How good are we at developing players?

[noideaatall]

I've read varying opinions on our ability to develop players. Seems a pretty important question as we have so much young talent in the wings whilst also a string of second chance/older types. With our resources and financial stability I would hope this is an area we stand out in but yet to be convinced. Thoughts?

 

[BEEG]

Problem is a lot of the young players we have come in have had injuries which has put there development back

4 years ago we were the best but we were also pumping teams and kids were coming in playing a roll it's a bit different now

 

[noideaatall]

Development over last 3/4 years
Rucks: Wood - none Witts - steady Grundy - juries out no ruck coach?? no Hudson, no Jolly even.
Mids: Beams - yep Sidebottom - last year Pendles - steady then a whole heap of the juries out.
Forwards : Cloke - same same White - nah, nothings changed Eliot: predictable development Reid - devolved AA back
Backs: Keefe - yep Frost: yep Langdon - yep Williams - yep
There is a whole heap of nahs left out. Some mature players like Goldsack, White Toovey Brown Blair who don't seem to have gone far. Lots of inconsquentials like Dwyer Martin Clarke Yargmor.
Let go of Ceglar to look bad, Wood to look good
A whole heap of players we'd hope would flourish have been limited by injury, like fasolo, Thomas, tooves, brown, Scharenberg.

I just seems to me we aren't particularly outstanding in developing talent. Predates the Bucks era. Is there something about the pies which stifles development?

 

[Kilmo]

Development over last 3/4 years
Rucks: Wood - none Witts - steady Grundy - juries out no ruck coach?? no Hudson, no Jolly even.
Mids: Beams - yep Sidebottom - last year Pendles - steady then a whole heap of the juries out.
Forwards : Cloke - same same White - nah, nothings changed Eliot: predictable development Reid - devolved AA back
Backs: Keefe - yep Frost: yep Langdon - yep Williams - yep
There is a whole heap of nahs left out. Some mature players like Goldsack, White Toovey Brown Blair who don't seem to have gone far. Lots of inconsquentials like Dwyer Martin Clarke Yargmor.
Let go of Ceglar to look bad, Wood to look good
A whole heap of players we'd hope would flourish have been limited by injury, like fasolo, Thomas, tooves, brown, Scharenberg.

I just seems to me we aren't particularly outstanding in developing talent. Predates the Bucks era. Is there something about the pies which stifles development?

Bit harsh on Elliott don't you think?

 

[Pleasedontfail11]

I think the number of rookies we have developed over the last ten years speaks for itself. You could argue we got the best out of high pick players like Pendlebury, D Thomas, Reid and Brown as well despite injuries. Of course the jury is still out on most of our players we have recruited over the last five years mostly because it takes time to know and partly because of uncontrollable injuries. If players whom every club had and opportunity to recruit like Langdon, Fasolo, Goodyear, Oxley and Mantit play 100+ games then you could argue our development is still excellent.

 

[soreplums]

I think we have been good at developing players in the early years from 18-21/22, but then have trouble in getting our players to take that next step from 23-26. I know a lot during the second phase is determined by the player and their character, but instructions and guidance comes from the trainers and model team mates

 

[3066]

How many years did we play straight finals? nuff said.

My only beef was the lack of true young ruck players coming through until Witts and Grundy. I am puzzled though of no "ruck coach" at the moment.

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

Middle of the road.

 

[Ketchup]

Arguably the worst developers in the history of the AFL. Like, omg so bad.

 

[didaksrightfoot]

The only way that this would be relevant, or even semi-accurate, discussion is to be comparing us to all 17 other teams - and there would be too many factors to take into account to get a good picture.

Every club will have players its picks up as rookies or low draft spots that turn out to be good, and every club will have high draft picks that don't succeed.

I would guess that our overall development is probably better than average... but still a fair bit behind Hawthorn (and maybe Port - but need to consider their high draft picks).

 

[Robroy22]

The only way that this would be relevant, or even semi-accurate, discussion is to be comparing us to all 17 other teams - and there would be too many factors to take into account to get a good picture.

Every club will have players its picks up as rookies or low draft spots that turn out to be good, and every club will have high draft picks that don't succeed.

I would guess that our overall development is probably better than average... but still a fair bit behind Hawthorn (and maybe Port - but need to consider their high draft picks).

So much of Hawthorn's development comes from familiar names and role models: Hodge, Mitchell, Lewis, Sewell, Burgoyne, and the same happened at Geelong with Bartel, Johnson, Chapman, Selwood, Scarlett etc.....
Clubs that can maintain their core of guns for extended periods will breed high expectation and discipline amongst the developing youth. We haven't been able to do it this time around (or after the 1990 flag either) but it's something to work on for our next great side. Maybe Maxy's doing research on it over at The Storm.

 

[jackcass]

Don't think our youth development has been as good since Richo left, nothing to back it up, just a feeling. Of course there are numbers of factors which contribute. As we were building toward 2010 we had a strong and stable senior core and injuries seemed to afflict more peripheral players. Can't say the same about the environment now.

Still confident that the club works very hard in this area, just unfortunate that some of the kids are being trown into senior footy before they've earned their stripes.

 

[Knightmare]

We develop our new young players (lets call them under 22s) exceptionally well. We're probably in the best 1-3 in the competition if this is all you assess the development of.

Once they get to their mid 20s you don't see any further improvement.

Once they get to their late 20s they start to decline.

By 30 their all a shadow of who they once were.

And the trend is pretty consistent across the squad and has been for a while now.

Other than that young player improvement we're poor developers of talent and it's in those other age brackets that further work needs to be done to change things and go from being the Collingwood development academy we are at the present time to a contending team again.

 

[noideaatall]

Bit harsh on Elliott don't you think?

It wasn't meant to be harsh on Elliot rather that his development was what we might have expected when he was recruited rather than evidence of our ability to develop.

 

[mattys123]

During the 90's we were near league worst, a lot of that had to do with the shitty facilities we had at Vic Park which towards the end were shocking.

Come the 00's and we improved remarkably, under Mick and co we pushed for flags in 5-6 seasons and made the finals in 8 in a row.

Now it's hard to judge, we have such a young list that you can't really decide if a player has been developed properly until they have been in the system for 3-4 seasons at least.

Come back in 2 years.

 

[Pedro]

Once they get to their mid 20s you don't see any further improvement.

Once they get to their late 20s they start to decline.

By 30 their all a shadow of who they once were.

And the trend is pretty consistent across the squad and has been for a while now.

Not many teams would be bucking that trend though would they? That seems pretty normal to me.

 

[Knightmare]

Not many teams would be bucking that trend though would they? That seems pretty normal to me.

No club perhaps in the competition does it worse with those over 23s regarding development.

Guys in their mid 20s still have the capacity to improve, and generally guys when they hit 30s might lose a bit of speed or have a higher incidence of injury, but even then they can still add small things to their games. We're just not seeing any of that at Collingwood.
What has Cloke added? Brown? Goldsack? Macaffer? Blair? You can look through that 2010 premiership squad and ask the question who has improved and you wouldn't jump up and down and enthusiastically say anyone. Beams (now gone - improved in 2012) and Reid for that 2011 season were really those only improvers, but we haven't really seen it from anyone else.

Fremantle with Ross Lyon are our opposite in that their relatively poor developing those under 22s but then once their in their mid 20s and even when they hit 30, his guys still have the capacity to improve and we saw the same with his teams at St Kilda.
You've also got other perennial contenders in Hawthorn, Sydney, Geelong, Fremantle and St Kilda who only more recently have dropped off though still have some really good veterans. Often on those worse sides you'll see veterans drop away earlier, perhaps this is them knowing their not on a contender and not putting in as hard relative to those veterans on contending teams who desperately want to be part of a premiership or at least some finals success.

Collingwood even despite until last year having the longest run of consecutive finals appearances in the competition just haven't been able to like those other good teams keep the veterans going or even get that development from their mid career guys.

Overall it's greatly troubling that your mid career and late career guys are not continuing to develop or in the case of the late career guys, deteriorating at such a rapid rate. It's highly unusual for a team that has been so successful, and to be successful it's a critical element to winning that at the present time is missing and not where it needs to be for the ultimate success to again be experienced.

 

[lozza63]

Knighter i think Steele Sidebottom has improved nicely in the last year (ie 23-24).

 

[TradeDraft]

During the 90's we were near league worst, a lot of that had to do with the shitty facilities we had at Vic Park which towards the end were shocking.

Come the 00's and we improved remarkably, under Mick and co we pushed for flags in 5-6 seasons and made the finals in 8 in a row.

Now it's hard to judge, we have such a young list that you can't really decide if a player has been developed properly until they have been in the system for 3-4 seasons at least.

Come back in 2 years.

Agree - We have a Very Young List so give it about 3 seasons to have a better idea and hopefully less injuries in those 3 years

 

[Hagla]

We develop our new young players (lets call them under 22s) exceptionally well. We're probably in the best 1-3 in the competition if this is all you assess the development of.

Once they get to their mid 20s you don't see any further improvement.

Ben Johnson had close to the best form of his career in 2010 at the age of 29 and Leon had the best year of his career in 2011 at the age of 30 (should never have let him retire after 2011). We actually had quite a few older guys that managed to improve in 2010 and 2011, Leigh Brown (best years 28 and 29 then retired on a high), Didak hit a purple patch at the age of 27 (career best form and then declined rapidly due to injury).

Once they get to their late 20s they start to decline.

True for the most part, but this is completely natural.

By 30 their all a shadow of who they once were.

As is the case with most 30 year olds in the AFL, hence the reason why so many retire around the 30 mark. Obviously there are going to be a few older players scattered around the league who are still going in their thirties. I'd say the Hawks are an exception to the rule here. It is just as likely that they have been lucky to have recruited durable types though.

And the trend is pretty consistent across the squad and has been for a while now.

This looks a lot like you are only judging this from 2010 onwards though mate.

Other than that young player improvement we're poor developers of talent and it's in those other age brackets that further work needs to be done to change things and go from being the Collingwood development academy we are at the present time to a contending team again.

Admittedly most of the examples I gave earlier didn't have long enduring careers but to say our players don't improve past the mid 20's is a misconception and is really just an indication of where our list has been at over the past 3 years.

 

[TradeDraft]

^^^

Very Well said Halga and I agree with what you posted

 

[Douglass]

No club perhaps in the competition does it worse with those over 23s regarding development.

Guys in their mid 20s still have the capacity to improve, and generally guys when they hit 30s might lose a bit of speed or have a higher incidence of injury, but even then they can still add small things to their games. We're just not seeing any of that at Collingwood.
What has Cloke added? Brown? Goldsack? Macaffer? Blair? You can look through that 2010 premiership squad and ask the question who has improved and you wouldn't jump up and down and enthusiastically say anyone. Beams (now gone - improved in 2012) and Reid for that 2011 season were really those only improvers, but we haven't really seen it from anyone else.

Fremantle with Ross Lyon are our opposite in that their relatively poor developing those under 22s but then once their in their mid 20s and even when they hit 30, his guys still have the capacity to improve and we saw the same with his teams at St Kilda.
You've also got other perennial contenders in Hawthorn, Sydney, Geelong, Fremantle and St Kilda who only more recently have dropped off though still have some really good veterans. Often on those worse sides you'll see veterans drop away earlier, perhaps this is them knowing their not on a contender and not putting in as hard relative to those veterans on contending teams who desperately want to be part of a premiership or at least some finals success.

Collingwood even despite until last year having the longest run of consecutive finals appearances in the competition just haven't been able to like those other good teams keep the veterans going or even get that development from their mid career guys.

Overall it's greatly troubling that your mid career and late career guys are not continuing to develop or in the case of the late career guys, deteriorating at such a rapid rate. It's highly unusual for a team that has been so successful, and to be successful it's a critical element to winning that at the present time is missing and not where it needs to be for the ultimate success to again be experienced.

So where do you think our coaches are going wrong with their attention to the mid to late agers? Has it got to do with Buckley's stated belief that players should find their own motivation? In other words are we lacking in being able to coach the players to find higher performance levels through psychological means? Or do we lack skills in the coaching staff group to pass on to this age group? What are your thoughts?

 

[Kilmo]

We develop our new young players (lets call them under 22s) exceptionally well. We're probably in the best 1-3 in the competition if this is all you assess the development of.

Once they get to their mid 20s you don't see any further improvement.

Once they get to their late 20s they start to decline.

By 30 their all a shadow of who they once were.

And the trend is pretty consistent across the squad and has been for a while now.

Other than that young player improvement we're poor developers of talent and it's in those other age brackets that further work needs to be done to change things and go from being the Collingwood development academy we are at the present time to a contending team again.

Swanny might be an exception, as one who has been much better in his later career than his early days?

 

[Knightmare]

Knighter i think Steele Sidebottom has improved nicely in the last year (ie 23-24).

I find Steele as having played much the same footy.

In 10/11 he was mostly used forward with occasional bursts through the midfield and has since played more up the field, more often. I speculate his numbers would likely have been roughly the same as they are now, had he been introduced to the midfield earlier. He has just always had such elite endurance, clean skills etc.

In saying that my examples are more related to those players not as young as Sidebottom.

Ben Johnson had close to the best form of his career in 2010 at the age of 29 and Leon had the best year of his career in 2011 at the age of 30 (should never have let him retire after 2011). We actually had quite a few older guys that managed to improve in 2010 and 2011, Leigh Brown (best years 28 and 29 then retired on a high), Didak hit a purple patch at the age of 27 (career best form and then declined rapidly due to injury).

True for the must part, but this is completely natural.

As is the case with most 30 year olds in the AFL, hence the reason why do many retire around the 30 mark. Obviously there are going to be a few older players scattered around the league who are still going in their thirties. I'd say the Hawks are an exception to the rule here. It is just as likely that they have been lucky to have recruited durable types though.

This looks a lot like you are only judging this from 2010 onwards though mate.

Admittedly most of the examples I gave earlier didn't have long enduring careers but to say our players don't improve past the mid 20's is a misconception and is really just an indication of where our list has been at over the past 3 years.

Johnson was by far and away at his best 04-06. During that period he was playing near and arguably to a best on the list standard. 2010/2011 he was more a top 10-15 guy.

You would be right to say with Johnson that 2010 was a renaissance season for him and 2011 he performed well also.

Leon Davis had that terrific 09 season.

The relevant question now is any examples under Nathan? We saw this partly as a problem under Mick but as the examples you bring up suggest, they're not guys who have had these kinds of seasons since Nathan has become head coach.

So where do you think our coaches are going wrong with their attention to the mid to late agers? Has it got to do with Buckley's stated belief that players should find their own motivation? In other words are we lacking in being able to coach the players to find higher performance levels through psychological means? Or do we lack skills in the coaching staff group to pass on to this age group? What are your thoughts?

It is an interesting question and being outside the club it's not a question I can answer as to why it's happening. I can merely on the outside only observe that it's happening and clearly an issue. It's really on the club to find what the issue/issues are.

My best guess is it's physical rather than mental. The guys we have at the club are good guys who put in the work and seem as best I can tell to want it. Physically though we've seen all these injuries and given it's a mid-late career issue and not an early career issue, that makes the most sense.

But again it's something inside the club I hope they're really looking for active solutions to.

Swanny might be an exception, as one who has been much better in his later career than his early days?

Swan took time, but that was under Mick and in the mid 00s where he broke through and 2010 as a 25/26 year old where he discovered his best footy. We've seen him this year and to a lesser extent in recent years decline and not perform to as high of a level. Last year much of that can be attributed to injury, but in saying that his best is clearly passed as seems the case with all our guys when they get into their late 20s with that age of 30 where things fall apart.

Again the examples of relevance are those under Nathan's tenure. Johnson, Jolly, Tarrant, Brown, Maxwell, Didak, Krakouer, Ball, Swan, Shaw, Lumumba. They're all guys who have gone backward with each season under Nathan and in most cases it's been an unusually sharp decline for their various levels into players who are either too injured to play or not good enough to play, which with the class of these guys shouldn't happen when it doesn't at rival clubs who seem too old every year and continue to produce.

 

[DrDavoren]

Taking off the rose colored glasses I think we are top 6 for developing young talent.
My concern is the leadership is not top 6 anymore with the likes of Maxy and Ball now gone, we had a good core of leadership from around 2005 to about 2010 then I feel we have been falling back ever since.

There is some signs of good leadership now coming into the club, but I think we won't see this for another year or two.

Like the looks of Adams, Moore and Elliot who seem to be destined for leadership.

Hopefully a few others put their hands up and set the tone as this young group of potentially laden players are coming through together.

I don't think we have a player that demands his team mates to step up and until this is changed I think we might be making up the numbers.

Will be interesting to see Adelaide after appointing Tex as captain and if the players follow his lead.

I love Pendles as a player but I wish he was more of a demanding captain, it seems a little fabricated (Leading teams) where with a Voss or Selwood it comes naturally.

Only time will tell.