Opinion End The Negativity

[1954]

Leo



Leopard and spots.

After 5 years, one year _after_ the infamous "we know who you are" ultimatum, we come to this.

So who will it be- the players, or the coach?

If Ken is the man, and it's just players following instructions, then we've wasted 5 years..it's not going to change without a wholesale turnover of the players. Which isn't going to happen.

Either way, if the board "strengthen" Ken up in the box , they are all negligent and should go.

Let's not forget90% of us here told what the problem would be before the last game . Too small in defense. No chop for a tiring Ryder and no foil for Dixon. Manic press and deep& wide inside 50 leading to behinds scored. Applauding umps leading to subconscious bias which is costing us.

If Ken can do the obvious, then you can say stay. But he is stubborn, and we are 5 seasons in and that would mean a 5th reactive game plan.

Basically, it's the boards fault. It would appear they have not demanded accountability and the rot trickled down.

Ken a 10 year coach?,or even one more year? That's another season of hoping we kick straight despite 5 years of evidence suggesting it's a coin toss


Melbourne missed the finals on a percentage margin of just one goal after the entire season.

We saw this week how costly one missed shot is.

Why would we persist with a strategy that is not better odds than 50/50?

We beat the cripple teams because we get a roll and score multiple goals back to back...because we have a forward line the ball comes into after each goal.


Against better teams it's harder. After 4 minutes of no score we push up and then it's all over as we have no forward set up structure. The best we have is a manic crap shoot that is extreme running forward hoping for some magic to nail a goal.

We spent years watching game plan. Hodges leads, marks. He has a foil. Tredrea, Ebert, Schultz, lead, mark, be foiled by another forward. This is not rocket science

Every other club plays 2 power forwards. Heck, west coast played Kennedy, petrie and darling and they won the game in the first 5 minutes because of that. What did we have? More inside 50s but the coin toss didn't come our way.

Close losses vs close wins what, 4&17? It's all we need to know

Do you really want to build the gameplay on winning a premiership on a coin toss when we have know we can bring it inside 50 as much as we do and have the talent we do? I don't.

It's just bizarre we don't play 2 tall forwards. We would have finished top 2 and won last week if we played Brett Eddy. Period.

Ken won't play him he's stubborn. Instead he plays midget Neade as his solution..."pressure". Well Ken it worked 4 years ago but hasn'tt work the last 3 years so why do you persist?

Like I said, he's a loser. He doesn't know how to win. Just lose games that matter and close ones. His mentality is lose, his record is lose.

Why on earth would we keep him?

Two of my least favourite coaching comments, were Choco's `heads will roll,' and Kern's `we know who you are,' because on each occasion SFA was done to back up those statements.

 

[thundercloud]

Leo



Leopard and spots.

After 5 years, one year _after_ the infamous "we know who you are" ultimatum, we come to this.

So who will it be- the players, or the coach?

If Ken is the man, and it's just players following instructions, then we've wasted 5 years..it's not going to change without a wholesale turnover of the players. Which isn't going to happen.

Either way, if the board "strengthen" Ken up in the box , they are all negligent and should go.

Let's not forget90% of us here told what the problem would be before the last game . Too small in defense. No chop for a tiring Ryder and no foil for Dixon. Manic press and deep& wide inside 50 leading to behinds scored. Applauding umps leading to subconscious bias which is costing us.

If Ken can do the obvious, then you can say stay. But he is stubborn, and we are 5 seasons in and that would mean a 5th reactive game plan.

Basically, it's the boards fault. It would appear they have not demanded accountability and the rot trickled down.

Ken a 10 year coach?,or even one more year? That's another season of hoping we kick straight despite 5 years of evidence suggesting it's a coin toss


Melbourne missed the finals on a percentage margin of just one goal after the entire season.

We saw this week how costly one missed shot is.

Why would we persist with a strategy that is not better odds than 50/50?

We beat the cripple teams because we get a roll and score multiple goals back to back...because we have a forward line the ball comes into after each goal.


Against better teams it's harder. After 4 minutes of no score we push up and then it's all over as we have no forward set up structure. The best we have is a manic crap shoot that is extreme running forward hoping for some magic to nail a goal.

We spent years watching game plan. Hodges leads, marks. He has a foil. Tredrea, Ebert, Schultz, lead, mark, be foiled by another forward. This is not rocket science

Every other club plays 2 power forwards. Heck, west coast played Kennedy, petrie and darling and they won the game in the first 5 minutes because of that. What did we have? More inside 50s but the coin toss didn't come our way.

Close losses vs close wins what, 4&17? It's all we need to know

Do you really want to build the gameplay on winning a premiership on a coin toss when we have know we can bring it inside 50 as much as we do and have the talent we do? I don't.

It's just bizarre we don't play 2 tall forwards. We would have finished top 2 and won last week if we played Brett Eddy. Period.

Ken won't play him he's stubborn. Instead he plays midget Neade as his solution..."pressure". Well Ken it worked 4 years ago but hasn'tt work the last 3 years so why do you persist?

Like I said, he's a loser. He doesn't know how to win. Just lose games that matter and close ones. His mentality is lose, his record is lose.

Why on earth would we keep him?

Hi Boydmoan as i read the above progress is being made and you are on the cusp of being an evangenical for hinkley, which puts you in the i have faith corner?

 

[thundercloud]

Mr tibey has conceded that goal kicking is the problem and not the coaches. This on post number 1500000. So negativity has had its day and tom will be bright @ wonderful

 

[Doctor Feel]

What the **** is this rubbish, honestly

 

[Janey]

What the **** is this rubbish, honestly

Should be some way of automatically diverting some content to the junk folder.

 

[Ando39]

Could you imagine if that happened?

We re-up on Hinkley, give him a 2-year extension to the end of 2020, and we miss the eight or get bundled out in week one at home again?

What then? Stuck with a lameduck a la Williams in 2010.

Three years of failure isn't a blip.

It astounds me that people cant see how extending Hinkley's contract at any point before mid next year is Mark Williams 2010 all over again, only this time its worse because we have a year up our sleeves. Ken's not leaving us for GCS this year, if only for the reason that whatever anyone thinks of him as a coach, his morals clearly prohibit him from breaking a contract, so why the hell are we so desperate to re-sign him?

 

[tribey]

What the **** is this rubbish, honestly

The false dichotomy that coaching/upstairs has nothing to do with our endemic goalkicking failures supplied a giggle at least.

We keep recruiting ball butchers, we employ a forward structure that relies on everyone - even our 100 kilo beheamoth - perpetually running around like a blue-arsed fly so as they're often exhausted when they're lining up for goal, and we're addicted to going wide to the pockets where degree of difficulty ramps right up.

Meanwhile, Josh Kennedy constantly finds himself 25-40 metres out straight in front without having just run a 4 x 400m relay to get there and we're all amazed he repeatedly kicks straight.

 

[B0ydmoan]

No, because we will be able to play another key forward who is fit enough to not leave holes in our team defence, we will kick straighter.

We could play Quentin out there and it would achieve its objective. A witches hat even!

Dixon would be straighter, and have 2 players climbing him instead of 3

 

[Ando39]

Na, I'm happy because we won 14 games - 1 & 1/2 games from top spot.
And yeah - I'm in the camp that we're not far away.
Granted, if we keep doing EXACTLY what we are doing we'll remain a middle of the road team winning 11-14 games a year, but if we tinker with a couple things and bring in a FA or 2 in the off-season those 11-14 wins may turn into 15-17 wins and a serious assault on the flag.

Can we all get off this "1 & 1/2 games from top spot" business? The Crows were the least winningnest minor premiers in 20 years. Any standard year we're a minimum of 3 wins and a slight % boost from top spot.

 

[B0ydmoan]

Have you played much footy Boydy? Kicking always goes to shit when you're stuffed.

And why are we so stuffed? #helter skelter

 

[B0ydmoan]

Do you sit in bay 139? You remind me of a bloke that sits in front of me who loves the word loser

I only use it for Ken and Bill Shorten

 

[B0ydmoan]

In case you missed it, I've never been against tall forwards. I've been against forwards that are only played because they are tall.

There has to be more to a position than just being tall. As Bassett says 'It doesn't really matter if you're tall, it matters if you're good.'

Except last weekend in the first5 minutes when the game, and season, was lost.

It didn't matter if they were any good. Just that they were taller

 

[tribey]

Except last weekend in the first5 minutes when the game, and season, was lost.

It didn't matter if they were any good. Just that they were taller

Their first goal: Petrie mark. Kennedy mark. Darling mark.

(((dread)))

 

[I Dont Care]

The only positive I took out of this year was our draw, so there's that.

 

[Noobz0r]

And why are we so stuffed? #helter skelter

In the Dixon example is is because he has to do a lion share of the work up and down the ground as a key forward, and he ain't at Nick Riewoldt levels of fitness.

 

[B0ydmoan]

Well I'm probably done with this incantation. Time to retire again. At least for 6 months.

I might RE register under another name if they do something stupid like extend Ken before the middle of next year.

I don't know why I care about the club . I think I enjoy the sanfl as much. Incredibly well paid man boys who can't even kick a goal from right in front. And yes you know what? I don't actually think they care all that much

Thanks for the year everyone.

Over and out the b0ydmoan

 

[Magus]

In case you missed it, I've never been against tall forwards. I've been against forwards that are only played because they are tall.

There has to be more to a position than just being tall. As Bassett says 'It doesn't really matter if you're tall, it matters if you're good.'

How do you reckon Neadey would go in the ruck?

 

[PatientMental]

Burgess was impressed with Dixon's work rate, but he felt he needed to lose weight. Dixon dropped 5kg in the off-season to go from 115kg to 110kg.

“They did a lot of work around Charlie losing a bit of weight. I think he was about 115 kg throughout last season and it was probably a bit too heavy. He thought he needed to be heavy as a forward but credit to Charles he listened to Burgo and the team and really responded."

I reckon another 5 kg (105 kg) will have him exactly where we want him to be. Franklin is 100 kg.

Do that, and he'll go to another level.

Was 110, went to 105 over the preseason, has got back to 110 as of his most recent 5aa interview.

 

[1954]

Well I'm probably done with this incantation. Time to retire again. At least for 6 months.

I might RE register under another name if they do something stupid like extend Ken before the middle of next year.

I don't know why I care about the club . I think I enjoy the sanfl as much. Incredibly well paid man boys who can't even kick a goal from right in front. And yes you know what? I don't actually think they care all that much

Thanks for the year everyone.

Over and out the b0ydmoan

I have already registered `F*** NO' Boydster, so you can't have that one!

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Burgess was impressed with Dixon's work rate, but he felt he needed to lose weight. Dixon dropped 5kg in the off-season to go from 115kg to 110kg.

“They did a lot of work around Charlie losing a bit of weight. I think he was about 115 kg throughout last season and it was probably a bit too heavy. He thought he needed to be heavy as a forward but credit to Charles he listened to Burgo and the team and really responded."

I reckon another 5 kg (105 kg) will have him exactly where we want him to be. Franklin is 100 kg.

Do that, and he'll go to another level.

Buddy is listed at 199cm and 106kgs. Charles is listed at 200cm and 105kgs lines himup with Buddy. Buddy definitely looks bigger than 100 kgs. Big Dix was listed as 202cm and 110kg in 2015. Burgo shrank his weight and height.

 

[Janus]

Buddy is listed at 199cm and 106kgs. Charles is listed at 200cm and 105kgs lines himup with Buddy. Buddy definitely looks bigger than 100 kgs. Big Dix was listed as 202cm and 110kg in 2015. Burgo shrank his weight and height.

I just went by Google search...and Dixon looks way bigger than Buddy.

 

[Tredz]

I'm actually fairly confident we've got the personnel both on and off the field required to improve next year, BUT we need to address a couple of issues in order to take the next step in becoming a serious contender for a premiership. It's not really rocket science we just need to make some modest improvements in a couple of areas - this is both a source of optimism and pessimism for me. Optimistic because it should be something so easily addressed. Pessimistic because we seem not to have addressed a couple of these exact same issues in years passed.

1) Skills - Set shots on goal, tackling and disposal efficiency.
2) Composure - We absolutely need to address our lack of composure at important moments in the game (ie Geelong, WCE Semi Final)
3) Forward line - Another genuine big forward to take some opposition pressure off Charlie.

Fix these things and I think we can truly be a serious contender next year - fail to address them and I fear we'll remain a mid-ladder team.

 

[pastmyprimus]

This season showed we couldn't match it with the best teams in the comp. We looked well off the mark in some games. I have doubts that we can close that gap in one pre-season.

Having said that I think the club's done a good job in assembling the current squad. Brought in quality players like Dixon and Paddy, and drafted kids that are showing real promise. I can see our defence being a strong point next year with Howard, Jonas, Clurey forming the backbone and Hamish, Jasper, Bonner and Houston providing strong support. We could do with more class in the midfield, and our forward line relies too heavily on Dixon and Robbie, when he plays there. Class falls away quickly after that. Marshall is a wild card and while the signs are promising there are too many unknowns. I'd like to see Eddy given a proper go but Ken won't pick him.

I can see the team improving next season but not enough to be a premiership contender.

 

[Lou Zyffer]

I read these posts and think, no one is 100% correct and no one is 100% wrong. Both Boydy and Janus have points I think are true but this stubbornness to hold a position is more frustrating to me than watching us piss away another year. Well maybe not but you know where I'm coming from.

I really CBF getting in to this debate. It's not enjoyable to read these posts flogging the same thing over and over so just as an example of what I'm saying...

Janus is all about running up and back. I think he's bang on the money. Where we differ is our value of talls. It's not a huge difference mind you and I'll come back to that to make my point.

The Boydy argument is for more talls and traditional structure. Well clearly I agree on the first but the second part is nonsensical. Every team plays a similar style these days. Janus' comment re every player further than 60m from the ball is useless is bang on the money. It's scrappier as a consequence as a game with more players around the ball and I think some traditionalists really struggle with that. They want to see the FF one out like Dunstall and Lockett etc. but those days are gone. I don't expect to see another 100 goal FF in the remaining 20 or 30 years or whatever I get of my existence.

The one thing I do agree with Boydy though and is probably at odds with Janus is that we were too short (and not the first time) Saturday night. Unfortunately height does make a difference. I don't believe for a second that Basset's comment seemingly to the contrary was anything more than a throwaway line. If we recruit 4 x pacy 175cm half back flankers and throw Doogs and Marshall back to the Maggies I'll stand corrected.

One adage that holds firm since Jesus played full back for Jerusalem is that runners get tired, tall players don't get shorter.

Anyone who seriously thinks height is not an advantage hasn't played footy. A 180cm player is always gonna struggle in aerial contests against a 200cm player.

I know Trengove isn't athletic or hugely skilled but I wanted him in on Saturday night. I got Impey. I think that was as poor a selection as White against GWS. At least Trengove could've put more pressure on WC's forwards and as Macca pointed out as well, he could've given Paddy a chop out and then Paddy goes up forward to make McGovern more accountable.

There simply are no absolutes. Each game is different and must be approached on it's merits. Fortunately by next year we may be on our way to remedying these structural issues with Howard, Marshall and Frampton.

Yes, we need to run up and back and maintain our shapes.

Yes, we need tall players to mark and intercept.

Oh and kicking for goal with burning lungs and jelly legs is hard but that doesn't mean we shouldn't work on it.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

I'm actually fairly confident we've got the personnel both on and off the field required to improve next year, BUT we need to address a couple of issues in order to take the next step in becoming a serious contender for a premiership. It's not really rocket science we just need to make some modest improvements in a couple of areas - this is both a source of optimism and pessimism for me. .........

Are you suggesting we make #marginalgains across the board in 2018?