Recruiting List Development 2017 - How do we develop our list?

[Killer_Mike]

Supporters and Coaches love to win games and generally speaking, a winning team is also a happy team.
Good results usually mean happy supporters, but as coach, does Woosha have an obligation to look beyond short term goals?

Currently their is 18 teams in the competition and traditionally you can only expect 4 or 5 of them to be in the "Premiership Window".

This throws up the age old question of, do we pick a team each week to win games of football and appease the media and supporter base, or do we play an inexperienced team and build for the future?

It's an unenviable position to be in as Coach and in a day and age where Members and Supporters feel that teams should always be gunning for a premiership and the expectations are that if they haven't delivered within a few years they are considered a failure.

Using our very own Bomber Thompson as an example, Bomber was in his 8th season by the time he delivered Geelong a premiership but was under considerable scrutiny from both media and public alike for many of those years. In those years Bomber constructed a list that could not only compete but also delivered three flags and is now considered on of the greatest teams of the modern era.

In those early development years modern greats like Gary Ablett Jnr, Cameron Ling, Stevey J and Matthew Scarlett were often criticized and were constantly compared to players at a rival of the time St Kilda who at the time were thought to be more talented.

That group of players that delivered that flag started their apprenticeship together in the VFL where they won the 2002 premiership but then were moved into the AFL team where they were considered not to be up to standard.

What I propose is some discussion about how we are best served to deliver a premiership and the merits of playing certain players over other players.

I will start the ball rolling by nominating somebody that is under considerable scrutiny and is probably not playing up to the expectations of some in here.

Kyle Langford:

For me I believe he needs to play the majority of this year in the seniors due to a couple of different factors.
-First of all he has great potential and has been identified by the coaching staff as somebody they believe can play a midfield role for us in the future.

-Second of all our midfield mix is a combination of either older players like Goddard and Watson who are getting closer to retirement, or young and mostly inexperienced players like Merrett(obviously a jet), Parish and McGrath. Heppell would be the only player in the prime of his career that can be relied on week in week out. Once Goddard and Watson retire who plays that big bodied midfielder role?

-Finally i'm not convinced we have somebody that can come in and fill a midfield rotation whilst also offering that lead up role in the forward line that is integral in today's football.

I admit he hasn't set the world on fire so far this year and am not opposed to him going back to the VFL but I do believe he needs to be playing AFL for the majority of the year so he gets that exposure to the top line of football but also so he can build that chemistry with his teammates.

If you want to criticize the player's then you are best served going into their "Player Watch" thread but if you have a counter argument or would like to build a case for another player then I would be interested in hearing your opinion.

 

[DapperJong]

Best new poster in the bag after like two weeks.

 

[Dons4days]

Great post & something that I've thought about lots while debating the inclusions of players like Baguley, Kelly, Goddard, Stanton, Hocking, Howlett Etc.
I for one am a big fan of playing with the future in mind and while the abovementioned players are likely to have more immediate impact, are they really the players that we think with take us to our next premiership?

I want games pumped into our young players like Francis, Langford, Laverde (when fit) Ridley (when fit), Redman, McKenna, Mutch & Clarke. While I do think we have a good team right now I think that by dropping a few games this year through inexperience we could become a great team in a year or two.

It will come across as harsh at the end of the year but I think we need to have a bit of a cull.

 

[DapperDon]

I agree in parts.

This season is still very much a building season, we aren't a realistic shot for a flag though I do think we are capable of playing finals.

Playing the upcoming talent together is important, but at the same time players shouldn't be given a free pass just because we are hopeful of their future. Most of us rate Langford, some as a midfielder some as a forward. I think he'll be a good player, but right now he seems lost in what his actual job is. This might be in part to poor communication from the top, or he is still finding his feet in a new role.

Does playing an out of form player week in week out actually helping or is it hindering their confidence? If Langford were to play 2-3 weeks in reserves focusing on key parts to what his role is, without the added pressure of a supporter base screaming down his neck actually a bad thing? I personally don't think do.

As you stated though, if a player isn't knocking down the door as a replacement it does leave things in a difficult place at the selection table.

Back to the actual thread topic and not just Langford in isolation, yes we need to be playing our core talent together as much as possible but if they aren't performing they shouldn't have any favourable selection over others. The team is what it is this year, you play best 22 as it stands. Next year when we have retirements then those in the wings come on and take up the open positions. If the senior players starting dropping during the season, then they too shouldn't have a free pass, though they do get more chances to dig out of a hole than the kids.

 

[Killer_Mike]

I agree in parts.

This season is still very much a building season, we aren't a realistic shot for a flag though I do think we are capable of playing finals.

Playing the upcoming talent together is important, but at the same time players shouldn't be given a free pass just because we are hopeful of their future. Most of us rate Langford, some as a midfielder some as a forward. I think he'll be a good player, but right now he seems lost in what his actual job is. This might be in part to poor communication from the top, or he is still finding his feet in a new role.

Does playing an out of form player week in week out actually helping or is it hindering their confidence? If Langford were to play 2-3 weeks in reserves focusing on key parts to what his role is, without the added pressure of a supporter base screaming down his neck actually a bad thing? I personally don't think do.

As you stated though, if a player isn't knocking down the door as a replacement it does leave things in a difficult place at the selection table.

Back to the actual thread topic and not just Langford in isolation, yes we need to be playing our core talent together as much as possible but if they aren't performing they shouldn't have any favourable selection over others. The team is what it is this year, you play best 22 as it stands. Next year when we have retirements then those in the wings come on and take up the open positions. If the senior players starting dropping during the season, then they too shouldn't have a free pass, though they do get more chances to dig out of a hole than the kids.

I agree with you on the part about Langford not knowing what his actual job is.

As others have mentioned that half forward/midfield role is a very difficult one to learn as you just aren't involved in the game the whole time.

I would really like to see him have a go as a full time mid just to see what he can do. For that to happen though obviously its going to have an impact on clearances.

I'm not against him going back to VFL like he did last year to get a run on ball but I would hope that its only for a few weeks and who would replace him I'm not certain on.

 

[DapperDon]

I agree with you on the part about Langford not knowing what his actual job is.

As others have mentioned that half forward/midfield role is a very difficult one to learn as you just aren't involved in the game the whole time.

I would really like to see him have a go as a full time mid just to see what he can do. For that to happen though obviously its going to have an impact on clearances.

I'm not against him going back to VFL like he did last year to get a run on ball but I would hope that its only for a few weeks and who would replace him I'm not certain on.

It doesn't help that VFL starts a month behind AFL. We really don't have a good idea on who can come up and this will most likely save him this week I imagine.

 

[bombreys]

I understand the argument of not wanting to drop young guys to the VFL after every bad game, but I think most would agree Langford needs to be dropped after the Carlton game.

With the query on not knowing who can replace him, I think this is where people overrate him somewhat - he's averaging 10 stats a game, taken 5 marks (across all three games) and kicked two goals (across all three games). So whichever way you look at it, he's not exactly setting the world on fire as a midfielder, nor as a forward. Based on these numbers, he's very easily replaced.

Long term, he looks to be a good, solid player. I don't personally think he's going to be the star some people project him to be (I still cringe at the Fyfe comparisons), but we don't need 22 stars.

 

[bombreys]

I agree with you on the part about Langford not knowing what his actual job is.

As others have mentioned that half forward/midfield role is a very difficult one to learn as you just aren't involved in the game the whole time.

I would really like to see him have a go as a full time mid just to see what he can do. For that to happen though obviously its going to have an impact on clearances.

I'm not against him going back to VFL like he did last year to get a run on ball but I would hope that its only for a few weeks and who would replace him I'm not certain on.

I agree with the full-time midfield role idea, but I think I'd rather see it in the VFL first. If he can string together 3+ solid games in the midfield in the VFL, then give him a chance to do it at AFL-level.

Right now, we can't afford to be playing him there full time at the top level. We have too many other/better options. He's going to need to force his way in, just like Merrett and Parish have had to do.

 

[Howard Moon]

There are a few points for us not just gifting kids games...

Firstly winning form is good form, and creates a winning culture. If you are a better chance to win games with older experienced players, do it - the kids will be better off in the long run being brought up in a winning culture.

When you finally earn your spot rather than being gifted it you know you have deserved it and stepped up a level in your career.

I also think we have a unique situation, right or wrong... where we may feel we owed some of the older banned guys a fair crack at it after what they have been through. I know its not a good reason, or a popular one - and the clubs seems not to have fallen for this one too much, but i think its there and relevant. A few of our guys may have been delisted or moved on in any other circumstance - but we still have them, so we are working with it.

 

[boncer34]

I direct you to Melbourne 2009 - 2013 as an example of gifting kids games and dumping veterans who still offer something.

 

[Howard Moon]

I direct you to Melbourne 2009 - 2013 as an example of gifting kids games and dumping veterans who still offer something.

i direct you to Hawthorn 2017

too soon?

 

[Capt Hindsight]

Up until the mid season bye you play the best 22 you have available as a winning team and a hard 22 to break into drives competition for spots and motivates and rewards players. The exceptional young players often break into the best 22 anyway.
By that time the young unproven or underdeveloped players have some VFL form in a certain and well defined role. Rather then having them often play a fringe role.
If you aren't a finals threat then after the bye you bring in the young players to expose them to AFL level and develop while fringe older players are relegated to VFL footy.
Langford should be dropped to VFL so he can get significant midfield time as a big bodied midfielder who rests forward we will need him to be in the future and get his confidence back. If he is good enough to step back up to AFL then he wont be in the VFL long.

 

[Killer_Mike]

I direct you to Melbourne 2009 - 2013 as an example of gifting kids games and dumping veterans who still offer something.

The suggestion is not to dump the experienced players but rather incorporate youngsters in to compliment the senior players.

Some suggest that we dump the kids and play the senior players but I think that is a flawed approach.

Premierships aren't necessarily won by the older or more experienced team but rather the one that has more talent, a better gameplan and can stick to that gameplan. For those to occur you need to build that chemistry.

 

[Howard Moon]

The suggestion is not to dump the experienced players but rather incorporate youngsters in to compliment the senior players.

Some suggest that we dump the kids and play the senior players but I think that is a flawed approach.

Premierships aren't necessarily won by the older or more experienced team but rather the one that has more talent, a better gameplan and can stick to that gameplan. For those to occur you need to build that chemistry.

Or you build a winning system that any player can move in and out of to play a role in it.

 

[monty1104]

Whoever the player is, when they play in the VFL, they need to be played in the role that they intend to play in the AFL. This is the biggest advantage of having a standalone VFL team.

 

[Killer_Mike]

Or you build a winning system that any player can move in and out of to play a role in it.

I agree but that takes significant time and patience.

The Geelong team and the Hawthorn teams are both good examples of that.

Both coaches were under pressure before delivering premierships.

Leicester City is a great example of modern politics in football. Just delivered a team their first premiership in over 130 years of history yet got cut the following year because the team wasn't performing.

 

[Howard Moon]

I agree but that takes significant time and patience.

The Geelong team and the Hawthorn teams are both good examples of that.

Both coaches were under pressure before delivering premierships.

Leicester City is a great example of modern politics in football. Just delivered a team their first premiership in over 130 years of history yet got cut the following year because the team wasn't performing.

There are failings to the system system however!

Ross Lyon is a case in point. You can build the best system but if you lose player buy in it can fall apart in an instant. Can he rebuild a list with kids? Be interesting too see if his style can stand up with non AFL hardened bodies.

 

[BrunoV]

I direct you to Melbourne 2009 - 2013 as an example of gifting kids games and dumping veterans who still offer something.

Quality of recruiting, standard of and level of investment in development/off field program, quality of coaching and the psychology of the players we have on our list are the factors which would be enormously different which do not relate to player selection.

In terms of player selection, Melbourne, even if it did not retire McDonald too soon, did not have players of the quality of Watson, Goddard, Hurley, Hooker, Heppell, Daniher and Merrett at the very top end. Neither did it have a blend of individuals of the quality of Myers, Zaharakis, Kelly, Stanton, Baguley, Hocking, Bird and Howlett who would play in any team.

What happened at Melbourne is of absolutely no relevance to what could happen at Essendon if we extend our number of development spots in each 22 from 3 to 4 or 5 (which is basically what is in issue).

 

[Lore]

I think the main thing for me is that if you have a selection between a young player with the same output as an older player in the same position and there isn't a lot else to split them on (both in form and will provide something similar to the team) then they should be picking the younger player to develop him more (as long as he can cope with pressure etc). I think that's more the last few spots you select though, rather than playing a complete list of youths.

 

[Mercurial89]

I think the main thing for me is that if you have a selection between a young player with the same output as an older player in the same position and there isn't a lot else to split them on (both in form and will provide something similar to the team) then they should be picking the younger player to develop him more (as long as he can cope with pressure etc). I think that's more the last few spots you select though, rather than playing a complete list of youths.

I think John is on record as saying this is exactly what he will be doing with us too.

 

[Killer_Mike]

Wooshas interview on Bomber Radio.

A few points he made on the year so far.

-Want to be a consistent team. No matter the opposition, no matter the location.
-Reviewed the video of Carlton game and concentrated on the way we moved the ball and also intensity levels.
-Believes after three rounds we are tracking well in regards to developing team unit. With both Leuy and Green back should only improve.
-Wants to improve ability to lock ball in forward 50 and clearances.
-With Walla going forward have challenged the defenders to take on more offensive responsibilities.
-Is happy with McGrath. Great mix of attack and defence. Definitely Mid in future.
-Wants to restrict Adelaide's inside 50's.
-Left Hartley out so he can work on his attacking ability. Thought VFL was best place for him to work on that.
-Excited by depth in VFL.
-Feels that two tall forwards works well surrounded by smalls. TBell and Stewart would have to demand a spot.
-Looking forward to measuring themselves against Adelaide.
-Pleased that the VFL is starting back.
-Presenter asked if Francis could be a mid. Said that he has played there on occasion but if he were to play there its at least another 12 months away.
-Adjusted to living in Melbourne well. Loves Melbourne.


http://www.essendonfc.com.au/news/2017-04-12/bomber-radio-ep-4

 

[Towno78]

Looks like Daniher is going to be doing a lot of ruck relief this year

 

[efcboy]

Looks like Daniher is going to be doing a lot of ruck relief this year

You're probably right but McKernan could play as a tall wingman/flanker who also relieves in ruck. He doesn't have to play in F50 as he has the mobility to get around the ground, is decent at ground level, gets clearances etc. I think they should explore more options with McKernan as he was very good in patches in r1-2 (what he struggles with is playing a full afl game in ruck as it is tiring for him to compensate for his height over an entire match - limit that to 20% and we could have a handy player)

 

[efcboy]

On the original topic Geelong had little choice but to play that group of guys as they didn't have many other options. And those guys generally all earnt there place coming thru VFL. I don't recall any of those Geelong stars getting a free ride.

 

[scanlon]

You're probably right but McKernan could play as a tall wingman/flanker who also relieves in ruck. He doesn't have to play in F50 as he has the mobility to get around the ground, is decent at ground level, gets clearances etc. I think they should explore more options with McKernan as he was very good in patches in r1-2 (what he struggles with is playing a full afl game in ruck as it is tiring for him to compensate for his height over an entire match - limit that to 20% and we could have a handy player)

McKernan is either full time ruck or not in the side IMO. Has to play ruck to get himself into the game, but doesnt have the class tap work of leuey to stay in the side. I like him but he's only a depth player for me