Non Lions Discussion 2019

[Gadzorks]

could be the opposite..........Eddie wanting a new CEO

Shudder

 

[MacMum]

He's been there, done that.

No brainer. I'm pretty sure Qld is a far more pleasant state to live/work in than Vic/Collingwood.

 

[Nunez]

Amazing news Rankine signed on. Just what the Suns needed.

 

[AFLQLD]

Amazing news Rankine signed on. Just what the Suns needed.

Very good news. It is another tiny step that helps a little to break down the myth that you have to get to a football state to have a worthwhile career, which I think the southern clubs and media are happy to perpetuate.

 

[briztoon]

As an aside, it did mention in the Rankine article that Ben King has put off contract talks until next year.

 

[bungalow_bill]

As an aside, it did mention in the Rankine article that Ben King has put off contract talks until next year.

Something we're very familiar with and doesn't bode well. Still if they could only keep one of the three I think Rankine is the one

 

[Milpool]

Yeah that's great news for the suns. Hopefully they have a smart and successful trade period this year and can start stringing some positive things together.

 

[BangyBangy]

Something we're very familiar with and doesn't bode well. Still if they could only keep one of the three I think Rankine is the one

Wants to go to St Kilda for more success......

 

[luthor]

Wants to go to St Kilda for more success......

Billy Longer says hi.

 

[CarterS]

Its not often I can say I completely agree with Sellers Maclure but this is one of those times, Judd put his foot in it here, Teague has done great.

 

[Kernel Kurtz]

Went to bed at Half Time. Good to see Hawks win but seriously the AFL has a big problem if that is the marquee Friday night game. That was horrible watching and I gather the 3rd qtr was even worse before at least an exciting last qtr. One good qtr for the match and 130 points scored in fine conditions. Teams use to score 130 !

No rule changes will fix the game while we have 10 coaches in the box. Almost got to the stage where we have a coach for every player. It's ruining the game. You go to games now and within a minute of the opening bounce one team has flooded back.

Do we really need to have six plus coaches for every club? What's wrong with a Head Coach and two/three assistants. There would be up to a dozen people in the coaches box at anyone time in matches now.

Would rather the money that went to all these coaches be given to players and make each clubs list 45 players - maybe even 46 for the two Queensland clubs. Provide more opportunities for kids to play AFL.. not remunerate ex players more money as Assistant coach to the Defence coach crap.

Put some of the money towards a National Reserves comp.

Thank god the Lions play attractive footy.

It's not great viewing for an AFL fan let alone someone that doesn't normally watch.
First thing I would do is take a little control off the coaches and reduce the interchange.
First year down to 48 then the following year down to 24. You have 6 changes per quarter at an average, that's plenty.

Teams that don't change the flooding tactic will fade away at some stage in the season.
We might see midfielder actually being rotated forward to have a rest from continual running back and forth and staying forward.
It's rubbish how the coaches use the it will cause more injuries , absolute rubbish.

Interesting, sorry about quoting my own post, but I also quoted Royboys as his post was the post I replied to.
Have a listen on Damian Barret's" In the game" , he has Danny Frawley - ex coach discussing these very points.
Have a look at the index below on the Afl site and it starts around the 12th minute mark.
One of his suggestions is drop the interchange down to 50 , I still say first year drop it down to 48 then following year maybe not 24 but maybe 36.
Then follow his other points in reference to coaches then using players staying behind the ball when fatigue sets in.
Great to hear this being discussed , more noise about this the better.

 

[Fatcat08]

Interesting, sorry about quoting my own post, but I also quoted Royboys as his post was the post I replied to.
Have a listen on Damian Barret's" In the game" , he has Danny Frawley - ex coach discussing these very points.
Have a look at the index below on the Afl site and it starts around the 12th minute mark.
One of his suggestions is drop the interchange down to 50 , I still say first year drop it down to 48 then following year maybe not 24 but maybe 36.
Then follow his other points in reference to coaches then using players staying behind the ball when fatigue sets in.
Great to hear this being discussed , more noise about this the better.

Whats the easiest way to make coaches care about scoring points? incentivise scoring and make it actually worth something. You scrap percentage first up and just use a net for and against as the first part. I mean percentage doesn't mean a heck of a lot, but any tie breaker than rewards you for playing defensive football has some affect on the way you play the game. And secondly you bring in extra points for scoring over certain amounts. If you're getting an extra premiership point for scoring over 100 points and an extra 2 for scoring over 150, you watch the coaches start to balance out their thoughts with regards to playing attacking football. Rules only do so much, give coaches a set of rules and they will manipulate them to suit their end goal. So how do you actually change the thought process? you change the end goal and make higher scoring games worth more premiership points. Then you start seeing sides more open to attacking in a different style and the game open up a bit more.

 

[dlanod]

Whats the easiest way to make coaches care about scoring points? incentivise scoring and make it actually worth something. You scrap percentage first up and just use a net for and against as the first part. I mean percentage doesn't mean a heck of a lot, but any tie breaker than rewards you for playing defensive football has some affect on the way you play the game. And secondly you bring in extra points for scoring over certain amounts. If you're getting an extra premiership point for scoring over 100 points and an extra 2 for scoring over 150, you watch the coaches start to balance out their thoughts with regards to playing attacking football. Rules only do so much, give coaches a set of rules and they will manipulate them to suit their end goal. So how do you actually change the thought process? you change the end goal and make higher scoring games worth more premiership points. Then you start seeing sides more open to attacking in a different style and the game open up a bit more.

I like this...

Updated ladder:
Geelong - 54
West Coast - 47 (+160 pts)
Brisbane - 47 (+140)
Collingwood - 45
GWS - 42
Richmond - 40
Essendon - 35
Port Adelaide - 34 (+116)
(Adelaide just misses out on 34 points as well)

 

[Fatcat08]

I like this...

Updated ladder:
Geelong - 54
West Coast - 47 (+160 pts)
Brisbane - 47 (+140)
Collingwood - 45
GWS - 42
Richmond - 40
Essendon - 35
Port Adelaide - 34 (+116)
(Adelaide just misses out on 34 points as well)

interesting ladder in that its not much different to whats currently there. Widens the gap a little bit in some spots - aka us and the bottom of the 8. Shows the impact it could have on the ladder, therefore teams would be more attacking in nature. Also gives you something if you kick a good score yet lose, you can still get a point out of it. Suddenly those last few minutes of a game that is over are a bit more important.

 

[dlanod]

interesting ladder in that its not much different to whats currently there. Widens the gap a little bit in some spots - aka us and the bottom of the 8. Shows the impact it could have on the ladder, therefore teams would be more attacking in nature. Also gives you something if you kick a good score yet lose, you can still get a point out of it. Suddenly those last few minutes of a game that is over are a bit more important.

Quite a few teams finished on 99, and I'd love to see the frantic attempts to get that extra point in the final seconds.

 

[M Malice]

I can't see bonus points for 100+ points happening, it has been put forward as an idea before but the kybosh has been put on it. The reasoning was that some teams play in pristine scoring conditions most weeks ie. Marvel Stadium and others can play in less than ideal conditions ie. MCG on a windy wet day.

 

[BigCat2]

Yes, though that didn't Super Rugby offering bonus points for 4 or more tries scored, regardless of conditions. If you give the incentive, coaches and teams will try to do it.

 

[M Malice]

Yes, though that didn't Super Rugby offering bonus points for 4 or more tries scored, regardless of conditions. If you give the incentive, coaches and teams will try to do it.

It wouldn't matter if it was the Suns or Lions playing in rain every other week BUT even if there's a perception that power clubs like the Magpies and/or Tigers are being disadvantaged it wont happen.... just ask Eddie.

 

[Dalions]

I can't see bonus points for 100+ points happening, it has been put forward as an idea before but the kybosh has been put on it. The reasoning was that some teams play in pristine scoring conditions most weeks ie. Marvel Stadium and others can play in less than ideal conditions ie. MCG on a windy wet day.

Wouldn’t work on a points based bonus but what about a percentage based bonus point?
Say a 150% win earns an extra point?
The team in front would want to score more and the team behind would also want to score more as well to stop them from getting there?

 

[Jivlain]

Wouldn’t work on a points based bonus but what about a percentage based bonus point?
Say a 150% win earns an extra point?
The team in front would want to score more and the team behind would also want to score more as well to stop them from getting there?

When I think of massive %age wins I tend to think of teams slaughtering the opponent with manic pressure, ala our game rather with Richmond last year, rather than high-scoring shootouts eg WCE 2016. The :aesthetic: crowd want to maximise the latter instead.

 

[Fatcat08]

Wouldn’t work on a points based bonus but what about a percentage based bonus point?
Say a 150% win earns an extra point?
The team in front would want to score more and the team behind would also want to score more as well to stop them from getting there?

Percentage favours keeping scores low so that would have the opposite affect

 

[Fatcat08]

I can't see bonus points for 100+ points happening, it has been put forward as an idea before but the kybosh has been put on it. The reasoning was that some teams play in pristine scoring conditions most weeks ie. Marvel Stadium and others can play in less than ideal conditions ie. MCG on a windy wet day.

Realistically conditions don't make as much difference as it gets beaten up to be. Currently teams that play in poor conditions regularly are favoured by the current system.

 

[patfullfankezz]

I swear the Cameron brothers could be twins.

Chatting with boyfriend over the outcome of this game - if Eagles win, we can move into third, the Pies win, we can be closer equal 2nd on the ladder but still in 4th. It's exciting and interesting to think about.

 

[Nunez]

Can we have Charlie jr now please?!?

 

[bato]

Cameron!