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

[citizen-erased]

Well, can't remember the last inside mid with a norm smith and we've just witnessed a dynasty without a notable inside midfielder. And Collingwood. So yeah I don't agree

Jordan Lewis. Nothing but an inside midfielder. As is Shiel.
Mitchell a bit of both.

 

[Teflon Dons]

Jordan Lewis. Nothing but an inside midfielder. As is Shiel.
Mitchell a bit of both.

Lewis played off a wing.

 

[Zach Package]

Inside mids [emoji23]

The team that's 2nd last beat us in the clearances by 14, 'Inside mids, tears' is just about spot ****ing on for me

 

[Teflon Dons]

The team that's 2nd last beat us in the clearances by 14, 'Inside mids, tears' is just about spot ****ing on for me

We won?

 

[Zach Package]

We won?

Us winning and you having a seriously poor grasp on this aren't exactly mutually exclusive

 

[Teflon Dons]

Us winning and you having a seriously poor grasp on this aren't exactly mutually exclusive

Put me back on ignore mate I was wrong I haven't missed ya

 

[Zach Package]

Put me back on ignore mate I was wrong I haven't missed ya

You still are champ, it's that the the thread makes zero sense unless I click the 'show unignored content'.

Will also add that Mitchell, Hodge, Lewis and Burgoyne are in the top 30 ever (since stats were recorded) for contested possessions and clearances. But they're not important yeah?

 

[Teflon Dons]

You still are champ, it's that the the thread makes zero sense unless I click the 'show unignored content'.

Will also add that Mitchell, Hodge, Lewis and Burgoyne are in the top 30 ever (since stats were recorded) for contested possessions and clearances. But they're not important yeah?

We don't play a game plan that requires a glut of inside mids. I've said I'd like us to go after Kennedy, Webb and or Balic so I don't even know what you're whinging about tbh

And 3 of 4 of those blokes are 300 gamers, there's been 85 of those. Doesn't take a mathematician to figure out how that stat might be a little skewed. Because I would consider only one of those guys an inside mid in mitch.

Just for clarity on our style

We smashed Geelong while getting destroyed in clearance and contested numbers.. something people think happens 1 in 100 times.

We beat Richmond at the contest with a +9 stoppage clearance advantage and lost. Buckley after that 50 possessions Tom Mitchell had? "Didn't really hurt us though did they". And we've smashed teams like Port in the contest.

Today's dominance in the centre was quite clearly Kreuzer's doing, he was awesome.

 

[BrunoV]

We don't play a game plan that requires a glut of inside mids. I've said I'd like us to go after Kennedy, Webb and or Balic so I don't even know what you're whinging about tbh

And 3 of 4 of those blokes are 300 gamers, there's been 85 of those. Doesn't take a mathematician to figure out how that stat might be a little skewed. Because I would consider only one of those guys an inside mid in mitch.

Just for clarity on our style

We smashed Geelong while getting destroyed in clearance and contested numbers.. something people think happens 1 in 100 times.

We beat Richmond at the contest with a +9 stoppage clearance advantage and lost. Buckley after that 50 possessions Tom Mitchell had? "Didn't really hurt us though did they". And we've smashed teams like Port in the contest.

Today's dominance in the centre was quite clearly Kreuzer's doing, he was awesome.

;



This might be a better place to have this discussion because any criticism of such things in the Worsfold thread is interpreted as being hysterical.

Game plans and roles are often cited as justification for things that simply have no justification.


For a start, your comments about Hawthorn miss the point that the Hawks had a completely different focus on contested possessions in finals. They were good enough to play a possession game and to limit an opponent's ball movement so that they could coast through a season despite having a weak midfield unit.

The other thing that I'd say about Hawthorn is that if they had a decent inside midfield unit they would have been almost unstoppable (and teams like Richmond and GWS would not have troubled the Hawks throughout their reign). They played to their strengths to guard against their weaknesses but it did not always work.


Back to us, you can't look at the game against Geelong and say that contested possessions and clearances don't matter because our game plan doesn't need it. 'Play the way we want to play' is the worst phrase to become part of footy lingo because it ignores that there is an opposition who plays against you who also is trying to 'play the way we want to play'.

What we have shown a lot this year is that when we lose control of a game we really can't do anything to wrestle momentum back. The game against the Dogs was a great example because it wasn't really momentum, we just kept doing the same thing during the second and third quarters and it resulted in quick enough scoring to keep us close but the way in which the game was being played was being dictated by the Dogs until 3/4 time. The Dogs are very much side which a 7-10 side in terms of ladder position - if we dish up the same style against Adelaide they'll torch us (much like they did last time).

If we cannot win the ball we are inherently reactive to an opponent. It means that the starting point is that you can't necessarily implement a game plan because fundamental to any game plan is pressure (and it's hard to put pressure on the ball when you're being smashed in the middle of the ground).

Yesterday when we lost control of the game for the middle two quarters we still only had the one answer: move the ball quickly and continue to take risks (despite it paying into Carlton's hands).

What I would like to think we could have done yesterday against the 17th placed side, and which we would certainly do with a decent midfield, is to embrace their slow game beat them in the slog and control the movement of the ball by hitting up our three talls who dominate in the air 1v1 because if you can beat an opponent playing on their terms they basically can't beat you.

 

[Killer_Mike]

;



This might be a better place to have this discussion because any criticism of such things in the Worsfold thread is interpreted as being hysterical.

Game plans and roles are often cited as justification for things that simply have no justification.


For a start, your comments about Hawthorn miss the point that the Hawks had a completely different focus on contested possessions in finals. They were good enough to play a possession game and to limit an opponent's ball movement so that they could coast through a season despite having a weak midfield unit.

The other thing that I'd say about Hawthorn is that if they had a decent inside midfield unit they would have been almost unstoppable (and teams like Richmond and GWS would not have troubled the Hawks throughout their reign). They played to their strengths to guard against their weaknesses but it did not always work.


Back to us, you can't look at the game against Geelong and say that contested possessions and clearances don't matter because our game plan doesn't need it. 'Play the way we want to play' is the worst phrase to become part of footy lingo because it ignores that there is an opposition who plays against you who also is trying to 'play the way we want to play'.

What we have shown a lot this year is that when we lose control of a game we really can't do anything to wrestle momentum back. The game against the Dogs was a great example because it wasn't really momentum, we just kept doing the same thing during the second and third quarters and it resulted in quick enough scoring to keep us close but the way in which the game was being played was being dictated by the Dogs until 3/4 time. The Dogs are very much side which a 7-10 side in terms of ladder position - if we dish up the same style against Adelaide they'll torch us (much like they did last time).

If we cannot win the ball we are inherently reactive to an opponent. It means that the starting point is that you can't necessarily implement a game plan because fundamental to any game plan is pressure (and it's hard to put pressure on the ball when you're being smashed in the middle of the ground).

Yesterday when we lost control of the game for the middle two quarters we still only had the one answer: move the ball quickly and continue to take risks (despite it paying into Carlton's hands).

What I would like to think we could have done yesterday against the 17th placed side, and which we would certainly do with a decent midfield, is to embrace their slow game beat them in the slog and control the movement of the ball by hitting up our three talls who dominate in the air 1v1 because if you can beat an opponent playing on their terms they basically can't beat you.

Carlton yesterday are effectively into their second year under Bolton and have shown that they are learning to play to their structures. I believe the way they are playing is in the long term going to hurt them and history will tell you that its the attacking teams that win flags.

Our side is effectively in its first season under Woosha and is learning a far more complex style of football and have proven that it stacks up against the best teams in the comp. You and others can continue to pedal your "contested football" is king rhetoric but the facts are that it's the teams that have unique gamelans that go on and have success.

Yes, we need to improve our midfield but I think thats just pointing out the bleeding bloody obvious. We are continually getting held back by guys that would not be playing at other clubs but Woosha is showing them some loyalty because of what has happened in the last four years.As I pointed out above we are learning a new gameplan and Woosha has decided it's best to stick to our structures that we are refining as we go and allow the players to make the changes out on the field. Bluey McKenna mentioned on radio before the game that the players aren't instructed to go flat stick for the whole game they do have instructions to make adjustments as the game requires it! When you have Jobe, Merrett, Myers and Howlett doing very little to influence the game then what the hell do people expect? It's not like we are deliberately not playing a certain type of football, it's that we don't have the players to carry it out!

Since 2013 we have picked Merrett, Langford, Laverde, Parish, Mutch, Begley, Redman, McGrath and Clarke that are all going to play as midfielders in some capacity. This in my opinion is going to be a very good midfield. Some will look at it and say well it's lacking big names. What it lacks in big names or contested bulls like everyone keeps banging on about it will make up for in players that can win their own footy and roll forward. As Teflon keeps pointing out is this is the new arms race and we need to keep building on that with good ball users and smart footballers. If they can win their own ball then thats an added bonus.

You talk about Hawthorn and if they had a better contested brigade they would have been unstoppable? You do realise what separated them from the rest was the way they moved the ball!

 

[Teflon Dons]

;



This might be a better place to have this discussion because any criticism of such things in the Worsfold thread is interpreted as being hysterical.

Game plans and roles are often cited as justification for things that simply have no justification.


For a start, your comments about Hawthorn miss the point that the Hawks had a completely different focus on contested possessions in finals. They were good enough to play a possession game and to limit an opponent's ball movement so that they could coast through a season despite having a weak midfield unit.

The other thing that I'd say about Hawthorn is that if they had a decent inside midfield unit they would have been almost unstoppable (and teams like Richmond and GWS would not have troubled the Hawks throughout their reign). They played to their strengths to guard against their weaknesses but it did not always work.


Back to us, you can't look at the game against Geelong and say that contested possessions and clearances don't matter because our game plan doesn't need it. 'Play the way we want to play' is the worst phrase to become part of footy lingo because it ignores that there is an opposition who plays against you who also is trying to 'play the way we want to play'.

What we have shown a lot this year is that when we lose control of a game we really can't do anything to wrestle momentum back. The game against the Dogs was a great example because it wasn't really momentum, we just kept doing the same thing during the second and third quarters and it resulted in quick enough scoring to keep us close but the way in which the game was being played was being dictated by the Dogs until 3/4 time. The Dogs are very much side which a 7-10 side in terms of ladder position - if we dish up the same style against Adelaide they'll torch us (much like they did last time).

If we cannot win the ball we are inherently reactive to an opponent. It means that the starting point is that you can't necessarily implement a game plan because fundamental to any game plan is pressure (and it's hard to put pressure on the ball when you're being smashed in the middle of the ground).

Yesterday when we lost control of the game for the middle two quarters we still only had the one answer: move the ball quickly and continue to take risks (despite it paying into Carlton's hands).

What I would like to think we could have done yesterday against the 17th placed side, and which we would certainly do with a decent midfield, is to embrace their slow game beat them in the slog and control the movement of the ball by hitting up our three talls who dominate in the air 1v1 because if you can beat an opponent playing on their terms they basically can't beat you.

Well it's in regards to the type of players we want so imo on topic.

The hawks didn't change their philosophy at all going into finals, it's just an inherently higher intensity, more contested game in the last month.

If they thought it was an issue before the dogs came last year, I'm sure they would have sought to secure a Tom Mitchell earlier. Instead of chasing Lake and Frawley. They didn't because it would have compromised their movement and structure, and they didn't need them. He's been the master of using other coaches strengths against them, saw Horse as the most likely to challenge during the expansions years, exploited the swans inside strength and literally made it their weakness, genius.

Looking at the Geelong game, that's the only conclusion I can come to. We lost contested possessions by 20, -9 centre clearances, -10 stoppage clearances. And won by 17 points with them kicking away in junk time.

Kreuzer dominating Bellchambers doesn't necessarily equate to our mids getting out worked or out muscled at the contest. They just didn't see it that often. When Bellch started to get on top, so did we.

I'm all for improving our inside stocks with some youth. They still need to be capable on the outside and able to play multiple roles, one dimensional slow inside mids like Jobe are really killing our movement and my spirit.

We're adding those layers to our game as we go, and we did slog it out with Carlton yesterday at a slower tempo, picking up our first close win for the year. Bolton is a master at reducing good teams to their level. When they start thinking about leaving the bottom 4, they will start playing their own way as well.

 

[yodellinhank]

Carlton yesterday are effectively into their second year under Bolton and have shown that they are learning to play to their structures. I believe the way they are playing is in the long term going to hurt them and history will tell you that its the attacking teams that win flags.

Our side is effectively in its first season under Woosha and is learning a far more complex style of football and have proven that it stacks up against the best teams in the comp. You and others can continue to pedal your "contested football" is king rhetoric but the facts are that it's the teams that have unique gamelans that go on and have success.

Yes, we need to improve our midfield but I think thats just pointing out the bleeding bloody obvious. We are continually getting held back by guys that would not be playing at other clubs but Woosha is showing them some loyalty because of what has happened in the last four years.As I pointed out above we are learning a new gameplan and Woosha has decided it's best to stick to our structures that we are refining as we go and allow the players to make the changes out on the field. Bluey McKenna mentioned on radio before the game that the players aren't instructed to go flat stick for the whole game they do have instructions to make adjustments as the game requires it! When you have Jobe, Merrett, Myers and Howlett doing very little to influence the game then what the hell do people expect? It's not like we are deliberately not playing a certain type of football, it's that we don't have the players to carry it out!

Since 2013 we have picked Merrett, Langford, Laverde, Parish, Mutch, Begley, Redman, McGrath and Clarke that are all going to play as midfielders in some capacity. This in my opinion is going to be a very good midfield. Some will look at it and say well it's lacking big names. What it lacks in big names or contested bulls like everyone keeps banging on about it will make up for in players that can win their own footy and roll forward. As Teflon keeps pointing out is this is the new arms race and we need to keep building on that with good ball users and smart footballers. If they can win their own ball then thats an added bonus.

You talk about Hawthorn and if they had a better contested brigade they would have been unstoppable? You do realise what separated them from the rest was the way they moved the ball!

Yep it's the names from the last few drafts that prove we're on the right path. Especially the ones that haven't even played a game. We are essendon we are essendon we are essendon we are essendon.

 

[Killer_Mike]

Yep it's the names from the last few drafts that prove we're on the right path. Especially the ones that haven't even played a game. We are essendon we are essendon we are essendon we are essendon.

You are a funny man yodellinhank

 

[BrunoV]

Carlton yesterday are effectively into their second year under Bolton and have shown that they are learning to play to their structures. I believe the way they are playing is in the long term going to hurt them and history will tell you that its the attacking teams that win flags.

Our side is effectively in its first season under Woosha and is learning a far more complex style of football and have proven that it stacks up against the best teams in the comp. You and others can continue to pedal your "contested football" is king rhetoric but the facts are that it's the teams that have unique gamelans that go on and have success.

Yes, we need to improve our midfield but I think thats just pointing out the bleeding bloody obvious. We are continually getting held back by guys that would not be playing at other clubs but Woosha is showing them some loyalty because of what has happened in the last four years.As I pointed out above we are learning a new gameplan and Woosha has decided it's best to stick to our structures that we are refining as we go and allow the players to make the changes out on the field. Bluey McKenna mentioned on radio before the game that the players aren't instructed to go flat stick for the whole game they do have instructions to make adjustments as the game requires it! When you have Jobe, Merrett, Myers and Howlett doing very little to influence the game then what the hell do people expect? It's not like we are deliberately not playing a certain type of football, it's that we don't have the players to carry it out!

Since 2013 we have picked Merrett, Langford, Laverde, Parish, Mutch, Begley, Redman, McGrath and Clarke that are all going to play as midfielders in some capacity. This in my opinion is going to be a very good midfield. Some will look at it and say well it's lacking big names. What it lacks in big names or contested bulls like everyone keeps banging on about it will make up for in players that can win their own footy and roll forward. As Teflon keeps pointing out is this is the new arms race and we need to keep building on that with good ball users and smart footballers. If they can win their own ball then thats an added bonus.

You talk about Hawthorn and if they had a better contested brigade they would have been unstoppable? You do realise what separated them from the rest was the way they moved the ball!

If you read my posts you'd know that I'm well aware that there is more to footy than contested ball which is why, for example I have been so critical of Buckley and the way he has set Collingwood up.

I don't understand your point about Hawthorn in response to my post. Maybe re-read.

There is nothing particularly complex about the way we play. In fact it's close to the most traditional style of footy played by any team.

What we are struggling with is developing the skill level and work rate to play very high risk footy. We also can't play high risk footy without the ball which is why we need better inside midfielders.

 

[WEEVZ]

If you read my posts you'd know that I'm well aware that there is more to footy than contested ball which is why, for example I have been so critical of Buckley and the way he has set Collingwood up.

I don't understand your point about Hawthorn in response to my post. Maybe re-read.

There is nothing particularly complex about the way we play. In fact it's close to the most traditional style of footy played by any team.

What we are struggling with is developing the skill level and work rate to play very high risk footy. We also can't play high risk footy without the ball which is why we need better inside midfielders.

Exactly. If we're not getting the ball first (and assuming we don't turn it over almost immediately) we look like amateurs and are forced to play in a very reactive way rather than in the proactive way we want to. Of course it also doesn't help that we seem to lack a Plan B when things aren't going our way, but that's a whole other discussion.

 

[Killer_Mike]

If you read my posts you'd know that I'm well aware that there is more to footy than contested ball which is why, for example I have been so critical of Buckley and the way he has set Collingwood up.

I don't understand your point about Hawthorn in response to my post. Maybe re-read.

There is nothing particularly complex about the way we play. In fact it's close to the most traditional style of footy played by any team.

What we are struggling with is developing the skill level and work rate to play very high risk footy. We also can't play high risk footy without the ball which is why we need better inside midfielders.

Your criticism of Woosha is based on how you think we should play rather than what he is trying to build. You conveniently overlook the fact that he's effectively 1 year into his tenure!

My Hawthorn comment was related to this!

"The other thing that I'd say about Hawthorn is that if they had a decent inside midfield unit they would have been almost unstoppable (and teams like Richmond and GWS would not have troubled the Hawks throughout their reign). They played to their strengths to guard against their weaknesses but it did not always work."



"There is nothing particularly complex about the way we play. In fact it's close to the most traditional style of footy played by any team. "
Do you think we should go down the path that Carlton or most of the other clubs are going and playing defensive?

"What we are struggling with is developing the skill level and work rate to play very high risk footy. We also can't play high risk footy without the ball which is why we need better inside midfielders."

Like I said, doesn't take a genius to work out that our midfield is letting us down! Doesn't mean it will be like that next year. This is a development year despite what you think!

 

[Laverde2Smack]

Like do you reckon Clarko or Damien Hardwick don't think their key backs in Hodge and Rance are the most vital part of them seeing success? Hence spin. I reckon clarko loves horse Longmire stocking up on slow blokes. Gave them josh Kennedy for free. Coaches loves games

Hodge has never been a key defender.

Sent from my F3115 using Tapatalk

 

[Laverde2Smack]

Seagull/general behind the ball then. He has never been an inside midfielder.

We've come so far from Zach Package isolating 2 words out of context and attacking them [emoji23]

So Hodge isn't part of the discussion regarding the coaches survey.

It is more like Clarko deciding who was more vital for him Sam Mitchell or James Frawley. Pretty obvious why Clarko voted inside mid as most vital.



Sent from my F3115 using Tapatalk

 

[Teflon Dons]

So Hodge isn't part of the discussion regarding the coaches survey.

It is more like Clarko deciding who was more vital for him Sam Mitchell or James Frawley. Pretty obvious why Clarko voted inside mid as most vital.



Sent from my F3115 using Tapatalk

I never said I thought the coaches were wrong. Just unsure how many would put the actual position they thought was most important for team success. I can see the coaches surveys going something like the Simpsons "I was elected to lead, not to read.. number 3"
"but sir that says inside mi-"
"number 3"

 

[BrunoV]

Your criticism of Woosha is based on how you think we should play rather than what he is trying to build. You conveniently overlook the fact that he's effectively 1 year into his tenure!

My Hawthorn comment was related to this!

"The other thing that I'd say about Hawthorn is that if they had a decent inside midfield unit they would have been almost unstoppable (and teams like Richmond and GWS would not have troubled the Hawks throughout their reign). They played to their strengths to guard against their weaknesses but it did not always work."



"There is nothing particularly complex about the way we play. In fact it's close to the most traditional style of footy played by any team. "
Do you think we should go down the path that Carlton or most of the other clubs are going and playing defensive?

"What we are struggling with is developing the skill level and work rate to play very high risk footy. We also can't play high risk footy without the ball which is why we need better inside midfielders."

Like I said, doesn't take a genius to work out that our midfield is letting us down! Doesn't mean it will be like that next year. This is a development year despite what you think!

For a start, I still don't know where the point of disagreement on Hawthorn is, especially if you look at the other comment I made about them (being that their ball movement and ability to control the ball movement of an opponent enabled them to coast through seasons).

What you say about Worsfold is the perfect example of reference to game plans being a justification for things that are unjustifiable. Do you think that any coach is not trying to build a list, team and style of play that in his eyes will end up in the next premiership dynasty?

I also know that if we chose not to continue with rigid adherence to a style that can be stopped by mediocre opponents that it doesn't necessarily mean that we just end up playing 'defensive' footy (whatever that is). In fact, who are the teams other than Carlton who are playing defensive footy? Don't mistake the inefficiency of forward pressing sides like Collingwood, Dogs and occasionally St Kilda as being sides which are defensive. They're trying to score but they tend to suck at it.

Carlton is in a unique situation as under Bolton is started a rebuild from as close to a genuine ground zero as any team (and we probably won't see a team or a list sink so far into mediocrity, which is a kind word for it, ever again). They have a lone mature key forward option who can't kick straight, Matthew Wright as their top scoring player with the rest of their forwardline being made up of players with a about 20 games of experience between them. They've got 5 or 6 talented defenders and some quality midfielders so it always made more sense for them to start with defence (especially given that the already fickle Carlton supporter based probably wasn't going to tolerate numerous 100 point losses).

How do you even argue that Carlton's approach has been correct given the number of wins that they've somehow managed in the last two years?

Ask Worsfold if this is a development year - he clearly doesn't think that it is. He said on one of the website shows last week that he's selecting a side to make finals. That side hardly beat Carlton yesterday and conceded 240 points to North and the Western Bulldogs in a fortnight. It wouldn't hurt the grand plan to have the players think their way through 10 minutes of footy here and there.

 

[Yoda_]

BrunoV
If you break it down more, we lack versatile midfielders. Our mids (namely Jobe, Zac, Myers, Howlett, Heppel) are virtually rendered useless when they are not played in there prime position.

 

[eDPS]

BrunoV
If you break it down more, we lack versatile midfielders. Our mids (namely Jobe, Zac, Myers, Howlett, Heppel) are virtually rendered useless when they are not played in there prime position.

Don't agree with Heppell he could easily play half back and Zerrett is rarely even given the chance to play forward and back

 

[Killer_Mike]

For a start, I still don't know where the point of disagreement on Hawthorn is, especially if you look at the other comment I made about them (being that their ball movement and ability to control the ball movement of an opponent enabled them to coast through seasons).

What you say about Worsfold is the perfect example of reference to game plans being a justification for things that are unjustifiable. Do you think that any coach is not trying to build a list, team and style of play that in his eyes will end up in the next premiership dynasty?

I also know that if we chose not to continue with rigid adherence to a style that can be stopped by mediocre opponents that it doesn't necessarily mean that we just end up playing 'defensive' footy (whatever that is). In fact, who are the teams other than Carlton who are playing defensive footy? Don't mistake the inefficiency of forward pressing sides like Collingwood, Dogs and occasionally St Kilda as being sides which are defensive. They're trying to score but they tend to suck at it.

Carlton is in a unique situation as under Bolton is started a rebuild from as close to a genuine ground zero as any team (and we probably won't see a team or a list sink so far into mediocrity, which is a kind word for it, ever again). They have a lone mature key forward option who can't kick straight, Matthew Wright as their top scoring player with the rest of their forwardline being made up of players with a about 20 games of experience between them. They've got 5 or 6 talented defenders and some quality midfielders so it always made more sense for them to start with defence (especially given that the already fickle Carlton supporter based probably wasn't going to tolerate numerous 100 point losses).

How do you even argue that Carlton's approach has been correct given the number of wins that they've somehow managed in the last two years?

Ask Worsfold if this is a development year - he clearly doesn't think that it is. He said on one of the website shows last week that he's selecting a side to make finals. That side hardly beat Carlton yesterday and conceded 240 points to North and the Western Bulldogs in a fortnight. It wouldn't hurt the grand plan to have the players think their way through 10 minutes of footy here and there.

Who's arguing that Carlton's approach is better? It is clearly not and thats my point.

You are pulling a quote from Woosha from a week ago? Come on mate thats ridiculous. Of course he's going to say that now that we are in touch of the finals.

He has been tempering peoples expectations all year and you know it! Yet you like a few others want measure the side against where you think they are. Your thoughts are unrealistic and if you understood whats going on you would recognise that we have actually exceeded where we should be.

And I love how you think Carlton are in a "unique" situation! Our past five years have just been run of the mill football seasons!

 

[Teflon Dons]

BrunoV
If you break it down more, we lack versatile midfielders. Our mids (namely Jobe, Zac, Myers, Howlett, Heppel) are virtually rendered useless when they are not played in there prime position.

Yep. Exactly the point. We need versatility and the ability win the ball, avoiding having one at the expense of the other.

Not saying that contested possession are meaningless by any stretch.

 

[Killer_Mike]

BrunoV
If you break it down more, we lack versatile midfielders. Our mids (namely Jobe, Zac, Myers, Howlett, Heppel) are virtually rendered useless when they are not played in there prime position.

Thats spot on. I'm tired of hearing about contested footballers.

We have had contested midfield for the last ten years and where did that get us.

We need guys that can do it all.

Which I believe we have some good ones already but are very young. I personally don't believe our midfield is as bad as people keep saying. We have drafted lots in the last few years and good ones.