CFC Stagnation?

[95blues]

I think Big Red mentioned Collingwood "finding" Beams and Sidebottom. Personally i dont think teams like Collingwood, Geelong and Hawthorn "find" anyone, that other teams dont already have somewhere. They just develop them properly and give them clear cut roles in a team with a well structured GAMEPLAN. I dont think either of those 2 guys would be half as good running around in Blue playing our Glass Cannon/unpredictable style.

Those teams manage to win time and time again with injury lists far worse than ours, they call it depth but its structure. When you play every man for himself footbal like we do, its always the Judds, Carrots, Murphys that are going to carry the team... but when one or some of those guys are out, there is nothing left. To be honest, im amazed we have done as well as we have the last couple of years playing the way we do.

 

[jimsta10]

You have to be kidding. Hampson is constantly pushed off the ball and couldn't catch a cold. Do I really have to present the video footage or him constantly running under balls (because he's scared of the contact) or bouncing balls off his chest on the lead?

Agreed.
Not enough basic ability there to work with.
It's like getting a 7 foot player to play basketball and he can't even reach the ring. Just quit

the apple doesnt fall far from the tree...it would be a different story if the team was winning I beat. problems, issues, whats the solution can you two genius conquer up?

 

[Big Red is back]

I am just so grateful I'm not you. All that doom & gloom hanging around you. It can't be a pleasant existence.

Not doom an gloom I am bullish (excuse the pun) about our rebirth with a full side post the bye, just pointing out how bad our year has been and what a terrible job Ratten has done. Lucky the players will cover for him post bye as our best 22 can do anything even with him cheering from the coaches box.

Excuse me for not being happy when we have our side on the verge of missing the finals when we should be playing in a GF.

 

[Big Red is back]

I think Big Red mentioned Collingwood "finding" Beams and Sidebottom. Personally i dont think teams like Collingwood, Geelong and Hawthorn "find" anyone, that other teams dont already have somewhere. They just develop them properly and give them clear cut roles in a team with a well structured GAMEPLAN. I dont think either of those 2 guys would be half as good running around in Blue playing our Glass Cannon/unpredictable style.

Those teams manage to win time and time again with injury lists far worse than ours, they call it depth but its structure. When you play every man for himself footbal like we do, its always the Judds, Carrots, Murphys that are going to carry the team... but when one or some of those guys are out, there is nothing left. To be honest, im amazed we have done as well as we have the last couple of years playing the way we do.

That is the sad truth.

 

[blue healer]

I think Big Red mentioned Collingwood "finding" Beams and Sidebottom. Personally i dont think teams like Collingwood, Geelong and Hawthorn "find" anyone, that other teams dont already have somewhere. They just develop them properly and give them clear cut roles in a team with a well structured GAMEPLAN. I dont think either of those 2 guys would be half as good running around in Blue playing our Glass Cannon/unpredictable style.

Those teams manage to win time and time again with injury lists far worse than ours, they call it depth but its structure. When you play every man for himself footbal like we do, its always the Judds, Carrots, Murphys that are going to carry the team... but when one or some of those guys are out, there is nothing left. To be honest, im amazed we have done as well as we have the last couple of years playing the way we do.

To a certain extent I agree with your comment on structure but wonder how much of our structural problem is caused by our injury list. Just once I'd like to see us able to put something approaching our best side on the ground to give us some indication of what the coaching staff see as our ideal structure. Then, and only then, will we know if our coaching staff can cut the mustard. Fortunately our injuries are not season ending so we may just see that later in the season, here's hoping.

I, like many, was seduced by our performance in the finals last year. We went into the last game with one ruckman against the best ruck duo in the league, without Gibbs, Waite, Kreuzer, with Jammo on one leg and lost our only tall forward (Thornton) by half time. We fell agonisingly short of the win. It was reasonable to assess, on that result, that we were potentially a top 4 side with something approaching a fit list. Injuries, again, have impacted those expectations but is it deeper than that?

To return to the point of the original post, structural issues aside, we have had no one who has shown anything but marginal improvement this year. We were told by Ratts that Gibbs was set to explode and if that's happened it must have been a gentle fart as I have missed it but is this because he is destined to be no better than a good ordinary player or because we, through injuries, haven't been able to utilize him in his best position. I would like to hope it's the latter.

We thought, with a full preseason, Kruezer and Waite would make a huge difference to our team, it may still happen but if it's not soon it'll be too late.

You mention Sidebottom and Beams. Both were publicly challenged to lift their game when Swan was injured and both responded in spades.

When Murphy was injured we had no one who could do this. I would have thought that, necessity being the mother of opportunity that someone like Lucas would stick his hand up but he can't even make the team. Incidentally that Lucas/Talia decision is looking worse every day and is almost threadworthy on it's own (may have been done though).

I still think we have the list to compete against the best but only if our lower tier players grow a leg. If not, are we destined to mirror St Kilda?

 

[BuxbaumBixby]

To a certain extent I agree with your comment on structure but wonder how much of our structural problem is caused by our injury list. Just once I'd like to see us able to put something approaching our best side on the ground to give us some indication of what the coaching staff see as our ideal structure. Then, and only then, will we know if our coaching staff can cut the mustard. Fortunately our injuries are not season ending so we may just see that later in the season, here's hoping.

I, like many, was seduced by our performance in the finals last year. We went into the last game with one ruckman against the best ruck duo in the league, without Gibbs, Waite, Kreuzer, with Jammo on one leg and lost our only tall forward (Thornton) by half time. We fell agonisingly short of the win. It was reasonable to assess, on that result, that we were potentially a top 4 side with something approaching a fit list. Injuries, again, have impacted those expectations but is it deeper than that?

To return to the point of the original post, structural issues aside, we have had no one who has shown anything but marginal improvement this year. We were told by Ratts that Gibbs was set to explode and if that's happened it must have been a gentle fart as I have missed it but is this because he is destined to be no better than a good ordinary player or because we, through injuries, haven't been able to utilize him in his best position. I would like to hope it's the latter.

We thought, with a full preseason, Kruezer and Waite would make a huge difference to our team, it may still happen but if it's not soon it'll be too late.

You mention Sidebottom and Beams. Both were publicly challenged to lift their game when Swan was injured and both responded in spades.

When Murphy was injured we had no one who could do this. I would have thought that, necessity being the mother of opportunity that someone like Lucas would stick his hand up but he can't even make the team. Incidentally that Lucas/Talia decision is looking worse every day and is almost threadworthy on it's own (may have been done though).

I still think we have the list to compete against the best but only if our lower tier players grow a leg. If not, are we destined to mirror St Kilda?

I reckon the key word that seems to be getting missed is 'leadership'. (leadership from within the playing group)

Geelong, Hawks and Pies have leadership in spades. Newcomers to the team are instantly shown the culture, and expectations, of the group. Who shows our guys the non-negotiables? Who stands up when we're up against it? Can't be just one bloke - need a core of 6-8.

Judd is an obvious leader (although if we had any options I think there would be an argument for a tougher styled leader) - but where's the next tier? Carazzo, Scotland and Jamison are the next most likely ... but what happens when they get injured or they themselves are struggling with form?

Our list is 'talented' - possibly more talented than the pies list - but as a group they have more quality leaders that simply drive the team to success.

 

[Kades_Dad]

the apple doesnt fall far from the tree...it would be a different story if the team was winning I beat. problems, issues, whats the solution can you two genius conquer up?

Drop him, because he isn't up to it. Problem solved.

 

[son of dominator]

the apple doesnt fall far from the tree...it would be a different story if the team was winning I beat. problems, issues, whats the solution can you two genius conquer up?

I don't go quite as far as beating myself off when the team wins, each to his own

 

[Hus83]

the apple doesnt fall far from the tree...it would be a different story if the team was winning I beat. problems, issues, whats the solution can you two genius conquer up?

I dunno. Maybe just play a shit ruckman as a shit ruckman, rather a shit ruckman as a shit forward.

 

[Blue Flame]

Had the strangest dream, I was a Tigers supporter (I even had a mullet), only the team wasnt called the Tigers or Richmond, it was called Carlton and or the Blues, our jumper was navy with a white logo on it and fans at games would call out stuff like go the Baggers, or go the mighty blues, stuff like that, but I would come home, go to my favorite footy forum and every thread is this player is shit, this bloke should never pull the jumper on again, have we stagnated, should we sack the coach, get Malthouse or Roos.

It was a nightmare.

Then I woke up.

Oh wait.......

Photoshoppers, we need a picture of 40YB with Ivan Maric's mullet.

 

[The Coach]

This..

Even if not as head coach there needs to be a role for Rat's at Carlton, the club in recent decades has at will dumped people on a whim for many faults that are a result of many issues. A good organisation finds positives and weaknesses in staff and when necessary retains staff in a capacity suited to them.

It is great for us to speculate on whether or not Rat's is the man, he may just be, but may not be for all we know, but notwitshstanding he is a great club man and should be treated ammicably by the club and it's supporters in any circumstance.

The ones whom I feel sorry for are all the coaching staff under the coach. Their appointment may have had little connection to the coach's but when a coach is replaced 75% of them are replaced and so their future (at the current club) is first and foremost tied to his ability

 

[Murphkreuzmitch]

The ones whom I feel sorry for are all the coaching staff under the coach. Their appointment may have had little connection to the coach's but when a coach is replaced 75% of them are replaced and so their future (at the current club) is first and foremost tied to his ability

My post is not intended as let's feel sorry for Rat's, it's about the long term benefit of the club and a shift in club culture. I do not promote Rat's as the senior coach, nor do I say he is the worst as I am undecided. But what I am clear on is that a good organisation embraces the retention of staff whether it be in one role or an altered role (demotion or promotion) and yes Rat's, along with those you mention deserve that courtesy.

The depth of the playing list is being argued by many on this forum, you could almost ask the question, player recruitment and development for specific roles, whom takes care of this? Is it the senior coach? Since Ratten has been involved the club seemingly has tried to fill holes in the list with a mixture of smalls, talls and young and hold.

The structures above ratten and around him, what clearly defined policies and processes are in place? Who is accountable for overseeing the football department? Perhaps this person has failed them all, perhaps the club has failed by not providing enough support in this area.

Improvement for the long term always comes from within the club, people working collectively within it to improve. Sacking staff unless they insubordinate to policies is never the answer.

 

[The Coach]

I will address your response to Fact 2 which was about (to quote your original):

"that a good man, a man that bleeds for the club be sacked by that club, have his future earning ability severely impeded (high profile sacking does not lend itself to future employment prospects)"

and in your response to my claims that this is irrelevant it became

"I believe he or any other contracted person ought be able to enjoy the fulfilment of that contract without having to constantly address speculation about it"

Point 1 The original premise that he is a good man and bleeds blue is still irrelevant - it will come down to whether his employers think he is doing a good enough job

Point 2 In the real world contracts are terminated regularly if the fit is no longer seen as mutually beneficial but people are compensated under the terms that they agreed to when they accepted the position

I am ignoring the responses to the other minor facts (in comparison to this main one) as getting bogged down in long debates is not what I am here for

 

[The Coach]

My post is not intended as let's feel sorry for Rat's, it's about the long term benefit of the club and a shift in club culture. I do not promote Rat's as the senior coach, nor do I say he is the worst as I am undecided. But what I am clear on is that a good organisation embraces the retention of staff whether it be in one role or an altered role (demotion or promotion) and yes Rat's, along with those you mention deserve that courtesy.

I cannot think of too many demoted people being retained in football clubs. I remember Adelaide saying Craig could more or less have a role for life but he did not say. Likewise in business, how often are demoted chiefs retained and then how long do they stay around? I know what my experiences tell me and I will read any reply but as I mentioned to 40yo I will leave it at that as I really don't come here for long debates
Cheers

 

[40yearBLUE]

My post is not intended as let's feel sorry for Rat's, it's about the long term benefit of the club and a shift in club culture. I do not promote Rat's as the senior coach, nor do I say he is the worst as I am undecided. But what I am clear on is that a good organisation embraces the retention of staff whether it be in one role or an altered role (demotion or promotion) and yes Rat's, along with those you mention deserve that courtesy.

The depth of the playing list is being argued by many on this forum, you could almost ask the question, player recruitment and development for specific roles, whom takes care of this? Is it the senior coach? Since Ratten has been involved the club seemingly has tried to fill holes in the list with a mixture of smalls, talls and young and hold.

The structures above ratten and around him, what clearly defined policies and processes are in place? Who is accountable for overseeing the football department? Perhaps this person has failed them all, perhaps the club has failed by not providing enough support in this area.

Improvement for the long term always comes from within the club, people working collectively within it to improve. Sacking staff unless they insubordinate to policies is never the answer.

Cant say I disagree with any of this post, in fact I strongly endorse it except that I feel it is far to early to decide if anybody (in the current administration) has failed. Under the current football dept, senior coach, recruiting team, and general club management we have gone from perennial failure and bottom 4 dweller to finalist (we finished 10th in Ratts first full season and finalist every year since after finishing bottom 4 for all but 1 of the previous 6 seasons pretty much says all I need to hear right there, score on board) and except from some injury setbacks this season, our progression is still in line with the ups and downs most successful clubs have had on course to their ultimate successes and I find nothing disturbing about the position we are currently in, notwithstanding the disappointment that every loss is.

 

[Murphkreuzmitch]

I cannot think of too many demoted people being retained in football clubs. I remember Adelaide saying Craig could more or less have a role for life but he did not say. Likewise in business, how often are demoted chiefs retained and then how long do they stay around? I know what my experiences tell me and I will read any reply but as I mentioned to 40yo I will leave it at that as I really don't come here for long debates
Cheers

There are 18 jobs at the senior level, and we all know once someone is sacked it's just about all over for that person in asenior role, the percentage rate of getting a senior gig elsewhere at the moment is extremely low. Brett Ratten would understand this if he finds himself with his back to the wall and it would be prudent of him to consider any offer fielded to him.

Players loose captaincy regularly, they stay, some take pay cuts, coaching staff if given a suitable role in the club where they are in touch with the game may just stay.

Agree to disagree. Thanks for the discussion.

 

[Blue Flame]

I know I'm new here and shouldn't say much on this, but I have to agree with the coach on this one. When we come across idiots or trolls, I am all for crushing them, but that doesn't mean we should go looking for them.
The tone of some messages in this thread is derisive and overly aggressive, when people have not been overtly ill-intentioned. Let's try not to get too defensive despite what has not been a good year.

 

[mikeythemoocow]

I actually had a look back at players drafted in the 2nd and 3rd round since 2005. 1st round picks should be generally pretty safe that you get 1st 22 list player from (Russell has shown he can be, not sure why he has gone so far back, and Lucas hopefully get a shot and shows he can make it), and that the picks in the 2nd and 3rd round can really make a team. Since 2005 to 2010 we have taken

Bower - almost left last year and doesnt seem to be in future plans
Jake Edwards - gone
Hammer - confident he can be a good player
Grigg - gone, for whatever the reasons, and playing seniors.
Austin - playing seniors at the Dogs, didnt seem to get much of a chance at Carlton
Steven Brown - gone
Armfield - handy player
Robbo - good player
Marcus Davies - not sure yet

So while we have got a few players from these picks, i think most of us we could have been hoping for more. Not sure if its due to who we drafted, problems in our development or bad luck but it has been exposed by the injurys we have gotten this year.

We have probably doen better than other clubs with rookies though so maybe its all swings and round abouts.

 

[The Coach]

some reasoned discussion and some excellent analysis here.

40yo I quote Azzurro here because I want to point out another reason why some come to a footy forum. Rubber stamp supporting on a forum is going to result in 'casting your votes' as the most challenging thing you can do

Baiting cannot be an acceptable pastime. I too have never been on Bay 13

What name did you once go by 40yo? Until recently I was Five. You might have guessed I finally replaced my copy of The Coach and decided on a name change (with some kindness by our Fred)

 

[40yearBLUE]

40yo I quote Azzurro here because I want to point out another reason why some come to a footy forum. Rubber stamp supporting on a forum is going to result in 'casting your votes' as the most challenging thing you can do

Baiting cannot be an acceptable pastime. I too have never been on Bay 13

What name did you once go by 40yo? Until recently I was Five. You might have guessed I finally replaced my copy of The Coach and decided on a name change (with some kindness by our Fred)

I was 30yearBlue but changed to 40year when my 40 year certificate arrived last year (certificate I thought a bit lame, my wife got an 8 year certificate, I thought if I got a pin for 30 years I would get a pin for 40 at least).

It is an interesting debate to discuss where the line is on what is positive affirmation of ones support and what is constructive criticism to what is mindless blather and venting (venting threads I find perfectly acceptable even on a positive only board, you know, like you do with the Bay, exactly what to expect) to what is just blatant trolling.. I dont say there should not be a place where negative posters can go, but I say I want no part of it, but you leave me no choice but be immersed in it because you wont take it to the places that welcome you, you insist on doing it here and there leaving me no sanctuary.

There is no rational discussion with them, I welcome rational discussion, and to be fair I have had a few here, but they are becoming less and less frequent as the place has become a zoo, well it always was, I learned that in my first weeks here back in 08, but more so or perhaps to my disappointment it hasnt become less so.

And as to rational debate, its thin on the ground because most posters post opinion as fact. Take my latest protagonist on the now permanent Sack Ratts thread, states that Malthouse would have fixed Fev and got more from him and that not having done so was a failing of Ratts and our club in isolation. Refuses to accept that a multitude of others had failed also, refuses to accept that Malthouse has no runs on the board with regard to disciplining wayward players and that finally, so convinced of his worth as a fixer upper that every single club ignored him when they could have had him on rookie pay in the last draft. His response is he knows what he knows and doesnt need to prove his points, he can just post what he likes and I shouldnt be so rude to him. Well perhaps he does not have to justify anything to himself, but if he posts it he has to be able to defend it because if its crap I will tear it down with my arguments.

Thats how it is here now, someone posts rubbish, someone else argues with them and they invariably dont like it. So it seems what negative posters want is the same as what I want only in reverse, they want a place to wallow and for others to wallow with them without pesky facts, without rational debate. How, how do you debate rationally with an irrational statement to start with. And as I have repeatedly pointed out, they have places to go where they can say anything negative they like about the club and coach or players and everyone will agree with them. Take it there and leave us positive posters a place free from your bullshit. Its not much to ask. And because my requests not only get ignored they get derision, people wonder why I become cynical and negative too. I can remember I even got derided for typing long posts at one stage. Stuff that would take 30 seconds to say. And posters here found that too laborious.

So yeah, I have started a new club, Monkey Baiters United. Our motto: Unus monachus est quoque plures

 

[Krooooze]

According to AFL figures obtained by The Australian last month, the Blues spent $2.4 million on fitness and conditioning, more than any other club.​

​

Collingwood was the next-highest, spending $1.8m,from Fremantle ($1.7m) and Essendon, Geelong, Hawthorn, Sydney, St Kilda and North Melbourne, who all spent $1.5m. Carlton's fitness and conditioning spend was four times what it invested in recruiting and list management.​

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/sport/injurys-not-what-is-ailing-judd/story-e6frg7mf-1226404773405

It's disturbing that we spend so much more on fitness and conditioning. No wonder our player development has stagnated.

 

[pepalenko]

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/sport/injurys-not-what-is-ailing-judd/story-e6frg7mf-1226404773405

It's disturbing that we spend so much more on fitness and conditioning. No wonder our player development has stagnated.

I don't think that just because you spend more on fitness and conditioning that this has a direct effect on development. How do you think that this is the case?
If we were only focussing on fitness and not on skills, tactics etc then that would be a worry. Really would be shocked if that was the case.

 

[40yearBLUE]

yes, lol.
what i was trying to point out is, your 'support' of ratten is bereft of any comment at all regarding his coaching abilities! does this reflect badly on you, or the coach, or both? wheeling out the old WE MUST SUPPORT says nothing at all about the coach himself. have you nothing to say in his favor other than WE MUST SUPPORT? it doesn't look like it at all. perhaps then you might find some common ground with the people you're arguing against because discussions about the coach needing to feed his family, being a carlton man through and through are quite frankly pathetic, and really not at all complimentary to him and partly to blame for the ongoing conversation about him which you since became angry at. you owe him reasoned discussion about his abilities and shortcomings, honesty, and not blind support, and you would prefer to shut up shop instead of compliment the mans coaching abilities or discuss them at all. why? because you don't know why we should support him, because you have no idea about football, why?? sticking your fingers in your ears and la la la-ing, and being obstinate doesn't make a coach better or more worthy of support. the powers that be are probably discussing ratten as a matter of due diligence in a far more sensible manner than you, i see no reason why people on this forum shouldn't do the same. you don't seem capable of sensible discussion and have admitted as much, and then put everyone else at fault when 'we should support' is all you've got to add.

can i have a go? i'm not someone who thinks we should sack ratten, at least not until the end of the year if needs be. i am open to the possibility without saying it should happen.
"ratten has had a tough year, with injuries affecting some of his talented onball brigade, and judd having a bad patch of form possibly due to injury and an interrupted preseason. on top of this, waite has also been injured after being an integral part of our early success. other key position injuries like laidler have affected the team at other times"
"thornton and hampson have shown his ability to remake footballers to a degree, thornton being very close to the scrapheap and hampson an unrealized talent which is slowly bearing fruit. he also shares a demonstrable and strong rapport with the players (as shown by his coaching while on the bench) which surely holds him in good stead"
"however, the team has since gone through a rough patch with an almost unexplainable drop off in certain important statistics, ie clearances. other players such as garlett have not contributed like he will have wished and depth players like joseph and bower have not performed as well as they've done in the past. his use of some players has question marks. he may have been tactically found out, but has made mention of adjusting the way the players play"
"the rest of the year, in which ratten will regain some of his injured players will go some way towards restoring his teams successes, if he has the ability to turn around some of the worrying trends, and may see him retain his position in spite of continued discussion about the teams' midyear slump"

that wasn't too hard, maybe not completely detailed or correct. and i didn't even have to insult anyone.

First your first point, perhaps my recent defence of Ratts has bereft of any rationale, it would be because I have and other have said it all before, to no avail. No one on here is listening. They have their whipping boys and no amount of rational argument will change that, and Ratts has been in the sights for some time, there was a minor reprieve for the first 3 rounds, then unlike real fans that rally to a wounded friend, bam they found their in to stick their knives in again. As to your actual arguments, well made its true, but they ignore an important point. There are variables in the human condition (a lofty claim but what does that mean, well it means that psychology is such a poorly understood thing that we cannot yet call it a science, so if we dont understand how and what motivates each of us how then can we say, this coach is to blame for the variables of performance?) variables in the vaguaries of luck that a bouncing ball creates. For example people (me among them) now claim the Esssendon game as a watershed, that we were "found out" and that it is the blueprint for others to follow. In my more lucid moments I understand this to be the emotional claptrap of an emotionally invested fan, but the rational understanding returns that any game can go a number of ways all dependant on luck. Carrots injury, just bad luck, had a profound effect on the rest of the game, and as a result the season.

You claim we should discuss the attributes that Ratts possesses in our defence against the hordes of unwashed that would have him sacked, but how, how is that discussion possible. You cannot do a comparison because you have no data with which to compare or contrast. You have no control subject. For example people say Roos would be better or Malthouse would be, but on what basis. In order for that comparison to be made you have to know exactly what they would do differently and you cannot do that by understanding what they did with the last team they coached. That was an entirely different group made up of different strengths and weaknesses in a different time and place. Totally pointless. We tried (and many others have too) importing a tried and tested coach, how did the Pagan years work out? And Collingwood did the same, they didnt work out exactly, so what did they do? They waited. They didnt sack him, they waited. Because perhaps they understood that Malthouse had the right ideas, just needed time to get the list right and for the players they had to fulfil. And they did. Once. Thats good enough. Onces is a fantastic achievement. But its not the be all and end all that ought motivate other clubs to get him at all cost. Then you contrast a first year coach with a ready made list like Scott at the Cats. If the rationale behind the get Malthouse camp were to be believed, Scott should never have been able to snag a cup in his first year. Perhaps, just perhaps, the influence a coach has is much much less than they would have you believe. (As possibly the greatest modern day coaches have pointed out, both Matthews and Blight have both said that the coach is nowhere near as important to present outcomes as others make out).

I could go on but those more inclined to the one liner deserve better wouldnt you say?

 

[40yearBLUE]

Just noticed that Aph has closed the Ratts Mega thread (what took you so long is one question, WHY WHY is another, Who shot Liberty Valance is another........but I digress)

Taking a poll on how long it takes for someone else to start another thinly veiled invitation to examine his contract status.....my guess is about half time of the Hawks game in 7 days time. Am I cheeky enough to start an actual poll thread? Might get me carded and do my sanity the world of good........just sayin

 

[I bleed Blue]

Thank god it was closed.