Review The Good, the Bad and the Ugly - Round 11 edition

BlightysCats

Norm Smith Medallist
Aug 5, 2013
6,653
4,115
Northcote
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
The Phil Opiontube Phillies
I list various Premiers who probably wouldn't be premiers had they been without their best mids.
That could very well be true, but if we had Dangerwood injured for the season we wouldn't lose a grand final, we wouldn't make the 8 and would be lucky to win over 8/9 games for the year.
 
Aug 16, 2006
5,094
6,695
AFL Club
Geelong
That could very well be true, but if we had Dangerwood injured for the season we wouldn't lose a grand final, we wouldn't make the 8 and would be lucky to win over 8/9 games for the year.

FWIW, there is a good chance WCE of 06 wouldn't have made the 8 either without Judd and Cousins; certainly would have struggled to make the four. But splitting hairs. I'm sure you see the point I am making.
 

Ray Donovan

Staring into the abyss
Oct 11, 2016
4,040
3,592
Sydney
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Oklahoma City Thunder
You seem to be missing my point. I am saying that it's not a 'problem' having the best 1-2 mid combo, yet strangely if you listen to many media pundits and some on this board it apparently is. I am saying that having the best 1-2 mid combo does, however, make it harder for the second tier to get into the game. I am also saying that the idea Geelong is 'over-reliant' on its best mids is a furphy, because if you take any teams best mids out they will be significantly weakened. Indeed, I list various Premiers who probably wouldn't be premiers had they been without their best mids.

I have given detailed reasoning for each of these points, including why it isn't as simple as 'sharing it around'.

I don't feel like repeating what I have already clearly stated. It is there for you to read. If you don't agree, that's fine. We obviously have a different opinion. Cheers.

I think you have missed my point as well all good. Your point a bit contradictory to itself because no one is saying its bad to have the best 1-2 combo in the game no media I have read anywhere suggests that.

And I believe having two incredible mids should make it so much easier for 2 tier mids as they are not exposed to tagging or as much heavy attention. And not required to do the heavy lifting

And over reliance on our best two mids is a furphy if you take any two best mids out they will struggle?

We are not talking or questioning how much worse we would be if they are out of the side. Of course we are worse off but the point is they haven't been missing games we have been struggling when they are not in the midfield for patches of games. Hense the over reliance

they have been playing its a question of depth and the guys around being able to contribute enough to beat a Sydney type side which has a much bigger midfield group.

The over reliance is just relating to that nothing more.

All good anyway agree to disagree
 
Last edited:

BlightysCats

Norm Smith Medallist
Aug 5, 2013
6,653
4,115
Northcote
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
The Phil Opiontube Phillies
FWIW, there is a good chance WCE of 06 wouldn't have made the 8 either without Judd and Cousins; certainly would have struggled to make the four. But splitting hairs. I'm sure you see the point I am making.
We have far far less depth than that Eagles Premiership team, probably far less drug addicted players too.
 
Aug 16, 2006
5,094
6,695
AFL Club
Geelong
I think you have missed my point as well all good. Your point a bit contradictory to itself because no one is saying its bad to have the best 1-2 combo in the game no media I have read anywhere suggests that.

And I believe having two incredible mids should make it so much easier for 2 tier role players as they are not exposed to tagging or as much heavy attention.

And over reliant on our best two mids is a furphy if you take any two best mids out they will struggle?

We are not talking or questioning how much worse we would be if they are out of the side. Of course we are worse off but the point is they haven't been missing games we have been struggling when they are not in the midfield for patches of games. Hense the over reliance

Doesn't make sense because they have been playing its question of depth and the guys around. The over reliance is just relating to that nothing more

All good anyway agree to disagree
All good. We are basically disagreeing about the effects two seriously dominant mids have on the second tier. I believe Caddy's decision to go kinda bears out my argument - he knows that he simply can't compete with those two or get the opportunity to develop as much (for reasons I have pointed out). I do see the contradiction you point out in my argument, and it is kinda contradictory. I'm saying it's great having that 1-2 combination, but perhaps at the inevitable expense of the 'lesser' mids. So there is that potential problem. But ultimately, having both through our midfield outweighs that concern IMO. I have referenced past premiers to point out that we aren't the first club to be heavily reliant on a power-mid combo.
 

Goggin Our Best

Norm Smith Medallist
May 23, 2011
7,523
11,742
sydney
AFL Club
Geelong
I couldn't believe it when King described him as a special talent. Had to be sure he was talking about the same player.

That will bite you on the aarse one day

What did Dangerfield say about him in the previous years pre season- the1st time Dangerfield had seen him - where have you been hiding him
 

Ray Donovan

Staring into the abyss
Oct 11, 2016
4,040
3,592
Sydney
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Oklahoma City Thunder
All good. We are basically disagreeing about the effects two seriously dominant mids have on the second tier. I believe Caddy's decision to go kinda bears out my argument - he knows that he simply can't compete with those two or get the opportunity to develop as much (for reasons I have pointed out). I do see the contradiction you point out in my argument, and it is kinda contradictory. I'm saying it's great having that 1-2 combination, but perhaps at the inevitable expense of the 'lesser' mids. So there is that potential problem. But ultimately, having both through our midfield outweighs that concern IMO. I have referenced past premiers to point out that we aren't the first club to be heavily reliant on a power-mid combo.

What you said were some in the media and big footy said it was bad having a big two.

Which me and you definately or anybody doesnt think is the truth!

That's where we disagree because the more good mids you have the easier it is for the group in general the lesser mids as you call them. History shows and all premiership KPI's the larger your group of elite contributors the better off your side will be.

And those premiership sides you mentioned

Brisbane ( Voss, Black) with these guys out

Akermanis ( Brownlow) all australian
Power ( All Australian )
Lappin (4x all Australian) Hall of fame
Hart ( Norm smith )

West coast Cousins Judd out

D.Kerr ( All australian )
D.Cox ( 3x All australian)
A.Embley ( norm Smith )
C.Fletcher ( all Australian )
T.Stenglien ( 200) games

Hawthorn ( hodge & Mitchell)

Burgoyne ( brownlow )
Lewis (all australian ) 250 games

And because we have danger and selwood caddy leaving confirms we don't have enough room for more good mids because we have a big 2. Did you ever think maybe the reason we don't have a flag is you need a bit more help than a big two? All these other teams you mentioned horrible examples had brownlow medalists all australians hall of famers gracing the same field and managed to develop a bit past a 2nd tier mid. but we can't fit caddy because of our big two or he didn't develop cause danger and sel are in there. Few more positions in the midfield we can fill.

O.k pal I highly doubt when our perceived weakness to win a flag is our depth we don't have room for a 2nd tier mid to become elite or these two guys danger and sel are stopping someone becoming elite.
 
Last edited:
Aug 16, 2006
5,094
6,695
AFL Club
Geelong
What you said were some in the media and big footy said it was bad having a big two.

Which me and you definately or anybody doesnt think is the truth!

That's where we disagree because the more good mids you have the easier it is for the group in general the lesser mids as you call them. History shows and all premiership KPI's the larger your group of elite contributors the better off your side will be.

And those premiership sides you mentioned

Brisbane ( Voss, Black) with these guys out

Akermanis ( Brownlow) all australian
Power ( All Australian )
Lappin (4x all Australian) Hall of fame
Hart ( Norm smith )

West coast Cousins Judd out

D.Kerr ( All australian )
D.Cox ( 3x All australian)
A.Embley ( norm Smith )
C.Fletcher ( all Australian )
T.Stenglien ( 200) games

Hawthorn ( hodge & Mitchell)

Burgoyne ( brownlow )
Lewis (all australian ) 250 games

And because we have danger and selwood caddy leaving confirms we don't have enough room for more good mids because we have a big 2. Did you ever think maybe the reason we don't have a flag is you need a bit more help than a big two? All these other teams you mentioned horrible examples had brownlow medalists all australians hall of famers gracing the same field and managed to develop a bit past a 2nd tier mid. but we can't fit caddy because of our big two or he didn't develop cause danger and sel are in there. Few more positions in the midfield we can fill.

O.k pal I highly doubt when our perceived weakness to win a flag is our depth we don't have room for a 2nd tier mid to become elite or these two guys danger and sel are stopping someone becoming elite.

Oh, brother, I give you the internet!

You are taking what were a few very basic observations, then stretching these observation out into finite conclusions that I never came to (for example, I never suggested we would win a flag with just 'the big two', or that depth isn't important), and you're doing a fine line in torturing prose along the way. Obviously the teams I mentioned have more depth than Geelong currently: I never suggested otherwise. But the simple point remains that if you take out the big-two mids of each of my examples then it's very unlikely they would have had the same success. My point was really that simple. Your vivid imagination is colouring in the rest.

Good day, sir!
 

Ray Donovan

Staring into the abyss
Oct 11, 2016
4,040
3,592
Sydney
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Oklahoma City Thunder
Oh, brother, I give you the internet!

You are taking what were a few very basic observations, then stretching these observation out into finite conclusions that I never came to (for example, I never suggested we would win a flag with just 'the big two', or that depth isn't important), and you're doing a fine line in torturing prose along the way. Obviously the teams I mentioned have more depth than Geelong currently: I never suggested otherwise. But the simple point remains that if you take out the big-two mids of each of my examples then it's very unlikely they would have had the same success. My point was really that simple. Your vivid imagination is colouring in the rest.

Good day, sir!

Fair enough I carried away at the end with the premiership analogies you were using I took them out of context.

I got carried away with this

I think this is where i got confused

" I am saying its not a 'problem' having the best 1-2 mid combo but if you listen to any media pundit or poster on this board it apparently is"

" we aren't the first club to be reliant on a power mid combo"

I took that out of context then I just didn't think those examples Haw, Bris, W.C were similar as they had incredible depth.

Yeah I just got confused as to the reason behind taking danger and sel out of our side. And saying we would obviously be worse off
Then comparing and taking those premiership combos out of the other sides. And saying they would also struggle without these guys.

So I assume you meant all these other teams were just as reliant on the top two players as we were. This season and if they were out they would struggle or be reliant on two gun players just the same as GFC 2016.

Where I got confused was they were playing so I got stuck on the over reliance point and I missed the metaphor involved

Mis understanding I just got confused its my fault
Good day
 
Last edited:

BlightysCats

Norm Smith Medallist
Aug 5, 2013
6,653
4,115
Northcote
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
The Phil Opiontube Phillies
Fair enough I carried away at the end with the premiership analogies you were using I took them out of context.

I got carried away with this

I think this is where i got confused

" I am saying its not a 'problem' having the best 1-2 mid combo but if you listen to any media pundit or poster on this board it apparently is"

" we aren't the first club to be reliant on a power mid combo"

I took that out of context then I just didn't think those examples Haw, Bris, W.C were similar as they had incredible depth.

Yeah I just got confused as to the reason behind taking danger and sel out of our side. And saying we would obviously be worse off
Then comparing and taking those premiership combos out of the other sides. And saying they would also struggle without these guys.

So I assume you meant all these other teams were just as reliant on the top two players as we were. This season and if they were out they would struggle or be reliant on two gun players just the same as GFC 2016.

Where I got confused was they were playing so I got stuck on the over reliance point and I missed the metaphor involved

Mis understanding I just got confused its my fault
Good day
It's in midfield rotations where it gets you, our inability to really do anything without one or both of Danger and Selwood in the middle means our rotations are restricted and if both aren't in there then our next lot of mids are easy pickings for most decent midfields.
 

Ray Donovan

Staring into the abyss
Oct 11, 2016
4,040
3,592
Sydney
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Oklahoma City Thunder
It's in midfield rotations where it gets you, our inability to really do anything without one or both of Danger and Selwood in the middle means our rotations are restricted and if both aren't in there then our next lot of mids are easy pickings for most decent midfields.

Yeah I understand that I was just trying to work out nankervis brothers point of view. I mean Brisbane, WC probably two of the best midfield's in the modern generation incredible depth and no over reliance on one guy. They had multiple options Akermanis, Kerr, Burgoyne could definately carry a midfield when above two were out.

so I just got confused when he referenced the above teams and spoke about being reliant on a midfield power combo like geelong. so its just a mis understanding of "his" opinion of those sides and what they were. My opinion doesn't see it that way at all but it doesn't matter
 

IronMike

All Australian
Jul 22, 2010
798
1,586
Locked up in Don King's basement.
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Collingwood
That could very well be true, but if we had Dangerwood injured for the season we wouldn't lose a grand final, we wouldn't make the 8 and would be lucky to win over 8/9 games for the year.

That is true, but the same could be said for most teams.

How would Sydney go without JPK and Buddy? etc..
 

BlightysCats

Norm Smith Medallist
Aug 5, 2013
6,653
4,115
Northcote
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
The Phil Opiontube Phillies
That is true, but the same could be said for most teams.

How would Sydney go without JPK and Buddy? etc..
C'mon we all know Geelong are far more reliant on Dangerwood than any half decent team in the comp is on any two of their players, in fact I'd say we're more reliant on Danger alone than any team in the comp is on one player.
 

Danger!Selwood

All Australian
May 18, 2016
800
1,062
AFL Club
Geelong
C'mon we all know Geelong are far more reliant on Dangerwood than any half decent team in the comp is on any two of their players, in fact I'd say we're more reliant on Danger alone than any team in the comp is on one player.

I'd argue that Freo last year losing Fyfe and Sandi for majority of the season and going from 17 wins to 4 in the space of a year shows they are more reliant.
 
Bit late to this but oh well, didn't see the first half on Sunday so can't comment on that specifically.

Good:

Zach Tuohy, looks like he'll be a decent acquisition into our best 22 and can provide that drive off half back we've been needing. Do query his accountability when we can transitioned against but maybe just a small sample size, we'll see.
The glimpses we've seen of some of the new recruits, Parfitt and Zuthrie in particular look like prospects, both have composure in the contest and Zuthrie in particular looks like he reads the play well, that bodes well at a young age.
Menzel getting some miles in the legs and not getting injured, that'll always be the worry from now on.
Duncan looks a lot better than last season too and GHS has staked a claim for R1, if he performs to the level he has over the preseason there's a spot for him.

Bad:

Haphazard ball movement, when we move the ball quickly we pile on the scores, we just don't do it often enough, and seemingly do it when we're in need of doing it, should just do it from the start and build a lead early.
The rucks, Stanley looked the best of the 3 but lots of inconsistency. Worrysome conundrum.
Taylor and Hawkins, not sure about this, not sure it'll work but I guess if Taylor can pull a defender away from Hawkins then that'd be considered a success, without even taking into account Taylor's goals.

Ugly:

Forwardline delivery, no rhyme or reason to it, when we do spot up leads it generally results in marks and shots on goal... yet we bomb long almost endlessly, clearly Johnson wasn't working on that in his stint at the club. Will be bloody infuriating if it continues all season. Lower your eyes and spot up targets!

Meh:

The kerfuffle over the 'shirt', don't get what the big fuss is, but I guess, to each their own.
 

Spazz Cat

Brownlow Medallist
Jun 10, 2013
24,890
30,162
AFL Club
Geelong
He did. I disagree.

McCarthy looked a lot better last year, but I wouldn't call him a special talent by any means.
Special talent is way over the top.
You can definitely see he has some X factor about him but overall his output isn't very good.
Would of went goalless in six or seven games last year and some very low disposal counts.
His best game was against the Saints but even then he also made some errors.
His job is to hit the scoreboard and make some goals out of nothing and his not doing it near enough.
There's a definite chance of improvement but yeah being called a special talent now is too much.
 
Nov 12, 2002
41,685
49,987
AFL Club
Geelong
Special talent is way over the top.
You can definitely see he has some X factor about him but overall his output isn't very good.
Would of went goalless in six or seven games last year and some very low disposal counts.
His best game was against the Saints but even then he also made some errors.
His job is to hit the scoreboard and make some goals out of nothing and his not doing it near enough.
There's a definite chance of improvement but yeah being called a special talent now is too much.

It's not the first time, and won't be the last:

1. Star player / coach offers some incredible opinion about a player. Or something that can be easily exaggerated.
2. People fall over themselves to agree.
3. People don't bother to actually think for themselves and analyse the argument. It's cooler to just agree.
 
We waited a very long time for McCarthy to kick his first goal if I remember correctly...maybe it takes a special talent to take that long to kick a goal from a small forward? o_O:huh:

Lets hope he is in fact a talent at least and bags 25-30 goals this year minimum.

I do like his aggression at the contest, and he does have good hands. Just needs to impact the scoreboard and play a more major role up front than he presently does.

The time is now.
 
Back