So cometh the day when...

[Ned_Flanders]

I think it would be very fair to say NO AFL takes notice of the combine tests and is not the point I was trying to allude to .
The identification of a player before they reach an AFL club in Footy smarts and will to win is far more important than fitness or conditioning once they reach an AFL club .
The Use of ex players for conditioning , assistants assistants and so forth as stated by the OP is jobs for the boys , make no mistake about it !

Depends upon who though. Some players I agree, its a mentality of "they were a good footballer and will be able to teach kids to train like they do". That worked in the 90's, but not now.

Today a lot of players are actually getting proper training on fitness and conditioning to set themselves up for their post footy life. The most notable example for RFC is Duncan, who became a physio and has used his skills in this area to some success at the Cats.

I also like the AFL program they have now where players can start coaching at lower levels to get experience while still a listed player. This is what Leigh Brown did, and apparently it has served him very well.

 

["The Roar Is Back"]

Depends upon who though. Some players I agree, its a mentality of "they were a good footballer and will be able to teach kids to train like they do". That worked in the 90's, but not now.

Today a lot of players are actually getting proper training on fitness and conditioning to set themselves up for their post footy life. The most notable example for RFC is Duncan, who became a physio and has used his skills in this area to some success at the Cats.

I also like the AFL program they have now where players can start coaching at lower levels to get experience while still a listed player. This is what Leigh Brown did, and apparently it has served him very well.

No ones begrudging players for getting education or training to assist them post their football career , it's the every growing list of hanger onners , which appears to be selected from past AFL players .
There are truck loads of examples , like a number of ex players first coaching stints being within the various state junior squads or the fact Peter Knights remains the coach of the VCFL side , it's not based on the fact theyare the best available it's simply due to their name . One of the means for entry into the AFL degree in coaching is now whether someone has or hasn't played AFL or state Footy , whilst the degree if not already ( can't remeber of top off head ) will soon be , a pre-requisite to coach at State or AFL level .
Bring back the days where's bloke went and learn his craft in the bush or metro leagues and got pulled into the system based on their performances within that role not on their playing ability , the 2 have little significance on each other . Whilst clubs should be spending more cash on recruiting , the amount of Mick Barlows or Mumfords , who have been overlooked ,generally from not having the right pedigree , is amazing !

 

[Roachy8]

This will pretty much be split down demographic lines...

Those posters with a groovy grey "V" under their name will say there is too much bullshit in footy today... too much science... too much structure... to many strategies... too many assisstants... too many coaches... too much psychological analysis... too many zones... too many interchanges... too many shaved legs... too few mullets... too many teeth... not enough mutton chops (Alan Martello)... not enough mud... not enough steel cans & ice fights in the outer... not enough piss after a game and finally... too much bullshit!

Younger posters will appreciate the need for greater science and theory and software and 3D imagery of players muscles and pre game and post game preview and review and elite performance management and so on....

Those of us who have the groovy "v"'s loved the game in those 'prehistoric' days when KB wore a lace-up and a solid shirtfront was celebrated rather than roundly berated and games were won more with guts and effort and blood on the day rather than through some clinician's expertise and a hyperbaric chamber in Arizona....

We often lament that footy has changed and is not as great as it once was.... perhaps these are some of the reasons?

Generally agree with a lot of the OP.... too much bullshit and it does in no way ensure success.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

No ones begrudging players for getting education or training to assist them post their football career , it's the every growing list of hanger onners , which appears to be selected from past AFL players .
There are truck loads of examples , like a number of ex players first coaching stints being within the various state junior squads or the fact Peter Knights remains the coach of the VCFL side , it's not based on the fact theyare the best available it's simply due to their name . One of the means for entry into the AFL degree in coaching is now whether someone has or hasn't played AFL or state Footy , whilst the degree if not already ( can't remeber of top off head ) will soon be , a pre-requisite to coach at State or AFL level .
Bring back the days where's bloke went and learn his craft in the bush or metro leagues and got pulled into the system based on their performances within that role not on their playing ability , the 2 have little significance on each other . Whilst clubs should be spending more cash on recruiting , the amount of Mick Barlows or Mumfords , who have been overlooked ,generally from not having the right pedigree , is amazing !

now you are talking recruitment, and thats a very different beast.

that is all about getting the right eyeballs in enough places. reason we sucked for so long is we didn't have enough, and were only looking at the obvious places like the TAC. Pies, Cats, WCE, and the like have the buggers everywhere, which is part of the reason they have been great at getting their speculative pics right.

 

[Trav 20]

The old "we didn't want them anyway thread", which panders to shallow thinkers.

I do enjoy 'defensive' threads where 'group think' is rife. It helps soften the blow when one sees other more prosperous clubs spending big and reaping benefits from their financial position. It doesn't mean those clubs aren't prudent, or that they throw money away, but still the exorbitance hits a raw nerve to supporters of less endowed clubs.

This from an article earlier in the year: "Richmond recently acknowledged this recent trend, with their research stating no club that has been in the bottom four of AFL clubs on football department spending has played in a grand final let alone won a premiership in the past decade."

In 2010 Collingwood spent $8.8 mil and the Dogs $4.7 mil. I hope the Dogs read the OP. It may make them feel better.

 

[captain blood 17]

This will pretty much be split down demographic lines...

Those posters with a groovy grey "V" under their name will say there is too much bullshit in footy today... too much science... too much structure... to many strategies... too many assisstants... too many coaches... too much psychological analysis... too many zones... too many interchanges... too many shaved legs... too few mullets... too many teeth... not enough mutton chops (Alan Martello)... not enough mud... not enough steel cans & ice fights in the outer... not enough piss after a game and finally... too much bullshit!

Younger posters will appreciate the need for greater science and theory and software and 3D imagery of players muscles and pre game and post game preview and review and elite performance management and so on....

Those of us who have the groovy "v"'s loved the game in those 'prehistoric' days when KB wore a lace-up and a solid shirtfront was celebrated rather than roundly berated and games were won more with guts and effort and blood on the day rather than through some clinician's expertise and a hyperbaric chamber in Arizona....

We often lament that footy has changed and is not as great as it once was.... perhaps these are some of the reasons?

Generally agree with a lot of the OP.... too much bullshit and it does in no way ensure success.

For the record Roachy, i have a foot in both camps, but what i believe in is balance, and not trends. You can have all the analysis, policies, laptops, assistants, etc, etc, but if the players can't get the thing, or catch it, or kick properly, what's the point. There has to be balance and moderation, and somewhere in the middle is where it's at. One 45 degree bounce in 2010 and the pies would have invested $40+ million in what, two second place finishes? We just need to stand back a bit and take a breath. I'm sure our club knows what it is doing, but, like i have previously stated, sometimes keeping up with the Jones's aint all it's cracked up to be.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

The old "we didn't want them anyway thread", which panders to shallow thinkers.

I do enjoy 'defensive' threads where 'group think' is rife. It helps soften the blow when one sees other more prosperous clubs spending big and reaping benefits from their financial position. It doesn't mean those clubs aren't prudent, or that they throw money away, but still the exorbitance hits a raw nerve to supporters of less endowed clubs.

This from an article earlier in the year: "Richmond recently acknowledged this recent trend, with their research stating no club that has been in the bottom four of AFL clubs on football department spending has played in a grand final let alone won a premiership in the past decade."

In 2010 Collingwood spent $8.8 mil and the Dogs $4.7 mil. I hope the Dogs read the OP. It may make them feel better.

ah no mate. You should actually read the thread because its not about individuals. Its about the idea of having an enlarged footy dept versus a smaller one.

I'm arguing for a larger more professional one. Those against have been against it in general. Not if its ex-player ABC just because they went to another club, but they are against it in general as they do not believe a lot of these coaches provide value (Pace has written quite well on this issue, and nowhere has he singled out a specific player as being his problem).

 

[CoggaRules]

For the record Roachy, i have a foot in both camps, but what i believe in is balance, and not trends. You can have all the analysis, policies, laptops, assistants, etc, etc, but if the players can't get the thing, or catch it, or kick properly, what's the point. There has to be balance and moderation, and somewhere in the middle is where it's at. One 45 degree bounce in 2010 and the pies would have invested $40+ million in what, two second place finishes? We just need to stand back a bit and take a breath. I'm sure our club knows what it is doing, but, like i have previously stated, sometimes keeping up with the Jones's aint all it's cracked up to be.

yep and therein lies the pointer to why IMO all these assistants, analysis, you name it its there are all an attempt to make this game like some exact science.
At the end of the day the ball is oval. Any amount of planning, any amount of analysis, any amount of sessions in hyperbaric chambers and altitude shit, any amount of psychological shit will not make it bounce your way....when it does and the game goes your way, the assistants and shit all become gurus, when it doesnt and the game slips, they head for their laptops to see where the "mechanisms" broke down...
I am not suggesting there is no room for modern science in footy, all i am suggesting like you cap, is that all of a sudden there has been this explosion of hiring of behind the scenes dudes. And why? because the clubs all want to look like pros, to their members. It might extract a 5% improvement in aerobic capacity, i.e. player x can run for longer, but what is the good of player x running for longer, if player x was a JON say?
As i said before if they have the gift they have the gift, if they havent and their smart they will hide their deficiencies by knowing their limitations, eliminating errors and knowing that all they need to do is get it to the gifted. If they are not smart they will forever try to look like they have the gift, and 8 times out of 10 come out looking like a comedian and by and large end up in suburbia, all be it with a superb elite performanced aerobic capacity..

 

[Roachy8]

For the record Roachy, i have a foot in both camps, but what i believe in is balance, and not trends. You can have all the analysis, policies, laptops, assistants, etc, etc, but if the players can't get the thing, or catch it, or kick properly, what's the point. There has to be balance and moderation, and somewhere in the middle is where it's at. One 45 degree bounce in 2010 and the pies would have invested $40+ million in what, two second place finishes? We just need to stand back a bit and take a breath. I'm sure our club knows what it is doing, but, like i have previously stated, sometimes keeping up with the Jones's aint all it's cracked up to be.

Yeah I'm the same in reality... I was just getting carried away with my rant!

Nothing is ever simply black or white... the truth, the answer and perhaps even the meaning of life is always going to be somewhere in the murky 'grey' area between the two extremes.

All that is old is not simply past it's use by date, nor is everything that is new the panacea to success and enlightenment.

Take the best from what has worked in the past and add the best of contemporary thinking + incorporate some original visionary thinking and you generally get where you want to go.

 

[Ralll]

Dont agree with the OP at all about the coaching group.
Its about getting the most out of the players.

The more development/assistant coaches etc. there are, the more time can be put into developing the gameplan/players to the utmost degree. (as long as its well organized and all pushing in the same direction)

In the end if you dont have the cattle you wont win, but in a situation of two even teams, the team most successfully developed and coached will win everytime.

If you dont have the cattle look to the recruiting staff.

I agree the testing process has gone nuts with all the beep/vertical leap/agility test crap and players who can get the pill and has footy smarts are still the best recruits.

Geelong has not lost sight of this fact imo, and have both the off field and on field structures right at their club atm.

Collingwood are a well structured and financed club that are punching well above their weight with the cattle they have on the field.

 

[CoggaRules]

Dont agree with the OP at all about the coaching group.
Its about getting the most out of the players.

The more development/assistant coaches etc. there are, the more time can be put into developing the gameplan/players to the utmost degree. (as long as its well organized and all pushing in the same direction)

In the end if you dont have the cattle you wont win, but in a situation of two even teams, the team most successfully developed and coached will win everytime.

If you dont have the cattle look to the recruiting staff.

I agree the testing process has gone nuts with all the beep/vertical leap/agility test crap and players who can get the pill and has footy smarts are still the best recruits.

Geelong has not lost sight of this fact imo, and have both the off field and on field structures right at their club atm.

Collingwood are a well structured and financed club that are punching well above their weight with the cattle they have on the field.

give you an outside tip dude. Collingwood and the bummers are well financed and have a sustainable supporter/membership base. They have both gone out and set up these new positions and structures in their back rooms and by and large have increased their expenditures. They can handle this. Now you have a team like Mlebourne wanting to do same, so they can keep up with the Jones's. The thing is what is going to pan out is this....come the day when free agency comes into play, who will be best placed to offer the bucks to the best? Those who are financial or those who have hocked themselves to the hilt with "elite performance" directors and a host of other back room staff?
Stay tuned, the day of reckoning is approaching and tipping Benny knows it and we are now not throwing cash at the next you beaut idea, that was given to us by the next coat puller.
Its the good old formula, you take smalls steps get them right and build into big steps. The fools like Lyon and co are wanting to go from crawling to running, thinking spending cash will do it...ask Eddie what he found when he got to Collingwood and how hard they had to work to get to the point where they can send players to Arizona....Collingwood are set up, in 2 years time when the free agency comes in, you can bet your bottom dollar that if its a star that everyone wants, more than likely they will head to the pies, because teams that are hocked to the hilt will have to rattle the tins or suck up to the bank manager to extend their debt.

What is real pleasing is that by and large via rumour or media we have been associated with most of the available candidates and slowly we are hiring hand picked candidates who werent even on anyones radar, prime example Ross Smith. This suggests we do have a blue print and we do have people ear marked, but we also have a limit to how far we will go to get them. i.e. how bad to we need this, or do we need something more important elsewhere. Like captain blood suggested, balance is the key and when we have come to the point our list needs to up the ante, i.e. they play footy and execute the plans as they should be executed, then we can see what is needed to extract the next 5 or 10 %...if that includes a professor of anatomy then so be it..but until a list isnt ready, you can have god there and it would amount to 0.

For those who can remember, there was one real important factor that hasnt been mentioned when it comes to the 70s....yes tommy had his training regime, but we also went out and hired Dr Rudy Webster....i think that was his name..1 person talking to various players, not a whole army confusing the shit out of everyone.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

This is a bloody good point. Any increase in footy dept has to be done in a way that is sustainable.

 

[Livonski]

Faultless display Cogga.

 

[captain blood 17]

give you an outside tip dude. Collingwood and the bummers are well financed and have a sustainable supporter/membership base. They have both gone out and set up these new positions and structures in their back rooms and by and large have increased their expenditures. They can handle this. Now you have a team like Mlebourne wanting to do same, so they can keep up with the Jones's. The thing is what is going to pan out is this....come the day when free agency comes into play, who will be best placed to offer the bucks to the best? Those who are financial or those who have hocked themselves to the hilt with "elite performance" directors and a host of other back room staff?
Stay tuned, the day of reckoning is approaching and tipping Benny knows it and we are now not throwing cash at the next you beaut idea, that was given to us by the next coat puller.
Its the good old formula, you take smalls steps get them right and build into big steps. The fools like Lyon and co are wanting to go from crawling to running, thinking spending cash will do it...ask Eddie what he found when he got to Collingwood and how hard they had to work to get to the point where they can send players to Arizona....Collingwood are set up, in 2 years time when the free agency comes in, you can bet your bottom dollar that if its a star that everyone wants, more than likely they will head to the pies, because teams that are hocked to the hilt will have to rattle the tins or suck up to the bank manager to extend their debt.

What is real pleasing is that by and large via rumour or media we have been associated with most of the available candidates and slowly we are hiring hand picked candidates who werent even on anyones radar, prime example Ross Smith. This suggests we do have a blue print and we do have people ear marked, but we also have a limit to how far we will go to get them. i.e. how bad to we need this, or do we need something more important elsewhere. Like captain blood suggested, balance is the key and when we have come to the point our list needs to up the ante, i.e. they play footy and execute the plans as they should be executed, then we can see what is needed to extract the next 5 or 10 %...if that includes a professor of anatomy then so be it..but until a list isnt ready, you can have god there and it would amount to 0.

For those who can remember, there was one real important factor that hasnt been mentioned when it comes to the 70s....yes tommy had his training regime, but we also went out and hired Dr Rudy Webster....i think that was his name..1 person talking to various players, not a whole army confusing the shit out of everyone.

Yep, there it is. Reading your words at the moment is like reading poetry Coggs. That's how easy it is. (great point on T shirt and Rudy as well).

 

[Ralll]

give you an outside tip dude. Collingwood and the bummers are well financed and have a sustainable supporter/membership base. They have both gone out and set up these new positions and structures in their back rooms and by and large have increased their expenditures. They can handle this. Now you have a team like Mlebourne wanting to do same, so they can keep up with the Jones's. The thing is what is going to pan out is this....come the day when free agency comes into play, who will be best placed to offer the bucks to the best? Those who are financial or those who have hocked themselves to the hilt with "elite performance" directors and a host of other back room staff?
Stay tuned, the day of reckoning is approaching and tipping Benny knows it and we are now not throwing cash at the next you beaut idea, that was given to us by the next coat puller.
Its the good old formula, you take smalls steps get them right and build into big steps. The fools like Lyon and co are wanting to go from crawling to running, thinking spending cash will do it...ask Eddie what he found when he got to Collingwood and how hard they had to work to get to the point where they can send players to Arizona....Collingwood are set up, in 2 years time when the free agency comes in, you can bet your bottom dollar that if its a star that everyone wants, more than likely they will head to the pies, because teams that are hocked to the hilt will have to rattle the tins or suck up to the bank manager to extend their debt.

What is real pleasing is that by and large via rumour or media we have been associated with most of the available candidates and slowly we are hiring hand picked candidates who werent even on anyones radar, prime example Ross Smith. This suggests we do have a blue print and we do have people ear marked, but we also have a limit to how far we will go to get them. i.e. how bad to we need this, or do we need something more important elsewhere. Like captain blood suggested, balance is the key and when we have come to the point our list needs to up the ante, i.e. they play footy and execute the plans as they should be executed, then we can see what is needed to extract the next 5 or 10 %...if that includes a professor of anatomy then so be it..but until a list isnt ready, you can have god there and it would amount to 0.

For those who can remember, there was one real important factor that hasnt been mentioned when it comes to the 70s....yes tommy had his training regime, but we also went out and hired Dr Rudy Webster....i think that was his name..1 person talking to various players, not a whole army confusing the shit out of everyone.

Thats all well and good but I didnt at any stage make a comment regarding the balancing of our football department expenditure, i was merely debating your theory regarding the overrated benefits of a large coaching/development etc. staff and the difference it can make to a football teams improvement and overall performance.

but thanks for the random outside tip anyway...

regarding your theory on expenditure, I guess the other side of the argument is, spend the money now, improve onfield performance and the influx of members/sponsors and money will take care of itself.
But meh its a risk either way.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

regarding your theory on expenditure, I guess the other side of the argument is, spend the money now, improve onfield performance and the influx of members/sponsors and money will take care of itself.
But meh its a risk either way.

We did that approach under Casey, and it nearly bankrupted us

Much prefer to expand the footy spend as our ability to pay for it increases

 

[IDGAF]

Ahhhhhh the old days

Chortle

Love it

 

[IDGAF]

Yep, there it is. Reading your words at the moment is like reading poetry Coggs. That's how easy it is. (great point on T shirt and Rudy as well).

Dunno about poetry but a degree in comprehension helps

 

[captain blood 17]

Dunno about poetry but a degree in comprehension helps

Mate, what's not to like, someones always winking at me, and there's a dick joke in there with dude flat out.
The man is a street poet (and not some bee bop beatnik type).

 

[Strawbs]

Great sig Captain. Had Graeme Landy's number on one of my Tiger jumpers back in the day.

 

[captain blood 17]

Great sig Captain. Had Graeme Landy's number on one of my Tiger jumpers back in the day.

Welcome back Strawbs. Been a while. Yeah, i was gonna lead with Poole's no fool, but the Landy one seemed better.