Remove this Banner Ad

Analysis List Management, Recruiting and Development. Where did the problem really reside?

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Lids will play 5 more seasons.

All you pretenders saying he is done, cut our losses are just fear mongerers.

Based on what Intel is he injured beyond repair?

He had a bad year.. Sure.

But he is also one of the most durable players in the league & takes care of himself 100%.


What if Lids plays 5 more seasons?? How is that the point??

The point is will he play a premiership for us like Shaw at Collingwood?
 
The trouble with trying to be right - we cling to every shred of evidence as a proof. This stops us being analytical and really getting to the deeper source of the problems.

Unless we keep an open mind so we can really learn what has been going wrong - ie keep analysing until the picture is very clear - we are probably going to make the same mistakes!

Miles - it was clear that DH's attitude was : you must be earning games by knocking down the door. That was fine when we were winning. He changed - as he should have - when we were not winning. No issue from me there.

Dea is an ok footballer. I rated him and I agree he deserved more opportunities. He's not much more than a C grader though...

McBean - he has not got AfL intensity. Doesn't deserve a game.

Arnott etc - they had their chance !!!!!! They were not good enough.

Chaplain - was good in numerous areas - and until this year, was an integral part of one of the best backlines in the league (stats back that up!)

Newman - he was a good player !!

King - was deserved of the opportunities he got !

Sorry - but I am just left thinking you hate the coach and so can't see the wood for the trees.
DON'T disagree with most of these but will say:

Dea is an improving footballer, who our coaches had no idea how to develop. Essendon will reap some rewards. The knock on him was he couldn't find enough of his own ball - well a bunch of 20-plus possession games suggests he can.

Agreed, Newman was a good player from 2002-13. No way he should have been in our side in 2014-15 and held back the development of a younger player. We were obsessed by getting him a finals win, yet he was a mere shadow of his former self.

King did well to reinvent himself as a defensive forward, but the hoopla about him being so irreplaceable after he left was pure nonsense. Trying to reinvent Steve Morris as the next 'Jake King' was an abject failure and nearly cost Morris his career.

McBean agree .... but hard to say that when you gift 18 games this season to a a supposed senior and class player in Vickery, who showed less intensity. The question has to be asked how can so little intensity be so detrimental to one player but rewarding for another?
 
DON'T disagree with most of these but will say:

McBean agree .... but hard to say that when you gift 18 games this season to a a supposed senior and class player in Vickery, who showed less intensity. The question has to be asked how can so little intensity be so detrimental to one player but rewarding for another?

I think Vickery dropped off more this year than any other and it reflected in his games played in the VFL. If we don't match his hawthorn contract (if one is offered) then it would be for his lack of apparent intensity.

I think the trouble may have been - guessing here so my thought are a bit scattered - but it is based on some player descriptions of his work ethic...

He worked hard off the track but his body type, running technique and fitness level are just not up to the level of AFL sustained intensity . That means he has patches of looking great but is not reliable and just looks disinterested or lazy when tired.

He certainly has some elite skills - kicking for goal and making the most of his opportunities. Once he gets up to speed - he is quite fast.

He does not seem to have an ability to gut run and in the game I watched focusing on him, had poor technique for holding his ground and poor technique for agility (direction changing) (Center of gravity to high).

Once he gets into a losing mindset, he would appear to be giving even less intensity to give as he was at 100% capacity just keeping up when in a winning frame of mind.

In other words - he was giving his all - his all just is not good enough.

However - can a new coach change that fitness base or technique? I suspect it is possible - but trust that we have coaches who work on this kind of thing all the time - making it unlikely.

It is possible we have had a fitness coach who just does not understand how Ty's body works best .....

It is likely he is already 90-95% the footballer he can become.
 
You see this is where everyone gets it arse about when discussing this subject, yes they have so many fails, but they have the "best recruiting records" too...we havent and we have so many fails. I dont regard a success being a player was drafted and he played 150 games because as we well know at tigerland there have been truckloads of hacks get to that number because of the good ol excuse, no one better to take their place. I regard players who make an impact on the scoreboard on game day and on the ladder position and affect the opposition in how they plan for us.
I have been told many times over the last 2 decades by close mates, who worked with or had a mate who was say an analyst for other clubs and it was the same thing each time. We plan to allow x y and z etc all the room and space they need because if the tigers have the ball we want them to have it, knowing there is an 80% chance it will be in our possesion with the next play and we focus on say 3 players and make sure they are starved of delivery.
Thats how you had the likes of Chris Hyde racking up "elite" numbers that kept the tiger heads gooing gaga and thinking they were watching some kind of super star when in essence he was a plodder that all and sundry were high fiving when he got the ball.

Agreed - a player playing 150 games - could be the kind of list clogged we don't want. That is one of my earlier points. We don't trade out of bad situations early enough.

Players who are flawed like Vickery need to be traded early and often. We need to have a lot of first and second round picks.

We tend to not value 2nd rounders and are happy to trade the pick out rather than get more of them.

There is logic to it - you are meant to get more of a known - but not superstar. Maric (was better than predicted) but only 3 years of top service. Yarran - cost us 2 2nd rounders. Hampson - is ok and we need a ruckman ...

2nd rounders are a gamble - but enough become stars that you need a lot of them. That is how Geelong and Hawthorn did it anyway ....
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

It's the shit game plan that ****ed us this year, not the drafting.

Pavlich was inexcusable, buddy less so (at the time).

We actually have some decent players coming through and those that can't make it I expect to be let go. Maybe we should have got hepell but the guy looks like a ponce.

I can't excuse the state of our ruck stocks though. That's piss poor management.
 
You see this is where everyone gets it arse about when discussing this subject, yes they have so many fails, but they have the "best recruiting records" too...we havent and we have so many fails. I dont regard a success being a player was drafted and he played 150 games because as we well know at tigerland there have been truckloads of hacks get to that number because of the good ol excuse, no one better to take their place. I regard players who make an impact on the scoreboard on game day and on the ladder position and affect the opposition in how they plan for us.
I have been told many times over the last 2 decades by close mates, who worked with or had a mate who was say an analyst for other clubs and it was the same thing each time. We plan to allow x y and z etc all the room and space they need because if the tigers have the ball we want them to have it, knowing there is an 80% chance it will be in our possesion with the next play and we focus on say 3 players and make sure they are starved of delivery.
Thats how you had the likes of Chris Hyde racking up "elite" numbers that kept the tiger heads gooing gaga and thinking they were watching some kind of super star when in essence he was a plodder that all and sundry were high fiving when he got the ball.
Brandon Ellis.
 
Brandon Ellis.

exacory...:thumbsu: opposition planners, give him space, let him run, do all the shit he does and 6 times out of 10 he will stop the play and 3 times out of 10 he will turn it over and every now and then hit a target or kick a goal and job done, we have our patsy and they continue to pick him because he produces the stats. There is a train of thought that ask whats better?, 14 quality possesions/disposals or 35 where probably 5 worked for you 20 were ineffective nothingness and 10 worked for the opposition. ;)
 
The trouble with trying to be right - we cling to every shred of evidence as a proof. This stops us being analytical and really getting to the deeper source of the problems.

Unless we keep an open mind so we can really learn what has been going wrong - ie keep analysing until the picture is very clear - we are probably going to make the same mistakes!

Miles - it was clear that DH's attitude was : you must be earning games by knocking down the door. That was fine when we were winning. He changed - as he should have - when we were not winning. No issue from me there.

Dea is an ok footballer. I rated him and I agree he deserved more opportunities. He's not much more than a C grader though...

McBean - he has not got AfL intensity. Doesn't deserve a game.

Arnott etc - they had their chance !!!!!! They were not good enough.

Chaplain - was good in numerous areas - and until this year, was an integral part of one of the best backlines in the league (stats back that up!)

Newman - he was a good player !!

King - was deserved of the opportunities he got !

Sorry - but I am just left thinking you hate the coach and so can't see the wood for the trees.
to say king deserved his shot proves you know nothing. In arnotts first game he laid a dozen tackles had 28 pressure acts. His reward getting dropped for the pushup queen the following week. In another game Rory Thomson was destroying riewoldt in first half. Arnott crunched him puts him in hospital riewolt gets off the chain and kicks a bag. Newman was a great servant but his last 3 years were rubbish. And anybody with a clue who gives a sh#£ about the tiges should have more than hate for softwick.
 
I've commented about this very topic elsewhere, the three pillars of success are
-Recruiting
-Development
-Coaching
To reach the pinnacle , all need to be strong. The dogs are great examples where they have made great strides in all key areas
1. Aced their r1 selections
2. Developed their talent and rookie selections , Johannison , Dalhaus , m Boyd ,,,,and now in vfl GF
3 Bevo is arguably an heir apparent to Clarkson as a modern day maestro
By comparison we have barely got a pass mark in any category, I'm sure this was outlined in the review
 
It's just like the IKEA effect.
Just like all IKEA trading trips with the missus seems to end in tears, the results show that RFC trading / drafting team seems to act in the similar way.

See how one person (Gordon) made the gutsy call in Tom Boyd and got it right. The RFC are like the committee designing a horse, and keep coming up with a donkey.
We need a better single decision maker. A benign dictator perhaps?
 
It's just like the IKEA effect.
Just like all IKEA trading trips with the missus seems to end in tears, the results show that RFC trading / drafting team seems to act in the similar way.

See how one person (Gordon) made the gutsy call in Tom Boyd and got it right. The RFC are like the committee designing a horse, and keep coming up with a donkey.
We need a better single decision maker. A benign dictator perhaps?
That's prob the one decision they'd like again, lucky for them they had a dozen good ones prior that it hasn't held them back,,,,still could
 
Lids will play 5 more seasons.

All you pretenders saying he is done, cut our losses are just fear mongerers.

Based on what Intel is he injured beyond repair?

He had a bad year.. Sure.

But he is also one of the most durable players in the league & takes care of himself 100%.

He won't be there in the next premiership. He fits the bill perfectly, older player, match winner, talent, still has value in terms of trade.

We keep him, we don't deserve to ever complain about not having a great future side.
 
He won't be there in the next premiership. He fits the bill perfectly, older player, match winner, talent, still has value in terms of trade.

We keep him, we don't deserve to ever complain about not having a great future side.

Says "madness."
 

Remove this Banner Ad

We would have taken more than enough if any of them were any good. :p

Yes ... and the hit rate on bigs across all clubs taken with picks like Derickx (63rd) or McKenzie (77) ?

It is extremely low - (have to check but think it's in the order of 1 success in 10) meaning you need to keep churning them to get a decent one.
 
This business of picking players can be tricky. Lets take the truism that 'talls take longer to develop' which may or may not be true. Does the corollary also work- that therefore smaller players will develop more quickly?
It seems to me that they're all going to develop at different rates and that in theory a players development should follow a basic bell curve, when we and the recruiters would like it to follow a j-curve. But it doesn't always go this way...some mature as footballers a lot earlier, then decline, and in fact some kids who are drafted have already peaked while only in their teens. There's been plenty of kids who star in junior leagues them fall away and spend the careers playing metro and country footy. The history of recruiting is littered with kids who go this way. Its possible that B.Ellis may be one of them, Vickery another. Others peak, then fall away quickly and Essendon's Terry Daniher might be a perfect example, so might Travis Cloke.
What recruiters are looking for is a perfect world where a continuous run of recruits have long and credentialed careers like say Nick Reiwoldt. (I dont rate him all that highly, but his career has been long and he's been great value for the Saints)
My point...we've picked very few who have lived up to the bell curve and even fewer who have had 'j-curve' careers.
Who's at fault for this? For judging how far along that curve a player is and how far down it he might go? I cant say, but I know its trickier than it appears, and I also know that the fault may not be with the recruiters, but with the staff who coach the new recruits.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Analysis List Management, Recruiting and Development. Where did the problem really reside?


Write your reply...

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top