Legs feed the wolf

[G3TWOTYAD3S3RV]

https://youtube.com/watch?v=uBgGaGUnvA0

“Just one more set shot conversion a week...and you’re at the MCG on Grand Final day.”



That’s all well and good. Tell me who you were going to bring in?

We didn’t change our structure because for the most part it was actually working. Ken dismissed the Essendon game as just a bad day, and that was fair enough. It was when we got smashed by Adelaide that it was evident that it was actually a choice by the players to ignore instruction. Unfortunately, we couldn’t select Frampton because he simply wasn’t ready and Marshall had well documented personal issues.

There’s a reason why we’ve targeted McKenzie, Trengove and Thomas.

Essendons game was just a bad day ? And the first showdown ? Blind man Freddy could see it was way worse than a bad game. You bring up the if we kicked straight we coulda shoulda won but from my perspective we should never have got ourselves in that mess to begin with. We hug the boundary and kick to the forward pockets. Reminds of Malthouse Collingwood days. Boring as all **** .Of course our goal conversions are fukd !!

 

[Janus]

Essendons game was just a bad day ? And the first showdown ? Blind man Freddy could see it was way worse than a bad game. You bring up the if we kicked straight we coulda shoulda won but from my perspective we should never have got ourselves in that mess to begin with. We hug the boundary and kick to the forward pockets. Reminds of Malthouse Collingwood days. Boring as all **** .Of course our goal conversions are fukd !!

I said that Ken dismissed the game as just being a bad day because hardly anyone was doing their roles. 9 players got votes from the coaches. That means 13 players were considered to be liabilities to the team, but up until that point we had been playing ok.

And Malthouse got to two grand finals (three if you count the drawn one) and won a flag with that style. I couldn't give two flying ****s if it's boring. I want to dominate teams and win flags. Adelaide played 'sexy football' this year and what did it get them? Ridicule when it all fell apart. You want entertainment, watch WWE.

I want flags. And our style with better forward line delivery and conversion is going to get flags.

 

[G3TWOTYAD3S3RV]

I said that Ken dismissed the game as just being a bad day because hardly anyone was doing their roles. 9 players got votes from the coaches. That means 13 players were considered to be liabilities to the team, but up until that point we had been playing ok.

And Malthouse got to two grand finals (three if you count the drawn one) and won a flag with that style. I couldn't give two flying ****s if it's boring. I want to dominate teams and win flags. Adelaide played 'sexy football' this year and what did it get them? Ridicule when it all fell apart. You want entertainment, watch WWE.

I want flags. And our style with better forward line delivery and conversion is going to get flags.

Go back & listen to Hinkleys after match interview after losing to all the top 8 sides. The same ol broken down record but we all knew the real reasons & they were selections & his stupid boundary line gameplan that he stubbornly stuck to. At least the Pies has the cattle to execute a grand final but they should have won more. Boring to watch. **** yeah & you may not give a shit but we once packed out Adelaide Oval with exciting footy. A kick away from a grand final remember ?? Sorry but what happened to that style of play ? Ken Hinkley changed it is what happened. He went too technical. Bulldogs & Richmond.. Now I like that brand of footy and it delivers Premierships.

 

[Magus]

I said that Ken dismissed the game as just being a bad day because hardly anyone was doing their roles. 9 players got votes from the coaches. That means 13 players were considered to be liabilities to the team, but up until that point we had been playing ok.

And have a look at who we dropped following that debacle - Ah Chee, Pittard and Toumpas. Pittard was arguably the only tough call made.

13 underperformers and we dropped the fringe players. No wonder the second Showdown happened the way it did.

And Malthouse got to two grand finals (three if you count the drawn one) and won a flag with that style. I couldn't give two flying ****s if it's boring.

How is that relevant to now? Malthouse is gone because the game passed him by. In the first post you said this:

If you're going in 2018 thinking that our game style is going to reset back to some crap that your grandfather used to play, I hate to tell you this, but you'll be sorely disappointed.

So the way champion teams played in decades gone by is irrelevant but Malthouse's coaching style at Collingwood is? Please.

 

[GremioPower]

On "counter-pressure," a soccer equivalent could be the early 90's AC Milan. The team would always have its 10 field players concentrated in 3/5 of the pitch (either top, middle, or bottom), depending on where the ball was.

On Footy terms, it would be like transitioning between:

[D50: 1-2-3-4-5 :F50]
8-5-5-0-0 (ball on defense), to
0-5-8-5-0 (ball on center), to
0-0-5-5-8 (ball on offense).

Team would have 5 lines:
5 defenders (move between 1-2-3)
3 def/mid (1-2-3-4)
2 midfielders (2-3-4)
3 mid/att (2-3-4-5)
5 atackers (3-4-5)

The pressure happens somewhat naturally because the whole team is always near the ball.

---

Janus describes Watts as a classic soccer number-10 — who seems to play wearing suit and tie, and make football look easy and simple.

I've calculated it. At PAO, for instance, there would be five sections of 33,4m in length. The distance between the deepest defender and the most advanced attacker would be 100m. All 18 players would be in-between that.

This makes the field-of-play to look 40% smaller than it actually is. If well executed, it is suffocating for the opposition.

I don't know whether this is what Janus has in mind or whether this is Hinkley's plan, but it seems to fit Janus' description.

 

[El_Scorcho]

I reckon we have done something about games like the Essendon and Adelaide losses.

In those games we get overrun in the midfield and can't find the ball enough to steady the ship. Enter master accumulator Tom Rockliff to find the ball like nobody else and share it with his teammates so that everyone works their way into the game.

Watts is the most important offseason recruit, but Rockliff will make our midfield far less prone to completely shutting down.

 

[Andre]

I reckon we have done something about games like the Essendon and Adelaide losses.

In those games we get overrun in the midfield and can't find the ball enough to steady the ship. Enter master accumulator Tom Rockliff to find the ball like nobody else and share it with his teammates so that everyone works their way into the game.

Watts is the most important offseason recruit, but Rockliff will make our midfield far less prone to completely shutting down.

Motlop is icing. For the other two although both (/all three) will help in all situations I’d put it that Watts will improve the ceiling of our side, where as Rockliff will put a higher floor for our worst performances.

 

[badbeats]

All I saw was a thread created at ~1130pm and immediately thought Janus was drunk.

 

[Contested Marx]

You almost had me up until this cracker of a paragraph.

Seriously, with the players we've recruited, if we don't win the flag Geelong 2007 style, something has got to be wrong. Adelaide were the most dominant team this year. ******* Adelaide! Josh Jenkins, the guy who won't take a contested mark cause he's afraid he might break a nail. Taylor Walker, the worst captain in the entire league. These campaigners aren't even that good, and the entire league made them look like world beaters!

 

[Janus]

I've calculated it. At PAO, for instance, there would be five sections of 33,4m in length. The distance between the deepest defender and the most advanced attacker would be 100m. All 18 players would be in-between that.

This makes the field-of-play to look 40% smaller than it actually is. If well executed, it is suffocating for the opposition.

I don't know whether this is what Janus has in mind or whether this is Hinkley's plan, but it seems to fit Janus' description.

The Australian football team play a similar strategy to what we do with three at the back and the wingers starting from a neutral position and then tucking in behind the half backs when defending. More a backwing than a wingback, if that makes sense? But we also add our high forwards dropping back into defence, playing as “box to box” midfielders.

I think the only time I ever saw us play our game style correctly at home was against Fremantle in R2.

 

[badbeats]

I think the only time I ever saw us play our game style correctly at home was against Fremantle in R2.

This should be super worrying.

 

[GremioPower]

The Australian football team play a similar strategy to what we do with three at the back and the wingers starting from a neutral position and then tucking in behind the half backs when defending. More a backwing than a wingback, if that makes sense? But we also add our high forwards dropping back into defence, playing as “box to box” midfielders.

I think the only time I ever saw us play our game style correctly at home was against Fremantle in R2.

1) Not even v Hawks?
2) How could you be sure that is our style, then?

 

[Janus]

1) Not even v Hawks?
2) How could you be sure that is our style, then?

1) For the first half, yes. The second half they moved away from it.

2) Because I actually listen to what the coaches and players say and I correlate the coaches votes with the performance of the team - and the Fremantle game was the only one where every player got votes and only one (Eddy) rated less than a 5. Hartlett said that is exactly what the wingers are meant to do back in 2016 when we lost to Adelaide in the first Showdown. When Boak and Sam Gray push as far down as defensive 50, I take notice of it.

 

[badbeats]

 

[GremioPower]

1) For the first half, yes. The second half they moved away from it.

2) Because I actually listen to what the coaches and players say and I correlate the coaches votes with the performance of the team - and the Fremantle game was the only one where every player got votes and only one (Eddy) rated less than a 5. Hartlett said that is exactly what the wingers are meant to do back in 2016 when we lost to Adelaide in the first Showdown. When Boak and Sam Gray push as far down as defensive 50, I take notice of it.

Thanks.

 

[GremioPower]

The Australian football team play a similar strategy to what we do with three at the back and the wingers starting from a neutral position and then tucking in behind the half backs when defending. More a backwing than a wingback, if that makes sense? But we also add our high forwards dropping back into defence, playing as “box to box” midfielders.

I think the only time I ever saw us play our game style correctly at home was against Fremantle in R2.

I've said it would be 5-3-2-3-5.
Perhaps, it would be better:

B - 2
HB - 3
DF - 3
C - 2
OF - 3
HF - 3
F - 2

DF - Defensive Followers
OF - Offensive Followers

The OF would be the "box-to-box" mids; while the DF, those "backwings" you've mentioned. They would both cover 4/5 of the ground.

Does it make sense?

 

[Janus]

I've said it would be 5-3-2-3-5.
Perhaps, it would be better:

B - 2
HB - 3
DF - 3
C - 2
OF - 3
HF - 3
F - 2

DF - Defensive Followers
OF - Offensive Followers

The OF would be the "box-to-box" mids; while the DF, those "backwings" you've mentioned. They would both cover 4/5 of the ground.

Does it make sense?

Take away 1 back and put him as a defensive follower, and that’s pretty much it from a defensive point of view. We definitely play one deep defender with two players screening in front of him - hence why against Essendon Hombsch was caught out one on one so many times with no one around him.

 

[GremioPower]

Take away 1 back and put him as a defensive follower, and that’s pretty much it from a defensive point of view. We definitely play one deep defender with two players screening in front of him - hence why against Essendon Hombsch was caught out one on one so many times with no one around him.

But that's a calculated risk. If the pressure works, this shouldn't happen often. Still, those two in front couldn't be so much ahead that they would be unable to help our "goalkeeper." Right?

 

[Janus]

But that's a calculated risk. If the pressure works, this shouldn't happen often. Still, those two in front couldn't be so much ahead that they would be unable to help our "goalkeeper." Right?

Absolutely. I’ve always maintained that it’s the pressure around the contest that is the driving force behind our system. Not so much contested ball, but pressured ball.

But just like in football, the tendency is for defenders to sit deeper and deeper the more the ball is down their end of the ground, until eventually they are rooted to the spot and not attacking like they should.

We need to get to the next contest quicker if we lose possession and move the ball away from the contest quicker once we gain possession.

We still play way too slow for it to work effectively.

 

[GremioPower]

Absolutely. I’ve always maintained that it’s the pressure around the contest that is the driving force behind our system. Not so much contested ball, but pressured ball.

But just like in football, the tendency is for defenders to sit deeper and deeper the more the ball is down their end of the ground, until eventually they are rooted to the spot and not attacking like they should.

We need to get to the next contest quicker if we lose possession and move the ball away from the contest quicker once we gain possession.

We still play way too slow for it to work effectively.

Have you watched footage of Netherlands v Uruguay in the 1974 World Cup?

---

Janus

 

[Amarula]

Absolutely. I’ve always maintained that it’s the pressure around the contest that is the driving force behind our system. Not so much contested ball, but pressured ball.

But just like in football, the tendency is for defenders to sit deeper and deeper the more the ball is down their end of the ground, until eventually they are rooted to the spot and not attacking like they should.

We need to get to the next contest quicker if we lose possession and move the ball away from the contest quicker once we gain possession.

We still play way too slow for it to work effectively.

Hardwick said something like this during the finals - about sides being obsessed with winning contested ball, but "they don't understand the importance of pressure."

 

[Duck Farmer]

The Australian football team play a similar strategy to what we do with three at the back and the wingers starting from a neutral position and then tucking in behind the half backs when defending.

We should drop the Socceroo "can't finish in front of goal" strategy though.

 

[Powerage]

I too am pissed and stoned and I'd like to see a gameplan where the ball never leaves our half of the ground. I'm working on the details with Frodo and Bilbo but expect Smaug will be our full back.

 

[SwampRat]

Tldr> we will rule the world.

We should at least. We have one of the best lists in the comp. Fo we have the coaching and game plan? Yet to be seen.

 

[Janus]

“I'm not looking for the best players, I'm looking for the right ones.”