Prediction Round nine, team changes for the saints

Status
Not open for further replies.

(Log in to remove this ad.)

BringouttheGimp

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Apr 18, 2015
Posts
11,959
Likes
10,964
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
PAOK of SALONIKA LIVERPOOL
If we f lose this man.. I f swear.. I will give away 2 gf tickets to lawn27 valued at 3 gorillas each.

I have f had it man.. that's it for me.
 

3rdMan

Team Captain
Joined
Sep 27, 2008
Posts
314
Likes
321
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Collingwood
I've gone from having been lost to dying.
I'm not really sure how Greenwood's stats are relevant to a comparison between Langdon and Aish.
Langon's gets a lot of intercepts, our intercptor then feeds the ball backwards and sideways, which is how most of our transition begins. Aish doesn't offer drive from defence, he gets up higher because he's covering his man and isn't usually part of the defensive core who try to 'keep shape' as Bucks would say. Aish doesn't have the pace to play the role that Langdon plays. Despite being very good in the air, he doesn't have the aerial ability to play the role Langdon plays and your claim that Langdon usually gets weaker opponents is blatantly untrue. You seem to be going only on the Carlton game where Langdon had a shocker. And if that was the only game he had played for the year, you'd have a point about him looking worthy of the axe, but other than that one, he's been excellent.
It wasn't about Aish in particular but another runner, of which Greenwood is an example. And they wouldn't be playing the same role as Langdon, that's the point. And Langdon does often get lesser opponents. We have Moore and Roughead taking the two best talls, usually Howe taking the best medium and Maynard the best small. Langdon and Crisp get the leftovers. This is because he is used more as a help defender. My view is we'd be a better team if that player could also offer something coming out of defence, Moore, Crisp, Howe, Maynard all do, Langdon and Roughead are the two that don't.

Also, just a reminder where this conversation started: I was pointing out a scenario in which Langdon "could" be omitted, not that I expect him to any time soon. In my view our back seven lacks a small, but it is still defending well (transition is another question), so altering the mix is unlikely to happen unless there are injuries. The one position that is still open is the second small defender. So far this year it has been Aish/Greenwood, I'd think Quaynor is a big chance to go past those two.
 

swoop42

Premiership Player
Joined
Sep 29, 2014
Posts
3,282
Likes
5,855
AFL Club
Collingwood
We were vulnerable last week without Adams and Beams.

If de Goey joins Elliott and Cox on the sidelines then this is a real danger game for us albeit no excuse given St Kilda will be without a handful of best 22 players also.

St Kilda seem to have rediscovered their brand of football that they displayed in recent seasons prior to 2018 and will expose us if our intensity levels wane for extended periods like last week.
 

sr36

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 20, 2009
Posts
11,136
Likes
14,362
Location
Vietnam
AFL Club
Collingwood
It wasn't about Aish in particular but another runner, of which Greenwood is an example. And they wouldn't be playing the same role as Langdon, that's the point. And Langdon does often get lesser opponents. We have Moore and Roughead taking the two best talls, usually Howe taking the best medium and Maynard the best small. Langdon and Crisp get the leftovers. This is because he is used more as a help defender. My view is we'd be a better team if that player could also offer something coming out of defence, Moore, Crisp, Howe, Maynard all do, Langdon and Roughead are the two that don't.

Also, just a reminder where this conversation started: I was pointing out a scenario in which Langdon "could" be omitted, not that I expect him to any time soon. In my view our back seven lacks a small, but it is still defending well (transition is another question), so altering the mix is unlikely to happen unless there are injuries. The one position that is still open is the second small defender. So far this year it has been Aish/Greenwood, I'd think Quaynor is a big chance to go past those two.
I think we view our defence differently. The way I see it, we have the core who are expected to keep their shape and provide a stable defensive structure, of which Langdon is a part. He's really good at zoning and his pace helps him to cover a lot of territory make intercepts and timely spoils. As someone who is expected to keep shape, he's not someone who would be encouraged to go on a heap of searching runs. It's the mids and high half backs who are expected to run and transition the footy. Replacing his role with a dasher, would stuff up our defensive structure. You could replace him with somebody like Appleby if you wanted to shift the defensive balance from the air to the ground (I do think we are a bit too tilted in terms of defending the air and the ground), but I wouldn't come close to doing that, unless Appleby has improved by a mile.
 

3rdMan

Team Captain
Joined
Sep 27, 2008
Posts
314
Likes
321
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Collingwood
Yes, I think we pretty much agree. I was looking at a change that could be made, not one I necessarily support. I don't think we currently have, other than potentially Quaynor, a running defender that it would be worth altering our structure for. At this stage, if he can prove himself, I think Quaynor can take the place of Aish/Greenwood, I don't think we then have another runner who is going to push Langdon out.

If we do keep, and we will, the current structure of our back seven (two smalls, two talls, three mediums), one of those smalls or mediums needs to be an attacking runner. I think Quaynor is the only one capable of that role. We currently have Maynard, Moore and Crisp who can sometimes provide some attack, but to this point not consistently enough.
 

sr36

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 20, 2009
Posts
11,136
Likes
14,362
Location
Vietnam
AFL Club
Collingwood
If we do keep, and we will, the current structure of our back seven (two smalls, two talls, three mediums), one of those smalls or mediums needs to be an attacking runner. I think Quaynor is the only one capable of that role. We currently have Maynard, Moore and Crisp who can sometimes provide some attack, but to this point not consistently enough.
I think I do still view it differently. I view us as having a 4 - 6 man intercepting web depending on opposition, who play man on man but try to sag off their man into a zone. They keep their basic shape and thus rarely try to get involved in overlapping run. Despite how good they are in the air, Moore and Howe don't often present as marking targets to aid transition, because we are so keen on keeping our shape behind the ball. Moore and Maynard play in this web and do occassionally provide some run, but it's initial run breaking from a contest or an intercept, they don't often get involved in the continued transition as then the shape behind the ball will be lost. This a secondary not core aspect that they bring to the defender's role. The core role is to be a part of an intercepting web - they all have to be good in the air. Quaynor sounds like he may be able to add to this in the future as a player who can break from the intercept, whilst also offering the core duties to a good standard.

The high half backs - especially Crisp, whilst having a defence aspect are part of the transition and overlapping run. To me they are more like defensively positioned wingman than a real core part of our defensive structure, just as high half forwards are like attacking wingmen more than genuine forwards.

Anyway, we'll change the personnel due to injuries and form, but I can't see us shifting away from this structure in order to add more run from defence, and I hope we don't, because it's working so well. If someone comes along who is good enough to do Langdon's core duties to a similar standard and also break from the intercept, then it's a conversation, but that will take an extremely good player.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Somebody

Premiership Player
Joined
Apr 12, 2007
Posts
3,194
Likes
781
Location
Somewhere
AFL Club
Collingwood
If I was coach (and starting to regret turning down their offer, 1 mill a year just was a bit low) I'd try swapping Reid and Moore. I've always thought Reid is a much better defender than forward and Darcy a better forward than REidy.

I don't think Reid woudl be better in defense than Moore at this stage but might be as good or close, and the overall effect could be a big improvement overall if Moore started dominating forward.
 

iGNITER

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Posts
6,925
Likes
4,838
Location
Vegas
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Collingwood VFL, Melbourne Storm
Elliott for Varcoe makes perfect sense.
Wills for Beams makes sense too - last in first out in the same position. Thought he may have gotten another week, but when looking at the team it’s good balance.

Even with our outs it’s a pretty strong team.

How we line up:

B - Langdon Roughead Howe
HB - Maynard Moore Crisp
C - Sidebottom Pendlebury Phillips
HF - Varcoe Mihochek WHE
F - DeGoey Reid Stephenson
R - Grundy Beams Treloar
INT - Thomas Greenwood Brown Mayne

If DeGoey is a late out I would bring in Wells.
Put Varcoe/WHE/Thomas in the pocket and push Wells onto HFF.

Would also like to see Brown and Thomas given more time on the ball.
When that occurs I would play Sidebottom deep forward.

Greenwood to potentially play a defensive role on Gresham or Billings.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom