Philosophy: Neeld vs Bailey

[SuburbanMe]

Yep, will withhold judgement until we actually beat a legitimate AFL standard club.

well, we did - they're called Essendon. Their ladder position was great until we beat them. We shattered their confidence and they kept losing from there on.

 

[Wonaeamirri33]

well, we did - they're called Essendon.

Exactly right.

And a resounding win it was too!

 

[Wonaeamirri33]

Depends - Some people like a good tossed salad.

 

[Bond.ShaneBond]

well, we did - they're called Essendon. Their ladder position was great until we beat them. We shattered their confidence and they kept losing from there on.

Essendon lost that match due to somehow being shitter than us.

 

[SuburbanMe]

Essendon lost that match due to somehow being shitter than us.

heh - of course - as it was told on the radio too. Funny how in a year that we are hounded in every way you could possibly think of - it's totally out of the question that we just beat them.

 

[Bluelegs]

Essendon lost that match due to somehow being shitter than us.

Both teams were pretty shocking, our defence was okay but we were fortunate that they missed their early shots or the confidence would've been shot. They started to come back in the third quarter but them Somehow we turned up in the last quarter and Essendon couldn't handle it. It was a damn fine last quarter from our part.

 

[demon_dynasty13]

implying Dean Bailey and Barry Prendergast has a philosophy to begin with


Thank god those morons have gone from our club

 

[Ando727]

Essendon lost that match due to somehow being shitter than us.

The correct answer is Colin Garland.

 

[jhong]

Bailey " Give me an athlete and we will try to turn him into a footballer"
Neeld "Give me a footballer ,and we will turn him into an athletic footballer "

 

[Bond.ShaneBond]

The correct answer is Colin Garland.

J Watts... 3 votes.

I loved that game and gave plenty of lip to the scum around me. But that win, where we kicked 8? goals and they missed plenty within 25m isn't going to convince me on Neeld.

 

[Viney]

J Watts... 3 votes.

I loved that game and gave plenty of lip to the scum around me. But that win, where we kicked 8? goals and they missed plenty within 25m isn't going to convince me on Neeld.

Under Bailey when the heat was switched on, we would've folded like a house of cards

 

[saj_21]

I touched on this in another thread, and the clear difference in philosophy is easy to see

demonfan9 you are correct - we did froth (with good reason)

Watts, Scully, Trengove, Tapscott, Blease was / is mouth watering

These guys will still all develop into top line talent IMO

Then there was Gysberts, Cook etc. who were all a little bit of "what the?" selections, along probably with Strauss as well

Later picks netted us blokes like Fitzy - again, long term prospect

The issue with these guys is they were all (mostly) long term propspects

The majority of them needed MULTIPLE preseasons before they'd ever have a chance of dominating

We drafted too many "3 years / 5 years" time players

What Neeld is drafting is ready made players

Let's look at his record thus far:

Clark - say no more
Sellar - was exceptionally servicable
Tynan / Taggert - both ready made, just hit with injury
Magner - was great for a mature rookie in his 1st season - ready to go day 1
Couch - not a great impact but ready made
Williams - man mountain - ready made
Sheahan - project(ish) player who was a ROOKIE PICK - exactly where project players should be taken (not with Pick 12 in ND)

This draft - Viney (ready made), Hogan (ready made), likely Ollie Wines (ready made), Dom Barry - should play games next year

I'd prefer to take a bloke like Daniel Rich who will give you 5 bloody good years before Lucas Cook's even pulled on a jumper, if you know what I mean

Everyone on here is getting hung up on skinny players, just becuase you are skinny doens't mean you aren't ready to play AFL look at Andrew Gaff skinny as a rake but is an absoulte jet of player. Compare with Tapscott , ready made player for us and he has had as little impact as the other skinny players we have drafted. Our issues are partly who we drafted in, but for mine it is the lack of development in these players that has killed us. Well built teenagers arent solely the answer we need to develop all types and sizes into being good footballers.

 

[Viney]

Everyone on here is getting hung up on skinny players, just becuase you are skinny doens't mean you aren't ready to play AFL look at Andrew Gaff skinny as a rake but is an absoulte jet of player. Compare with Tapscott , ready made player for us and he has had as little impact as the other skinny players we have drafted. Our issues are partly who we drafted in, but for mine it is the lack of development in these players that has killed us. Well built teenagers arent solely the answer we need to develop all types and sizes into being good footballers.

Andrew Gaff also has the benefit of seasoned hardened mids around him

I'm not fussed with skinny players, but when that's ALL we drafted for a period, it's not going to work

 

[Amarula]

That

Andrew Gaff also has the benefit of seasoned hardened mids around him

I'm not fussed with skinny players, but when that's ALL we drafted for a period, it's not going to work

That, and the fact that our player development seemed almost non-existent under Bailey.

I got really annoyed about the mantra of "we just have to get 50-100 games into these kids", as if that was all that needed to happen.

There may have been some efforts to develop the players, but from the outside it sure didn't look like it.

Meanwhile, other clubs were able to develop lower draft picks - in some cases, much lower draft picks - into better players.

 

[saj_21]

Andrew Gaff also has the benefit of seasoned hardened mids around him

I'm not fussed with skinny players, but when that's ALL we drafted for a period, it's not going to work

Gaff also came into a very successful environment, despite one low year the eagles are very rarely low on the ladder much like geelong and sydney these last 10 years. I would say the seasoned hardened mids example set on game day and during training is much influencial than there direct physical impact they may have on a game.

I just wanted to make the argument that a drafting kids with bigger bodies doesn't also translate to quicker and better development. I do blame the lack of development on poor senior leadership or lack there of (on and off the field), lack of resources and of course Bailey and co.

One thing i think we can all agree on (despite my numerous past posts) is Neeld and co are heading in the right direction, i like the way they have gone about the last 2 draft's and trade periods.

 

[Viney]

Gaff also came into a very successful environment, despite one low year the eagles are very rarely low on the ladder much like geelong and sydney these last 10 years. I would say the seasoned hardened mids example set on game day and during training is much influencial than there direct physical impact they may have on a game.

I just wanted to make the argument that a drafting kids with bigger bodies doesn't also translate to quicker and better development. I do blame the lack of development on poor senior leadership or lack there of (on and off the field), lack of resources and of course Bailey and co.

One thing i think we can all agree on (despite my numerous past posts) is Neeld and co are heading in the right direction, i like the way they have gone about the last 2 draft's and trade periods.

Yes I agree

I'm not putting a knock on skinny kids, I'm putting a knock on recruting predominately skinny kids

Bigger bodies don't always translate into better / quicker development, but they often have a better straight up impact

Question.

What would you prefer? 5 years of bloody good football from Daniel Rich with little upside? Or 5 years of potential but not a lot of game time from Lucas Cook?

I'd take the 5 good years

 

[saj_21]

Yes I agree

I'm not putting a knock on skinny kids, I'm putting a knock on recruting predominately skinny kids

Bigger bodies don't always translate into better / quicker development, but they often have a better straight up impact

Question.

What would you prefer? 5 years of bloody good football from Daniel Rich with little upside? Or 5 years of potential but not a lot of game time from Lucas Cook?

I'd take the 5 good years

The question is a no brainer becuase you have the benefit of hindsight. Would you rather Andrew Gaff or Luke Tapscott? Its rehtorical questions, i don't think you can draw a direct correlation between size and development and becoming a good AFL player.

 

[Captain Jack]

I think we can split the middle on this - recruiting skinny kids is not a problem in itself, but when 1) the coach is terrible 2) the game plan is terrible 3) the development program is non-existent and 4) there is very little protection provided by the 'senior' players, fair to say skinny kids are going to struggle to have a consistent impact over the season.