Opinion First Captain under Walsh?

[Southerntakeover]

Good point. I actually think at some times this year danger struggled BECAUSE he was trying too hard to put team first (silly turnovers and unnecessary passes). Danger plays best when he puts his body on the line and plays on instinct. His best contribution to the team is when he does everything by himself

I don't think it had anything at all to do with that.

He lost pace this year.

 

[1970crow]

How do we assess captaincy from 2013 if we accept that the coaching was below par?

Fair question. Although I'd suggest Sloane and Danger were more up against it. From memory they were sharing only the game day captaincy while VB was still the captain of the club. I don't think sharing the Captaincy makes it any easier, in fact I'd argue that by definition it would make it harder. This would be harder again for first time captains finding their feet in the role. If it was easier and provided better results, then it would be the preferred model. It's not and never will be, which is why it was a stupid decision by our footy dept.

Anyway, with Trigg and Sando gone, combined with a defined head of footy (expect Trigg or Smart had final say in the past), I'm much less concerned about VB continuing in the role. Having said that, coming off a full season injury, he's going to have to improve on his 2013 form. Otherwise, we'll be heading towards a Cassisi scenario. But if the club chooses to take that punt, then fair enough, it's their call.

 

[Emperoar]

I was 50/50 on who should be captain while Sloane/Dangerfield were co'ing but Sloane's won me over. Dangerfield has the x-factor but Sloane is way more consistent and whenever he's near the ball I simply just believe. If he has that sort of impact on the fans I'm sure its tenfold for the players running on the field on game-day. VB is an interesting factor and I'm sure what he's missed out on in the field for 2014 he's made up for off-field. I think the bigger picture is if Dangerfield can accept Sloane taking the role if he's chosen. Would be happy with either VB or Sloane taking the captaincy but VB only if he can bring results into the games he plays. The players need a beacon to look to when we're getting the sh*t kicked out of us during a game and all it takes from Sloane is one of his hard fought chest marks in the right places.

 

[Johnycake]

Douglas will captain this team next year with Sloane and Danger vice... pencil it in
Only eraser mark might rub out Danger on the vice

 

[CrowsB4hoes]

I can't see how we can have Danger as captain with his me-first attitude about his contract.

 

[40porpoise]

I can't see how we can have Danger as captain with his me-first attitude about his contract.

Ridiculous. Sloane and tex are out of contract too. If we're all about team it's one rule for all, not one rule for some, and harsher rules for danger

 

[Dredd]

Douglas will captain this team next year with Sloane and Danger vice... pencil it in
Only eraser mark might rub out Danger on the vice

yeah, ok

 

[cmndstab]

I can't see how we can have Danger as captain with his me-first attitude about his contract.

Probably by recognising that he doesn't actually have a "me-first attitude" about his contract and that it's entirely reasonable to choose not to ink a new deal a full 12 months before his contract expires.

 

[Jcpdragonx]

I can't see how we can have Danger as captain with his me-first attitude about his contract.

Oh look a Port Alias.

 

[ManInTheArena]

Will be interesting to see, do you recon his second point rules danger out?

I imagine Phil will be talking to him about doing the little things to help his team mates rather than trying to lead by doing big stuff and trying to drag the team with him. I think he is committed to the team but the way he plays may not 100% demonstrate it.

 

[ManInTheArena]

How do we assess captaincy from 2013 if we accept that the coaching was below par?

You mean 2013 and 2014? I reckon you can still see who the team players are and who performed on game day even if the coaching of the team was shit. I also think Phil would have some preformed views from looking externally on who he thinks meets the criteria, plus he can now get a look at their psyche individually and at training. He'll have a fair idea but it would be difficult for Van Berlo with the first criteria I reckon.

 

[CrowsB4hoes]

Probably by recognising that he doesn't actually have a "me-first attitude" about his contract and that it's entirely reasonable to choose not to ink a new deal a full 12 months before his contract expires.

It is entirely reasonable for anyone ...except the captain. Especially if the distraction affects his and the teams performance. How is he supposed to lead if he himself isn't committed?

 

[Southerntakeover]

You mean 2013 and 2014? I reckon you can still see who the team players are and who performed on game day even if the coaching of the team was shit. I also think Phil would have some preformed views from looking externally on who he thinks meets the criteria, plus he can now get a look at their psyche individually and at training. He'll have a fair idea but it would be difficult for Van Berlo with the first criteria I reckon.

Look, maybe. Wait and see. I also think that Walsh's comments in the past weren't particularly enthusiastic towards Sloane/Dangers captaincy. Something to the effect of 'I thought they were young blokes being asked to do too much' or something like that.

All I'm saying is this: if we're saying that the coaching was on the completely wrong track, that needs to be taken into account in how we assess performance. Saying 'reward those that succeeded anyway' isn't necessarily always the right option- sometimes people can stand up playing an undisciplined game style and free lancing, but this doesn't always translate into being a great player in a different game style. My NFL team has great examples of this- we recently transitioned from a 4-3 to a 3-4 defense. Much consternation has been regarding players who have had big reductions in game time- they were fantastic 4-3 defensive ends i.e. when left just to rush the passer were fantastic, but the new style required discipline and lane control and by not following their assignment they weren't getting this done, even if their stats flashed.

That doesn't mean that any of other players necessarily fit that definition, it just means you need to do a deeper analysis. The question isn't necessarily 'did this player perform well last year', its 'will this player perform well this year'. With van Berlo there certainly are big question marks around that, particularly coming back from long term injury. The only point I'd make is that coaching does appear to make a difference regarding how he performs as captain. He actually won the job with his performances whilst the captaincy was up for grabs in 2011. If Walsh thinks he can get that sort of performance he might be satisfied.

I also think that people are making false connections between change at the club, and every crappy opinion that they've held. Change at the club is not an endorsement of the 'lol vunberlosuxz' campaign. He's always been held in very hard regard by the likes of Ricciuto, Goodwin etc.

Still, if we're moving on from vB (and if we are going to do so I can cop it in this situation because of the drastic changes at the club), I maintain my thought that Tex is the natural successor.

 

[rocket18]

It is entirely reasonable for anyone ...except the captain. Especially if the distraction affects his and the teams performance. How is he supposed to lead if he himself isn't committed?

Like your teams captain hosting another clubs captain and coach at his place to see what they were offering.

 

[Tex Support]

I'd love to see vB skipper in 2015 personally.

His on field general skills were sorely missed last season, and I reckon Walsh is the type of guy to "back him in", even if for 1 season.

 

[Archie87]

I can't see how we can have Danger as captain with his me-first attitude about his contract.

WTF are you talking about? Only Port trolls think Dangerfield is a "me-first" kind of guy. Everyone who has met the bloke knows how driven, loyal and team-orientated he is. There's no need for him to sign this year. Boak didn't re-sign until August of the year his contract expired and he's a very "team-orientated" kind of player. Dangerfield isn't doing anything out of the ordinary when it comes to signing. Does he need to renew his contract every 12 months to placate the paranoia and fears of the club's fans?

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Was Walsh at Port when the coaches wanted Burgoyne captain and the Board over-ruled them? And when did Boak take over?

I hope we don't have a wishy washy "everyone's a captain" structure that avoids a hard call.

 

[ManInTheArena]

Look, maybe. Wait and see. I also think that Walsh's comments in the past weren't particularly enthusiastic towards Sloane/Dangers captaincy. Something to the effect of 'I thought they were young blokes being asked to do too much' or something like that.

Yeah I'm not suggesting it's them either, I'm just questioning if one of the criteria will rule van Berlo out.

All I'm saying is this: if we're saying that the coaching was on the completely wrong track, that needs to be taken into account in how we assess performance. Saying 'reward those that succeeded anyway' isn't necessarily always the right option- sometimes people can stand up playing an undisciplined game style and free lancing, but this doesn't always translate into being a great player in a different game style. My NFL team has great examples of this- we recently transitioned from a 4-3 to a 3-4 defense. Much consternation has been regarding players who have had big reductions in game time- they were fantastic 4-3 defensive ends i.e. when left just to rush the passer were fantastic, but the new style required discipline and lane control and by not following their assignment they weren't getting this done, even if their stats flashed.

I'm not saying reward those who succeed anyway, I'm saying that Phil would have a fair indication of who is going to get the job done on game day by what he has noticed analysing them externally taking into consideration what he wants to do on game day next year. The new coaching methods aren't going to change the fact that someone like Talia will get the job done on game day.

That doesn't mean that any of other players necessarily fit that definition, it just means you need to do a deeper analysis. The question isn't necessarily 'did this player perform well last year', its 'will this player perform well this year'. With van Berlo there certainly are big question marks around that, particularly coming back from long term injury.

That's my point I suppose.

The only point I'd make is that coaching does appear to make a difference regarding how he performs as captain. He actually won the job with his performances whilst the captaincy was up for grabs in 2011. If Walsh thinks he can get that sort of performance he might be satisfied.

I'm not sure that he won it on on-field performances? I know he had a great year on-field but I know the Crows had a huge emphasis on training performance at that point.

I also think that people are making false connections between change at the club, and every crappy opinion that they've held. Change at the club is not an endorsement of the 'lol vunberlosuxz' campaign. He's always been held in very hard regard by the likes of Ricciuto, Goodwin etc.

Personally, I haven't had that opinion. I think he has done a decent job in his role (tagger) and don't expect him to average 20+ disposals doing that role like some, but the last year he was full time Captain he was very ordinary and then injured for a year. Plus I don't equate decent job with getting the job done on game day. I see that as consistent high performance. I know he's held in high regard internally and he's obviously a great leader but I have doubts about his ability to get the job on game day, which is a key criteria for the captaincy. One year in his whole career where he's got the job consistently doesn't convince me.

Still, if we're moving on from vB (and if we are going to do so I can cop it in this situation because of the drastic changes at the club), I maintain my thought that Tex is the natural successor.

I can't take Tex seriously for some reason. He must be a leader of some sort though if he was voted into the leadership group.

 

[Hank93]

Was Walsh at Port when the coaches wanted Burgoyne captain and the Board over-ruled them? And when did Boak take over?

I hope we don't have a wishy washy "everyone's a captain" structure that avoids a hard call.

Burgoyne left in 09, I think Walsh was at West Coast at the start of that year?

 

[relapse]

Walsh's comments about needing a captain who can lead and also make an impact on the field is an interesting one. Surely that may put Van Berlo's tenure into some doubt.

I think Sloane is our captain in waiting, just a question of who Walsh wants to steer the ship between now and then.

 

[dylan123]

Burgoyne left in 09, I think Walsh was at West Coast at the start of that year?

I think it would have been before that time if the coaches were pushing for him to be captain anyways.

As Southerntakeover mentioned, I also believe Tex would be a fantastic leader of the club if we ever considered making the swap and chose not to go with Sloane/Dangerfield. He oozes on field leadership, has plenty of presence and you can see everyone on our team walks that little bit taller when he's playing. Sticks up for all our players as well, not afraid to get physical which I think if the leader is prepared to do that, the others follow.

Will be interesting regardless to see how we/Walsh goes about the captain decision. It seems Van Berlo is very well loved by the players and if they're voting, then it's hard to not see him being the captain of the club again going into 2015 even though he mightn't be a 'match winner' in how he plays. He doesn't need to get lots of it to be a match winner, someone like Crowley is great with everything he does and it's not about the stats for him but Van Berlo wasn't able to match this when he was tagging in 2013. It's obviously hard to know where exactly Van Berlo will be playing next year, I personally think across half back might be his position and he might be able to do all those team things required to 'warrant' the title of being the captain in that first category mentioned.

 

[Emperoar]

Walsh's comments about needing a captain who can lead and also make an impact on the field is an interesting one. Surely that may put Van Berlo's tenure into some doubt.

I think Sloane is our captain in waiting, just a question of who Walsh wants to steer the ship between now and then.

Agreed - Sloane's perfect for the role.

 

[FantasticShirt]

First choice would be Sloane. Way he plays and the way he speaks says it all.

Second choice would be VB. Still think he has a role to play and the players seem to genuinely rate him as a leader. In the leadership group no matter what.

Rest of leadership group: Dangerfield, Talia, Walker, Thompson.

 

[OzSparrow]

Agreed - Sloane's perfect for the role.

Agree.

Real man crush on this guy. Wish we had 2 of him.

 

[OzSparrow]

First choice would be Sloane. Way he plays and the way he speaks says it all.

Second choice would be VB. Still think he has a role to play and the players seem to genuinely rate him as a leader. In the leadership group no matter what.

Rest of leadership group: Dangerfield, Talia, Walker, Thompson.

Could I throw a curve ball in to this debate and add Eddie's name to the plate?

I think he would add experience and good leadership to the playing group.