Opinion The 'Carlton related stuff that doesn't need it's own thread' thread

[HARKER]

Eventually one of our young forwards will take a primary leadership role in that area, until then, I would like to see someone like Thomas or Murphy playing there for the majority of the game, probably Thomas as he spent many years in the forward half with Collingwood

Getting back to young forwards, I am confident Teague will continue to tweak/educate/nurture our young forwards, but what should be the non negotiable from all forwards is to apply constant pressure, not just small/medium players, but even our talls.

Charlie, Harry and Gov, just don't work hard enough defensively

Reckon we'll see Thomas forward this week and it doesn't matter whose idea it was, as long as we give it a try and the expense of some that just can't make good of the new positions they've been charged to play.

If we're really going to persist with Gibbons as a small forward, shouldn't he be allowed to ply his trade with the Northern Blues and not the senior team and likewise with Polson. This whole defensive forward stuff hasn't worked to date and surely can't be allowed to fester in the main team for too much longer.

 

[Robertio]

I think we always knew that the forward line would be a problem, given;
a. The three talls getting used to playing with one another.
b. The lack of clever small and medium-sized forwards.

Poor Teague being handed over a dogs breakfast to make good with.(Teague is our forward coach, for those that may not know)
i.e. Given the mix of inexperienced talls (none had played 50 games coming into the season) and then having to 'find' some smalls to operate around them.

Pretty sure he may not be having himself a great time of things right now.

Think he'll over come it as he is a very good coach.

 

[Arr0w]

SkyhorseTamer warning TLDR

Following up on the first part https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/thre...-thread-thread.1073627/page-245#post-60302235

This may also be of interest, despite not agree entirely with the piece it is more balanced than Matt Walsh's article https://www.bay13sports.com.au/late...5/the-blues-0-4-the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly

Part 2:

Disagree, they're good points. Whilst they might be narrow and not the whole picture they can't be happily dismissed. The only area that is arguably performing better than last season is the defense. The midfield and forward line one exposed form have not got any better.

Its rather shit reading how our time in forward half has gotten worse when it's apparently been a focus area of Boltons.

I have address your first paragraph with the 3 links above, as stated, stats should always be considered with vision. On our back 6, it does help that when you have more senior players/bodies and of course more stability considering we used 18 different players in our defensive unit, due to injuries last year

No wonder that our midfield and especially our forwards are struggling to find synergy. To our midfield we have added, Setterfield, Walsh, while Ed and Murphy are playing different roles, the forwardline also has 3 new faces, Ed, Gibbons and McGovern. We have seen other young sides still struggling when adding so many new players to a starting 22, it just takes time

The abysmal kicking efficiency is a huge alarm especially in conjunction with the extraordinarily bad # of disposals we have. Bad teams need to control the ball, they need to retain possession to keep young heads in the moment and lower our kms run. The fact that we are running the most of every team is not a good thing. 'let the ball do the talking' we shouldn't have to run that much and still only be competitive for under half a match... Which brings us back to the only thing keeping us competitive this season. Our defence. Weitering and Jones are unbelievable.

I agree, our kicking efficiency has been extremely poor. Part of that is young players adjusting to the tempo of a higher level, the other is decision making, trying to hit up the wrong targets. As I highlighted in the stats above, most teams have suffered in this area early in the season. I don't disagree with controlling the ball, but while we are developing this area, sometimes you would rather have a turnover occur 50 odd metres down the line, than 15 metres away through the centre corridor. We saw the focus of trying to lower our eyes on the weekend, yet many of our players missed very easy targets. It will improve over time, it always does as the core mature. Think we can highlight both sides of a better running capabilities, 1) fitter and able to create more options 2) chasing tail due to poor initial defensive setups, which hurts us with opposition spread. Our competitive nature has kept us in the game, I touch more on this later

I've been stewing on this for a few days and I've been a strong backer of Bolton but I simply can't get behind this absolute faith in him and the way he's doing things. I don't think he's finished but I do strongly believe he's approaching a crossroads.

The swans are bad, they don't have the personnel anymore. They're almost as young as us, which isn't the ultimate point, the ultimate point is that John Longmuir found a way to win. He quite clearly found some matchups to expose and a tactic that would counter our game plan - severely condensed the game.

While we continue to be competitive, wins will arise on a more regular basis over time. I wouldn't write off the Swans just yet, we have seen in past years that they start slowly then build to make finals yet again, similar to their previous 3 years

Wins are important and he knows that, Bolton seems to be so stubbornly engrossed in his plan/method that he refuses to go for the win. Things could've been tweaked against port and against Sydney to bring us back earlier and weren't. This method was fine last season when it was instill the game plan at all costs but that's got to shift towards having a real crack at winning. Dew is a good in game coach. I can almost guarantee we'll be competitive for a chunk early, then something will change (dews adjustments) they'll build a lead and we'll never catch them.

Oh and don't get me started on getting hammered in the uncontested possession count and tackle count in the same game. That's a red flag.

Yes I agree that Bolton seems single minded with some of his setups, playing our best midfield tagger as a forward, Murphy more on the outside etc, which are possibly contributing to some close losses, but it is not detrimental to the medium/long term by playing our kids at the coal face

As for the game stats, surprisingly we won most of them https://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/ft_match_statistics?mid=9755&advv=Y and while it states that GC had a younger average age, we had 5 players in that critical 23-26 ages range, while they had 9, nearly double https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/rd-4-massive-choke-bottomed-out-again.1215943/#post-60350783

Go back to the Bulldogs season before they won the premiership. Extraordinarily young and they were obviously developing a game plan that was both intense and engaging for their team. Picken Murphy etc weren't playing roles any different to what our own old heads are doing. Beveridge gave the youth the responsibility and energised them by providing a game plan they could visualise working.

I understand the injury situation perfectly fine. I'm sure we'd be more structured with doch and Co but that's kinda the point. The game plan isn't shaped to the players strengths. The players are being shaped to fit the game plan. Which rarely ever works out. Probably my most important observation tbh

Dogs had more/experienced players as well as many in that crucial 23-26 range. Boyd, Picken, Biggs, Libba, Dahlhaus, Wallis, JJ, Suckling, Wood, Morris, Dickson, Roughead, Stevens, Campbell, Redpath, Adcock, all of which contributed during the season and finals. We have nothing like that at the moment.

The gameplan shouldn't be shaped to the players strengths, as all players are different, like Beveridge, Bolton should be ensuring structure and discipline, while still allowing for players natural talent, it is a fine line when it comes to balance

I know you'll probably disagree with most and say its all part of the learning curve and development but I'll put this forward, my final point. A bit of personal experience. I took over an under 16s girls team that hadnt won a game in 2 seasons.. We made the grand final.

I was an assistant coach for a team with athletes being paid. We had more than 50% of the starting team come in new that season after the club had come last the season before. We were top 4.

Lastly my under 21s team came first in all age first division.

I too have coached, at various levels and age groups right through to seniors, so I admire what you undertook and achieved. I guess you have inadvertently touched on a major difference from under age to where our side is at the moment. At junior level, generally kids are of similar size physically and similar levels of experience and mentality.

I liken our current situation to a young talented boxer, 18 years old, fighting at 70KG weight class, coming up against another talented opponent, 25 years old and weighing 85 KG. The results would generally be one way.

Just to add in a lost season last year Bolton had the opportunity to cut players loose, let the have some fun. Try daisy up forward again, look for x factors to incorporate into the next season. Did. Not. See. Any. Evidence. Of. That. Not even when games were lost. Instead it was just whack numbers behind the ball. Think about that. What did that teach our young players, new to the afl? Nothing. You don't learn anything in that situation as a player. You aren't playing a game style that has any hope of. Winning, the only thing you're doing is opening up the possibility for lazy/ negative/ bad habits to creep into games. Bolton needed to be stronger and not give a shit about scorelines.

I remember Sheedy doing something similar in his second year with GWS, had 10 odd players in defense at centre bounces. While looking ugly, it forces players to run harder, especially if they are going through the motions/lazy. Never ideal, players remember.

Finally, what needs to be considered is this rebuild is like no other, while there are similarities with the GWS build, they had the benefit of bringing in more talent in a shorter space of time, due to the high number of picks they had over the first 4 years. Other rebuilding sides, Lions, Saints, GC, Demons retained/targeted more senior players, through the process, yet if you compare the timelines, we are no further behind what these sides were achieving.

I will continue to be critical of SOS and Bolton, like I have in the past, but where I will really be p1ssed, is if we deviate due to internal and or external pressure for a short term win only and compromise the strategy that will benefit medium to long term. Right now, I want our current competitive nature to become a consist habit, so we can focus on other areas that will help develop the squad

Short term, it is frustrating and painful, but bringing through a large core group together will have it's rewards

 

[Robbo's my hero]

Happy birthday Bolts.

 

[Robbo's my hero]

Cottrell in the vid today.

 

[ITCHY EYEBALLS]

Haven't read the whole thread, yeah slack I know, so its prob been already mentioned, but I reckon we should try to get N Reiwoldt involved with our fwd group. Especially Charlie.
He rates our list and could do wonders for us, imo.

 

[B if i Know]

SkyhorseTamer warning TLDR

Following up on the first part https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/thre...-thread-thread.1073627/page-245#post-60302235

This may also be of interest, despite not agree entirely with the piece it is more balanced than Matt Walsh's article https://www.bay13sports.com.au/late...5/the-blues-0-4-the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly

Part 2:



I have address your first paragraph with the 3 links above, as stated, stats should always be considered with vision. On our back 6, it does help that when you have more senior players/bodies and of course more stability considering we used 18 different players in our defensive unit, due to injuries last year

No wonder that our midfield and especially our forwards are struggling to find synergy. To our midfield we have added, Setterfield, Walsh, while Ed and Murphy are playing different roles, the forwardline also has 3 new faces, Ed, Gibbons and McGovern. We have seen other young sides still struggling when adding so many new players to a starting 22, it just takes time



I agree, our kicking efficiency has been extremely poor. Part of that is young players adjusting to the tempo of a higher level, the other is decision making, trying to hit up the wrong targets. As I highlighted in the stats above, most teams have suffered in this area early in the season. I don't disagree with controlling the ball, but while we are developing this area, sometimes you would rather have a turnover occur 50 odd metres down the line, than 15 metres away through the centre corridor. We saw the focus of trying to lower our eyes on the weekend, yet many of our players missed very easy targets. It will improve over time, it always does as the core mature. Think we can highlight both sides of a better running capabilities, 1) fitter and able to create more options 2) chasing tail due to poor initial defensive setups, which hurts us with opposition spread. Our competitive nature has kept us in the game, I touch more on this later



While we continue to be competitive, wins will arise on a more regular basis over time. I wouldn't write off the Swans just yet, we have seen in past years that they start slowly then build to make finals yet again, similar to their previous 3 years



Yes I agree that Bolton seems single minded with some of his setups, playing our best midfield tagger as a forward, Murphy more on the outside etc, which are possibly contributing to some close losses, but it is not detrimental to the medium/long term by playing our kids at the coal face

As for the game stats, surprisingly we won most of them https://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/ft_match_statistics?mid=9755&advv=Y and while it states that GC had a younger average age, we had 5 players in that critical 23-26 ages range, while they had 9, nearly double https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/rd-4-massive-choke-bottomed-out-again.1215943/#post-60350783




Dogs had more/experienced players as well as many in that crucial 23-26 range. Boyd, Picken, Biggs, Libba, Dahlhaus, Wallis, JJ, Suckling, Wood, Morris, Dickson, Roughead, Stevens, Campbell, Redpath, Adcock, all of which contributed during the season and finals. We have nothing like that at the moment.

The gameplan shouldn't be shaped to the players strengths, as all players are different, like Beveridge, Bolton should be ensuring structure and discipline, while still allowing for players natural talent, it is a fine line when it comes to balance



I too have coached, at various levels and age groups right through to seniors, so I admire what you undertook and achieved. I guess you have inadvertently touched on a major difference from under age to where our side is at the moment. At junior level, generally kids are of similar size physically and similar levels of experience and mentality.

I liken our current situation to a young talented boxer, 18 years old, fighting at 70KG weight class, coming up against another talented opponent, 25 years old and weighing 85 KG. The results would generally be one way.



I remember Sheedy doing something similar in his second year with GWS, had 10 odd players in defense at centre bounces. While looking ugly, it forces players to run harder, especially if they are going through the motions/lazy. Never ideal, players remember.

Finally, what needs to be considered is this rebuild is like no other, while there are similarities with the GWS build, they had the benefit of bringing in more talent in a shorter space of time, due to the high number of picks they had over the first 4 years. Other rebuilding sides, Lions, Saints, GC, Demons retained/targeted more senior players, through the process, yet if you compare the timelines, we are no further behind what these sides were achieving.

I will continue to be critical of SOS and Bolton, like I have in the past, but where I will really be p1ssed, is if we deviate due to internal and or external pressure for a short term win only and compromise the strategy that will benefit medium to long term. Right now, I want our current competitive nature to become a consist habit, so we can focus on other areas that will help develop the squad

Short term, it is frustrating and painful, but bringing through a large core group together will have it's rewards

Outstanding read Arrow...."this rebuild is like no other"

 

[therubbernub]

https://www.foxsports.com.au/video/afl/afl-360/blues-forward-line-disaster!727071

Sorry but I agree with the analysis.

What we do know is that Charlie is not a deep thinker. I am with Maclure in that Charlie cant be expected to be the General. i dont see MM or Harry being the general either.
Weitering would be perfect to run the forward line- if he wasnt such a great general down back now.
I would like williamson to replace Daisy down back and give Daisy the job- he is smart and can play the role IMO

 

[KnobHead]

What we do know is that Charlie is not a deep thinker. I am with Maclure in that Charlie cant be expected to be the General. i dont see MM or Harry being the general either.
Weitering would be perfect to run the forward line- if he wasnt such a great general down back now.
I would like williamson to replace Daisy down back and give Daisy the job- he is smart and can play the role IMO

Bit harsh on Charlie, he’s a playmaker. Your general won’t necessarily be your best forward.

Actually think Murphy in the forward line is the best placed to be the “general.”

Also, the way Gibbons has been playing in the forward line must be very disorienting for the “talls.”



On iPad using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[F_therest]

What we do know is that Charlie is not a deep thinker. I am with Maclure in that Charlie cant be expected to be the General. i dont see MM or Harry being the general either.
Weitering would be perfect to run the forward line- if he wasnt such a great general down back now.
I would like williamson to replace Daisy down back and give Daisy the job- he is smart and can play the role IMO

Seems like quite a few of us are on board with the Daisy forward scenario...myself included.

We need to start blooding some younger defenders anyway, given Simmo and Daisy's age.

 

[therubbernub]

Bit harsh on Charlie, he’s a playmaker. Your general won’t necessarily be your best forward.

i think we are saying the same thing really

 

[Eiffel 65]

Seems like quite a few of us are on board with the Daisy forward scenario...myself included.

We need to start blooding some younger defenders anyway, given Simmo and Daisy's age.

Well it's a logical move. He played a forward/midfielder hybrid role at Collingwood.

He's the person you need in the forward line to direct everyone and maintain team structures forward of centre.

 

[therubbernub]

Bit harsh on Charlie, he’s a playmaker. Your general won’t necessarily be your best forward.

Actually think Murphy in the forward line is the best placed to be the “general.”

Also, the way Gibbons has been playing in the forward line must be very disorienting for the “talls.”



On iPad using BigFooty.com mobile app

I think Murph is needed for his run further up the ground at the moment, but i agree he would be able to perform the general role in the F50.

 

[Coops93]

I'd prefer Thomas or Simpson as the general over Murphy.

Though I reckon McGovern is capable of it, if given the reigns.

 

[Lace_Out]

I think Murph is needed for his run further up the ground at the moment, but i agree he would be able to perform the general role in the F50.

Murphy is no general, lacks presence.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

 

[bigm386]

https://www.foxsports.com.au/video/afl/afl-360/blues-forward-line-disaster!727071

Sorry but I agree with the analysis.

100% bang on.

 

[rampar]

Bit harsh on Charlie, he’s a playmaker. Your general won’t necessarily be your best forward.

Actually think Murphy in the forward line is the best placed to be the “general.”

Also, the way Gibbons has been playing in the forward line must be very disorienting for the “talls.”



On iPad using BigFooty.com mobile app

The guys on big coin, 22. He needs to take some responsibility. Mcgovern is no spring chicken either.

They need time to gel, i get it, but 5th round in its time we start seeing a little more cohesion. Forward coaching needs to improve

 

[bigm386]

Gibbons is in no way a forward. If we needed a small forward we shouldn't have taken Gibbons.

Is a midfielder.

 

[BluStreak]

Gibbons is in no way a forward. If we needed a small forward we shouldn't have taken Gibbons.

Is a midfielder.

Agreed he is a midfielder and should be playing there. I reckon they have been trying him forward to get him up to speed, but that is only a thought.

 

[boltsbabyblues]

What I laugh about is people on here paying out on “the old Carlton way”

The old Carlton way has won us 16 premierships, the new way has won us nothing, 5 wins in 70 games.

I can see a need for change, but I fear we have over corrected and lost what made us Caaaaaaaarlton

 

[Gethelred]

What I laugh about is people on here paying out on “the old Carlton way”

The old Carlton way has won us 16 premierships, the new way has won us nothing, 5 wins in 70 games.

I can see a need for change, but I fear we have over corrected and lost what made us Caaaaaaaarlton

Can you pay to bring a player from another league in another state over to play for us over and above what any other victorian/interstate club can? Can you offer more to a player than any other club can? Do you have the history of success in an immediate context that Carlton used to possess?

We can't do any of that. The rules have changed, the competition has changed. You cannot overpay players to get them to play for you; you cannot exploit your zone or mine interstate leagues for gems, not with the draft and the state leagues already being mined by other clubs. And we don't have the sense that a flag is only ever a year away anymore.

So, what part of old Carlton would you have come back?

 

[thylacine60]

What I laugh about is people on here paying out on “the old Carlton way”

The old Carlton way has won us 16 premierships, the new way has won us nothing, 5 wins in 70 games.

I can see a need for change, but I fear we have over corrected and lost what made us Caaaaaaaarlton

never thought of it like that - tell us more.......

 

[boltsbabyblues]

I agree on the points about paying players because you can’t do it as easy as you used to. Can still be done, recruiting free agents etc

I just think we have started to accept losing, like when we started the rebuild we made it clear we were happy to accept losing and couldn’t win.

I disagree with that philosophy. I think an expectation of excellence should be the minimum no matter what list we have

 

[boltsbabyblues]

Can you pay to bring a player from another league in another state over to play for us over and above what any other victorian/interstate club can? Can you offer more to a player than any other club can? Do you have the history of success in an immediate context that Carlton used to possess?

We can't do any of that. The rules have changed, the competition has changed. You cannot overpay players to get them to play for you; you cannot exploit your zone or mine interstate leagues for gems, not with the draft and the state leagues already being mined by other clubs. And we don't have the sense that a flag is only ever a year away anymore.

So, what part of old Carlton would you have come back?

see below, but specifically our mindset

 

[Gethelred]

I agree on the points about paying players because you can’t do it as easy as you used to. Can still be done, recruiting free agents etc

I just think we have started to accept losing, like when we started the rebuild we made it clear we were happy to accept losing and couldn’t win.

I disagree with that philosophy. I think an expectation of excellence should be the minimum no matter what list we have

Hmmm...

I think your notion that we were happy to accept losing is incorrect, just as the notion that we are somehow still content to accept loss is. There is a marked difference between realising the reality of what such a hard rebuild will accomplish as far as your immediate short term prospects are (you aren't winning many without your key players being between the ages of 22-26, as the last few weeks have ably demonstrated) and being happy or accepting loss. Do you truly think that Bolton in his first season, when he motivated the shit out of Gibbs, Kreuzer, Murphy, Wright, Thomas and Simpson and arguably got them to the best footy of their career (outside of Murph's 2011; that shit was out of this world) that Bolton wasn't trying to win games of footy? Last year and this year, he's arguably held firm to structures and to gameplans when he's known that they have not been working; he's holding tightly to Plan A, despite its failure.

I don't think the answer to the question that implies - why is he doing this??? - is that he lacks the ability to rotate the squad and to change the levers to get the side working. I think that's too simple a solution, as it flies completely contrary to evidence we've been provided from him in the first two seasons, when he was capable both of getting the game on our terms and getting us to play cohesively by twisting things; sending Lamb back/forward, Murphy to the wing/outside the stoppage, playing SPS in the guts when it's wet, giving Charlie the licence to roam when he's on, etc. He was able to get our clearance setup working when Cripps and Ed were absent for the final 6 weeks of 2016 (not at the same level, but producing similar clearance, tackle and contested ball numbers).

Outside of that, I agree essentially with what you're saying. You cannot be satisfied winning once; you must need to win, over and over again. You must detest and despise the notion of losing, to the point where it's aberrant for you to even contemplate it, that when/if it starts you actively react viscerally to prevent it. If that's old Carlton, then I don't disagree with you that it would be good to have it back, but old Carlton means more than that to most people.