Coaches wake up

[Winky]

At last someone in the coaching box has twigged. Just about everybody seated around us have been questioning for weeks why they have persevered with a structure that seemed doomed to failure and made young kids look incompetent.

Finally a few simply basics like returning Hunter to the backline, bringing Brown forward, Leaving Lynch at full forward (I know he did do short stints on the ball but not as long as before) and avoiding the temptation to make Cox a full forward while "resting" has made the team look instantly better. Giving Scott Selwood a bit of a run in the midfield and putting Stenglein as a negating back have also helped.

They have gone as a team, from the point where I simply cringed to the stage where they may well now improve. Provided of course the brains trust don't revert to the misplaced structure previously in place!

 

[Jimmy_the_Gent]

I can see where you're coming from but the temptation to move a player as soon as something goes wrong is one which a coach has to get over.

Often it's important to give a guy or structure a certain amount of time before you know if it's good or not. Otherwise you could be changing things every week and never finding anything good because nothing gets a chance to click.

 

[bunsen burner]

I agree with the OP but don't believe it so simple. We'll use the same structure in Melbourne and look like a bunch of arse hats.

Whilst Stenglein was very good on the weekend he had been woeful for at least 18 months. Playing in the WAG|FL probably sparked his confidence, putting his career on the line probably sparked his determination, and the realisation and acceptance that he was blocking and negating for kids rather than Judd probably sparked his perspective.

 

[Winky]

I agree with the OP but don't believe it so simple. We'll use the same structure in Melbourne and look like a bunch of arse hats.

Whilst Stenglein was very good on the weekend he had been woeful for at least 18 months. Playing in the WAG|FL probably sparked his confidence, putting his career on the line probably sparked his determination, and the realisation and acceptance that he was blocking and negating for kids rather than Judd probably sparked his perspective.

I'm not saying its an instant answer I'm jusr saying that the previous structure was completely wrong and it took us backward. Better to look at the simple and obvious structure and use that to build on rather than persevere with one that is embarassing.

 

[Underdog]

How dare we experiment in a rebuilding year?

 

[greatwhiteshark]

Not many as critical of the coaches or coach than me but lets be fair here.
Yes I believe that Lynch is the obvious FF and we need to accept that and just leave him there. Will never be a 100 goal kicker but has proved he can kick 60 odd which is a good return. Just need to accept that there will be some bad days.

Hunter has always been steady up back but Woosha has been able to rely on him pinch hitting forward and we should not stop that just because we are developing kids.

Woosha did a good job yesterday and got the boys up to have a red hot go against a powerhouse side. In fact maybe not enough credit has been given the Eagles yesterday.

Sure Geelong did not have their greatest day but maybe, just maybe the Eagles did not let them have their greatest day.

In my view its not about accepting the game as an honourable loss, but realisticly the Coaches and the players did a very good job yesterday. Our skill level is way below par and thats why we miss easy opportunity's. maybe the skills will improve with confidence.

But if they play with the right intensity then the boys can be very competitive and they showed that yesterday.

Well done to the club yesterday.

 

[kane249]

Liked the move of Brown up forward, offered a good target. Hunter up forward wasn't working this season and needed to move down back. Hunter should at best be a pinch hitter up forward and not be up there permantly IMO

Blooding Nick Nat this week will allow us to leave Lynch up forward which can only benefit us instead of him having to play a dual role.

 

[bodazoka]

Its basically moving the older players to the positions where they used to play in 06 I guess. Hunter as a backman, Lynch at FF, Stinga has been played on backmen before. You also have to give credit to the players, apparently we were actually down on tackles but it seemed as though we won allot of hard ball and were able to beat the best and bigest bodies in the AFL in contests.

I think we are still a long way off winning games, Geelong played to our level and I believe that if we challenged them with score board pressure (ie got 12 infront) they would of retaliated and blew us apart.

 

[Eagle87]

Its basically moving the older players to the positions where they used to play in 06 I guess. Hunter as a backman, Lynch at FF, Stinga has been played on backmen before. You also have to give credit to the players, apparently we were actually down on tackles but it seemed as though we won allot of hard ball and were able to beat the best and bigest bodies in the AFL in contests.

I think we are still a long way off winning games, Geelong played to our level and I believe that if we challenged them with score board pressure (ie got 12 infront) they would of retaliated and blew us apart.

Has he? Really?

I actually thought he played on forwards yesterday and had done before but fair enough, perhaps he has....

Or did you just stretch yourself there vis-a-vis the English language and completely botch things up?

On your last "point", Geelong did respond anytime we got close, in the third quarter we twice got within single figures and both time they immediately kicked 2 or 3 goals. They were playing at about half rat power which also explains why we won the contested possessions stats. Although this was not really a win for our weak bodies v their harder ones - our leading contested possession winners were Cox & Lynch (because their rucks are shit), and Hunter, Stenglein & Ebert - so all harder bodied players bar Ebert - who was IMO our second best player and showed why he will be very good.

 

[shoe]

Don't agree OP. If they hadn't tried new things, everyone would be saying Woosha and the coaches are too stubborn, rigid and afraid to make a few changes when things aren't working out.

I'm happy with the level of position experimentation we've tried this year.. they have tried fairly logical position changes, nothing too stupid or drastic. It's a rebuilding year after all, it makes sense to see if the team can be optimised with a bit of shuffling.

 

[Snooperclyde]

It's easy to be happy with the structure when the boys play well but don't forget the round two mauling of Port when we had Hunter forward etc.

OK time to send Hunter back, can't argue with that, he has proved he is a gun down back.

Lynch at FF is debatable though. He took three marks for the day and kicked two goals, yes he can kick from 60m but that alone is not a guide to playing FF. Very good FF's take marks (Fev, Richo, Lloyd, Bradshaw, Tredrae etc) and while Lynchy has done this well on occasion I believe he has been more dominant when used in the middle. The making of Lynchy as a power onballer needs to happen while Cox is in the ruck, not as a backup ruckman when Coxy needs a rest.
Lynchy has been fantastic at ground level then using his booming kick to send the ball forward and his size puts fear into opposition players if only he would learn to be an aggressive tackler. Naitanui coming in might just be the tonic to give the big Q a chance in the middle as a clearance specialist.

FF could be filled by Brown, Hunter or even Mackenzie could try out at FF.
The next generation player is Notte............he has the traits to make a top class FF so developing him early can only be beneficial (in the J Westoff mold). Cox changing with Naitanui at FF could be another option.

In a bold move it should really be time to play the kids (no disrespect to the great servants we have on the list) so they can fast track their development because it will be those players that bring the next GF our way. I don't see the point of holding them back now as the final eight has slipped from reality and I would rather cop more losses knowing we are building strength for the future ATM.

 

[lewigie]

Ebert is pretty damn big. Broke even with J.Selwood I reckon.

Brown up forward looked so good.. For the first half he disappeared in the second half, but he's got a great kick on him.

 

[Winky]

Don't agree OP. If they hadn't tried new things, everyone would be saying Woosha and the coaches are too stubborn, rigid and afraid to make a few changes when things aren't working out.

I'm happy with the level of position experimentation we've tried this year.. they have tried fairly logical position changes, nothing too stupid or drastic. It's a rebuilding year after all, it makes sense to see if the team can be optimised with a bit of shuffling.

For 11 weeks with the side getting worse? In fact not only worse but bloody laughable. A bit of simple common sense yesterday and suddenly there are options and people to hand off to when you are in trouble....slow learners!

 

[Underdog]

For 11 weeks with the side getting worse? In fact not only worse but bloody laughable. A bit of simple common sense yesterday and suddenly there are options and people to hand off to when you are in trouble....slow learners!

So you don't condone experimentation whilst we are rebuilding?

That's ridiculous.

 

[Winky]

So you don't condone experimentation whilst we are rebuilding?

That's ridiculous.

That's not experimenting...that's denying the bleeding obvious when it ain't working. Experimentation is doing what was done yesterday. i.e. Trying some new blood, moving Brown forward, giving Le Cras a run on the ball. If you want more, you could perhaps give McKenzie a run forward or even Nikoski. There is even the option for Notte to get a run on the flank or forward pocket.

What has happened in the past 11 weeks is leaving Hunter forward when we were screaming for run from defense and he has struggled forward. OK to try it but stop if it hasn't worked for a few weeks. Similarly having Lynch run around the ground half the day without someone to kick to forward is just stupid.

At least they bit the bullet and tried Kennedy and also dropped Jones where he looked to gain confidence as the game went on for Claremont so those are steps in the right direction.

 

[Underdog]

What about when our experimentation worked and we won games?

I also don't think Hunter was any worse then McKinley up forward. Hunter crashed packs and created spills.

 

[drexel]

Um i think the best part was that we went back to the 'handball' gameplan which we initially helped develop, which is the only way to play, which for some insane reason we stopped doing.

Of course it helps that players are getting fitter but damn, you notice the difference a gut running leader makes when he's not there. So many of our players haven't wanted to put in the hard work endurance wise, so badly that it took a veteran like Embley to show the way in the last 5-6 weeks.

 

[lewigie]

Embley's a ****ing gun.

You don't win Norm Smith's for nothing.