Analysis The Clarkson Rebuild Model - A Reason For Optimism

[threesixpio]

Well timed thread in light of poster nominations BrisHawk. I reckon you'll get my vote!

 

[threesixpio]

As fans the main things we see are:
- whether we win or lose
- how good/bad our skills were
- how players performed against our own expectations
- a general pattern of play
- how our whipping boys performed

What clarkson and the coaches see
- how players performed against the game plan
- how the opposition team responded to that game plan
- the progression of each player along a personal planned progression

It's a really different perspective and a coaching team can theoretically look at a loss like we had as a raging success. At the risk of sounding like Chris Scott "mission accomplished" a game like we had can be illuminating.

We looked sloppy and less energetic than essendon - this is very different to whether or not the game plan is working. This is the bit that is impossible for fans to discern - which portion of that 4 goal list is the strategy and which is the execution. If it was the right strategy and the execution was bad it might only need a 5% improvement from us to get a 60% improvement in the result it achieves.

I won't lie - that game has dampened my enthusiasm for the year. Solace comes from thinking it's part of a much bigger plan.

The game against Adelaide will be telling, and I'm thinking the following thoughts:
- a loss over 4 goals will require a sudden set of changes as we won't risk a 0-3 opening to the season
- a win would be a real surprise, but it would confirm that round 1 was an aberration
- another loss of 4 goals or less would be a massive improvement given how strong Adelaide looked.
- part of being a 30+ player means your peak performance window drops, so Gibson Burgoyne hodge and birchall won't hit their straps until mid season. Don't expect too much from them.
- if clarkson sees Adelaide as a much stronger team than us he will go really defensive. Expect almost no corridor play and lots of long kicks to contests. It's horrible to watch but he's done this every time we have been on the back foot within a season.

In his presser Clarko mentioned, referencing errors made by umpires, being human and that the coaches in his box even made errors.

I think LP is right - there was no sense of Clarko shitting himself.

Also love that unlike Sooky Scott Clarko is not one to harp on about umpires

 

[Mappa]

A couple of quick points.

How are we looking at a "rebuild" ? Is it new players ? Well O'Meara was the only real newbie to footy, and even he is 40+ games in now. Vickery and Mitchell and Henderson have more than enough experience under their belt, so who exactly are we rebuilding with ? Not sure if Burton was injured, but he and Brand and Stewart are the blokes you would put in the side if you were really fair dinkum about rebuilding the list.

So are we rebuilding the game plan ? Well if Saturday night's game plan was any indication, it has been rebuilt with the same quality as a Docklands apartment. Who other than McEvoy played in a position ? The whole "lets confuse them by throwing players all over the place" simply doesn't work. When we won the flags, games were won with the most skilful team. Now games are won with the team that can run like they stole something and tackle hard. Hartung (as apparently one of our elite runners) being run down by Daniher shows we are failing in that regard.

Thirdly, why can't we have a forward ? Can anyone imagine Josh Kennedy, or Taylor Walker, or Tom Hawkins or Jeremy Cameron roaming up around half back, or even being named there ? Not on your life. Sicily is a FORWARD. He's a smartalec, cocky FORWARD. Why does everyone have to be a jack of all trades now ? Some can do it, but he and Schoey and Gunston shouldn't be them. They are great kicks of the footy (and good marks) and as such I want them kicking for goal, not spotting up targets of half back. That's what backmen are for. Brand is young and raw and is a back man. Put him there.

 

[threesixpio]

A couple of quick points.

How are we looking at a "rebuild" ? Is it new players ? Well O'Meara was the only real newbie to footy, and even he is 40+ games in now. Vickery and Mitchell and Henderson have more than enough experience under their belt, so who exactly are we rebuilding with ? Not sure if Burton was injured, but he and Brand and Stewart are the blokes you would put in the side if you were really fair dinkum about rebuilding the list.

So are we rebuilding the game plan ? Well if Saturday night's game plan was any indication, it has been rebuilt with the same quality as a Docklands apartment. Who other than McEvoy played in a position ? The whole "lets confuse them by throwing players all over the place" simply doesn't work. When we won the flags, games were won with the most skilful team. Now games are won with the team that can run like they stole something and tackle hard. Hartung (as apparently one of our elite runners) being run down by Daniher shows we are failing in that regard.

Thirdly, why can't we have a forward ? Can anyone imagine Josh Kennedy, or Taylor Walker, or Tom Hawkins or Jeremy Cameron roaming up around half back, or even being named there ? Not on your life. Sicily is a FORWARD. He's a smartalec, cocky FORWARD. Why does everyone have to be a jack of all trades now ? Some can do it, but he and Schoey and Gunston shouldn't be them. They are great kicks of the footy (and good marks) and as such I want them kicking for goal, not spotting up targets of half back. That's what backmen are for. Brand is young and raw and is a back man. Put him there.

I don't know if the Billy being run down by Jo is replaying too often in my mind but Billy H disappointed me so much the other night. But the issue is who else do we have who can run?

 

[Mappa]

I don't know if the Billy being run down by Jo is replaying too often in my mind but Billy H disappointed me so much the other night. But the issue is who else do we have who can run?

Apart from Smith, and maybe Poppy, no one. The issue was evident on the counter attack. They routinely transition from back to front with ease because they could run to space. We got the ball at half back and either hoofed it forward or slowed play right down, and got cut up as a result

 

[Bedi]

Last night hurt. It did. Not only because any loss to the scum hurts but because it mad a lie of the belief that we are fundamentally only a few soldiers short of a premiership list. Take out Mitchell, Lewis and Hill...replace them with O'meara, Mitchell and Henderson. Replace the departed Hale with Vickery. One soldier for another until we are back on top. That is the Clarkson model right?

After a match in 2012 in which Poppy had missed a simple shot for goal and it cost us the match, Clarkson told Poppy that he needed to learn composure; that in order to continue to play up forward he had to make good decisions under pressure and if he couldn't do it he [Clarkson] would need to find Poppy another role. Note, he didn't threaten to drop him, just find another role on the field that he could do. Even as much as Clarkson preaches processes and systems over personal, he places his absolute faith in people to win matches. That is why he recruited Burgoyne. That is why he played Hodge and Ellis in the 2012 grand final (yes, it doesn't always work). So to discard Mitchell and Lewis is a massive statement about where he thinks the list is relative to those two players.

In 2009 when injuries ravaged the squad and wins became hard to come by it was Clarkson's faith in the players that would return that caused him to retain a dysfunctional game plan through the first half of 2010. In round 6 2010 we were hammered by Essendon to the tune of 43 points. After the match Kennet famously confronted Clarkson, Fox and Evans, drew an inverted pyramid on a whiteboard, and reminded them that they sat at the bottom of that pyramid. The message was clear. Change or be changed.

From the team that lost to Essendon in round 6 2010 to the team that lost a heart breaking preliminary final to Collingwood less than 18 months later there were eight changes. All eight would go on to win a premiership (or three) with Hawthorn in the next four years. In fact only four players in that loss were not part of our premiership threepete with only two who were also not part of 2008 (Murphy and Whitecross - still hoping for Whitey!) That is a big transformation of the team and a massive change in fortunes orchestrated very quickly. Once Clarkson understood the players he was using were not up to it he looked for and found players who were. Four of the eight players came from off the list over the offseason (Poppy, Hale, Gibson and Smith). Bailey, Burgoyne (arrived in 2009), Mitchell and Suckling were already on the list. A further three players on the list did not play that day but would go on to win premierships (Breust, Duryea and Roughead). So we can see player development was a very important part of the transformation from bottom dwellers to powerhouse. So too was finding a few diamonds in the rough via the draft. So for me the question isn't can Clarkson rebuild the list or where will he find the players with the talent, competitiveness and commitment to achieve success, its does he yet know who among those who played last night are able to take us forward and who should be put to pasture? Kennet isn't there any longer to realign his thoughts. Neither is Fagan. Hoping Clarkson has mastered self reflection and can ask honest questions of himself and the list. I know he can rebuild the list, its just a matter of whether or not he is capable of making that honest assessment.

I think the departure of Mitchell and Lewis demonstrates that he at least knows in what ballpark our team is in so I think it is fair to say the rebuild is underway. What is important to realise is that two weeks after losing to Essendon there were seven changes to to the team that ran out and narrowly defeated Richmond (thank you Sam Mitchell!), four of which were never apart of a premiership team but that win got the team moving in the right direction for the rest of the year. There is going to be some short term needs put above our premiership ambition either to ensure competitiveness or due to injuries etc. It isn't going to be all smooth sailing. The seas are going to get rough and we are going to want to mutiny. But we have the right captain and he can see us through this storm. The storm will pass and we will rebuild. We will be strong again. Go Hawks!

So essentially yr writing us off 2017 after round 1?? Not onboard at all.

 

[Sir Galahad]

Jesus H Spangher it was frustrating watching us kick to nothing throughout the game while Gunston was far up the ground.

From Clarko's "Ask the coach" Q&A on afl-media, 2 weeks ago:

Question -
"Clarko, With Gunston playing further up the field in recent times and with the return of Roughy, have you given any thought of swinging Gunston permanently into a key defensive position as we seem to still lack the necessary speed/strength against some of the better forwards in the league."

Clarko's reply -
"Jack's greatest influence on games of football is in the front half of the ground. Our greatest challenge is not to take Jack away from there, but to strengthen our defence."


It's interesting that clarko dismisses moving Gunston into the backline; but persists playing him up the ground, in a hybrid role.

Sure, he still kicked 51 goals last year, while simultaneously plugging a gap elsewhere; but the whole forward line looks more functional when he plays as a conventional forward.

 

[Ned Ryerson]

So essentially yr writing us off 2017 after round 1?? Not onboard at all.

He's being realistic. Not such a bad thing based on how we played over the weekend.

 

[Leather Poisoning]

The way we're throwing players into multiple positions these days doesn't look like a bottom up rebuild to me - it looks like a rebuild on the run.

For those that remember the 06/07/08 rebuild everyone was pretty much a one-position player. According to Crawf and Browny in a few interviews they said that every player knew their specific role to incredibly precise detail as to where to stand on the field, where to run to etc.

After the great hangover of 2009 and into 2010 we started to get a bit more creative with player positioning. That's where we first saw Mitchell on the back flank. It is scarily familiar. At the time we had Roughy and Buddy standing in the goal square saying "bomb it long to me". Every post game thread had people saying "Buddy needs to be allowed to get on his bike".

It was also in this year that we confirmed that the crop of Ellis, Dowler, Thorp, Muston, Miller, Morton, Murphy just weren't going to take us to that next level. From there we brought in Stratton, Smith, Shiels, Hill, Breust, Puopolo.

2011/2012 was the false dawn when we nearly got there with the glaring holes of Ruck and CHB. We went back to players sticking to predictable roles. 1 or 2 at most. Jordan Lewis was a goal kicking defensive forward sometimes, clearance mid at others.

This (2013) is also where we started playing Buddy in different positions on a regular basis. We got Bailey to a comfortable level of fitness and Lake came in. You could see it brewing up to perfection.

So when Clarko arrived he had the core nucleus of Mitchell, Hodge, Crawford but saw that the key position area needed an overhaul and we focused on clearing out Hay and Thompson and bringing in elite young talent.

We're in a really different position now. The core nucleus of players that can be relied on, A graders, aren't in the middle - they're everywhere else. Roughead, Rioli, Smith, Shiels, Stratton, Breust, Gunston. The elite young talent isn't based in the forward line - it's in the middle of the ground. The youth is being tested now and it's not the unblooded youngsters (Stewart, Burton, Lovell, Miles etc) it's that level above: Langford, Hartung, Sicily, O'Rourke, Howe, Mitchell and O'Meara. And I think we'll only be bringing in that next young crop when this group is confirmed as a failure or success. Clarko is also probably going to persist with these guys in their positions, which yes, includes Sicily at HB, Hartung doing things in the backline and the senior, reliable crop being thrown all over the place to allow for these guys to develop (or fail) in relative stability.

It's painful to watch. Change is always difficult. We are not topping up with Brian Lake - we're rebuilding key components with Vickery and a new midfield. We would all love to see the midfield hitting up Gunston and Roughead on the lead, and awesome slingshot footy from one end to the other, but we're not there yet. We're developing new weapons that will look meek until they're ready. Like the death star - it's vulnerable until it's finished.

The stubbornness we talk about with Clarkson is an overcommitment to things. Overcommitment to players and/or gameplay. He can't and won't ignore facts though - and losses are very strong feedback on what's working and what's not. The Geelong final could be explained away, the Bulldogs semi final couldn't and the Essendon one wasn't the change in trend we were hoping for.

Don't expect a premiership this year - but watch with interest because we'll have a few games where it all clicks and it'll be exciting as hell.

 

[Gralin]

So essentially yr writing us off 2017 after round 1?? Not onboard at all.

didn't take anything else from the post than that huh?

 

[Gralin]

The way we're throwing players into multiple positions these days doesn't look like a bottom up rebuild to me - it looks like a rebuild on the run.

For those that remember the 06/07/08 rebuild everyone was pretty much a one-position player. According to Crawf and Browny in a few interviews they said that every player knew their specific role to incredibly precise detail as to where to stand on the field, where to run to etc.

After the great hangover of 2009 and into 2010 we started to get a bit more creative with player positioning. That's where we first saw Mitchell on the back flank. It is scarily familiar. At the time we had Roughy and Buddy standing in the goal square saying "bomb it long to me". Every post game thread had people saying "Buddy needs to be allowed to get on his bike".

It was also in this year that we confirmed that the crop of Ellis, Dowler, Thorp, Muston, Miller, Morton, Murphy just weren't going to take us to that next level. From there we brought in Stratton, Smith, Shiels, Hill, Breust, Puopolo.

2011/2012 was the false dawn when we nearly got there with the glaring holes of Ruck and CHB. We went back to players sticking to predictable roles. 1 or 2 at most. Jordan Lewis was a goal kicking defensive forward sometimes, clearance mid at others.

This (2013) is also where we started playing Buddy in different positions on a regular basis. We got Bailey to a comfortable level of fitness and Lake came in. You could see it brewing up to perfection.

So when Clarko arrived he had the core nucleus of Mitchell, Hodge, Crawford but saw that the key position area needed an overhaul and we focused on clearing out Hay and Thompson and bringing in elite young talent.

We're in a really different position now. The core nucleus of players that can be relied on, A graders, aren't in the middle - they're everywhere else. Roughead, Rioli, Smith, Shiels, Stratton, Breust, Gunston. The elite young talent isn't based in the forward line - it's in the middle of the ground. The youth is being tested now and it's not the unblooded youngsters (Stewart, Burton, Lovell, Miles etc) it's that level above: Langford, Hartung, Sicily, O'Rourke, Howe, Mitchell and O'Meara. And I think we'll only be bringing in that next young crop when this group is confirmed as a failure or success. Clarko is also probably going to persist with these guys in their positions, which yes, includes Sicily at HB, Hartung doing things in the backline and the senior, reliable crop being thrown all over the place to allow for these guys to develop (or fail) in relative stability.

It's painful to watch. Change is always difficult. We are not topping up with Brian Lake - we're rebuilding key components with Vickery and a new midfield. We would all love to see the midfield hitting up Gunston and Roughead on the lead, and awesome slingshot footy from one end to the other, but we're not there yet. We're developing new weapons that will look meek until they're ready. Like the death star - it's vulnerable until it's finished.

The stubbornness we talk about with Clarkson is an overcommitment to things. Overcommitment to players and/or gameplay. He can't and won't ignore facts though - and losses are very strong feedback on what's working and what's not. The Geelong final could be explained away, the Bulldogs semi final couldn't and the Essendon one wasn't the change in trend we were hoping for.

Don't expect a premiership this year - but watch with interest because we'll have a few games where it all clicks and it'll be exciting as hell.

i like your take on this.

I much prefer the thought that Clarko is playing Gunston on the wing to develop another player, but then I look at who played forward while Gunston was on the wing and it was the usual suspects other than when we rested Jaeger forward.

At times we had Gunston on the wing, Schoey at CHB, Vickery in the ruck, McEvoy on the bench, Rough in the middle and our forward line was

Cyril on one leg, Breust, Poppy, some combination of resting mids. That was puzzling

 

[QuietB]

When Clarko arrived Croad was gone and Clarko sent Hay, Thompson & Rawlings on their way for high draft picks that were critical to his rebuild.

So my question is will Clarkson blow this list up to achieve the same goal?

There are certainly pieces with a lot of value that could be traded. Without naming names, but Hawthorn clearly have too many forwards highlighted by the fact that two of the best from last year cannot even find a forward spot. One is on the wing completely under-utilised and the other is across half back.

So if this year goes bad will Clarko go full rebuild again?

 

[Leather Poisoning]

I don't know if the Billy being run down by Jo is replaying too often in my mind but Billy H disappointed me so much the other night. But the issue is who else do we have who can run?

I'm really against having players in the team that only have speed or endurance as qualities.

Brad Hill - for all his lack of tackling prowess, had speed and was an incredibly good decision make. His little 45 degree kicks always opened up our forward line. Losing him at Mitchell at the same time is going to hurt our ability to hit up forwards.

Smith has speed and endurance but is also a really aggressive player. I don't mean he goes around trying to crunch people, but he runs to really dangerous spots, when he gets the ball he opens up the ground because he sprints 20-50m laterally and makes the whole opposition defence shift position.

Hartung unfortunately has a timidness about him that means he is really fast but he's just not using it as a weapon. There's no hurt with that pace so it may as well not be there. It's like having a tall guy who can't mark, kick or ruck in the side. You can go the structure argument but the opposition quickly learn to play off that player if they don't demand respect.

I would have Whitecross in the side every week. But Hartung is being tested and extended and will be in the side if fit until the coaching staff give up on him. In which case he'll be out of the side unless we have injuries (basically the same way we treat Whitecross)

 

[Leather Poisoning]

When Clarko arrived Croad was gone and Clarko sent Hay, Thompson & Rawlings on their way for high draft picks that were critical to his rebuild.

So my question is will Clarkson blow this list up to achieve the same goal?

There are certainly pieces with a lot of value that could be traded. Without naming names, but Hawthorn clearly have too many forwards highlighted by the fact that two of the best from last year cannot even find a forward spot. One is on the wing completely under-utilised and the other is across half back.

So if this year goes bad will Clarko go full rebuild again?

Yeah I think we're right in the middle of it.

Instead of trading for high draft picks we're shelling older players and using free agency to replace them.

 

[OzJohnnie]

The way we're throwing players into multiple positions these days doesn't look like a bottom up rebuild to me - it looks like a rebuild on the run.

For those that remember the 06/07/08 rebuild everyone was pretty much a one-position player. According to Crawf and Browny in a few interviews they said that every player knew their specific role to incredibly precise detail as to where to stand on the field, where to run to etc.

After the great hangover of 2009 and into 2010 we started to get a bit more creative with player positioning. That's where we first saw Mitchell on the back flank. It is scarily familiar. At the time we had Roughy and Buddy standing in the goal square saying "bomb it long to me". Every post game thread had people saying "Buddy needs to be allowed to get on his bike".

It was also in this year that we confirmed that the crop of Ellis, Dowler, Thorp, Muston, Miller, Morton, Murphy just weren't going to take us to that next level. From there we brought in Stratton, Smith, Shiels, Hill, Breust, Puopolo.

2011/2012 was the false dawn when we nearly got there with the glaring holes of Ruck and CHB. We went back to players sticking to predictable roles. 1 or 2 at most. Jordan Lewis was a goal kicking defensive forward sometimes, clearance mid at others.

This (2013) is also where we started playing Buddy in different positions on a regular basis. We got Bailey to a comfortable level of fitness and Lake came in. You could see it brewing up to perfection.

So when Clarko arrived he had the core nucleus of Mitchell, Hodge, Crawford but saw that the key position area needed an overhaul and we focused on clearing out Hay and Thompson and bringing in elite young talent.

We're in a really different position now. The core nucleus of players that can be relied on, A graders, aren't in the middle - they're everywhere else. Roughead, Rioli, Smith, Shiels, Stratton, Breust, Gunston. The elite young talent isn't based in the forward line - it's in the middle of the ground. The youth is being tested now and it's not the unblooded youngsters (Stewart, Burton, Lovell, Miles etc) it's that level above: Langford, Hartung, Sicily, O'Rourke, Howe, Mitchell and O'Meara. And I think we'll only be bringing in that next young crop when this group is confirmed as a failure or success. Clarko is also probably going to persist with these guys in their positions, which yes, includes Sicily at HB, Hartung doing things in the backline and the senior, reliable crop being thrown all over the place to allow for these guys to develop (or fail) in relative stability.

It's painful to watch. Change is always difficult. We are not topping up with Brian Lake - we're rebuilding key components with Vickery and a new midfield. We would all love to see the midfield hitting up Gunston and Roughead on the lead, and awesome slingshot footy from one end to the other, but we're not there yet. We're developing new weapons that will look meek until they're ready. Like the death star - it's vulnerable until it's finished.

The stubbornness we talk about with Clarkson is an overcommitment to things. Overcommitment to players and/or gameplay. He can't and won't ignore facts though - and losses are very strong feedback on what's working and what's not. The Geelong final could be explained away, the Bulldogs semi final couldn't and the Essendon one wasn't the change in trend we were hoping for.

Don't expect a premiership this year - but watch with interest because we'll have a few games where it all clicks and it'll be exciting as hell.

Good God, LP, you are on fire. A+ post. I really enjoyed that.

 

[Hawthorn United]

I don't know if the Billy being run down by Jo is replaying too often in my mind but Billy H disappointed me so much the other night. But the issue is who else do we have who can run?

He also had to ruck once so that's unfair to him.

 

[Hawthorn United]

The way we're throwing players into multiple positions these days doesn't look like a bottom up rebuild to me - it looks like a rebuild on the run.

For those that remember the 06/07/08 rebuild everyone was pretty much a one-position player. According to Crawf and Browny in a few interviews they said that every player knew their specific role to incredibly precise detail as to where to stand on the field, where to run to etc.

After the great hangover of 2009 and into 2010 we started to get a bit more creative with player positioning. That's where we first saw Mitchell on the back flank. It is scarily familiar. At the time we had Roughy and Buddy standing in the goal square saying "bomb it long to me". Every post game thread had people saying "Buddy needs to be allowed to get on his bike".

It was also in this year that we confirmed that the crop of Ellis, Dowler, Thorp, Muston, Miller, Morton, Murphy just weren't going to take us to that next level. From there we brought in Stratton, Smith, Shiels, Hill, Breust, Puopolo.

2011/2012 was the false dawn when we nearly got there with the glaring holes of Ruck and CHB. We went back to players sticking to predictable roles. 1 or 2 at most. Jordan Lewis was a goal kicking defensive forward sometimes, clearance mid at others.

This (2013) is also where we started playing Buddy in different positions on a regular basis. We got Bailey to a comfortable level of fitness and Lake came in. You could see it brewing up to perfection.

So when Clarko arrived he had the core nucleus of Mitchell, Hodge, Crawford but saw that the key position area needed an overhaul and we focused on clearing out Hay and Thompson and bringing in elite young talent.

We're in a really different position now. The core nucleus of players that can be relied on, A graders, aren't in the middle - they're everywhere else. Roughead, Rioli, Smith, Shiels, Stratton, Breust, Gunston. The elite young talent isn't based in the forward line - it's in the middle of the ground. The youth is being tested now and it's not the unblooded youngsters (Stewart, Burton, Lovell, Miles etc) it's that level above: Langford, Hartung, Sicily, O'Rourke, Howe, Mitchell and O'Meara. And I think we'll only be bringing in that next young crop when this group is confirmed as a failure or success. Clarko is also probably going to persist with these guys in their positions, which yes, includes Sicily at HB, Hartung doing things in the backline and the senior, reliable crop being thrown all over the place to allow for these guys to develop (or fail) in relative stability.

It's painful to watch. Change is always difficult. We are not topping up with Brian Lake - we're rebuilding key components with Vickery and a new midfield. We would all love to see the midfield hitting up Gunston and Roughead on the lead, and awesome slingshot footy from one end to the other, but we're not there yet. We're developing new weapons that will look meek until they're ready. Like the death star - it's vulnerable until it's finished.

The stubbornness we talk about with Clarkson is an overcommitment to things. Overcommitment to players and/or gameplay. He can't and won't ignore facts though - and losses are very strong feedback on what's working and what's not. The Geelong final could be explained away, the Bulldogs semi final couldn't and the Essendon one wasn't the change in trend we were hoping for.

Don't expect a premiership this year - but watch with interest because we'll have a few games where it all clicks and it'll be exciting as hell.

It comes to context of a season too and a realistic state of your list.

Last year, we were lauded for rebuilding on the run and fans were very optimistic with that approach as we were still contenders in the top 4.

It is only one game, but with the preseason form, it doesn't look great at the moment and now rebuilding on the run isn't looking like a good decision.

We'll have to reassess this style of rebuilding at the end of the season.

 

[Mrzohs]

the proof in the pudding will be this weekend .. i watched the adelaide game on the weekend they have a slow midfield like us but there run and carry link up hand ball is amazing!!! it covers there mids.
where is our link up hand ball from defence running in numbers we seem to handball out the back and look to spot up someone with a kick! to slow.the same defence that got 11 in row kicked on them in the prelim.

i think we have the cattle just need to give them a run lets see some run carry and dash from sicily & burton in the 18.

 

[onthemoney]

It's probably been done to death but we were just a bit out of it on the weekend. Handballing to where players were rather than where they were running to. Clarko's point about looking fast when you have the ball is accurate. You lose it pretty quickly when skill execution is poor and for the moment you do have it you're not moving it well enough to keep it.

 

[Bedi]

He's being realistic. Not such a bad thing based on how we played over the weekend.

ffs its round one. lets see how it plays out a bit.

 

[Spanish Sahara]

We do lack drive from half back. Duryea is playing poorly, Birchall does't break lines

Adelaide - Laird and Smith
GWS - Shaw, Williams Haynes
Dogs - JJ, Murphy, Boyd

 

[MrPremiership]

Are the kids on the list good enough for a rebuild on the run? I'm looking at TOB, Brand, Willsmore, Hardwick, Surman, Heatherley

There are only so many FAs you can target and squeeze in a salary cap. Eventually you need to replenish the list with quality talent from the draft, and after prolonged success, access to talent via draft just isn't as easily available.

I'm very keen to see how this plays out. But we may be on the road to mediocrity by trying this short cut, rather than just biting the bullet and getting some quality talent in via top 10 draft picks.

 

[Ned Ryerson]

ffs its round one. lets see how it plays out a bit.

In previous round one losses we haven't looked so completely out of touch against what will likely be a middle of the table team come the end of the year. People hailing patience with a rebuild aren't exactly out of line here. If you think we will be top 4 based on the end of our season last year, JLT performances (which I know aren't a guide as I often repeated - but it paints a picture now) and now round 1 loss were we were out-run, out-enthused and made to look ordinary - well that's awesome. I am not crossing my fingers - and I won't be upset if we don't dominate this year. Happy to ride the wave this year and see what the new players can do.

 

[Gene Simmons]

The new gameplan is going to encounter it's teething issues.. The loss of S.Mitchell & Lewis will hurt us in the immediate future but long term we will be in good stead and rebound alot quicker than we think.. Going back 2 steps to propel forward is necessary.... I'm just hoping they are short back steps because after what I saw Saturday night it seemed like giant strides!

 

[OzJohnnie]

I've just listened to the Smith interview and I think there are a few relevant points for this thread. Quotes are approximate.

* "A little went wrong but a lot went right. A lot of KPI's were ticked off but our finishing was poor."
- They played to a game plan and they achieved much of what they wanted. It is true that better kicking for goal would have changed the tenor of the match. Long story short: offensively, aside from the score, the team played as they intended to play.

* "When they rebound as quickly as they did and we were out of position as much as we were then you're always going to look slow."
- The phrase "out of position" leads me to believe that according to plan players should have been someplace other than where they were when Essendon rebounded, the implication being that the right positioning would have tempered Essendon's effectiveness. Mentioning the speed of the Essendon rebound leads me to think that perhaps we were over committed offensively and didn't have the time to set up the defense as a result. Some coaching strategising needed here because this is always a judgement on balance. Perhaps more effective finishing would have put Essendon under more pressure and limited the freedom they had to play loose and fast. Or at least that's the thinking.

* "We're pretty confident in the players we have. We have a lot of new guys in and they're still learning the game plan and how everyone plays. There's still a lot of improvement in the group."
- Pretty much a recapitulation of many arguments here.

* "We're going to have our supporters there [against Adelaide] so we're really looking forward to it."
- I think the Essendon crowd made it pretty tough for the boys. #sobrave.

* No quote, but he returns to the importance of kicking the easy goal.
- Our game plan is largely built about scoring so many points that opposition teams must hunker down and defend to slow us. Meaning that they must also reduce their offensive chances. We want to run a shooting match. But when we shoot crooked then we are exposed. Over committed. You can't have everything so I'm up with that strategy. Kick a bucket full of goals and the defending takes care of itself.


Ok. You got me Brishawk and Leather Poisoning. I'm going long on Hawthorn and will ride the bumps (with a grin).