above, there is no reason why that should not be our goal.

Does that make any sense???