McRae Coaching From Ground Level

[domus]

If ever you wanted to see an example of why players are willing to play attacking, risk taking footy and have the confidence to make mistakes it was on Monday when McCrae talked so calmly to the players on the interchange bench and his body language was so relaxed during a very tight, tense game. I felt soothed by the footage. We are in very good hands.

 

[Markfs]

If ever you wanted to see an example of why players are willing to play attacking, risk taking footy and have the confidence to make mistakes it was on Monday when McCrae talked so calmly to the players on the interchange bench and his body language was so relaxed during a very tight, tense game. I felt soothed by the footage. We are in very good hands.

He did look a bit nerdish, dont ya think Domie. He reminded me a little of my mum, checking to see if i was wearing clean underwear or whether i've brushed my teeth...

On a serious note, he seemed to be pretty disconnected from the overall strategies of the game - leaving it to the leper and the bolts

 

[domus]

He did look a bit nerdish, dont ya think Domie. He reminded me a little of my mum, checking to see if i was wearing clean underwear or whether i've brushed my teeth...

On a serious note, he seemed to be pretty disconnected from the overall strategies of the game - leaving it to the leper and the bolts

I love everything about him. I'm sure he is all over the strategies and game plan. I just find him such a welcome change. No nerdiness that I could detect.

 

[OniAu]

If ever you wanted to see an example of why players are willing to play attacking, risk taking footy and have the confidence to make mistakes it was on Monday when McCrae talked so calmly to the players on the interchange bench and his body language was so relaxed during a very tight, tense game. I felt soothed by the footage. We are in very good hands.

Its bloody refreshing. Also i think his approach has calmed fans. I was on edge and sick of the club after that trade week dissapointment a few years back.

Seeing Macrae back his players with a supportive approach i think is fantastic for such a young group.

Good times ahead

 

[Markfs]

I love everything about him. I'm sure he is all over the strategies and game plan. I just find him such a welcome change. No nerdiness that I could detect.

I dont disagree with it but the perception is that the head coach does everything.... he said that he planned to sit in the box for a month and then come down to the boundary and leave the moves to the other boys. There's going to be a percentage of supporters who wont like that he's sticking to the development side...

but personally, i see him as a good post buckley coach....the players needed to be freed up

 

[Markfs]

Its bloody refreshing. Also i think his approach has calmed fans. I was on edge and sick of the club after that trade week dissapointment a few years back.

Seeing Macrae back his players with a supportive approach i think is fantastic for such a young group.

Good times ahead

you know.... the team averaged 100 games per player last weekend. It's not a young group. The young group is in the VFL.

He is managing a fairly old group of players at AFL level.

 

[Daicos Torpedo]

We needed a change. Bucks was a legend, but fell a shite not paid free of possible glory.
Fly gives us all confidence as it's honeymoon time. That's a fact.
But, i do like what I am seeing so far

 

[Go Woods]

Loving all aspects of what Fly has brought to the club so far. I don’t mind the coaching/supporting the players at boundary level.
I’m very confident he is the man that can lead us to flag #16 in due course.

 

[swoop42]

For the love of God fix the typo in the thread title.

 

[OniAu]

you know.... the team averaged 100 games per player last weekend. It's not a young group. The young group is in the VFL.

He is managing a fairly old group of players at AFL level.

Sorry , Young and inexperienced.

Look at the group of

Ginnivan, McCreery, Quaynor , N Daicoss , McInness , as young and inexperienced


Cameron , Kruger, Madgen, Noble , Lipinski, Daicos, Brown , these all have not hit 100 games despite their age.

12 out of that side on the weekend haven't hit that 100 game average.

Hardly say its an old group

 

[Dynamics]

I like the fact that he's confidently backing his judgement already. If he feels it's best to be on the bench then good on him for trying it. David King says some daft things but he also throws out some pearls of wisdom. One of them is that you don't win flags by copying... You win by innovating and playing your own game. Fly knows who he is and what he wants to do and that's exciting to me.

Coaches and managers from multiple sports actively manage their teams pitchside and there are clear benefits as well as potential pitfalls.

And he's not in a bunker at Jolimont station either. He's still actively watching the game and has multiple highly experienced assistants watching from above, calling him whenever he needs to know something.

 

[sr36]

Sorry , Young and inexperienced.

Look at the group of

Ginnivan, McCreery, Quaynor , N Daicoss , McInness , as young and inexperienced


Cameron , Kruger, Madgen, Noble , Lipinski, Daicos, Brown , these all have not hit 100 games despite their age.

12 out of that side on the weekend haven't hit that 100 game average.

Hardly say its an old group

Melbourne's Grand Final team had 8 blokes 21 or under. By any measure, they were younger and less experienced than our team is.

Our actual team has an age demographic that should be peaking now.

Us having a young team just isn't a reality as much as we may want to believe it.

I don't see that as an issue as we have a heap of kids on our list - we've just got to cross our fingers that a lot of them push through.

 

[Maggie5]

For the love of God fix the typo in the thread title.

Done!

 

[OniAu]

Melbourne's Grand Final team had 8 blokes 21 or under. By any measure, they were younger and less experienced than our team is.

Our actual team has an age demographic that should be peaking now.

Us having a young team just isn't a reality as much as we may want to believe it.

I don't see that as an issue as we have a heap of kids on our list - we've just got to cross our fingers that a lot of them push through.

Yeah exactly , but do you class Madgen , Krueger, Cameron , Lipinnksi, Nobel who are all nowhere near 100 games as in that age demographic that should be peaking ? I dont see 3 out of those 5 as capabale of winning us a flag if they are in our 22

Inexperience is where we are at, we need a couple of seasons of pushing finals/lower top 8 before we get a proper tilt at it.

 

[sr36]

Yeah exactly , but do you class Madgen , Krueger, Cameron , Lipinnksi, Nobel who are all nowhere near 100 games as in that age demographic that should be peaking ? I dont see 3 out of those 5 as capabale of winning us a flag if they are in our 22

Inexperience is where we are at, we need a couple of seasons of pushing finals/lower top 8 before we get a proper tilt at it.

I wouldn't call blokes like Noble and Lipinski, who are mid twenties and have played 50 AFL games and a lot of state league footy as inexperienced. The talls on that list have missed a lot of footy due to injuries or basketball, so you might be able to make a case for them.

I'd say where the team is at is a strong core of very experienced AFL players - a standard number of kids and a group of mid or second half of their career blokes who aren't particularly good.

Those guys not being particularly good is why we're not at the pointy end, but it doesn't make the team young, inexperienced or developing. Hopefully the kids in the VFL can develop and push some of these guys out and then we can talk about a young developing team, but that hasn't happened yet.

I'm not saying this as a criticism of what we're doing - I'd play the older blokes until the kids go past them, which in most cases they haven't yet.

 

[Markfs]

I wouldn't call blokes like Noble and Lipinski, who are mid twenties and have played 50 AFL games and a lot of state league footy as inexperienced. The talls on that list have missed a lot of footy due to injuries or basketball, so you could make a case for them.

I'd say where the team is at is a strong core of very experienced AFL players - a standard number of kids and a group of blokes who aren't particularly good.

Those guys not being particularly good is why we're not at the pointy end, but it doesn't make the team young, inexperienced or developing. Hopefully the kids in the VFL can develop and push some of these guys out and then we can talk about a young developing team, but that hasn't happened yet.

I'm glad you left the madge in the young inexperienced group..... i'm starting to hear that 60 is the new 20...

 

[Markfs]

i just got a call from Geelong who wanted to have a go at me for classing young players as old...

They said so many people say that they're old but they have boys like miers atkins close holmes dempsey stengle o'connor ALL in their last weeks team

ALL under 100 games....

The boys at geelong tell me that compared to the pies, the cats are just out of school...

 

[sr36]

I'm glad you left the madge in the young inexperienced group..... i'm starting to hear that 60 is the new 20...

It's a disgrace that he doesn't qualify for the Rising Star. They need to rewriter.the rules.

 

[Markfs]

It's a disgrace that he doesn't qualify for the Rising Star. They need to rewriter.the rules.

the planets didnt align... but surely the browns are making a case to be nominated this year...

i think both of them are having breakout seasons...certainly breaking out more than they did last year.... or the year before that...or the year before that...or the year before that...

I just love seeing the young boys on the park enjoying themselves and getting a feel for the game. We can worry about them improving next year after they've settled in

 

[Markfs]

on a more serious note, pies average 100 games per player last weekend while essendon was about 70 according to foxfooty...

essendon averages 54 games across their list while the pies are about 62.

So what does that mean? the obvious is that they have a younger list....and the second is that essendon is playing more of their younger players than we are, which explains which the difference between the team was so high last weekend. The Dons had more of their younger players playing.

The pies are playing almost all of their most experienced players. All the youngsters on the list are playing VFL except for a few exceptions like the reef but I would say that mason cox

46

Mason Cox

Age

33

Ht

211cm

Wt

110kg

Pos.

F/R

Career

Season

Last 5

D

8.7

2star

K

5.2

2star

HB

3.5

3star

M

4.0

4star

T

1.6

4star

G

1.2

4star

D

6.0

1star

K

3.0

1star

HB

3.0

2star

M

2.3

2star

T

0.3

1star

G

1.0

4star

D

9.0

3star

K

5.4

2star

HB

3.6

3star

M

2.6

3star

T

2.4

4star

G

1.8

5star

is the only experienced player not getting a game.

However, several fox people have referred to the pies as a young team so of course they're right. I've seen it on social media so it must be right. I would never argue with social media...

 

[OniAu]

I wouldn't call blokes like Noble and Lipinski, who are mid twenties and have played 50 AFL games and a lot of state league footy as inexperienced. The talls on that list have missed a lot of footy due to injuries or basketball, so you might be able to make a case for them.

I'd say where the team is at is a strong core of very experienced AFL players - a standard number of kids and a group of mid or second half of their career blokes who aren't particularly good.

Those guys not being particularly good is why we're not at the pointy end, but it doesn't make the team young, inexperienced or developing. Hopefully the kids in the VFL can develop and push some of these guys out and then we can talk about a young developing team, but that hasn't happened yet.

I'm not saying this as a criticism of what we're doing - I'd play the older blokes until the kids go past them, which in most cases they haven't yet.

Yeah bang on , i think thats good for competition, we cant go the way of the dees early 2010s

 

[Masked Magician]

It's an interesting discussion.

I think we are in a similar spot to 2005/2006.

If we look at the 2006 list, there are plenty of experience good senior players there for the youngsters to learn off. It's interesting to see we were ranked 3rd (out of 16) for Experience in the comp and ranked 10th for age.

Collingwood Playing List for 2006 - Draftguru

www.draftguru.com.au

Collingwood Playing List for 2022 - Draftguru

www.draftguru.com.au

If we compare with 2022, we are ranked 10th for experience and 12th for Age.

 

[Markfs]

The key issue is the team on a given day is different from the list. If we are playing senior players on the AFL game, then we are playing a relatively experienced or old group of players...

look, i dont mind if the club spins a few yarns to take the pressure off the coach....but at the moment he is trying to adjust a pretty experienced group of players to a more attacking game style...

it's a lot like what chris scott

Chris Scott

Age

47

Ht

182cm

Wt

89kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

16.6

4star

K

11.2

4star

HB

5.4

4star

M

5.1

5star

T

1.6

4star

G

0.4

3star

No current season stats available

D

13.2

4star

K

10.2

4star

HB

3.0

3star

M

2.2

3star

T

2.8

5star

G

0.4

3star

is doing at the cats.....

but refer to the team as young if you want to kid yourselves...

 

[Masked Magician]

The key issue is the team on a given day is different from the list. If we are playing senior players on the AFL game, then we are playing a relatively experienced or old group of players...

look, i dont mind if the club spins a few yarns to take the pressure off the coach....but at the moment he is trying to adjust a pretty experienced group of players to a more attacking game style...

it's a lot like what chris scott is doing at the cats.....

but refer to the team as young if you want to kid yourselves...

I guess the point I'm trying to make is, do we win in 2010 and play off in a granny in 2011 if we prematurely got rid of our experience in 2006/7/8/9?

Would we have been better off Trav Cloke and Dawes learning off Rocca until 2009? or should we have moved on Rocca 2-3 years before?
would we have been better getting rid of Bucks and Licca and Burnsy a year or 2 before they did or was it beneficial to Thomas and Pendles and Swan etc learning off those.

I'm happy to die on the hill that 2010 doesn't happen if the below were not played/forced out prematurely:

• Bucks
• Burns
• Clement
• Licca
• O'Bree
• Lockyer
• Rocca
• Wakelin
• Presti

 

[Markfs]

I guess the point I'm trying to make is, do we win in 2010 and play off in a granny in 2011 if we prematurely got rid of our experience in 2006/7/8/9?

Would we have been better off Trav Cloke and Dawes learning off Rocca until 2009? or should we have moved on Rocca 2-3 years before?
would we have been better getting rid of Bucks and Licca and Burnsy a year or 2 before they did or was it beneficial to Thomas and Pendles and Swan etc learning off those.

I'm happy to die on the hill that 2010 doesn't happen if the below were not played/forced out prematurely:

• Bucks
• Burns
• Clement
• Licca
• O'Bree
• Lockyer
• Rocca
• Wakelin
• Presti

Whatever happened, happened as far as i'm concerned. The people are different and you cant compare teams or people and think you're going to get an answer.

The figures I used were general and so you can say some general things...

And i've the references to the current pies team as being young. I look at the team. I wouldnt call it young.

I think mcrae is trying to get the best team playing at their best. He apparently does not intend to get rid of players like the hawks did, to give opportunities to younger players. St. Kilda did it too and it was a bad outcome...Carlton too probably. It doesnt have to be, but it's not a simple solution. North got rid of their experienced players too and they are strugging for traction. Maybe the crows did too but they appear to have done it well.

I would try the browns out, the rest of the players like will kelly and murphy and all those types and give them to the end of the year and then turf them if they cant do something. If the browns complained that macrae wasnt giving them a shot, he could sue them. I have lost patience with both but the old man is legend and members will weep and wail if they arent given a shot - people are complaining now that callum isnt in the midfield when clearly he is too small and not good enough.....but macrae is new and he cant offend the old members so give the brown extra chances etc.

and then re-evaluate at the end of the year and I would sweep the browns, kelly, murphy and a few others out. They picked bianco so they need to give him a try but is he really going to end up as a goalkicker as he did in the vfl last week?...

And by next year we can get more of the current VFL guys into the team as howe and roughhead and others go out the door.

But overall, unless we jag a premiership next year because some miracle happens, this slow turnover plan with slowly easing the older players out the door etc etc, is going to mean a slow chase for the next premiership...

so I wouldnt expect a premiership until reef and ollie have 50 games at least...and we need our first round the next two years to be spot on the money...

now pick each word of this and make reasons for why i'm wrong but I'm just painting a general picture of what i think in a quick burst.

but in short, macrae isnt developing, he's managing the retirements and doing an assessment of the blokes who have been in the system since before 2018.