Roast IF it isn't biased or ncompetent..... THEN it must be inciteful media coverage part II

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Champion Data ranks the eagles as the 11th strongest list. Up 1 spot from 12th last season. One of the weaker midfields too. #keepsleepin
The ranks Brisbane's defence above ours for example, its nonsense.
 
Has anyone listened to the whole of that interview? I can’t imagine vic journos being as excited about one of our players coming back to play after being filmed snorting powder like they are about Mumford. The hypocrisy that exists in this sport is unbelievable.
Mumford hurts someone and its BIG MUMMY
Nic Nat does it and is blasted for it....

Also I've always thought Mumford was pretty overrated anyway.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

St-st-st-stat's all folks!
429ea2e433d21ed1c8f8476d79b18823.jpg
 
I’m watching a classic match on Foxtel from 1996, West Coast vs Carlton at Princess Park and the crowd are booing every decision that goes west coasts way. Of course if you ask the AFL that was invented by our crowd this year and causes umpires to not know the rules.. :rolleyes:

The match decided by the infamous Williams “goal”. My 9 year old self had a meltdown after that game :'(:eek:. But an even bigger injustice was to follow in that year... The “home” Semi Final. Ah the memories!
 
Champion Data ranks the eagles as the 11th strongest list. Up 1 spot from 12th last season. One of the weaker midfields too. #keepsleepin

On paper our midfield is pretty weak. But they all have their roles and as a collective it works.

I reckon collingwoods midfield has too many stars in it. Sidebottom, pendbury, beams, treloar, adams etc. They need masten and hutching role players.
 
It’s a computer algorithm

Who gives a s**t

Plenty of blokes on this site have used CD stats to justify all manner of stupidity and we live in a world where SC and various other diversions for fans have elevated the importance of contextless stats.

These sorts of exercises are useful reminders that stats often don’t mean s**t
 
On paper our midfield is pretty weak. But they all have their roles and as a collective it works.

I reckon collingwoods midfield has too many stars in it. Sidebottom, pendbury, beams, treloar, adams etc. They need masten and hutching role players.
A number of these stars have been asked to take a pay cut to get them under the cap
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I suspect 1st year players like Rioli & Ryan have low rankings and rapid improvers/form drop off don't get decent rank changes. Which would mean long term guns who are just ok now are still ranked highly.

TL;DR... using the player rankings to rank each team is silly
 
On paper our midfield is pretty weak. But they all have their roles and as a collective it works.

I reckon collingwoods midfield has too many stars in it. Sidebottom, pendbury, beams, treloar, adams etc. They need masten and hutching role players.

One of the reasons we won was because one of their role players - Levi Greenwood - was simply unable to curb Shuey in the second half, and our role player - Hutchings - limited Sidebottom to his worst game for the year.

Our midfield being ranked 15th is actually about right, because our whole is greater than the sum of the parts. Tactical innovation got us the flag, not individual brilliance from our midfield brigade.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top