Analysis Pass mark for 2015

[Marley10]

What is considered a pass mark?

To me, winning a final is a must. No win and it's an automatic fail (ASADA stuff aside).

Also, we cannot lose to a bottom four team. Cannot be in top 4 contention if they continue losing games against these teams. Sick of a Melbourne or St Kilda loss putting us out of contention.

Another thing I'm looking for in 2015 is putting sides away. All of Bulldogs x2, St Kilda, Melbourne, Brisbane, GWS, Carlton and an under strength Gold Coast were in a position to win the game in the 4th quarter (with two of them being losses and a draw). That's all of the bottom 7. Even the average sides put these teams away.

You could argue that one of Hawthorn or Geelong should have been a win. That EF against North pretty much summed up the year.

 

[Old Campaigner]

Consistent, clinical 4 quarter performances. No more piling on goals only to scrape home in the final quarter against the likes of WBD and GWS.

Stick with the top sides for the whole game and make them work for their win.

Win a final.

Assemble for a 'Class of 2012' reunion and take group photo of everyone giving ASADA the finger.

 

[Bombermania]

Pass mark

KPI 1 make the 8
KPI 2 win a final
KPI 3 beat at least 4 of the other 7 finalist
KPI 4 a forward kicks 30 goals plus
KPI 5 win all games that we lead at 3 quarter time or have been five goals in front
KPI 6 win a majority of the close games (less than two goals)

 

[BrunoV]

When you've got a best 22 as old as ours will inevitably be top 4 would be the pass mark.

Not sure how you could accept anything less.

 

[Old Campaigner]

When you've got a best 22 as old as ours will inevitably be top 4 would be the pass mark.

Not sure how you could accept anything less.

Because age != good enough to make top four. Lets face it, we topped up on a bunch of has beens and also rans.

 

[eth-dog]

Win a final.

 

[Towno78]

A preliminary final, however it happens. No less.

Because age != good enough to make top four. Lets face it, we topped up on a bunch of has beens and also rans.

He didn't say age was equivalent to making the top four. I believe he is suggesting Essendon's list management has been directed towards a tilt at a flag now and the very near future, so how can any less than top four be acceptable in that environment? I agree.

 

[doug85]

Top 4.

 

[Bombers36]

i think anywhere between 6 - 10 would be OK given the ASADA shit,

 

[Towno78]

i think anywhere between 6 - 10 would be OK given the ASADA shit,

You would take 10th this year?

 

[MightyDons4]

Top 8, winning a final is a bonus.

 

[Jobe Watson]

Should've won a final last year, should be winning 2 finals this year.

 

[BrunoV]

Because age != good enough to make top four. Lets face it, we topped up on a bunch of has beens and also rans.

Well if that is not what we are aiming at have we topped up to win a final?

Raises a number of angry questions more than anything else.

 

[Bombermania]

When you've got a best 22 as old as ours will inevitably be top 4 would be the pass mark.

Not sure how you could accept anything less.

I agree we should be pushing for a top four position but our forward line still has some maturating to do, hopefully someone can kick 30 plus then we should be right in the hunt for the top four.

 

[Old Campaigner]

Well if that is not what we are aiming at have we topped up to win a final?

Raises a number of angry questions more than anything else.

I think 'topping up' for a top 4 spot was the idea, I just think that as a group the players we already have are too far off for 'topping up' to do much at the best of times, and the players we 'topped up' with are not really good enough to make much difference even if they were added to a genuine flag contender. Obviously with the draft sanction our options were limited and we did well considering. This issue I see is that apart from Cooney none of them are genuine best 22 (even at their old clubs they didn't play every game), and only Giles and McKernan fill an obvious hole. Topping up is for top 4 clubs with a position they need to fill with a best 22 player, not middling clubs rounding up a bunch of guys past their prime or just plain average.

All up they improve our list without a doubt, but not enough to advance us more than maybe a spot or two up the ladder (barring injury to key players etc) and with that in mind the pass mark becomes winning a final, bonus marks if we win two...

They won't say it publicly but if covering possible player bans wasn't a large-ish part of the decision making process I'll eat my hat.

 

[VelvetSledge]

Prelim.

 

[BrunoV]

I think 'topping up' for a top 4 spot was the idea, I just think that as a group the players we already have are too far off for 'topping up' to do much at the best of times, and the players we 'topped up' with are not really good enough to make much difference even if they were added to a genuine flag contender. Obviously with the draft sanction our options were limited and we did well considering. This issue I see is that apart from Cooney none of them are genuine best 22 (even at their old clubs they didn't play every game), and only Giles and McKernan fill an obvious hole. Topping up is for top 4 clubs with a position they need to fill with a best 22 player, not middling clubs rounding up a bunch of guys past their prime or just plain average.

All up they improve our list without a doubt, but not enough to advance us more than maybe a spot or two up the ladder (barring injury to key players etc) and with that in mind the pass mark becomes winning a final, bonus marks if we win two...

They won't say it publicly but if covering possible player bans wasn't a large-ish part of the decision making process I'll eat my hat.

I basically agree with all of that.

The club should be judged on the team that will take the field. There should not be any tolerance for a team the core of which doesn't change, a team that doesnt perform when it matters and which is now being topped up.

 

[IggypopsTshirt]

ASADA brushed aside without player suspensions.
Hird retains top job.
Win 2 finals.
Significant reduction in the gulf between our best and worst footy/consistency.
>60,000k members.
Damian Barrett burned at the stake.

 

[Kakkle]

Top 8, winning a final is a bonus.

Simply finishing top 8 is not acceptable. Winning a final is an absolute must in 2015.

 

[MightyDons4]

Simply finishing top 8 is not acceptable. Winning a final is an absolute must in 2015.

Depends on how you define 'pass mark'. The absolute minimum required is to finish top 8, winning one final is the expected outcome and anything beyond that is great.

 

[Marley10]

Depends on how you define 'pass mark'. The absolute minimum required is to finish top 8, winning one final is the expected outcome and anything beyond that is great.

The list is beyond merely finishing top 8. I would argue that the pass mark for last year was winning a final (which they nearly did).

Winning a final is a must and being competitive in the semi final is what I would expect.

Then finishing top 4 would be a must in 2016 in order to build towards a premiership. Before we know it, GWS and Gold Coast would be dominating as expected so the next 2-3 years are crucial. Need to aim for a premiership within those years.

 

[84859300]

When you've got a best 22 as old as ours will inevitably be top 4 would be the pass mark.

Not sure how you could accept anything less.

Beat me to it BrunoV

My own personal pass would to be good enough to finish in the top 6 - hoping we can keep as much of our best 22 healthy and on the park. I think this would show that we have improved on 2014 and to get to this mark, we'd have to have been close to being competitive against the clubs higher than us - maybe beating a few and having a better percentage in avoiding blow out results

I, like you, feel that the club's pass mark is much higher than that. As you've said, the player choices we made at the draft looked like a club keen for a tilt at a prelim and maybe even a flag.

I must say, to me it feels very 'Ross Lyon' like where we have invested in some experienced band-aids to fill holes rather than develop our own players ourselves. The main difference, of course, is that we haven't finished in the Top 4 or won a final for a long time. Maybe the club knows better than what we do, in why we stumbled in 2014 i.e. issues with Thompson, player positions, injury management etc. and they feel if we do things better by 5% that we'll be in a much better place - but this is all pure speculation.

For the: ASADA saga, Hird v Thompson, The Flight Plan, personnel sackings, Paddy Ryder and the likes - the club's P.R. has been at an all time low. I just hope that with the direction we've taken has not been the club hierarchy issuing a quick fix for the fans and the competition... and that there is meaning behind the decisions. My 'Spidey Senses' tingle with the slightest mention of phrases like 'good for the club' and 'sit tight', because I'm always looking for an underlying factor of why certain paths have been chosen.

 

[BrunoV]

Beat me to it BrunoV

I must say, to me it feels very 'Ross Lyon' like where we have invested in some experienced band-aids to fill holes rather than develop our own players ourselves. The main difference, of course, is that we haven't finished in the Top 4 or won a final for a long time. Maybe the club knows better than what we do, in why we stumbled in 2014 i.e. issues with Thompson, player positions, injury management etc. and they feel if we do things better by 5% that we'll be in a much better place - but this is all pure speculation.

The other key difference between us and St Kilda under Lyon is that we've still got a group of 20 odd really young players most of whom are outside the best 22.

 

[Stickers32]

Top 6 would be a pass mark for me!

 

[fishardansin]

I agree with Bruno that prelim will be the internal pass mark. Whether or not the club is deluded is something we'll have to wait and see.

I fear we've got an uneven list with our young explosive mids to young to make an impact before the class of Watson and Goddard fade.

Essendon is a real dark horse for next year. If you look at our list from one perspective you can see a fairly vanilla team with some talented talls who haven't put it together for a long enough period and a bunch of youth that looks like "almost there" but not quite good enough.

From a positive perspective if we have a good run with injuries and the youth start to come on we could have a very good year. Cooney, Colyer, Zaka, Hibberd, Winderlich and Dempsey being fit and in form gives us some run that we've lacked over recent times. Backline is solid. A full year out of Watson+Heppell+Goddard is an amazing midfield core. Cooney, Chapman and Winderlich is a fragile but potent forward line, if Daniher and Carlisle can come on then it'll be nuts. If the kids start playing well then VFL footy is competitive and we can manage older fragile players like Chapman, Winderlich and Fletch.