News Heavy training phase

[TheJimmyCartel]

Not to mention probably the best thing about doing that - it illustrates to say Thurlow or Hamling what the gap is between seniors and reserves and they get a better appreciation of exactly what they need to do better to stay at that level. Every minute in the senior team is golden for young and developing players. But still the mindset persists that it should be easy or instant to perform at the top level. Go through our players with less than 100 games under their belt. I'd argue with a couple of exceptions it's a linear progression with Duncan being the best; to Motlop and Christensen; and so on. It's not a coincidence.

Exactly. If you jump on Footywire, and although not an absolute indicator of improvement, look at the career stats of nearly all the top current players it's a pretty consistent YoY improvement in disposal numbers for the first 6-7 years or occasionally one huge breakout year where everything just 'clicks' eg. Hawkins, where he basically started doubling his goal average after the '11 finals.

The sooner they get games under the belt the better off we will be. I think we're more realistically looking at 2017-20, competing with the expansions the way we are going. We're not going to see anywhere near the best of Lang, JK, Jansen, Hamling, Hartman, Lang, Thurlow et al until then, also about then we should be seeing the absolute peak of Bundy, Motlop, Murdoch, Kersten, Vardy (?), Duncan, Guthrie, Hyphen, Blitz, Simpson as the real core group. Can we fast forward? I wanna see what we've got!

 

[Partridge]

The theory is – our midfield has been severely stretched for most of the season – 34 games across 15 rounds is at least 2 preferred midfielders out each week. This has caused obvious and well-documented problems in clearances and contested possessions. Those issues have placed additional stresses on our backline. However, our backline has held up remarkably well – conceding only 9 points more after 15 games than at the same time in 2013. This has been, at least in significant part, to a relatively settled back 6 which has missed a combined total of 9 games over the 15 games. I think the MC has probably felt that it wasn’t in a position to ‘rest’/’manage’ the backline players too much because of the stresses it was under due to our midfield issues. This has meant, Bews aside, no games to the likes of Hamling and Kolo and only one to Jackson Thurlow. When backline openings have come up they've gone to players perceived as safe options like Hunt and Sherringham. In a different scenario where our midfield was not as stretched as it has been, I think the MC would have been more minded to put additional games into untried players.

Great work CE.

Ultimately we're going to find out in the next 2 weeks. They could have easily rested one key defender against the Dogs, and again this week. If they don't, and week by week they refuse to do it, it shows that whatever lip service they pay to managing players, ultimately they don't trust the next generation (outside of a select few) to do the job, even for an isolated week at a time.

I really don't see many players from the VFL getting games from here on in.

 

[cynical]

kids get games if they are injured, coming off injury or they are no chance of being best 22

 

[TheJimmyCartel]

kids get games if they are injured, coming off injury or they are no chance of being best 22

Unfortunately, that doesn't seem too far from reality.

 

[Catastic82]

I agree the development of kids is crucial and we are doing a good job in this aspect .

Still think we could punch a flag in the few years, even possibly this year if it all goes well and we click nearing the finals.

 

[Teriyakicat]

I have a theory, but you’ll have to wait to the end of this long post to read it…

If this is a notional ‘best 22’ in 2014 – i.e. excluding Menzel and Vardy:

B: Enright Lonergan Rivers
HB: Mackie Taylor Kelly
C: Duncan Caddy Christensen
HF: Motlop Hawkins Stokes
F: Varcoe Kersten Bartel
R: McIntosh Johnson Selwood
Int: Guthrie GHS Murdoch Blicavs

Then that 22 has played 273 out of a possible 330 games. I.e. 57 games have been missed in the following breakdown:

Allen Christensen 12
Shane Kersten 12
Josh Caddy 8
Steven Motlop 6
Mathew Stokes 3
Steve Johnson 2
Andrew Mackie 2
Hamish McIntosh 2
Corey Enright 2
George Horlin-Smith 2
Jared Rivers 2
James Kelly 1
Travis Varcoe 1
Harry Taylor 1
Tom Lonergan 1

Or by position:

mid 34
fwd 12
def 9
ruc 2

Who has been the beneficiary of the 57?

Dawson Simpson 11
Taylor Hunt 7
Jackson Sheringham 7
Jed Bews 6
George Burbury 5
Josh Walker 4
Jesse Stringer 4
Billie Smedts 4
Mitchell W. Brown 3
Lincoln McCarthy 2
Brad Hartman 2
Darcy Lang 1
Jackson Thurlow 1

These players haven’t missed any games:

Jimmy Bartel
Joel Selwood
Mitchell Duncan
Cameron Guthrie
Tom Hawkins
Jordan Murdoch
Mark Blicavs

The theory is – our midfield has been severely stretched for most of the season – 34 games across 15 rounds is at least 2 preferred midfielders out each week. This has caused obvious and well-documented problems in clearances and contested possessions. Those issues have placed additional stresses on our backline. However, our backline has held up remarkably well – conceding only 9 points more after 15 games than at the same time in 2013. This has been, at least in significant part, to a relatively settled back 6 which has missed a combined total of 9 games over the 15 games. I think the MC has probably felt that it wasn’t in a position to ‘rest’/’manage’ the backline players too much because of the stresses it was under due to our midfield issues. This has meant, Bews aside, no games to the likes of Hamling and Kolo and only one to Jackson Thurlow. When backline openings have come up they've gone to players perceived as safe options like Hunt and Sherringham. In a different scenario where our midfield was not as stretched as it has been, I think the MC would have been more minded to put additional games into untried players.

Well done for going through and pulling all those stats out, catempire! I think your reasoning is very sound but am disappointed that the young blokes really aren't going to get much of a run alongside our Premierships backline stars, who are going to begin their retirement phase over the next few years. There's a fine line between making a charge at a possible flag and managing our older players while giving our young blokes time in the seniors. We can only hope the MC have got this right.

 

[Rainfall]

Well done for going through and pulling all those stats out, catempire! I think your reasoning is very sound but am disappointed that the young blokes really aren't going to get much of a run alongside our Premierships backline stars, who are going to begin their retirement phase over the next few years. There's a fine line between making a charge at a possible flag and managing our older players while giving our young blokes time in the seniors. We can only hope the MC have got this right.

Ter the backline that catempire provided in the best 22, I see all of those players retired by the end of 2016 (Except Taylor) if you got to choose who would you have replace Mackie Kelly Lonners Rivers & Enright

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

I have a theory, but you’ll have to wait to the end of this long post to read it…

If this is a notional ‘best 22’ in 2014 – i.e. excluding Menzel and Vardy:

B: Enright Lonergan Rivers
HB: Mackie Taylor Kelly
C: Duncan Caddy Christensen
HF: Motlop Hawkins Stokes
F: Varcoe Kersten Bartel
R: McIntosh Johnson Selwood
Int: Guthrie GHS Murdoch Blicavs

Then that 22 has played 273 out of a possible 330 games. I.e. 57 games have been missed in the following breakdown:

Allen Christensen 12
Shane Kersten 12
Josh Caddy 8
Steven Motlop 6
Mathew Stokes 3
Steve Johnson 2
Andrew Mackie 2
Hamish McIntosh 2
Corey Enright 2
George Horlin-Smith 2
Jared Rivers 2
James Kelly 1
Travis Varcoe 1
Harry Taylor 1
Tom Lonergan 1

Or by position:

mid 34
fwd 12
def 9
ruc 2

Who has been the beneficiary of the 57?

Dawson Simpson 11
Taylor Hunt 7
Jackson Sheringham 7
Jed Bews 6
George Burbury 5
Josh Walker 4
Jesse Stringer 4
Billie Smedts 4
Mitchell W. Brown 3
Lincoln McCarthy 2
Brad Hartman 2
Darcy Lang 1
Jackson Thurlow 1

These players haven’t missed any games:

Jimmy Bartel
Joel Selwood
Mitchell Duncan
Cameron Guthrie
Tom Hawkins
Jordan Murdoch
Mark Blicavs

The theory is – our midfield has been severely stretched for most of the season – 34 games across 15 rounds is at least 2 preferred midfielders out each week. This has caused obvious and well-documented problems in clearances and contested possessions. Those issues have placed additional stresses on our backline. However, our backline has held up remarkably well – conceding only 9 points more after 15 games than at the same time in 2013. This has been, at least in significant part, to a relatively settled back 6 which has missed a combined total of 9 games over the 15 games. I think the MC has probably felt that it wasn’t in a position to ‘rest’/’manage’ the backline players too much because of the stresses it was under due to our midfield issues. This has meant, Bews aside, no games to the likes of Hamling and Kolo and only one to Jackson Thurlow. When backline openings have come up they've gone to players perceived as safe options like Hunt and Sherringham. In a different scenario where our midfield was not as stretched as it has been, I think the MC would have been more minded to put additional games into untried players.

I think there's a lot of truth in that. One point I would raise though is that many of those beneficiaries were considered 'best 22' at the time they were getting their games (or, at least, 'best 22', besides LTIs). Simpson, on and off. Hunt at the start of the year. Brown, at the start of the year. McCarthy, at the start of the year. Smedts, when he got over his injury. Bews and Kersten could be considered best 22 now, but weren't at the start of the season (Kersten, at least partly, due to injury). Even GHS has had to work his way into the best 22 this year. I'd say usually for a team in our position, there's maybe 16 healthy 'best 22' locks; the other positions in the lineup are dynamic and could change from week-to-week, simply because (for example) Murdoch has been playing better than Smedts between Round 11-16, but maybe Smedts is in better form between Roun 18-23 . If we allow for injuries to the squad at the moment, from the squad you selected, I'd probably put Bews in for Stokes and put Kelly in the midfield.

From that 22, I'd say Caddy, Bews, Varcoe, Kersten, McIntosh, Murdoch and Blicavs are best 22 now, but I'd by no means be locking them in for September just yet.

 

[TheJimmyCartel]

Ter the backline that catempire provided in the best 22, I see all of those players retired by the end of 2016 (Except Taylor) if you got to choose who would you have replace Mackie Kelly Lonners Rivers & Enright

Thurlow, Bews, Kolodjahnij, Hamling/Brown (would help if one of them would get on the protein shakes) & Frawley. Obviously I'm speculating on potential but it's all we can do given we haven't really had the chance to see if they're up to it at top level yet.

It we be good to have another Guthrie type down back, depends on what happens with the development of our midfielders. Perhaps Murdoch, Lang or Guthrie could play back there to give us some extra pace off half back, unless Bews can really develop that side of his game. I actually think he has the right qualites, just has to be able to get more of it and use his pace - hopefully that comes.

 

[Teriyakicat]

Ter the backline that catempire provided in the best 22, I see all of those players retired by the end of 2016 (Except Taylor) if you got to choose who would you have replace Mackie Kelly Lonners Rivers & Enright

I have only seen one VFL game on TV this year, Rainfall. Hamling seems to be earmarked for FB but has nowhere near the strength of Lonners and is a bit shorter, so will have to use his own attributes, if he does play there. Or perhaps Harry will move back to FB by then. If I assume none of our current players leave and a similar height replacement for our current line up:

Lonners first- the only players similar in height are (excluding Hawkins and the rucks): Brown, Taylor, Walker, Toohey, Hamling and Blicavs. Taylor could possibly hold FB for a year or two after Lonners goes but long term- maybe Walker or Hamling - strong bodied talls. Walker would have to learn a few tricks- like how to mark before he gets the gig.

The other +190cm boys: Rivers and Mackie- Brown, perhaps, as the intercept marking man, and maybe someone like Murdoch- a creative runner who can slot goals like Mackie from outside 50.

Then Enright- I won't argue with the current consensus that Thurlow is his man-in-waiting.
And Kelly- Bews seems a likely fella.

That leaves players like Kolodjashnij (193cm), Toohey (197cm) and Hunt (184cm) out. I haven't seen much of Kolo or Toohey so can't place them atm. Hunt in for Bews if Bewsy ends up in the midfield.

So:
Lonergan- Hamling
Rivers- Brown (doubt he'd be still here but, if not, then Kolo, just because I want another tall)
Mackie- Murdoch
Enright- Thurlow
Kelly- Bews
Taylor- Taylor

What do you think, Rainfall? Who would be your choices for our back six in 2016?

 

[Teriyakicat]

Thurlow, Bews, Kolodjahnij, Hamling/Brown (would help if one of them would get on the protein shakes) & Frawley.

It we be good to have another Guthrie type down back, depends on what happens with the development of our midfielders. Perhaps Murdoch, Lang or Guthrie could play back there to give us some extra pace off half back, unless Bews can really develop that side of his game. I actually think he has the right qualites, just has to be able to get more of it and use his pace - hopefully that comes.

I agree re Guthrie- though I can see him spending time in the backline via rotations, anyway, SS. I hadn't given Lang a thought.. might have to go back and think about players like Hartman, etc. as well. I just ignored all of our prospective midfielders but that's probably not a good way to approach the answer to Rainfall's question, is it?

 

[Rainfall]

I have only seen one VFL game on TV this year, Rainfall. Hamling seems to be earmarked for FB but has nowhere near the strength of Lonners and is a bit shorter, so will have to use his own attributes, if he does play there. Or perhaps Harry will move back to FB by then. If I assume none of our current players leave and a similar height replacement for our current line up:

Lonners first- the only players similar in height are (excluding Hawkins and the rucks): Brown, Taylor, Walker, Toohey, Hamling and Blicavs. Taylor could possibly hold FB for a year or two after Lonners goes but long term- maybe Walker or Hamling - strong bodied talls. Walker would have to learn a few tricks- like how to mark before he gets the gig.

The other +190cm boys: Rivers and Mackie- Brown, perhaps, as the intercept marking man, and maybe someone like Murdoch- a creative runner who can slot goals like Mackie from outside 50.

Then Enright- I won't argue with the current consensus that Thurlow is his man-in-waiting.
And Kelly- Bews seems a likely fella.

That leaves players like Kolodjashnij (193cm), Toohey (197cm) and Hunt (184cm) out. I haven't seen much of Kolo or Toohey so can't place them atm. Hunt in for Bews if Bewsy ends up in the midfield.

So:
Lonergan- Hamling
Rivers- Brown (doubt he'd be still here but, if not, then Kolo, just because I want another tall)
Mackie- Murdoch
Enright- Thurlow
Kelly- Bews
Taylor- Taylor

What do you think, Rainfall? Who would be your choices for our back six in 2016?

See the reason I asked this was because Lonners, Rivers, Boris, Kelly and Mackie will most likely all be gone at the end of 2015 and we don't seem to be rotating these guys off enough. We saw Kelly take the weekend off but that isn't enough game time or exposure for our younger players such as Thurlow. I like Collingwood's approach of things their main 4 current backman have played an average of 25 games between them (OKeefe, Seedsman, Frost and Williams) I would much rather be doing that instead of hoarding our older players. I think we are going to have to rotate two of them every week until they retire; however with this 2 a week rotation this also includes (SJ, Bartel and Stokes). I don't even think moving Enright on this year will help. We are just going to expect too much of these players. I saw the other thread and these guys have got 57 games this year due to others missing but that isn't really going to help come 2016. The reason I came up with that 2 week a rotation (even if players are suspended or injured) then that 2 will become 3, is because only one retirement seems likely this year which leaves a possible 5 or 6 the following year; 2015...

FB - Kolo Hamling Hunt/Smedts
CHB - Thurlow Taylor Bews

With Hunt/Smedts I have this feeling one will be gone eventually.

 

[speedybundy]

My gut feeling with Port is more that they peaked to early rather than are going through a hard phase, but given Ken's history with us wouldn't be surprising.

I'd say most clubs do a variant on this heavy phase around this time I'm fairly sure we were one of the first to do it or at least to the extreme many clubs are doing it today. It's now generally accepted that players are actually at peak fitness in round 1, and gradually lose fitness from there due to recovery/preparation days, minimizing injury risk at training etc. Idea of the heavy phase is not to gain fitness but to stop the gradual drop and maintain current levels, ensuring just that extra 5 or so % on opposition come finals. Combine that with clubs resting players and they are not only fitter than their opposition but also fresher. Us in 2009 and particularly 2011 are classic examples of this.

Will it work this year? Will be a challenge, got to weigh up pros and cons of resting players and that effect on form, %, wins/losses etc. I reckon we should be going full tilt for a top 2 finish but that's just me. Can't see us beating Freo in Perth or Sydney in Sydney in finals.

 

[Teriyakicat]

Rainfall you've raised some very good points above. I know that Chris Scott has said, on numerous occasions, that he will be a) giving the young blokes a run and b) resting the veterans. Yes, that was exactly what happened in 2011 and player management was crucial in the Cats boys being fitter than the Pies when the GF rolled around. We might have expected to see far more of the younger kids or rested older players- but they're our expectations, not his promises. Two things he did say, though, were that the young boys had to earn their games and that they had to be equal to the older player in performance before they would replace them.

Regarding resting the older players- I would have given each of our older players in defence a couple of extra weeks off at least this year, working in with the byes that we've had as well as the draw we have been given. Unfortunately we had a pretty long injury list in the first half of the year and that would certainly have restricted our ability to manage and rest these players as much as we'd like to have done. Because we had 2 ruckmen coming back from serious injuries and seemingly unable to play out a full game, plus quite a few others missing from what was our original starting 22, also via both serious and short-term injuries (*list below), the midfield and forward line has been pretty much cobbled together over the first half of the year and the coaches have probably had to tweak their game plan to suit the players they could get onto the park. For example, up until Round 7, when we had George Burbury/Lincoln McCarthy playing, the focus was to get the ball into our forward 50 and lock the ball in there. That seems to have to reverted back to rebounding from defence a la 2013 when we had no 1st ruckman.

In all this, the only stability we have had is our backline- and I think this is one of the primary reasons we are sitting within a game of first place on the ladder. These guys have played so many games together that they pretty much know what their teammate is going to do. Yes, there have been a few additions- we've had Rivers, Smedts at times, Varcoe, the midfielders rotating in and out but there is no doubt that the leadership of Taylor, Mackie, Enright, Kelly and Lonergan drive that back half of the ground. Each of the older players from our defence has actually missed a game or two through injury- Enright missed Rounds 3 and 11, Lonergan also missed Round 11, Mackie missed Rounds 6 and 7, Harry missed Round 14 and Rivers missed Rounds 2 and 13. Perhaps these 'rests' will have to be enough? I can see us resting Enright again before the end of the year, though- possibly disguised as a flare-up of an old injury. Also Lonergan and Rivers. Mackie and Harry might manage to push through, as we do have a late bye coming up- there isn't much of a chance to rest too many unless we see 2nd place on the ladder slip out of our sights.

I am with you on the necessity of exposing our young blokes to more senior games - especially when we still have our older players to teach them. We're lucky in that we have an extremely good club system in which the players train together each week and the young players in the VFL learn the same systems that the others are playing in the AFL so the move to the seniors isn't a drastic step for them. So far we've debuted Kersten (3 games), Hartman (2 games), Lang (1 game) and got games into Thurlow (1), McCarthy (2), Brown (3), Walker (4), Stringer (4), Burbury (5), Bews (6), Sheringham (7) and GHS (13). Yeah, that might be a bit light on games for the young blokes but several of those were restricted by injury.

I can't see us going down the path that you have said Collingwood are treading- with a shorter injury list, perhaps our story this season would've been very different. Maybe the MC are conscious of the fluctuating team list due to injury and are reluctant to tip the precarious boat over by playing more young players just for the sake of getting game time into them. We aren't in a full rebuild- we appear to be opening the throttle and are going full steam ahead for another assault on the flag - we'll have to wear the consequences of that next year and in 2016. I wouldn't be surprised if we lose Enright, Johnson and Lonergan at the end of this year, with 3-4 of Bartel, Kelly, Rivers, McIntosh, Stokes retiring at the end of 2015 (the other one or two playing part time VFL).


*Injuries to Cats players >3 weeks
Brown
Smedts
McCarthy
Caddy
Stokes
Christensen
Burbury
Motlop
Kersten

 

[Bobby_]

The oldman reckons he spoke to a Geelong fan who in turn said the team have been put through a heavy training phase. They chose this period because they thought some of the teams we have been facing are easier than others. It's back fired in a very big way.

I would have thought all teams choose certain periods of a season to over work their players. Perhaps Geelong have been pushed hard behind the scenes which may explain their performances to some degree. Sounds more like an excuse if you ask me.

 

[catempire]

The oldman reckons he spoke to a Geelong fan who in turn said the team have been put through a heavy training phase. They chose this period because they thought some of the teams we have been facing are easier than others. It's back fired in a very big way.

I would have thought all teams choose certain periods of a season to over work their players. Perhaps Geelong have been pushed hard behind the scenes which may explain their performances to some degree. Sounds more like an excuse if you ask me.

Scott refuted this in the post-match presser.

 

[FredLeDeux]

The oldman reckons he spoke to a Geelong fan who in turn said the team have been put through a heavy training phase. They chose this period because they thought some of the teams we have been facing are easier than others. It's back fired in a very big way.

I would have thought all teams choose certain periods of a season to over work their players. Perhaps Geelong have been pushed hard behind the scenes which may explain their performances to some degree. Sounds more like an excuse if you ask me.

Scott has expressly said that training has been easier the last couple of weeks.

 

[Bobby_]

I guess he would have no reason to lie about this kind of thing. Only main reason I can think of is the disrespect it would show toward teams like Carlton and Collingwood thinking you play below your usual output and still notch up the wins.

As I said, this came from a Geelong supporter who works with my oldman so I wouldn't take much notice but I thought it was interesting to post to see if there may be any truth to the comments.

 

[Pivo]

Scott has expressly said that training has been easier the last couple of weeks.

So, we should now be trotting out the "Soft Training Phase?" as our new excuse?

 

[FredLeDeux]

So, we should now be trotting out the "Soft Training Phase?" as our new excuse?

He al...most did.

 

[dazbroncos]

We played with little effort and interest. Blues wanted it more.
We saw the result.

The week before I would consider the gastro reasoning as an acceptable factor.
The Blues game eroded that possibility for mine.

Weak as piss effort.

And it needs to change now.

Go Catters

 

[vinum coupe]

It's bs.
Especially as Geelong have dropped training hours from 34 to 26, and Scott said after the carlton game they might have to start training them harder.

 

[vinum coupe]

We played with little effort and interest. Blues wanted it more.
We saw the result.

The week before I would consider the gastro reasoning as an acceptable factor.
The Blues game eroded that possibility for mine.

Weak as piss effort.

And it needs to change now.

Go Catters

I still wouldn't factor out the gastro. It's not like you immediately regain all your strength.
But we'll see.

 

[Bobby_]

I still wouldn't factor out the gastro. It's not like you immediately regain all your strength.
But we'll see.

where was this mentioned?

 

[vinum coupe]

where was this mentioned?

Only rumour here. Never seen an official quote I don't think.