Prediction Has Geelong's Window finally shut?

[Max Milburn]

I believe that children are our future;
Teach them well and let them lead the way.

Narkle, Jones, Constable?

 

[dazbroncos]

Nope you're doing it wrong.
Would take that finals failure pressure any day compared to the one we get under CS. He can only dream of 2 GF's in a row.

you mean like Hardwick and Bevo.?

Go Catters

 

[The rabbi]

Narkle, Jones, Constable?

Yes.
Show them all the beauty they possess inside
Give them a sense of pride
To make it easier
Let the children's laughter remind us how we used to be.

 

[JumpyHolden]

you mean like Hardwick and Bevo.?

Go Catters

Yes like Hardwick and Bevo, at least Hardwick developed his own team and won a GF unlike Scott.

 

[Vdubs]

The truth (I believe) is that there is no right or wrong way to go about it, whether its topping up, or rebuilding, or a little of both. The fact is only 1 team out of 18 gets it right in a given year.

Finishing out of the 8 for a year, or two years, or 10 years alone doesn't guarantee you will win finals, just as adding a few free agents doesn't either.

Its getting momentum, a little bit of luck and going from there.

Very true.

 

[Vdubs]

Most people really have no idea.

You have to look at the core of your playing list (talent wise) and put them on a bell curve. The top peak is a 26yo, on the left you have younger players, on the right you have older ones.

A club like Melbourne is far left of the peak, 3-4 years until their core hits that peak.
Pies are slightly to the left (but they have a wide distribution of players so their peak isnt as high, will need a lot of luck to win a flag)
WCE are probably spot on
Richmond moving further to the right
Geelong much further to the right, the core of our list is 28/29 and there is nothing under that group (there is a huge glut between the ages of 26-22)

Topping up has only kept us to the left of the peak, because our huge core of guns peaked long ago

You do not win flags with a bunch of cooked 28yo players and average kids.

We would need at least 10 clubs to have really bad luck for us to pinch a flag next year.

Good post.
I used to think injuries were our curse and a major reason for falling short.
Tigers had none last year, and that really assisted them to the flag.
But Dogs 2016, and this year, both GF teams, had really significant outs but prevailed.
It all comes dow to getting a lot more out of our bottom 10-12 if we are to compete. I don't think our current list is up to it, but Sav returning and if he can thrive, we are in for a goodish year. Sav, Parfitt, Henry, Stewart, Blicavs- some good sorts there to build up some hope

 

[The Casey Cat]

LOL r u a wizard?

2004-05: Failed under finals pressure
2007: Succeeded under finals pressure
2008: Failed under finals pressure

Am I doing this right?

Not the same. Not at all. In 2004 we were a pretty young side. Thumped by a very good premiership side. At least won a final and should really have beaten Brisbane (although in saying that the game really should have been in Queensland). In 2005 again won a final (by heaps) then outplayed the eventual premier most of the night in a losing semi. Nothing about our finals performances in those years was anything like our pathetic losses 2012-2018 except for perhaps the Port loss in '04 being a bit like our loss to the Hawks in '14 QF in that we were just well beaten by a much better premiership side. Although again it was a very inexperienced group in '04. And in 2008 we played a shocker in the grand final which sucked but at least made it with two comfortable wins that series.

 

[Partridge]

I do like one fact which is rarely if ever mentioned.

We dropped 6 ladder positions this season. Finished home and away in 2017 in 2nd position. In 2018, it was 8th.

But apparently we improved.

 

[RegHickeyStand]

My biggest concern is the snippets I get from our club's leaders about what they are thinking. When Carter was talking about staying in the 8 and remaining relevant, that disturbed me. The way we finish up our seasons looks exactly that. A finals tilt is a farce, but what is really important is pretending to look like a contender. And Scott saying (prior to Ablett returning) how he would have loved to coach Ablett. That made my stomach churn. He is supposed to be an AFL coach preparing a good side to win a flag. Not a bloody Cox Plate trainer!

I'll tell you who the only relevant teams are: the one that wins the flag, and the one that finishes last. They are the only two teams anyone wants to talk about. lol

 

[Mad_Hatter]

Our window was shut when we lost the 2013 Prelim IMO.
All we've done since is hold our nose to the window and peer through it.

 

[Partridge]

Our window was shut when we lost the 2013 Prelim IMO.
All we've done since is hold our nose to the window and peer through it.

Yeah I think the 2013 Qualifying Final was ground zero for a lot of things.

 

[Mad_Hatter]

Yeah I think the 2013 Qualifying Final was ground zero for a lot of things.

The QF was setup brilliantly for our run for a 4th flag and completely undone by bullshit MC decisions and injuries.
I still stew over that game. Home final, feral home crowd (in theory anyway, the 500 freo fans were louder than the 29 thousand Cats fans...), free kick at goal BEFORE THE BALL WAS BOUNCED and we completely fluffed it.

 

[The Casey Cat]

Our window was shut when we lost the 2013 Prelim IMO.
All we've done since is hold our nose to the window and peer through it.

If we had a decent game plan which emphasised team work rather than standing around while Selwood and Danger hopefully get it 40 times each then we very much had an opportunity in 2016.

Sent from my XT1572 using Tapatalk

 

[Ratcat]

No if we draft better and stop being soft when we trade.
Also learn to trade good players for better rather than the low end of the market or not at all.

 

[Ricketz]

We certainly weren't missing a top class ruckman, midfielder, and defender like West Coast were.

Mate, if you can't see the flaw in your argument, no one has a chance of explaining it to you.

For everyone else, it will be obvious that we we didn't have injury issues like West Coast because our best ruck is maybe as good as their second ruck. But we lost our first ruck just before finals and went to what would be their fourth string ruck were he on their list.

You are angry at Geelong because of your dumb argument. It belies belief how stupid it is to say that we did not suffer worse injury issues than west coast. We didn't have a first string forward line or backline for the entire year.

Go support a club that will make you happy. Please.

 

[barmy44]

I do like one fact which is rarely if ever mentioned.

We dropped 6 ladder positions this season. Finished home and away in 2017 in 2nd position. In 2018, it was 8th.

But apparently we improved.

ive posted this before, but in 2017 we were 4 or 5 lucky results from finishing 10th-12th: north (massive final quarter comeback against a team that won 6 games), hawks and freo (both missing winning shots on the siren), port (dixon forgetting to count to 30) and GWS (hawkins just squeaking a tying point through).

even just reverse the missed shot on the siren results, neither particularly difficult shots from memory, and we were 7th.

id say we are currently an ordinary team sitting mid-table. and probably were in 2017 as well. maybe we just got lucky in the close ones, finished 2nd, then got exposed by better teams in the finals.

 

[The Casey Cat]

Mate, if you can't see the flaw in your argument, no one has a chance of explaining it to you.

For everyone else, it will be obvious that we we didn't have injury issues like West Coast because our best ruck is maybe as good as their second ruck. But we lost our first ruck just before finals and went to what would be their fourth string ruck were he on their list.

You are angry at Geelong because of your dumb argument. It belies belief how stupid it is to say that we did not suffer worse injury issues than west coast. We didn't have a first string forward line or backline for the entire year.

Go support a club that will make you happy. Please.

We're angry at Geelong because since 2012 we've gone 3 wins and 9 losses in finals with the losses getting progressively larger in margin. And keep in mind one of those wins we fell over the line in against an inferior Hawks side that had us on the ropes at times and in another we played one massive quarter against Port (young interstate 7th placed side) and were beaten in the other three.

And lately we don't just lose, we look like we barely belonged to be there in the first place despite winning 16 games or more in 2016&17. This year we got belted out by a side we beat twice in the regular season. We play a poor system (if we play one at all) that does not encourage players to work hard for each other. Some may lift and work hard individually but it doesn't work in finals and only serves to get the few lifting their game even more frustrated. We have been trying to get by on talent for too long with little done to rectify it.

Sent from my XT1572 using Tapatalk

 

[ATSAM]

We're angry at Geelong because since 2012 we've gone 3 wins and 9 losses in finals with the losses getting progressively larger in margin. And keep in mind one of those wins we fell over the line in against an inferior Hawks side that had us on the ropes at times and in another we played one massive quarter against Port (young interstate 7th placed side) and were beaten in the other three.

And lately we don't just lose, we look like we barely belonged to be there in the first place despite winning 16 games or more in 2016&17. This year we got belted out by a side we beat twice in the regular season. We play a poor system (if we play one at all) that does not encourage players to work hard for each other. Some may lift and work hard individually but it doesn't work in finals and only serves to get the few lifting their game even more frustrated. We have been trying to get by on talent for too long with little done to rectify it.

Sent from my XT1572 using Tapatalk

And we continue to lose after a bye- year after year. Something that CS says he doesn't know why and obviouslyy can't fix.

 

[Pollywaffle]

Our window is open, but we are riding in a submarine.

 

[BORIS332]

West Coast and Collingwood’s windows were firmly shut this time last year.

 

[barmy44]

And we continue to lose after a bye- year after year. Something that CS says he doesn't know why and obviouslyy can't fix.

often as supporters - of any team / sport - we put far to much stock in actual outcomes. i.e - you lose, you prepared poorly; you win, you prepared perfectly.

its possible no one knows why. its also possible its just an unlikely confluence of results and outcomes - an unlucky sequence of results (losses) following an event (the bye). they arent necessarily directly correlated.

if it was as simple as scott being unable to prepare a team to win without them having played a game the week before, then our round 1 results would be equally bleak. but we are 6 Ws / 2 Ls in round 1 matches - they are games without one the week before, so why dont they follow the same pattern as post-bye games if it is purely a short-coming of the coach in that very particular situation?

is it a failure of preparation? it definitely could be. i wouldnt say thats the only issue, though. but if we win a couple of post-bye games in a row over the next couple of seasons, that doesnt necessarily mean scott has finally found the problem and fixed it, either. the overall preparation could be largely the same, just the results are more palatable to us.

collingwood havent won a GF in september in eddies lifetime. is that a failure of the club to somehow prepare for GF games in september properly, but when its in october, they somehow manage to prepare properly? or is it just an unlucky and unlikely sequence that happened to come up... when they do finally win one in september, will that mean the club has finally identified 'the problem' and fixed it? or is it just the end of an odd, unlucky, and unlikely sequence?

outcomes in football, like any other sport, are not entirely dependent on preparation alone. and unlikely sequences happen all the time - theres no way our 11 win streak against hawthorn was purely down to better preparation and a curse - it was a flukey sequence that would probably not repeat if you replayed those 11 games with the same preparation 1,000 times.

standard disclaimer - i think scott is far from perfect, and i wouldnt have been too upset if the club and he had decided to part ways. im not attempting to 'make excuses' with the above.

 

[Landgraft]

Okay, NEARLY all teams. Changes things slightly.

I’ll grant you Bontempelli and perhaps McCrae?) having a big hand in the Dog’s premiership, but did the Tigers’ and Eagles’ flags have anything at all to do with recently DRAFTED players? I mean anything significant? I’m happy to be shown otherwise but I suspect that 2016 is the exception that proves the rule. Premierships are still won by sides with certain age/experience profiles. I.e. The window is still relevant.

Sorry this response has been delayed, I've been busy and didn't want to fire something off without first looking them up so courtesy of draft records I give you breakdowns of when the three recent premiership teams were drafted.







If we broaden it to the four drafts before a flag we end up with 11 players for the Doggos, 7 for Richmond and 5 for West Coast. West Coast are pretty clearly the steadiest build out of the three, but all have had spikes of players - whether those are from heavily focused drafts or just more successful drafts isn't something I currently have an answer for but I do maintain that even players fresh out of the draft can be part of a teams significant improvement in the short term.

For reference players traded in, picked up as free agents, etc. have still been counted against their draft year. It's the best way to still capture the team profile within this exercise.

 

[Mad_Hatter]

And we continue to lose after a bye- year after year. Something that CS says he doesn't know why and obviouslyy can't fix.

My theory, and it has to do with our inability to match sides in the first quarter also, is we play a VERY reactionary game style.
We very rarely, if ever, come out and force a team to play our way, regardless of the opposition, just play OUR way.
We always seem to play a negating style, we go out with the intention of stopping the oppositions game style so we go in with the mentality of "let's see what they throw at us".
Hence why most of us are confused about our actual style, we very rarely see it and it changes every week, I know it's unfair to hark back to the Premiership years but you never doubted their style because it was the exact same week to week, they dared sides to beat it. Likewise recently with the Hawks, they always played the same style.
We see it now with Richmond, Collingwood, Melbourne and West Coast, they all play their way regardless of the opposition.
We need to join them.

 

[barmy44]

We see it now with Richmond, Collingwood, Melbourne and West Coast, they all play their way regardless of the opposition.
We need to join them.

i actually see it a bit differently... those teams force their opposition play the way they want them to, whereas we try and play our way - and stick to it - regardless of our opposition.

 

[Landgraft]

i actually see it a bit differently... those teams force their opposition play the way they want them to, whereas we try and play our way - and stick to it - regardless of our opposition.

On this at least I couldn't disagree with you more.

Scotty is the most reactive coach in the league imo. We don't play a brand that squeezes the opposition necessarily, but we will make a lot of changes week to week to try and cater to the opposition.