Preview R7: Changes v North Melbourne
- Thread starter Scorpus
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Thommo not playing is because he's been injured throughout the preseason, he hasn't been available. 2 years ago he spent the first 2 rounds in the SANFL after overcoming a hammy. Had he had an uninterrupted preseason, there's a chance that he would have started the year, especially with Brad overcoming his own issues.
dogs105
Sweet Kennels Proprietor
No that's 2017 apparently. A 20% increase to total salaries would require lists cut to 40 to average 400. Pretty crap union if they take pay rise for stars, for redundancies.
JJ looked up and about last Sunday to you?
Not for weather, not for match ups, not for balance, not to rest, not with an eye to any further away than 4 points this weekend. Basically, we don't make changes outside of injury, a sub 30 gamer only being ok and when a 100+ game player has finally had all the holes punched in his 10 s**t games on the trot card.
I don't believe that was through injury he and the club were trying to get him up for the showdown 4 games ago and said he was a chance to, he took 3 weeks longer due to the cautious approach.
JJ played poor, he was lucky due to timing to come straight in if there weren't any vacancies due to injury or form he would have played twos, personally I would have had him come back through the twos he isn't tex, Sloane, Talia, betts or Jacobs, they are the only players in my book that dont need to go through the twos
Who are the, "all the people". All I've seen is posters wanting Knight in with the expectation that the out will come from Milera or Mackay. Nobody has called for Menzel in ahead of Knight. Where have you read this?
Which is interesting as the two worst players last week were JJ and Hampton, both Mackay and Milera were much better than those two.JJ is the interesting one, realistically he is the one that should be called to go back with so many weeks off and coming back with bad form
A more competitive environment will be created by players who have played just well enough to hold their spot actually miss out in favour of a better player returning after a week off. That creates much more competition, it's a concept that you understand when talking about Sloane, Tex, Betts, Talia, but it also applies to a decision between Knight and either of Milera or Mackay. Just going well enough isn't enough and it's what we've always rewarded and as you know, we've not made the big dance for 20 years, so I'm sure you're looking to some changes somewhere. Or have I misunderstood and you want to improve but you don't think anything needs to change?
Menzel was nothing other than a short term replacement, he played fine in round 1 and was dropped after that. The only way he stayed in was to have played out of his skin because he wouldn't be moving upfield to replace either of Mackay or Milera when JJ returned.
Mackay played 19 games the year he's was contracted and averaged 18 possessions.
19 games in 2013 and 23 in 2012.
We did not have running players in our squad then. So what makes you think he saw himself as a depth player whose days were numbered? What makes you think the club saw him as that? The fact he continues to get picked suggests the opposite.
Players will pick themselves with form. It's unfortunate that if you get an injury you are up against it, look how JJ has come back, he is probably lucky because of his stature that he came straight back in, but it appears the wrong decision. He should have found form, there will always be players getting injured and out of form, so they should use the time in the twos to find form. Knights unfortunately travelling as an emergency will miss two weeks I would be inclined for him to play on the twos next week to ensure he has had a game
- Jun 21, 2014
- 8,593
- 9,374
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Jeez, the team has been set for some time, yet the Holy Trinity of posters are still banging on incessantly about Mackay! Take some valium and give it a rest, boys. If the hyperactivity won't go away, then turn your intellects to analyzing what methods we should use to beat North in the wet today.
We don't know his contract though, we don't know if they offered him two years at $400k and his manager negotiated 4 years at $350k to get him security. Mackay himself may have thought he was in doubt of being long term. So many unknowns apart from some player who you met who was pissed at the club and venting his anger to some bozzo called Elite whilst at the pub, can you see the irony
Even if he was venting, you don't know if the figure he was venting was incorrect, maybe that's one of the reasons he was angry, he knew the figure.
You're the one coming up with hypotheticals which see Mackay undervaluing himself, thinking he's under the gun besides being a regular player and accepting a contact that is unders when he knew he had no competitors for his place in the team. You also think it's a good idea to give a long term deal to an average player. Even if it's $350k, that ain't too far below $400k.
The only true way to establish whether assistant coaches are achieving their own KPIs in the eyes of footy management is whether they are still being employed. Its harsh to just pinpoint failure on one long term assistant purely on the basis that they have been there for a long time. Noble got blamed unfairly because 3 quarters of the time he wasn't even in the role he was being blamed for. Then when that was highlighted it was because he had performed that role and it was lingering.
What Pykes era has shown compared to previous coaches is just what a different a highly organised and structured coach can make to the entire performance.
Yes we both don't know how much he was getting paid or why he was offered 4 years we are both speculating so neither of us can critisize or congratulate the club, but there seems to be s**t loads of critisizm for something we don't know
Pyke is effectively in charge of the assistants if he was not unhappy with their output he would get rid of them, you would think that anyway , because if it was me I wouldn't put up with poor performance
You wouldn't think someone who was poor at their job would be involved in what we are seeing now. I guess the bottom line is that things take time to build and we at times were too quick to judge.
Campo and Clarke were still on contract when Pyke came on board.
Same with Walsh I'm pretty sure.
Hampton again led the pressure acts again last week, so he's still contributing defensively, even if he didn't find as much of the pill last week. It almost looks like he's been given a #1 priority as being a defensive presence at the centre square while we let Sloane, the Crouches and guys running through the square like Cameron, Betts etc worry about winning the pill. I noticed a bit of a different set up from the centre square too where we occasionally had Cameron and Betts run from our forward 50 into the square, rather than from the back of it. I wonder if that was to add another defensive element to the midfield after the 1st quarter as well.
That's probably not something we've previously worried about, but could be a factor in our early success in beating our opponents on the inside.
Similar threads
- Poll
