Coach Sam Mitchell's direction for the club and 2024 news

[Strapping Young Lad]

If anyone wants to have a listen about what the data is saying in regards to whether we have actually gotten worse this year have a listen to this from the 9:15 mark.

I know a few people have already touched on it, but the data is also showing that our results this year have been slightly better despite actually putting out a younger team and dealing with some injuries.




And here.

 

[Denver Day Lewis]

For those saying that Lloyd didn’t mean much by it and that he’s been positive, only two weeks ago he said that we’re “in for a lot of pain for the rest of this season now, I think they’ll struggle to win too many other games for the rest of this year”.

Lloyd flips and flops and while he generally is quite ok with his observations most weeks he also is prone to saying some pretty dumb s**t.

It's an easy arrow to sling as an armchair critic, but Lloyd still gives off real coward vibes. Don't respect the weak prick at all, he has no conviction, and when he says something smart he gives the distinct impression it was an accident.

What he does have going for him is that he's not Wayne Carey — he only king hits men (and only when he's wearing his magic arm wand.)

 

[Denver Day Lewis]

So in conclusion, Matthew Lloyd can eat something big, fat and better not mentioned.

Billy Brownless?

 

[Hawker55]

I did detect a subtext that all he's really doing is letting them go out with the instruction "Ok, boys, loosen the shackles, play your natural game" with not much else going on.

I think it's a bit more of directing the team to take the aggressive option when possible and backing them in if they screw up. One area I've noticed this year is that we rarely get caught in the whole switching from flank to flank at the back that we did last year - where we'd often do two or three switches before a forward quick.

This year it's often one switch and then a kick to a contest on the wing or an aggressive move back into the corridor. We're backing ourselves to win the ball - granted we don't have the experience or personnel to win games regularly playing like this but the fact we've been up in every game we've played this year shows the ability is there. Now it's all about pouring games into the likes of Day/DGB etc and getting them to 50 games.

 

[The hands of stone]

To have a modicum of respect and not just trying to pot Hawthorn at any point

I also hate the comparison between Collingwood and Hawthorn

They are so much older then us

Pies have managed to convince most they are in a heavy rebuild almost by stealth .....the only thing in common is we both have first year senior coaches

 

[Brant]

No thanks to the gorilla backman, of all the ways we get scored against it's rarely if ever by a big forward. If it is by a big forward, it's sheer luck - see Ben Brown.

All we need is some good two way running through the midfield and on the wings.

It's not so much that big forwards score heavily against us - it's that we have to commit multiple defenders against them to shut them up.

This leaves us vulnerable to small/crumbing forwards but worse, it means we have to defend the ball deep in our defence when we want to be intercepting it higher up or utilising the space near the oppo goal to switch the ball. Look what happens to Frost & Scrimshaw when they're required to play on the big forward(s) - their defensive games lack & their intercept games fall apart (I'm not even going to mention the free kicks against...).

IMO, a gorilla backman isn't important in stopping a big forward kicking 6 goals etc. - he's important because he can control a big forward by himself, allowing us to play our intercept game & effectively turn defence into attack.

IMO, we're in far greater need of a Brian Lake type, than a Josh Gibson type.

 

[KermitJagger]

It's not so much that big forwards score heavily against us - it's that we have to commit multiple defenders against them to shut them up.

This leaves us vulnerable to small/crumbing forwards but worse, it means we have to defend the ball deep in our defence when we want to be intercepting it higher up or utilising the space near the oppo goal to switch the ball. Look what happens to Frost & Scrimshaw when they're required to play on the big forward(s) - their defensive games lack & their intercept games fall apart (I'm not even going to mention the free kicks against...).

IMO, a gorilla backman isn't important in stopping a big forward kicking 6 goals etc. - he's important because he can control a big forward by himself, allowing us to play our intercept game & effectively turn defence into attack.

IMO, we're in far greater need of a Brian Lake type, than a Josh Gibson type.

I know he doesn't fit the gorilla backman archetype, but you've pretty much exactly described Sicily.

He takes the main, dangerous forward in most games. He's fantastic 1:1 and is currently in the top 5 for contested defensive 1:1s attended and has only lost 20%.

A far bigger issue for us is not conceding 60 inside 50s a game. A gorilla backman would be treating the symptom.

 

[Holy Rioli]

I am still unsure where we are at. Mitchell has the playing an attacking plan. Thats great it builds comradrie and wins and culture and its very attractive and exciting. However it is not sustainable. H e will need to adjust to being more defensive. I know some here will fly off the handle at this but it is not sustainable playing the way we do to win everything. Finals are rarely scoring fests. They are generally won by great defensive structures and intensity. Its always been that way. We concede way too many goals when the opposition get a run on.

Its why i was pretty happy that we started in defence first we still need another gorilla defender besides the hole in the middle of the ground.

Looking forward to the next few years. What Cornes has said is largely accurate. We are still in a so called honeymoon period for me i am going to enjoy this period. There is really no pressure on the players or coaches but it will change over the next few years as coaches start tweaking to play us and stop us as we improve.

I love everything you bring to this forum, you really do give us a great look inside the 4 walls at our beloved club as well. But in this instance defense first mentality I believe is yesterday's game. Scoring is well up this year compared to previous years across the board, key forwards are getting their hands on the ball and getting more shots at goal again, and rules such as the stand rule and 6/6/6 means there is actual space to be exploited again and transition from turnover is the future of the game.

 

[Holy Rioli]

Its actually easier to attack than it is to defend. Attacking comes naturally to every player. Melbourne won that premiership on the back of being the best defensive team in the league. I saw them winning it pretty early last year. Their full ground press and defensive method is second to none

They were also the best attacking team. Very much like us during our era. Sydney/Freo were our level in defense during that era, and Geelong with offense and only one of those sides presented regular challenges to us.

 

[flinchfree]

I am still unsure where we are at. Mitchell has the playing an attacking plan. Thats great it builds comradrie and wins and culture and its very attractive and exciting. However it is not sustainable. H e will need to adjust to being more defensive. I know some here will fly off the handle at this but it is not sustainable playing the way we do to win everything. Finals are rarely scoring fests. They are generally won by great defensive structures and intensity. Its always been that way. We concede way too many goals when the opposition get a run on.

Its why i was pretty happy that we started in defence first we still need another gorilla defender besides the hole in the middle of the ground.

Looking forward to the next few years. What Cornes has said is largely accurate. We are still in a so called honeymoon period for me i am going to enjoy this period. There is really no pressure on the players or coaches but it will change over the next few years as coaches start tweaking to play us and stop us as we improve.

Nope.

In finals, in any sport, when teams and players are playing maximum effort every minute, the defensive efforts of BOTH teams is very high and attempts to stifle easy scoring. The teams that can overcome the defensive pressure because they are BETTER offensively and still find ways to score churn out results.
Sure, a defensive juggernought can have periods of success all the way through to Grand Finals by throttling the beauty of our game.

But I hope you remember these guys.....1975 - 1978 Hawthorn teams? 1983-1991 Hawthorn teams? 2007 - 2015 Hawthorn teams?
Sure, we had great defenders. But the scoreboard pressure of kicking goals was everything to those teams.
They didn't try and win by holding teams under 80 points. They sought to slaughter the other sides and rely on defenders being a part of that, not the lynchpin.

I think you just have a preference for defense.
That's fine.
But I think you've forgotten how we got to be the Hawthorn that its supporters admire and opponents fear.
It looks something like this...

















Fancy, the one thing that the opposition teams from Collingwood to Footscray to Carlton to West Coast have feared most and helped create our success story, is the one thing you don't think is sustainable.

What about Hawthorn Football Club and its history shouts unsustainable to you?

 

[TheFourPillars]

Nope.

In finals, in any sport, when teams and players are playing maximum effort every minute, the defensive efforts of BOTH teams is very high and attempts to stifle easy scoring. The teams that can overcome the defensive pressure because they are BETTER offensively and still find ways to score churn out results.
Sure, a defensive juggernought can have periods of success all the way through to Grand Finals by throttling the beauty of our game.

But I hope you remember these guys.....1975 - 1978 Hawthorn teams? 1983-1991 Hawthorn teams? 2007 - 2015 Hawthorn teams?
Sure, we had great defenders. But the scoreboard pressure of kicking goals was everything to those teams.
They didn't try and win by holding teams under 80 points. They sought to slaughter the other sides and rely on defenders being a part of that, not the lynchpin.

I think you just have a preference for defense.
That's fine.
But I think you've forgotten how we got to be the Hawthorn that its supporters admire and opponents fear.
It looks something like this...

View attachment 1408284


View attachment 1408285

View attachment 1408286

View attachment 1408287

View attachment 1408288

View attachment 1408289

View attachment 1408290


Fancy, the one thing that the opposition teams from Collingwood to Footscray to Carlton to West Coast have feared most and helped create our success story, is the one thing you don't think is sustainable.

What about Hawthorn Football Club and its history shouts unsustainable to you?

All of our great teams had a great work ethic and defensive guns. Moore, Bremner, Knights, Langford, Mew, Ayres, Collins to name a few hard, tough and uncompromising. The game has changed over the years to become a lot more defensive I mean we play in one half of the ground now. Its not just man on man defence its team defences and structures. Scoring is important and will be going forward but Sammy's already identified it as something we are working on. Is our ability to stop a run on to switch on defensively when things are not going your way. It will happen you need to be able to defend those periods minimise the damage till the tide turns in your favour. Something we have lacked even under clarkson over the last few years. I have mentioned this before. I have been quite simply amazed at Sam's coaching for someone in the infancy of their tenure to have such an amazing feel for the game on game day and through the week at training. He knew exactly what we needed. Hence the commando style training to battle harden us during pre season and our transition football sucked balls and he has really improved that. Its a work in progress.

 

[TheFourPillars]

I love everything you bring to this forum, you really do give us a great look inside the 4 walls at our beloved club as well. But in this instance defense first mentality I believe is yesterday's game. Scoring is well up this year compared to previous years across the board, key forwards are getting their hands on the ball and getting more shots at goal again, and rules such as the stand rule and 6/6/6 means there is actual space to be exploited again and transition from turnover is the future of the game.

Mate i have never mentioned defense first. Read my other posts

 

[TheFourPillars]

They were also the best attacking team. Very much like us during our era. Sydney/Freo were our level in defense during that era, and Geelong with offense and only one of those sides presented regular challenges to us.

Actually in season Brisbane were but post season / end of season they took over. They were so far ahead of everyone defensively.

 

[Hawker55]

I know he doesn't fit the gorilla Blackman archetype, but you've pretty much exactly described Sicily.

He takes the main, dangerous forward in most games. He's fantastic 1:1 and is currently in the top 5 for contested defensive 1:1s attended and has only lost 20%.

A far bigger issue for us is not conceding 60 inside 50s a game. A gorilla backman would be treating the symptom.

There's two ways to handle a big forward - one is to put a gorilla on him who competes physically one on one. The other is the way Sic does it, with very clever bodywork. He's a master at the subtle push off and getting the opponent off balance so he can spoil/mark. So many of his marks are because he's completely outmaneuvred his opponent.

 

[flinchfree]

All of our great teams had a great work ethic and defensive guns. Moore, Bremner, Knights, Langford, Mew, Ayres, Collins to name a few hard, tough and uncompromising. The game has changed over the years to become a lot more defensive I mean we play in one half of the ground now. Its not just man on man defence its team defences and structures. Scoring is important and will be going forward but Sammy's already identified it as something we are working on. Is our ability to stop a run on to switch on defensively when things are not going your way. It will happen you need to be able to defend those periods minimise the damage till the tide turns in your favour. Something we have lacked even under clarkson over the last few years. I have mentioned this before. I have been quite simply amazed at Sam's coaching for someone in the infancy of their tenure to have such an amazing feel for the game on game day and through the week at training. He knew exactly what we needed. Hence the commando style training to battle harden us during pre season and our transition football sucked balls and he has really improved that. Its a work in progress.

I am 1 billion percent with you that being able to defend at a very high level when it's most important is a great characteristic of a champion football team.
But I disagree that footy has changed in what works. I think it changed because coaches at-large watched what seemed to be a successful method by a few and copied it, including the vapors inducing ugliness that was early Swans football success under Roos.

That just showed the limited confidence and imagination of those sheep coaches. Inventing playing styles to defeat hard defense was too much and not their forte, so they copied and pasted instead.
And that has stuck for way too long, to the detriment of clubs wanting to change their historic fortunes.
The doggies finally did, with run and throw football that could prove devastating for long enough bursts to created big enough buffers.
I'd argue that Richmond achieved it's success through pressure, not defense. I used to always tell my son as he was chasing the dream of elite soccer to run early so he didn't have to run far more late. Shadow when the oppo has the ball within a distance you know you can close, and do so with zeal and commitment so that you don't have to turn and run 3 times as far for 3 times as long while you defend a player attacking with the ball.
Yes they developed and drafted some special defending interceptors who could rebound, but they were able to do so because the ball coming in was haphazard and rushed through pressure upfield.
That's not defense really, it's understanding that you want to win the ball or create turnover possibility moments as quickly as you can through understanding where the points on the field you can commit extra numbers, and/or be willing to risk being left exposed because your expectation is to ruin the oppositions comfort with the ball.

Man City aren't a GREAT defensive team, but they make the opposition turn over the ball through pressure in areas of the field that give their teammates the best opportunity to read the play and get an advantage at the next point in the chain. They do it as quickly as they can, to retrieve and use the ball in a fashion to create scoring opportunities, because that's what the players actually love. Scoring. Unlocking. Their possession rates of a game are insane, but very very few of their players were recruited as Elite defenders. Or can do so in a way that just stops other attacking teams who ARE able to keep possession of the ball. But the want to, to get that ball back through pressure, is 100% committed to and non negotiable if they want to play.
Same with Liverpool. Same with Barca.

You named some all time great defenders for the Hawks, and we undoubtedly had them.
But in those Champion teams there were plenty of just aight goers whose efforts were elevated by the elite players around them.
Peter Welsh looked better because of those around him, as did Scotty Maguiness and David Polkinghorne among others.

Lastly, I just can't help but disagree with your perception that attacking footy is easier to play/coach/teach than defensive footy, because it's somehow innate to a football player to look to go forward. At junior footy sure, where the best kids are multiples of times more talented than the kids they go against, but as you get to AFL level you are surrounded by guys nearly as quick or quicker, just as good with the footy or better, and coached into playing systems that take away the easier instinctual play making.
In fact, of all the players who make it to AFL, not many really master being smart, efficent, lethal attacking players.
The spaces and time to dispose of the ball, the accuracy you need to execute in tiny windows so that a spoil can't be effected, the ability to read the flow of players ahead of you and in split seconds pick the best option of all you can see unfolding and ever changing......it's BLOODY hard.
But if you train it, and allow players to prioritize it, and find where your unique advantage lies per the lineup and makeup of your teammates, you can create better and quicker decision makers who make more of every possibility that they would otherwise find inneffectual.

Defense is nearly all want to.
Do you want to work as hard as you need to - to be in a position to spoil, to pressure, to commit and sacrifice your body to ruin the oppositions opportunities.
Hawthorn version of Darren Jarman was made to, Adelaide version not so much.
Not a talent thing, not a systems thing.
A want to thing. And then a willingness to accept or not that player's desire to play within his comfort zone.

Yes we'll get better at defense, zero chance Mitch would want an all grease no stop and stick team of front running campaigners.
I don't see alot of that kind of character from the players on our team, and guys like Titch I reckon will be moved on for exactly that reason for the best return we can get at the time that makes most sense.

Enjoy the attacking footy 4P, it's just a whetting of the appetite for what's to come.

 

[TheFourPillars]

I am 1 billion percent with you that being able to defend at a very high level when it's most important is a great characteristic of a champion football team.
But I disagree that footy has changed in what works. I think it changed because coaches at-large watched what seemed to be a successful method by a few and copied it, including the vapors inducing ugliness that was early Swans football success under Roos.

That just showed the limited confidence and imagination of those sheep coaches. Inventing playing styles to defeat hard defense was too much and not their forte, so they copied and pasted instead.
And that has stuck for way too long, to the detriment of clubs wanting to change their historic fortunes.
The doggies finally did, with run and throw football that could prove devastating for long enough bursts to created big enough buffers.
I'd argue that Richmond achieved it's success through pressure, not defense. I used to always tell my son as he was chasing the dream of elite soccer to run early so he didn't have to run far more late. Shadow when the oppo has the ball within a distance you know you can close, and do so with zeal and commitment so that you don't have to turn and run 3 times as far for 3 times as long while you defend a player attacking with the ball.
Yes they developed and drafted some special defending interceptors who could rebound, but they were able to do so because the ball coming in was haphazard and rushed through pressure upfield.
That's not defense really, it's understanding that you want to win the ball or create turnover possibility moments as quickly as you can through understanding where the points on the field you can commit extra numbers, and/or be willing to risk being left exposed because your expectation is to ruin the oppositions comfort with the ball.

Man City aren't a GREAT defensive team, but they make the opposition turn over the ball through pressure in areas of the field that give their teammates the best opportunity to read the play and get an advantage at the next point in the chain. They do it as quickly as they can, to retrieve and use the ball in a fashion to create scoring opportunities, because that's what the players actually love. Scoring. Unlocking. Their possession rates of a game are insane, but very very few of their players were recruited as Elite defenders. Or can do so in a way that just stops other attacking teams who ARE able to keep possession of the ball. But the want to, to get that ball back through pressure, is 100% committed to and non negotiable if they want to play.
Same with Liverpool. Same with Barca.

You named some all time great defenders for the Hawks, and we undoubtedly had them.
But in those Champion teams there were plenty of just aight goers whose efforts were elevated by the elite players around them.
Peter Welsh looked better because of those around him, as did Scotty Maguiness and David Polkinghorne among others.

Lastly, I just can't help but disagree with your perception that attacking footy is easier to play/coach/teach than defensive footy, because it's somehow innate to a football player to look to go forward. At junior footy sure, where the best kids are multiples of times more talented than the kids they go against, but as you get to AFL level you are surrounded by guys nearly as quick or quicker, just as good with the footy or better, and coached into playing systems that take away the easier instinctual play making.
In fact, of all the players who make it to AFL, not many really master being smart, efficent, lethal attacking players.
The spaces and time to dispose of the ball, the accuracy you need to execute in tiny windows so that a spoil can't be effected, the ability to read the flow of players ahead of you and in split seconds pick the best option of all you can see unfolding and ever changing......it's BLOODY hard.
But if you train it, and allow players to prioritize it, and find where your unique advantage lies per the lineup and makeup of your teammates, you can create better and quicker decision makers who make more of every possibility that they would otherwise find inneffectual.

Defense is nearly all want to.
Do you want to work as hard as you need to - to be in a position to spoil, to pressure, to commit and sacrifice your body to ruin the oppositions opportunities.
Hawthorn version of Darren Jarman was made to, Adelaide version not so much.
Not a talent thing, not a systems thing.
A want to thing. And then a willingness to accept or not that player's desire to play within his comfort zone.

Yes we'll get better at defense, zero chance Mitch would want an all grease no stop and stick team of front running campaigners.
I don't see alot of that kind of character from the players on our team, and guys like Titch I reckon will be moved on for exactly that reason for the best return we can get at the time that makes most sense.

Enjoy the attacking footy 4P, it's just a whetting of the appetite for what's to come.

I like having discussions with you . You know a lot about our history and the game. A lot of what you have mentioned is true however comparing man city and liverpool and the way they go about winning games is different to our game. For one our game can be a game of attrition where neither team can get the advantage as such and because of the physical nature of the game. Those who are harder for longer and defend better end up winning. Every great team is made up of soldiers like Finn's old man no argument there but they play their role as part of the team.

To say that the game as it is today is a result of sheep coaches is a bit over the top. It is a natural evolution of the game. If we are talking about soccer a perfect metaphor would be the structured formations (4-3-3 etc) the europeans came up with to counteract the south american individual brilliance. The south americans had to adapt or die. That system hasn't died it has just evolved. Similarly you are not going to see the game change that much over the next decade to go back to one on one unless of course the rules change. So in that sense defence has changed since I was playing football.

Learning to defend in structures is a lot harder than you might think. Its a lot harder than learning to attack with it. Players that can not think their way through end up on the scrap heap. Especially defenders. Its a change in mentality there are no real opponents defensively but the closest player to you. This might change when your team mate crosses paths and you have to go pick up his opponent. I have seen this not just in game through our glory years but through the players learning this stuff at hawthorn training. The stoppage drills that they do with set structures at training focus on where you should be in order to defend the ball carrier and receiver. I have seen Sam pull up the team many times during training calling players out for not being in the right position in order to defend the stoppage. I could ramble on here and give you plenty of other examples of which way the player should be facing so he can see both players etc etc but let me assure you that defending in the modern game is a lot harder.

Sam has focused on our most important weakness and the most important asset in the game. Transition football. This had to be fixed first because it is the foundation of modern football. However defending is a process and involves plenty of practice. The better we get at defending the better prepared we are and the more we will be able to turn defence into attack turn the ball over as you say. Sam Mitchell had a famous quote about Luke Hodge in that he was the best player he had ever seen without the ball. Luke was always thinking about where he should be where his team mates should be where the ball was going and how he could turn things around. How to get it and how to defend it if the opposition gets it. Its what made him one of the best players in the game in my opinion because he influenced his team mates and the team played better because of him.

What Sam has done has been refreshing and entertaining but i still maintain the real test is to come. Other teams will be looking at what we are doing and trying to break us down the more we play that style the more insight is gained. Evolution is inevitable in this game if you stand still everyone goes past you. We will need to evolve and tweak things and definitely improve our defending.

Edit i just remembered a perfect example of how we could defend better from the game and if we are in tune defensively in the future we will.

The play was Jaegar chasing Neal across the field 150 meters in the first or second qtr i can't remember exactly to ensure he doesn't get kick just outside 50. It fatigued JOM as he had to run so far just to defend. It was after Brisbane turned the ball over in defence. Neal was JOM's opponent at the time but what would have been better in that situation is we rolled the defence and the closest player to Neal picked him up and JOM picked up some one closer that way Neal is now covered and if the ball is turned over JOM who was now covering an attacking player automatically becomes an attacking force himself and he is ready to roll not fatigued and becomes a target for our next attack.

 

[Mercy Seat]

But I disagree that footy has changed in what works. I think it changed because coaches at-large watched what seemed to be a successful method by a few and copied it, including the vapors inducing ugliness that was early Swans football success under Roos.

That just showed the limited confidence and imagination of those sheep coaches. Inventing playing styles to defeat hard defense was too much and not their forte, so they copied and pasted instead.
And that has stuck for way too long, to the detriment of clubs wanting to change their historic fortunes.
The doggies finally did, with run and throw football that could prove devastating for long enough bursts to created big enough buffers.
I'd argue that Richmond achieved it's success through pressure, not defense. I used to always tell my son as he was chasing the dream of elite soccer to run early so he didn't have to run far more late. Shadow when the oppo has the ball within a distance you know you can close, and do so with zeal and commitment so that you don't have to turn and run 3 times as far for 3 times as long while you defend a player attacking with the ball.
Yes they developed and drafted some special defending interceptors who could rebound, but they were able to do so because the ball coming in was haphazard and rushed through pressure upfield.
That's not defense really, it's understanding that you want to win the ball or create turnover possibility moments as quickly as you can through understanding where the points on the field you can commit extra numbers, and/or be willing to risk being left exposed because your expectation is to ruin the oppositions comfort with the ball.

Man City aren't a GREAT defensive team, but they make the opposition turn over the ball through pressure in areas of the field that give their teammates the best opportunity to read the play and get an advantage at the next point in the chain. They do it as quickly as they can, to retrieve and use the ball in a fashion to create scoring opportunities, because that's what the players actually love. Scoring. Unlocking. Their possession rates of a game are insane, but very very few of their players were recruited as Elite defenders. Or can do so in a way that just stops other attacking teams who ARE able to keep possession of the ball. But the want to, to get that ball back through pressure, is 100% committed to and non negotiable if they want to play.
Same with Liverpool. Same with Barca.

You named some all time great defenders for the Hawks, and we undoubtedly had them.
But in those Champion teams there were plenty of just aight goers whose efforts were elevated by the elite players around them.
Peter Welsh looked better because of those around him, as did Scotty Maguiness and David Polkinghorne among others.

Lastly, I just can't help but disagree with your perception that attacking footy is easier to play/coach/teach than defensive footy, because it's somehow innate to a football player to look to go forward. At junior footy sure, where the best kids are multiples of times more talented than the kids they go against, but as you get to AFL level you are surrounded by guys nearly as quick or quicker, just as good with the footy or better, and coached into playing systems that take away the easier instinctual play making.
In fact, of all the players who make it to AFL, not many really master being smart, efficent, lethal attacking players.
The spaces and time to dispose of the ball, the accuracy you need to execute in tiny windows so that a spoil can't be effected, the ability to read the flow of players ahead of you and in split seconds pick the best option of all you can see unfolding and ever changing......it's BLOODY hard.
But if you train it, and allow players to prioritize it, and find where your unique advantage lies per the lineup and makeup of your teammates, you can create better and quicker decision makers who make more of every possibility that they would otherwise find inneffectual.

Defense is nearly all want to.
Do you want to work as hard as you need to - to be in a position to spoil, to pressure, to commit and sacrifice your body to ruin the oppositions opportunities.
Hawthorn version of Darren Jarman was made to, Adelaide version not so much.
Not a talent thing, not a systems thing.
A want to thing. And then a willingness to accept or not that player's desire to play within his comfort zone.

Yes we'll get better at defense, zero chance Mitch would want an all grease no stop and stick team of front running campaigners.
I don't see alot of that kind of character from the players on our team, and guys like Titch I reckon will be moved on for exactly that reason for the best return we can get at the time that makes most sense.

Enjoy the attacking footy 4P, it's just a whetting of the appetite for what's to come.

Not to dive into too much of your post because 4P has done a great job of that above, however, just on the football (soccer) analogies. Klopp came into Liverpool and had them playing some of the most exciting attacking football in years, much like in the manner you describe above with City, however would get crucified on the counter attacks and set pieces. It wasn’t until Liverpool signed the worlds best goal keeper and centre back pairing that they went to one of the worlds best teams, and eventually won the champions league a season later followed by the league. Yes you couldn’t describe them as a defensive team, however, it was the key component that once fixed, took them from an amazing yet inconsistent team to watch to the worlds best.

 

[Simon_Nesbit]

Not to dive into too much of your post because 4P has done a great job of that above, however, just on the football (soccer) analogies. Klopp came into Liverpool and had them playing some of the most exciting attacking football in years, much like in the manner you describe above with City, however would get crucified on the counter attacks and set pieces. It wasn’t until Liverpool signed the worlds best goal keeper and centre back pairing that they went to one of the worlds best teams, and eventually won the champions league a season later followed by the league. Yes you couldn’t describe them as a defensive team, however, it was the key component that once fixed, took them from an amazing yet inconsistent team to watch to the worlds best.

There's some other team that comes to mind too - something about adding a Key Defender to fill an obvious hole and going on to great success.

 

[Dipper]

I know he doesn't fit the gorilla Blackman archetype, but you've pretty much exactly described Sicily.

He takes the main, dangerous forward in most games. He's fantastic 1:1 and is currently in the top 5 for contested defensive 1:1s attended and has only lost 20%.

A far bigger issue for us is not conceding 60 inside 50s a game. A gorilla backman would be treating the symptom.

I agree that the conceding of inside 50s will be the thing that makes the biggest difference but I'm with Brant I still think a high quality genuinely big KPD is desirable.

I saw those defensive stats on was it On the Couch? And May was number 1, losing only 5% of 1:1s and I thought boy oh boy wowee that's very bloody impressive.

Sent from my SM-A326B using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[KermitJagger]

I agree that the conceding of inside 50s will be the thing that makes the biggest difference but I'm with Brant I still think a high quality genuinely big KPD is desirable.

I saw those defensive stats on was it On the Couch? And May was number 1, losing only 5% of 1:1s and I thought boy oh boy wowee that's very bloody impressive.

Sent from my SM-A326B using BigFooty.com mobile app

He's also an extreme outlier, given that he's a great key defender in the best team in the league. Every other defender in his vicinity in terms of 1:1 defenders is at roughly 20%. Football is easy when you're good and in a good team.

 

[Dipper]

He's also an extreme outlier, given that he's a great key defender in the best team in the league. Every other defender in his vicinity in terms of 1:1 defenders is at roughly 20%. Football is easy when you're good and in a good team.

I get that he's the outlier although I'm not sure being in the best team boosts his 1:1 duel percentage.

Point is that an exceptional genuine big is always desirable. Sicily is great but no doubt, but its better if he's on a 3rd tall type or even a lumbering ruckman that he can exploit the other way. Cue Mexican little girl can't we have both GIF.

Sent from my SM-A326B using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[KermitJagger]

I get that he's the outlier although I'm not sure being in the best team boosts his 1:1 duel percentage.

Point is that an exceptional genuine big is always desirable. Sicily is great but no doubt, but its better if he's on a 3rd tall type or even a lumbering ruckman that he can exploit the other way. Cue Mexican little girl can't we have both GIF.

Sent from my SM-A326B using BigFooty.com mobile app

It does, less entries in total and less quality entries. The ball going to more easily defended positions and not to the advantage of the forward.



These are May's last 4 years, Melbourne are playing their best defensive footy this year and his stats are helped by that. This year is an extreme outlier.

 

[chopflop]

Not to dive into too much of your post because 4P has done a great job of that above, however, just on the football (soccer) analogies. Klopp came into Liverpool and had them playing some of the most exciting attacking football in years, much like in the manner you describe above with City, however would get crucified on the counter attacks and set pieces. It wasn’t until Liverpool signed the worlds best goal keeper and centre back pairing that they went to one of the worlds best teams, and eventually won the champions league a season later followed by the league. Yes you couldn’t describe them as a defensive team, however, it was the key component that once fixed, took them from an amazing yet inconsistent team to watch to the worlds best.

Their offside trap is pretty important too

 

[Roger Rogerson]

Point is that an exceptional genuine big is always desirable. Sicily is great but no doubt, but its better if he's on a 3rd tall type or even a lumbering ruckman that he can exploit the other way. Cue Mexican little girl can't we have both GIF.

Sent from my SM-A326B using BigFooty.com mobile app

If we can find a gorilla defender to replace Frost we are in business.

 

[Dipper]

It does, less entries in total and less quality entries. The ball going to more easily defended positions and not to the advantage of the forward.

View attachment 1408770

These are May's last 4 years, Melbourne are playing their best defensive footy this year and his stats are helped by that. This year is an extreme outlier.

Yes I can see how fewer entries makes his 1:1 percentage better...that's of course how percentages work.

Sent from my SM-A326B using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Guardian Hawk]

I know he doesn't fit the gorilla Blackman archetype, but you've pretty much exactly described Sicily.

He takes the main, dangerous forward in most games. He's fantastic 1:1 and is currently in the top 5 for contested defensive 1:1s attended and has only lost 20%.

A far bigger issue for us is not conceding 60 inside 50s a game. A gorilla backman would be treating the symptom.

Good post mate. I've just bolded a word that probably could use a quick edit. I was reading the last page in isolation and did a double take when I saw it. When I saw it was from you, I trusted it must just be a typo and so read the context and post you were replying to (which confirmed it).

Either way, I reckon a good idea to change it to "backman".