Remove this Banner Ad

Preview Changes vs WCE

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

giantroo said:
Big changes for Eagles ahead of clash with @NMFCOfficial.

Duursma (calf) McCarthy (hammy), Ginbey (quad) all out injured. Champion dropped.

Lindsay, Hewett, Gross and debutant Marcus Herbert all in.
Click to expand...

We should be winning this shit by 5 goals minimum.

If we lose....just forfeit the rest of the season and spare us all the misery
 
Ardent Roo said:
Need to adjust for the fact that Tobes got to play against the weaker teams in Rounds 1-6. He's terrible.
Click to expand...
Yeah I know ... but 25 points?
 
Clarko said in that debut clip that the team needed not just Goad’s energy but the energy of him and others (I guess Harvey) who really have to work for their senior spots. As it’s a foreign concept for most of the team that embarrassed themselves last week, I guess it’s worth a try to remind them what the jumper is worth.
 
1. We have to pick a team each week that is capable of winning the game against the opposition that is in front of us. That is where we are at. Winning games has to be our number one priority.

2. Dropping senior players who had a bad week or two should only be considered if there is a viable option to replace them given the goal is to win games.

3. Despite what people say, there isn't a single player in the team picked this week that doesn't fall into at least one of the above categories i.e. we simply do not have a better option on our list that improves our chances of winning this game if they do not play.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Chadwiko said:
Mentioned this in the Wil Dawson thread, but I am O F F I C I A L L Y C O N C E R N E D with what our plan down back is this week.

After we played him as a KPD for the first time last week, now we've dropped Wil Dawson (which I think was the right call), but have not replaced him with any tall KPD. We've brought in Goad who will probably play a similar role to what Dawson did his first two weeks in the AFL as a low ToG% chop-out ruck for Xerri.

The West Coast named forward line includes;

Waterman - 192cm
Duff-Tytler - 201cm
Shanahan - 195cm
Cole - 189cm

We're left with Logue and Comben as the only "tall" KPDs with defensive experience to cover these guys.
Click to expand...
Trembath can also play down back. I know he's been used mostly as a forward, but he isn't in great form at the moment. Could be a curveball Clarko throws at them like Zurhaar. Starts down back and swings forward via the ruck.
 
Harvey Manfrenjensenden said:
1. We have to pick a team each week that is capable of winning the game against the opposition that is in front of us. That is where we are at. Winning games has to be our number one priority.

2. Dropping senior players who had a bad week or two should only be considered if there is a viable option to replace them given the goal is to win games.

3. Despite what people say, there isn't a single player in the team picked this week that doesn't fall into at least one of the above categories i.e. we simply do not have a better option on our list that improves our chances of winning this game if they do not play.
Click to expand...


Our goal shouldn't be to win games against dubious opponents by playing underperforming senior players. It should be to develop younger players capable of winning games regularly in the future.
 
chubbspeterson said:
I suppose it's which one senior player deserves to be dropped, when they all stank, as in the whole team bar a few.
I would've liked Logue or Daniel out. If they don't respond, they might be in trouble next week.
Click to expand...
Just pick one.

And then if they don’t respond pick another.

But they will likely respond our output likely much higher.

And then at some point we will have below standard games from players that really should not be putting them out on the park. Because we accept it and then do nothing about it.

We appear to be playing such a short term game. We’re only looking one ahead rather than saying we need to make bigger changes for longer term results.

Reactive Football Club.
 
Chadwiko said:
Taking a big dose of copium here, and putting the tinfoil hat on;

Goad did not fly over early in the week, when Harvey did.
We have brought in a ruck. Unlike Wil Dawson who was a KPD-ruck hybrid, Goad is only a ruck.
We did not bring in another tall KPD.
Toby Pink is still with the team and still an emergency.

...is Xerri going to be a late-out and Pink takes his place?
Click to expand...
No
 
Only Forwards said:
Not a single meaningful senior player dropped.

We will get a response.

May even win.

Then at some point in the next 6 weeks we’re going to drop games we should win because senior players know it doesn’t really matter how poorly they play they can just front up again the following week.

Delicate little flowers.
Click to expand...
You say delicate flowers, I say spoiled brat.

Yep. This is the second time Logue has been laughing after a loss this year. Was it WC or was it Sydney or Brisbane year? I forget. But that the ****ing audacity to not make an example. Maybe we play a good game, maybe we don’t. But one thing is his attitude just doesn’t change
 
Flying Ham said:
Lmac played well on waterman last time
Click to expand...
Lol no he didn’t. Waterman killed it just missed a shitload. I remember him having a couple on the full, missed 3 or 4 getable ones, was influential in ground ball and pressure and racked up a fair bit of the pill.
 
Masked Avenger said:
Our goal shouldn't be to win games against dubious opponents by playing underperforming senior players. It should be to develop younger players capable of winning games regularly in the future.
Click to expand...
A. That is incorrect. West Coast are far from dubious, they have beaten some teams this year, including us that other people would not have expected them to beat.

B. We should be developing players of all ages capable of winning games regularly in the future. Developing in the VFL and earning a game does not necessarily hinder our prospects of winning future AFL games. Conversely, playing players who do not improve our chances of winning AFL games now does not increase our chances of winning games regularly in the future or even occasionally.

C. There are at LEAST 5 games that we are a real chance of winning in the last half of the year. We could realistically win one or two more despite what the soft emotional types around here would have you believe.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Harvey Manfrenjensenden said:
A. That is incorrect. West Coast are far from dubious, they have beaten some teams this year, including us that other people would not have expected them to beat.

B. We should be developing players of all ages capable of winning games regularly in the future. Developing in the VFL and earning a game does not necessarily hinder our prospects of winning future AFL games. Conversely, playing players who do not improve our chances of winning AFL games now does not increase our chances of winning games regularly in the future or even occasionally.

C. There are at LEAST 5 games that we are a real chance of winning in the last half of the year. We could realistically win one or two more despite what the soft emotional types around here would have you believe.
Click to expand...

A) at their home in front of their home crowd at our home game, They should be favorites.

b) Sure. However part of winning games of football is having standards around what is and is not acceptable. we made 2 unforced changes after a 124 point loss. Omitted two blokes, one of whom should never have been in the team to start off with. We have a cycle, back in senior players, periodically have senior players collectively shit the bed, never drop them, back senior players in. Our next Freo-esque loss is in the post becuase we down right refuse to set standards about what is and is not acceptable from our senior cohort.

C) Only winning 2 games is underperformance. We play 4 games at home, a game against a side we recendly beat by 10 goals. If we only win 2 games out of the ones we have coming up no one should be satisfied with that.
 
ferball said:
I didn't think Daniel was as bad as Larkey, LDU, Logue, Chom, Fisher or X (not in any order.) I would be happy with any of those guys being dropped. Obviously LDU is important tho.

I don't remember Stephens or Simpkin being particularly bad but did spend long periods of the game trying to claw my own eyes out so might have missed it.
Click to expand...
LDU at least chased defensively when others wouldn't.
Larkey likely to have a good game this week. Chom and X too important.
Daniel you can at least give Harvey that role.
Pink or Dawson could've taken Logue role, but both couldn't go with their best forward on the lead.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Only Forwards said:
A) at their home in front of their home crowd at our home game, They should be favorites.

b) Sure. However part of winning games of football is having standards around what is and is not acceptable. we made 2 unforced changes after a 124 point loss. Omitted two blokes, one of whom should never have been in the team to start off with. We have a cycle, back in senior players, periodically have senior players collectively shit the bed, never drop them, back senior players in. Our next Freo-esque loss is in the post becuase we down right refuse to set standards about what is and is not acceptable from our senior cohort.

C) Only winning 2 games is underperformance. We play 4 games at home, a game against a side we recendly beat by 10 goals. If we only win 2 games out of the ones we have coming up no one should be satisfied with that.
Click to expand...
I like your last point. I said 5 wins and you're right, 2 more wins would be horrific
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom